Guest guest Posted August 21, 2003 Report Share Posted August 21, 2003 Pls excuse me for my "not so good" english A simple question. does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha karma etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully explained in sankhya philosophy) how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) and advaita(based on single soul) ? To make advaita complete, i think, we have to incorporate sankhya in it somehow.(i.e to show prakriti and purush are none other brahma) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2003 Report Share Posted August 22, 2003 --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > A simple question. > does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? > reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha karma > etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully > explained in sankhya philosophy) > how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) and > advaita(based on single soul) ? Vishalji, Your simple question is loaded! To answer simply, advaita is not based on any single soul - There is no soul and not-soul at that ultimate understanding - there is only one non-dual - sat chit and ananda. Existence-consciousness-ananda canot be divided. If one sees divisions they are only apparent and not real. If one takes the apparent real, then all others factors you mentioned become as real. Jiiva (what you call as soul) itself is notion and when that notion is taken as real - all those problmes that you mentioned become as real as jiiva. Hence reincornation and tranmigration of soul all real in that frame. Look at this way - if gold and iron and copper looks different if these difference as taken as real - they can exist in differnet forms - now as ring now as bangle not as chain now as braclet - gold undergoing tranmigration or reincornation in to different forms. If one understands all are nothing but just electron-protons-neutrons etc then from that perspective gold, iron, copper are just one buch of electrons-protons and neutrons -which themselves are nothing but energy-states. I can understand as a scientist they are all one - yet I can transact in the world taking gold as gold different from iron and copper. Transactions are done at one level while understanding is at the ultimate level - there is no confusion if one undestands correctly. I know that sun neither raises not sets but I can still appreciate the beauty of sun raise and sunset. That is adivatia inspite of dvaita - that is no-incornation inspite of reincornation. Karma is at the transactional level at the absoulte level I realize that I am never a kartaa. That my friend is adviata. Advaita inspite of dvaita. Hari OM! Sadananda > To make advaita complete, i think, we have to incorporate sankhya in > it somehow.(i.e to show prakriti and purush are none other brahma) > > > > > > > > > > > ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2003 Report Share Posted August 22, 2003 Sadananda But then if advaita says reincarnation is not real at ultimate level, then all the dharma and ethichs will collapse. as per advaita it is assumed that there is ekmevadvitiya brahma(there is only brahma and nothing else ) so i am nothing else than brahma. so i am brahma (aham brahmasmi) ok now pls justify my query------ suppose a body named ' vishal ' dies in its current life(now) without attaining liberation....what will happen to the owner of that body(brahma) will it take up another body (of say lizard...due to body's sins done here)?? if YES...then how will brahma decide which new body to take up...(because karmashaya....vasana..etc are un-real as per advaita) if NO ...then thats it.....no other body after destruction of this current body....then there is no need to gain liberation....my body will enjoy sensual gratification without any fear of ethics because there will be only one life...enjoy is to the fullest....no need of liberation. death of body will itself be liberation. vishal kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > A simple question. > does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? > reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha karma > etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully > explained in sankhya philosophy) > how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) and > advaita(based on single soul) ? Vishalji, Your simple question is loaded! To answer simply, advaita is not based on any single soul - There is no soul and not-soul at that ultimate understanding - there is only one non-dual - sat chit and ananda. Existence-consciousness-ananda canot be divided. If one sees divisions they are only apparent and not real. If one takes the apparent real, then all others factors you mentioned become as real. Jiiva (what you call as soul) itself is notion and when that notion is taken