Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste But Buddhism is even more subtle. It's master equation is: 0 Hope you were amused. Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste Sri Benjamin: The subtle message of Advaita is 'there is no equation.' Due to ignorance, we first created duality, and with wisdom we dissolved the duality through the equation! regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > Namaste > > Now what is the equation of Advaita? An even simpler one: > > A = B > > i.e. Atman equal Brahman! > > Or if you want to get even cuter, it is simply > > 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste Ramji! >The subtle message of Advaita is 'there is no equation.' >Due to ignorance, we first created duality, and with wisdom >we dissolved the duality through the equation! Touche! Back to school for me! Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste, The only 'equation' encountered in Vedas is the Peace Invocation : pUrNamadaH............. Infinite Existence minus Infinite Universe = Infinite Consciousness ‡ [E] - ‡ = ‡ [C] Prof.V.K. would have a more elegant formula. Regards, Sunder advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > Namaste Ramji! > > >The subtle message of Advaita is 'there is no equation.' > >Due to ignorance, we first created duality, and with wisdom > >we dissolved the duality through the equation! > > > Touche! > > Back to school for me! > > Om! > Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste Sunderji, Not to be pedantic, but it might be interesting to examine your equation: Infinite Existence minus Infinite Universe = Infinite Consciousness E - C = U Now this could also be written E = C + U But this would suggest that we are adding two different 'things': the Universe and the Consciousness. But my understanding is that the Universe is an illusory superposition (adhyasa) upon the Consciousness. Therefore they are not two distinct things that can be added, like one apple and another. This is not an attempt to be annoying and pedantic, but to pursue a bit the amusing topic of mathematics and advaita. Maybe our physicist guru Sadanandaji will have something to say. Om! Benjamin P.S. Of course, Ramji already answered this at the paramarthika level, but perhaps we can develop it a bit at the vyavahara level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Being a bit of a mathematician myself, I would point out that all of the elements of this equation are specified as "Infinite". All infinities fold into a map each other, thus we are led back to "There is no equation" in Infinity, which is "Not Two" and certainly "Not One"! advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > > Namaste Sunderji, > > Not to be pedantic, but it might be interesting to examine your equation: > > Infinite Existence minus Infinite Universe = Infinite Consciousness > > E - C = U > > Now this could also be written > > E = C + U > > But this would suggest that we are adding two different 'things': the > Universe and the Consciousness. But my understanding is that the > Universe is an illusory superposition (adhyasa) upon the > Consciousness. Therefore they are not two distinct things that can > be added, like one apple and another. > > This is not an attempt to be annoying and pedantic, but to pursue a > bit the amusing topic of mathematics and advaita. Maybe our > physicist guru Sadanandaji will have something to say. > > Om! > Benjamin > > > P.S. Of course, Ramji already answered this at the paramarthika > level, but perhaps we can develop it a bit at the vyavahara level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 advaitin, "lotusaware" <lotusaware> wrote: > Being a bit of a mathematician myself, I would point out that all of > the elements of this equation are specified as "Infinite". > > All infinities fold into a map each other, thus we are led back to > "There is no equation" in Infinity, which is "Not Two" and > certainly "Not One"! Namaste, There really is no equation at all of course, speculation and balance blow in an imaginary wind.........ONS...Tony. However back in delusion, there are a few unsolved equations in the Vedas, Arthava I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste Sri Benjamin: There are some amusing equations in Vedanta which doesn't require higher level mathematics or physics: Ocean + or - River = Ocean Ocean + or - Ocean = Ocean The purpose of the use of the analogy of ocean and river is to illustrate that desires (rivers) will not affect the fulfilled the mind (ocean.) The implication is quite important for the spiritual seekers. When the seeker learn the art of contentment, his (her) mind gets detached to the desires! The vedantic philosophy only