as real - all those problmes that you mentioned become as real as jiiva. Hence reincornation and tranmigration of soul all real in that frame. Look at this way - if gold and iron and copper looks different if these difference as taken as real - they can exist in differnet forms - now as ring now as bangle not as chain now as braclet - gold undergoing tranmigration or reincornation in to different forms. If one understands all are nothing but just electron-protons-neutrons etc then from that perspective gold, iron, copper are just one buch of electrons-protons and neutrons -which themselves are nothing but energy-states. I can understand as a scientist they are all one - yet I can transact in the world taking gold as gold different from iron and copper. Transactions are done at one level while understanding is at the ultimate level - there is no confusion if one undestands correctly. I know that sun neither raises not sets but I can still appreciate the beauty of sun raise and sunset. That is adivatia inspite of dvaita - that is no-incornation inspite of reincornation. Karma is at the transactional level at the absoulte level I realize that I am never a kartaa. That my friend is adviata. Advaita inspite of dvaita. Hari OM! Sadananda > To make advaita complete, i think, we have to incorporate sankhya in > it somehow.(i.e to show prakriti and purush are none other brahma) > > > > > > > > > > > ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2003 Report Share Posted August 22, 2003 praNAm prabhuji, Hare krishna, ekmevadvitiya brahma(there is only brahma and nothing else ) so i am nothing else than brahma. so i am brahma (aham brahmasmi) ok now pls justify my query------ > Just a side note, with whom you are enquiring this prabhuji?? since you are already ekamEvAdvitiya (one without second) brahma :-)) There are two view points considered in advaita vedanta for realisation of the absolute reality. One is pAramArthika (transcedental) view point & another one is vyAvahArika (transactional) view point. Sri Sadananda prabhuji will tell you more on this. Also see BG chapter -II. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2003 Report Share Posted August 22, 2003 --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > Sadananda > But then if advaita says reincarnation is not real at ultimate level, > then all the dharma and ethichs will collapse. No - all dharma and adharma operate at the transactions level only. They are as real as jiiva and Iswara. There is nothing to collapse since eventhing is included in that one - which is real from the absolute point. > > as per advaita it is assumed that there is ekmevadvitiya brahma(there > is only brahma and nothing else ) > so i am nothing else than brahma. > so i am brahma (aham brahmasmi) Yes in 'I am', 'I' stands for consciousness aspect and 'am' stands for existence as pect - I am + this where there is confusion of identification of subject with object 'this' - that is due to error which is due to ignornace of not knowing who that 'I am' - Right now ' I am 'a jiiva' is the notional understanding - I am Brahman is the vision of my self according to Upanishads. That true I am has to realized or recognized. > > ok now pls justify my query------ > suppose a body named ' vishal ' dies in its current life(now) without > attaining liberation....what will happen to the owner of that > body(brahma) > will it take up another body (of say lizard...due to body's sins done > here)?? Body is only a vehical or instrument provided to exhaust my vasana-s. I take suitable body that is required to exhaust my vasana-s. Essentially vasana-s decide the type of body required - man or woman or white, brown or black skin etc. I, the jiiva gravitate towards the environment that is conducive to my vaasana-s. Hence they are called 'kaarana shariira' or causal body. Hence what birth I take next depends on the most powerful vasana-s that are ready to germinate next - There is total bank account of jiiva (sanchita karma) - of which I brought in this life only those that can be exhausted - these are prarabda karma and if in the process I make now ones which cannot be exhuasted in this life they are deposited to my account and they are aagaami karma. Until all vasanas get neutralized, I will continue taking births in one form or the other. By yoga or sadhana I neutralize the vaasanas. When I realize who I am - I am not this not this etc since I the subject that can never be an object 'this' - I recognize that I am that sat chit ananda - there there is no more ownership to any karma too. All are transcended in that knowledge of who I am. > > if YES...then how will brahma decide which new body to take > up...