focuses on the 'fullness' and never on the 'emptyness.' Sri Sunderji's posting of the invocation verse ffrom the Isha Upanishad illustrates this point profoundly: "Om purnamadha purnamidam Purnat Purnamudachyate Purnasya purnamadaya Purunmeva vashish yate" Translation: (Om is the symbolic representation of Brahman) That is whole. This is whole >From the whole the whole becomes manifest >From the whole when the whole is negated What remains is again the whole Essentially the sloka says that Brahman remains the Brahman! Our own creation of the manifested universe and the forms and names of Jivas come from the Brahman. After negating the manifested universe and the names, forms and all notions, what remains is also the Brahman. Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > > Namaste Sunderji, > > Not to be pedantic, but it might be interesting to examine your equation: > > Infinite Existence minus Infinite Universe = Infinite Consciousness > > E - C = U > > Now this could also be written > > E = C + U > > But this would suggest that we are adding two different 'things': the > Universe and the Consciousness. But my understanding is that the > Universe is an illusory superposition (adhyasa) upon the > Consciousness. Therefore they are not two distinct things that can > be added, like one apple and another. > > This is not an attempt to be annoying and pedantic, but to pursue a > bit the amusing topic of mathematics and advaita. Maybe our > physicist guru Sadanandaji will have something to say. > > Om! > Benjamin > > > P.S. Of course, Ramji already answered this at the paramarthika > level, but perhaps we can develop it a bit at the vyavahara level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 --- Benjamin Root <orion777ben wrote: > > > Infinite Existence minus Infinite Universe = Infinite Consciousness > > E - C = U Benjmin the above equation is incorrect in several ways: 1. There is E in C and U, since we are not talking about non-existent consciousness and not existent universe. 2. The puurnamadaH sloka is mathematically even more profound. The infinite has all E, C and U, severally, as well as totally and therefore it says Infinite plus minus infinite = infinite. That is mathematically precise. The first infinite is 'I' (puurnamadhaH) and second infinite is U (puurnamidam) and the infinite on the right side of the equation is at the seat of meditation back to 'I'. The Sanskrit words are very flexible -aadaaya indicates both plus and minus and by doing either or both puurnam alone is left behind - by saying 'eva' alone it points out that it is to be unitoryness in the duality by adding or subtracting the universe - First by subtracting by neti neti and once realized - after realization it says that by adding the universe, it will not cause any problem since I recognize that I am infinite even with addition. So much Vedanta is packed in that simple looking verse yet mathematically precise. Hari OM! Sadananda > > Now this could also be written > > E = C + U > > But this would suggest that we are adding two different 'things': the > Universe and the Consciousness. But my understanding is that the > Universe is an illusory superposition (adhyasa) upon the > Consciousness. Therefore they are not two distinct things that can > be added, like one apple and another. > > This is not an attempt to be annoying and pedantic, but to pursue a > bit the amusing topic of mathematics and advaita. Maybe our > physicist guru Sadanandaji will have something to say. > > Om! > Benjamin > > > P.S. Of course, Ramji already answered this at the paramarthika > level, but perhaps we can develop it a bit at the vyavahara level. > ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. SBC DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 --- kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > The first infinite is 'I' (puurnamadhaH) and second infinite is U > (puurnamidam) and the infinite on the right side of the equation is at > the seat of meditation back to 'I'. I forgot about your Buddhistic 0 - it is actually 1/0 or I/0 - since it is indivisible -(One becomes wiser if one sees E in 0 too!) now we arrives at infinity - at least mathematically. Hari OM! Sadananda ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. SBC DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 Namaste all. Thanks, Benjamin, for making me think. C is Absolute Consciousness B is Brahman A is Atman m is mAyA me is mAyic effect, also ‘multiple effect’ of mAyA. BMI is Body-mind-intellect J is jIva U is universe c is the spark of Consciousness in Jiva Now the twin equations are: me = (BMI union c ) + U = J + U J mod me = C = A = B Here the mod symbol is the mathematical ‘modulo’. An integer modulo 