(because karmashaya....vasana..etc are un-real as per advaita) NO you are switching from one reference to the other. As long as I think I am a jiiva - the notions are recognized as facts and the Brahman does not come into picture- I am Brahman is only from the state of absolute knowledge - but until that is recognized as a fact not as a thought - jiiva-hood is there and vasana-s operate. So karma and its kshaya is there as long as you are there to question as the questioning is done by a jiva. As long as I am dreaming that I am being chased by a tiger - that dreamer tiger is as real as the one who is being chased - I have to run away as fast as I can to save myself from that tiger. Only when I am awakened to the higher state of conscisness, the tiger and the one whom the tiger is chasing as well as the forest and the gound I am running are all resolved in to my own mind. The dreamer thinks that the dream world is real until he is awakened to higher state where there is only one mind that projects the world of plurality. The plurality is real as long as dream lasts. The problme in your questions is you want to place one leg in the waking state and one leg in the dream state and question the validity of each from the other reference. Please think it over - the confusion gets slowly resolved. > if NO ...then thats it.....no other body after destruction of this > current body....then there is no need to gain liberation....my body > will enjoy sensual gratification without any fear of ethics because > there will be only one life...enjoy is to the fullest....no need of > liberation. > death of body will itself be liberation. I think I have answered your questions above - please think it over and let me know if some more clarification is needed. Please think from what reference one is asking the questions. Brahman is absoltue non-dual inspite of duality since even this duality is nothing other than Brahmna - sarvam khalidam brahma - all this is brahman says Upanishad. Any questions from Brahman point sitting at jiiva positions are like dreamer asking about the waking mind. Waking mind is one - adivata - the pluarality of the dream world is from the point of dreamer who thinks he is different from the tiger and the treas in the forest and the inert ground that both tiger and the subject are running. Please think it over. Hari OM! sadananda > > vishal > > kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > > --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > > > A simple question. > > does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? > > reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha > karma > > etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully > > explained in sankhya philosophy) > > how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) and > > advaita(based on single soul) ? > > Vishalji, > > Your simple question is loaded! To answer simply, advaita is not based > on any single soul - There is no soul and not-soul at that ultimate > understanding - there is only one non-dual - sat chit and ananda. > Existence-consciousness-ananda canot be divided. If one sees divisions > they are only apparent and not real. If one takes the apparent real, > then all others factors you mentioned become as real. > > Jiiva (what you call as soul) itself is notion and when that notion is > taken as real - all those problmes that you mentioned become as real > as > jiiva. Hence reincornation and tranmigration of soul all real in that > frame. > > Look at this way - if gold and iron and copper looks different if > these > difference as taken as real - they can exist in differnet forms - now > as > ring now as bangle not as chain now as braclet - gold undergoing > tranmigration or reincornation in to different forms. > > If one understands all are nothing but just electron-protons-neutrons > etc then from that perspective gold, iron, copper are just one buch of > electrons-protons and neutrons -which themselves are nothing but > energy-states. > > I can understand as a scientist they are all one - yet I can transact > in > the world taking gold as gold different from iron and copper. > Transactions are done at one level while understanding is at the > ultimate level - there is no confusion if one undestands correctly. I > know that sun neither raises not sets but I can still appreciate the > beauty of sun raise and sunset. > > That is adivatia inspite of dvaita - that is no-incornation inspite of > reincornation. Karma is at the transactional level at the absoulte > level I realize that I am never a kartaa. That my friend is adviata. > Advaita inspite of dvaita. > > 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2003 Report Share Posted August 22, 2003 kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > Sadananda > But then if advaita says reincarnation is not real at ultimate level, > then all the dharma and ethichs will collapse. No - all dharma and adharma operate at the transactions level only. They are as real as jiiva and Iswara. There is nothing to collapse since eventhing is included in that one - which is real from the absolute point. > > as per advaita it is assumed that there is ekmevadvitiya brahma(there > is only brahma and nothing else ) > so i am nothing else than brahma. > so i am brahma (aham brahmasmi) Yes in 'I am', 'I' stands for consciousness aspect and 'am' stands for existence as pect - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ' I ' STANDS FOR WHOSE CONSCIOUSNESS ?? MY OWN OR OTHERS?? I am + this where there is confusion of identification of subject with object 'this' - that is due to error which is due to ignornace of not knowing who that 'I am' - Right now ' I am 'a jiiva' is the notional understanding - I am Brahman is the vision of my self according to Upanishads. That true I am has to realized or recognized. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHO WILL REALIZE THE "true I am" ? FROM VYAVAHARIK(transactional) VIEW POINT JIVA(SOUL) WILL REALIZE THE "true I am" BUT FROM PARAMARTHIKA(transcedental) VIEW POINT I AM BRAHMA.. OK...I AGREE FOR TIME BEING..... NOW SUPPOSE I AM LIBERATED....I AM BRAHMA.....BUT I SEE MY FRINED 'xyz' NOT YET LIBERATED....BUT I KNOW I AM HE AND HE IS ME...FROM MY VIEW POINT HE TRIES HARD BUT FAIL TO GET LIBERATION...HE DIES...TAKES ANOTHER BODY..AGAIN STRIVES TO GET LIBERATED...AGAIN FAILS AND DIES AND AGAIN TAKES NEW BODY... NOW EACH TIME THE OLD BODY IS CAST OFF AND NEW BODY IS TAKEN.... WHO CASTS OFF THE OLD BODY AND TAKES THE NEW BODY ??? FROM MY VIEW POINT (ALL IS BRAHMA)...I CAST OF OLD BODY AND TAKE NEW BODY INSPITE OF BEING LIBERATED....... HOW WILL YOU JUSTIFY THIS...? > > ok now pls justify my query------ > suppose a body named ' vishal ' dies in its current life(now) without > attaining liberation....what will happen to the owner of that > body(brahma) > will it take up another body (of say lizard...due to body's sins done > here)?? Body is only a vehical or instrument provided to exhaust my vasana-s. I take suitable body that is required to exhaust my vasana-s. Essentially vasana-s decide the type of body required - man or woman or white, brown or black skin etc. I, the jiiva gravitate towards the environment that is conducive to my vaasana-s. Hence they are called 'kaarana shariira' or causal body. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) 'kaarana sharira' BELONGS TO WHOM ? IF IT BELONGS TO JIVA THEN JIVA CANNOT BE BODY...SO IT SHOULD BE SOUL SINCE MY 'kaarana sharira' BELONGS TO ME(JIVA) AND MY FRIEND'S 'kaarana sharira' BELONGS TO HIM(JIVA)...THERE ARE DIFFERENT JIVAS...SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT SOULS.. Hence what birth I take next depends on the most powerful vasana-s that are ready to germinate next - There is total bank account of jiiva (sanchita karma) - of which I brought in this life only those that can be exhausted - these are prarabda karma and if in the process I make now ones which cannot be exhuasted in this life they are deposited to my account and they are aagaami karma. Until all vasanas get neutralized, I will continue taking births in one form or the other. By yoga or sadhana I neutralize the vaasanas. When I realize who I am - I am not this not this etc since I the subject that can never be an object 'this' - I recognize that I am that sat chit ananda - there there is no more ownership to any karma too. All are transcended in that knowledge of who I am. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) IN THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH WHAT DOES ' I ' REPRESENT ???? ' I ' REPRESENTS JIVA...AND JIVA IS NOTHING BUT SOUL.... SO MULTIPLICITY OF SOULS IS ESTABLISHED 2) sanchit karma BELONGS TO WHOM ? VASANA BELONGS TO WHOM ? WHERE ARE VASANAS STORED ? > > if YES...then how will brahma decide which new body to take > up...(because karmashaya....vasana..etc are un-real as per advaita) NO you are switching from one reference to the other. As long as I think I am a jiiva - the notions are recognized as facts and the Brahman does not come into picture- I am Brahman is only from the state of absolute knowledge - but until that is recognized as a fact not as a thought - jiiva-hood is there and vasana-s operate. So karma and its kshaya is there as long as you are there to question as the questioning is done by a jiva. As long as I am dreaming that I am being chased by a tiger - that dreamer tiger is as real as the one who is being chased - I have to run away as fast as I can to save myself from that tiger. Only when I am awakened to the higher state of conscisness, the tiger and the one whom the tiger is chasing as well as the forest and the gound I am running are all resolved in to my own mind. The dreamer thinks that the dream world is real until he is awakened to higher state where there is only one mind that projects the world of plurality. The plurality is real as long as dream lasts. The problme in your questions