7 means as many multiples of 7 as possible should be taken away from the integer and what remains is the integer mod 7. So also J mod me means all the multiple effect of mAyA should be taken away from J and what remains is J mod me. Also the notation ‘me’ for mAyic effect is suggestive of the I-ness in Jiva. Once the I-ness that is ‘me’ is nullified from Jiva – mathematically this means that J is ‘reduced’ modulo ‘me’ – certainly advaita says that is nothing but A which is B which is C. The second equation above says that U also vanishes! praNAms to all advaitins profvk ===== Prof. V. Krishnamurthy My website on Science and Spirituality is http://www.geocities.com/profvk/ You can access my book on Gems from the Ocean of Hindu Thought Vision and Practice, and my father R. Visvanatha Sastri's manuscripts from the site. SBC DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 Namaste Ramji and Sadanandaji! OK ... to finish up with this little equation chuckle. Ramji said: >There are some amusing equations in Vedanta which doesn't >require higher level mathematics or physics: > >Ocean + or - River = Ocean >Ocean + or - Ocean = Ocean I understood what you said following this, and your point is well taken. However, I would like to point out that you have defined a new algebraic operation, namely, '+ or -' For millenia, we have been using '+' sometimes and '-' sometimes, but never this combination, to my knowledge. Therefore, you have defined a new algebra, which is a momentous event in higher mathematics! (Maybe something like this exists in 'fuzzy logic' ...) Then you said: >The vedantic philosophy only focuses on the 'fullness' >and never on the 'emptyness.' >... >After negating the manifested universe and the names, >forms and all notions, what remains is also the Brahman That last sentence is what I have been saying all along when discussing emptiness on this list. Emptiness is no more than the 'negating' of the 'manifested universe and the names, forms and notions', and what remains is Consciousness or Brahman. So my version of Buddhist emptiness is entirely consistent with what you just said about Advaita. Anyhow, from now on, all my Advaita vs. Buddhism comparisons will continue in my new discussion group called Clear Void at clearvoid/ I hope I don't get accused of outrageous self-promotion if I sneakily mention it yet again. I just want to pick up the few remaining souls who may really benefit from this and who haven't been checking this list lately. Thank you. Now Sadanandaji said (forgive me for quoting the whole thing but it is quite interesting): >> Infinite Existence minus Infinite Universe = Infinite Consciousness >> > > E - C = U > This was a typo; it should have been: E - U = C > Benjamin the above equation is incorrect in several ways: This is Sunderji's equation. Please be careful of inter-moderator protocol! :-) > > 1. There is E in C and U, since we are not talking about non-existent > consciousness and not existent universe. This is quite true. Actually, we know that E = C = U = oo This is the logical implication of nonduality. (The oo is the well-known infinity sign.) Some may object to including the 'Universe', since this is supposed to be Maya. But by Universe, I mean what remains after the adhysa is removed. > > 2. The puurnamadaH sloka is mathematically even more profound. > The infinite has all E, C and U, severally, as well as totally and > therefore it says > > Infinite plus minus infinite = infinite. Actually, I don't think it makes sense to add or subtract them in any way. How do you 'add' the ocean to the ocean? But I do agree that if you 'add' the infinite ocean to the infinite ocean, you get the infinite ocean. Subtracting the ocean is more subtle. Let us see what you go on to say. > >That is mathematically precise. > > The first infinite is 'I' (puurnamadhaH) and second infinite is U >(puurnamidam) and the infinite on the right side of the equation is at >the seat of meditation back to 'I'. > >The Sanskrit words are very flexible - aadaaya indicates both plus and >minus and by doing either or both puurnam alone is left behind - So I was mistaken about Ramji's revolutionary discovery in abstract algebra! (See above.) >by saying 'eva' alone it points out that it is to be unitoryness in the >duality by adding or subtracting the universe - First by subtracting by >neti neti and once realized - after realization it says that by adding >the universe, it will not cause any problem since I recognize that I am >infinite even with addition. So much Vedanta is packed in that simple >looking verse yet mathematically precise. As I understand you, we must first subtract the universe seen as illusion, and then what remains is the universe seen as