is you want to place one leg in the waking state and one leg in the dream state and question the validity of each from the other reference. Please think it over - the confusion gets slowly resolved. > if NO ...then thats it.....no other body after destruction of this > current body....then there is no need to gain liberation....my body > will enjoy sensual gratification without any fear of ethics because > there will be only one life...enjoy is to the fullest....no need of > liberation. > death of body will itself be liberation. I think I have answered your questions above - please think it over and let me know if some more clarification is needed. Please think from what reference one is asking the questions. Brahman is absoltue non-dual inspite of duality since even this duality is nothing other than Brahmna - sarvam khalidam brahma - all this is brahman says Upanishad. Any questions from Brahman point sitting at jiiva positions are like dreamer asking about the waking mind. Waking mind is one - adivata - the pluarality of the dream world is from the point of dreamer who thinks he is different from the tiger and the treas in the forest and the inert ground that both tiger and the subject are running. Please think it over. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ONE MORE QUESTION A BIT DIFFERENT... IF ALL IS BRAHMA ??? HOW IS THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL IS BONDED IN FIRST PLACE ?? IT IS LIKE BRAHMA ITSELF GETS BONDED AND ITSELF WITH THE HELP OF ITSLEF GETS LIBERATED FROM ITSLEF...... WHY IS BRAHMA DOING ALL THIS UNNECESSARILY :-))) ???? Hari OM! sadananda > > vishal > > kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > > --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > > > A simple question. > > does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? > > reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha > karma > > etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully > > explained in sankhya philosophy) > > how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) and > > advaita(based on single soul) ? > > Vishalji, > > Your simple question is loaded! To answer simply, advaita is not based > on any single soul - There is no soul and not-soul at that ultimate > understanding - there is only one non-dual - sat chit and ananda. > Existence-consciousness-ananda canot be divided. If one sees divisions > they are only apparent and not real. If one takes the apparent real, > then all others factors you mentioned become as real. > > Jiiva (what you call as soul) itself is notion and when that notion is > taken as real - all those problmes that you mentioned become as real > as > jiiva. Hence reincornation and tranmigration of soul all real in that > frame. > > Look at this way - if gold and iron and copper looks different if > these > difference as taken as real - they can exist in differnet forms - now > as > ring now as bangle not as chain now as braclet - gold undergoing > tranmigration or reincornation in to different forms. > > If one understands all are nothing but just electron-protons-neutrons > etc then from that perspective gold, iron, copper are just one buch of > electrons-protons and neutrons -which themselves are nothing but > energy-states. > > I can understand as a scientist they are all one - yet I can transact > in > the world taking gold as gold different from iron and copper. > Transactions are done at one level while understanding is at the > ultimate level - there is no confusion if one undestands correctly. I > know that sun neither raises not sets but I can still appreciate the > beauty of sun raise and sunset. > > That is adivatia inspite of dvaita - that is no-incornation inspite of > reincornation. Karma is at the transactional level at the absoulte > level I realize that I am never a kartaa. That my friend is adviata. > Advaita inspite of dvaita. > > 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. Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2003 Report Share Posted August 23, 2003 Namaste Vishalji and all. This addendum to Sadaji's brilliant comments is uncalled for. Please, therefore, bear with this futile exercise of composing certain personal thoughts strictly within the advaitic format, which may bring forth a better understanding of the concept of reincarnation. As usual, I am not taking recourse to usual terminology – an area where I am least competent and, therefore, afraid to tread. First of all, everyone tends to believe that reincarnation takes place in a perfect sequence. If one dies in 2003, the general belief is that the dead man reincarnates post-2003. If the dead man's mental leanings have a chance to find fulfillment in the Victorian days, why can't he reincarnate in the good old English era? If we stand apart from the tyranny of sequential time, such scenarios are quite possible. Then, logically, another question arises: "Why can't he reincarnate on another planet?" That also is within the cards. He can reincarnate anywhere in this universe or in other unknown universes. It is also possible that there are several planes of existence and we are all flitting between them without our knowledge. When confronted with a question about death, an old advaitin asked his adversary: "How many times in a day do we die and are reborn? Why are you asking about a particular death foreseen to take place some time in the future?". That is very logical thinking considering the fact that we switch off and switch on between two consecutive thoughts! If Consciousness is understood as limitless, then there could be innumerable planes of existence where we may all be playing our roles `right now' without our ever knowing it. Even as I type this post, I may be finding expression elsewhere. My current consciousness may possibly be only a flicker in an infinite ocean of knowing. However, due to my delusion, I 'see' only this, with all its inhabitants and parapherlalia, as valid and continuous. They are all there, because I AM. My birth is not my experience. It is just a reported incident about which I am aware notwithstanding all the scientific research on psychoanalytic regression. Similarly, my death also won't be my experience like I didn't experience the exact moment of my falling asleep last night. However, I anticipate the body's dying some time in the future as I find other bodies perishing around me. My death, therefore, is just an idea occurring in my living present. It is there becauase I AM. If I understand myself as Consciousness, then the grip of the ideas of birth and death slacken and I become aware that, as Consciousness, I will continue to find expression anywhere at any time. It is in that expression that the places, times and ingredients of my experiences are located. There cannot be any past or future for such expression and its contents cannot be exclusive of me. This means that all the so-called jeevas are within me and not outside. As my objects, what happens to them need not concern me advaitically. I, as the subject, only is relevant. This, to my understanding, is the relevance of all scriptural statements on reincarnation. We keep reincarnating eternally and everywhere. When the temporal and spatial attributes are done away with through advaitic logic, we are both timelessness and spacelessness (Consciousness) without adjuncts. That Consciousness don't need any liberation at all. I see that Vishalji has asked the question why Brahman is doing all this unnecessarily. Well, several years ago, I asked this question to a renowned teacher. "Why this ignorance at all, Swamiji?" He asked me to enquire and find out if there is delusion at all. I now understand that such questions have validity only within the transactional. The feeling that they are intelligent questions is simply transactional. When Knowledge consumes ignorance, the question also disappears. This is what the scriptures proclaim. Let the aspirant, therefore, study the scriptures, listen to his teachers and decide for himself through reflection if there is delusion. If there is, the prescription is also available in the scriptures of the transactional. Incidentally, such questions remind me of a story. There was this guy trapped at the bottom of a deep well inhabited by poisonous creatures including a huge python. The python was already relishing the thought of a beautiful breakfast. Some passers by heard the trapped man's cries for help and threw in a rope for him to climb out of the well. The man shouted out: "Well, before I climb out, tell me, ye guys, why am I here at all?". "Do we need the rope?" is then the million dollar question. PraNAms. Madathil Nair ___________________________ advaitin, Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4> wrote: > ONE MORE QUESTION A BIT DIFFERENT... > IF ALL IS BRAHMA ??? HOW IS THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL IS BONDED IN FIRST PLACE ?? > IT IS LIKE BRAHMA ITSELF GETS BONDED AND ITSELF WITH THE HELP OF ITSLEF GETS LIBERATED FROM ITSLEF...... > WHY IS BRAHMA DOING ALL THIS UNNECESSARILY :-))) ???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2003 Report Share Posted August 23, 2003 Incidentally, such questions remind me of a story. There was this guy trapped at the bottom of a deep well inhabited by poisonous creatures including a huge python. The python was already relishing the thought of a beautiful breakfast. Some passers by heard the trapped man's cries for help and threw in a rope for him to climb out of the well. The man shouted out: "Well, before I climb out, tell me, ye guys, why am I here at all?". "Do we need the rope?" is then the million dollar question. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Namaste THE MAN HAS FALLEN IN THE WELL ACCIDENTALLY or HAS HE HIMSELF PUROSELY DIGGED THE WELL....PUT SNAKES IN IT....JUMPED IN IT UNNECESSARILY...AND THEN ASKING FOR HELP TO BE TAKEN OUT....is the million dollar question . Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2003 Report Share Posted August 23, 2003 Namaste. WELL. IN THIS CASE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE MAN HIMSELF DUG THE WELL, PUT HIMSELF AND THE SNAKES IN IT AND IS CRYING OUT FOR HELP AND ALSO STUBBORNLY ASKING THE VAIN QUESTION "WHO PUT ME HERE?" IS THE INFINITE MILLION DOLLAR ANSWER, SIR. If heed was paid to the earlier portions of my post, I could at least have avoided answering the million dollar question this way. MADATHIL NAIR ______________________ advaitin, Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4> wrote: > Namaste > > THE MAN HAS FALLEN IN THE WELL ACCIDENTALLY or HAS HE HIMSELF PUROSELY DIGGED THE WELL....PUT SNAKES IN IT....JUMPED IN IT UNNECESSARILY...AND THEN ASKING FOR HELP TO BE TAKEN OUT....is the million dollar question . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2003 Report Share Posted August 23, 2003 Namaste Madathilji pls tell me then why the man has dug the well and himself jumped into it....is there any resason ? man cannot be foolish to dug the well and jump in it.... so we are foolish to think that man has dug the well and jumped in it....he has only fallen in the well accidentally.... in the same way....brahma cannot be foolish to have himslef bonded and later liberated...... or we are foolish in thinking that brahma gets bonded and later liberated(BRAHMA DOES NOT GET BONDED AND LIBERATED)...which brings us to the question that then the bondage and liberation belongs to whom. u may say it belongs to jiva.... but jiva is nothing else than brahma in reality (although it may not be aware of that fact) this means (BRAHMA GETS BONDED AND LIBERATED) we start with (BRAHMA DOES NOT GET BONDED AND LIBERATED) and reach (BRAHMA GETS BONDED AND LIBERATED).....any justification for this...?? Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote: Namaste. WELL. IN THIS CASE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE MAN HIMSELF DUG THE WELL, PUT HIMSELF AND THE SNAKES IN IT AND IS CRYING OUT FOR HELP AND ALSO STUBBORNLY ASKING THE VAIN QUESTION "WHO PUT ME HERE?" IS THE INFINITE MILLION DOLLAR ANSWER, SIR. If heed was paid to the earlier portions of my post, I could at least have avoided answering the million dollar question this way. MADATHIL NAIR ______________________ advaitin, Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4> wrote: > Namaste > > THE MAN HAS FALLEN IN THE WELL ACCIDENTALLY or HAS HE HIMSELF PUROSELY DIGGED THE WELL....PUT SNAKES IN IT....JUMPED IN IT UNNECESSARILY...AND THEN ASKING FOR HELP TO BE TAKEN OUT....is the million dollar question . Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2003 Report Share Posted August 23, 2003 Namaste Vishalji. I explained my understanding of reincarnation in the first post itself. I have nothing more to add. My second post was just a simple rejoinder since you repeated your question picking on an example I quoted just to drive home the futility of asking unanswerable questions. In fact, that post contained the answer all teachers give when the question who is deluded is addressed to them. The asker of the question is the deluded one. He is in the well of delusion. Why does he get deluded? Well, get out of the delusion and realize that there was no basis for the delusion at all like there was no snake on the rope. The questions "Who dug the well?" etc. have relevance only to the transactional like the dream world has validity only as long as the dream lasts. Any answers that you may get for them will only create further questions. Doesn't the interminability of questions and incomplete answers point at the possibility of an Infinite? Could that Infinite be anything other than the real you? All delusions should, therefore, end there. All delusions are because IT IS. Yet, you can't attribute delusion of multiplicity to IT because, logically, the Infinite cannot be split into finite pieces. So, the appearance of the objective world including the questions, the stubborn asker of the questions, the unsatisfactory answers and the unending search for satisfactory answers are just an appearance on the Infinite like the snake on the rope. Call it lIlA or mAya. Just think over it. The drama will get over. I have nothing more to say. Perhaps, other Members may be able to help you further on this subject. Thanks. Madathil Nair ____________ advaitin, Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4> wrote: > > pls tell me then why the man has dug the well and himself jumped into it....is there any resason ? > man cannot be foolish to dug the well and jump in it.... > ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2003 Report Share Posted August 23, 