Self. This last step could be interpreted as 'adding' the universe back in after subtracting the illusion. And the Brahman/Atman/Universe that remains is the Infinite. This all sounds fine to me. I just wished that you would recognize that the 'Neti, Neti' is the same as the Buddhist emptiness. It seems to me that there is some vasana in your mind (and that of other staunch Hindu Advaitins) which sees the label 'Buddhist' and subconsciously reacts like a Pavlov dog and thinks something like, 'Well yes, they are our brothers, they see much of the truth, but unlike them we are at the top of Everest!' Maybe this is true. Such pettiness doesn't matter. It may only be in my imagination anyway. And then, there are rather heated discussions WITHIN Vedanta, aren't there? Advaita, Visistadvaita, Dvaita, ... We have seen recent evidence of this with Sri Jay. But when we are lost in Samadhi, disputes are not only impossible, they are meaningless. Anyhow you might also wish sometimes to take a look at my 'all nondual paths say the same thing' discussion group mentioned above and maybe even contribute. You will be treated with great kindness and respect. I'm trying to make my attitude over there as gentle and sympathetic as possible, which I may not always have done here. It is never too late to change. By the way, Mount Everest should be given a Sanskrit name. Well, I guess that's enough of this discussion, but it is rather interesting. It is not so unreasonable to wonder if the topic of the Infinite does not have some mathematical properties. But we must exert extreme caution in this most subtle realm. It is like catching a light beam with a butterfly net! Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 Namaste Profvk-ji! It's so good to have you contributing. I wish it happened more often. When I sent my previous message, I hadn't yet seen this one or I would have answered you there. (I'm trying to bombard list members with fewer emails.) Hopefully, this will be my last contribution on this topic. Now I know that you're a mathematician, but I am quite impressed that you can insert the 'modulo' concept into this discussion. Now that is real mathematics. Also, I see in the second equation that you have written 'C = A = B'. That is like what I wrote in the email I just sent to Ramji and Sadanandaji, BEFORE reading your message. Not bad for a beginner. May I start a mathematics Ph.D with you, sir? :-) I will have to mediate some more on your application of the modulo concept. That is a bit subtle. But when you say that the Universe U vanishes, I assume you mean the Universe seen as maya, with the adhyasa superposed, as I said before. In other words, Jnanas do not go blind after the adhyasa is removed. They still see the same people, flowers, trees and mountains, only not as objects distinct from themselves. Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 Namaste! advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > > Namaste Ramji and Sadanandaji! > > OK ... to finish up with this little equation chuckle. > > > This is Sunderji's equation. Please be careful of inter-moderator > protocol! :-) ######### It was my 'equation' in quotes only! as I agreed with Ramji that Unity is by definition beyond equations [DUALITY]. Anyway Prof. V.K. has now taken us to another dimension! ------------------------------- > It is like catching > a light beam with a butterfly net! ##########NOTHING is impossible in 'me' (mAyic effect) mentioned by ProfVK.!! Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2003 Report Share Posted July 11, 2003 Namaste all, Following this 'explosion in consciousness of the group'...sphota.....can we please stop teachers telling pupils that 1+1=2: 1+1=1 and ever will unless we wish to live in the small house of vyashti, ignoring the samashti, Oh the joys of teaching Boolean Algebra, great memories, Ken Knight SBC DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Namaste This whole discussion about mathematics and metaphysics may seem a bit silly, but there is a grain of truth to it. We all know that the Indians excelled at both metaphysics (in the spiritual sense) and mathematics. They even invented the number '0', which changed the course of human civilization, and which the Greeks and Romans never had (and they thought they were so great!). Some have speculated on a connection between '0' and the notion of Shunya, and this does not seem so far fetched to me. Many mathematicians have 'mystical' tendencies (which started with Plato). And Brahman Saguna must surely be a superb mathematician. I'm not sure about Brahman Nirguna .... maybe 'it' just has the notion of '0', or '1', or 'not 2', or who knows? Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.