2003 Namaste Sri Vishal: I have been following your questions, the answers provided by Sri Sadanandaji and Sri Nayar carefully. During the discussions, instead of keeping an open mind to clear and clarify your doubts, you are applying 'Vitandavada.' Please understand that this forum expects the members to apply one of the three recognized learning methods - 'Samvada, Vada and Jalpa' while engaging in scholastic discussions. If you carefully read the list guidelines, you will be able to notice that the list will not permit members to engage in Vitandavada and waste everyone's time. Vitanda is a virus or infection that the list will not permit this virus to destruct the minds of youngsters who sincerely want to use this forum in enhancing the spiritual knowledge. After seeing your most recent message, I do feel sorry for you and I don't know why you want to engage your time and energy in a destructive path. You still have time to listen get of the well and save yourself from poisoning your mind. If you want to enage only the type of debate that you engaged in, please note that this forum is the wrong place for you and we do not entertain such discussions. I have also provided the details of the four Vadas which further explain why 'Vitanda' has no place in this forum! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran Samvada: >From the Vedic time peirod, discussions are classified by Samvada, Vada, Jalpa and Vitanda. Samvada is the discussion between the teacher and the taught. The Hindu scriptures are written in the form of samvada. Before the teaching starts, the teacher and the disciples invoke the grace of the Lord with prayers such as Om Sahanavavatu, etc., The purpose of such prayers is to remove any hatred feelings between the teacher and the students so that teaching can takes place in a congenial atmosphere. The teacher encourages the student to question, and the questioning is not intended to test the teacher but to clarify student's understanding (or misunderstanding). The only goal of the teacher is to help the student to reach the highest goal on his/her own. The best example for Samvada is the dialog between Lord Krishna and Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita. Vada: Vada is the discussion between any two (generally among equals) to establish the truth or to resolve any conflicts. The discussants even though each may believe and have strong conviction to their position, they are ready to keep an open mind during the debate. They both agree to listen and accept the opponents' version if they are convinced that the other's interpretation is more correct based on whatever the pramana that they use as the authority. The famous dialogue between Sankaracharya and Mandana Mishra is a great example for vada. The level of honesty of the discussion was exemplified by the fact that Mandana Mishra's wife Umabharati (who was believed to be the embodiment of goddess of Knowledge, Saraswati) was chosen as the Judge for the Vada. Interestingly at the end of the debate, she declares that her husband lost the contest. Mandana Misra accepts the verdict and he became Sankaracharya's disciple. Jalpa: Jalpa is the discussion between the two who are also convinced that each one is right and the opponent is wrong. Unlike in vada, the purpose is not to discover or establish the truth, but the sole purpose is only to convert the other guy. The outcome of this whole jalpa is lot of noise without any decisive conclusion. Even if it appears that one has lost an argument, he/she will not accept it, instead collects more materials or fabricate other arguments in support of his/her position. Some of the scholarly discussions in electronic discussions groups such as advaitin list (for example, Sri Benjamin's discussion on madyamika and advaita) belongs to this type. But even in Jalpa, the discussions are still objective, each is strongly convinced that he/she is right and the other is wrong. Many vedantic discussions, for example a discussion between scholars of vedantic schools will fall into jalpa. The highly specialized scholars belonging to each of the vedantic schools (advaita, dwaita and visitadvaita) will never be tired to bring more materials in support of their contentions. They are great masters of Sanskrit and they apply their skills to split the Sanskrit words in the scriptures that bring new interpretations in support for their arguments. In many situations, multiple meanings do exist for important Sanskrit words and the interpreter can appropriately choose the meaning that suits his/her viewpoint. For example, the meaning of the Sanskrit word Dharma can easily fill in several pages and the scholars have plenty of latitude to choose the meaning that fits well in support of their position. Interestingly, jalpa may not be of use to those who engage in the argument because they are unlikely to change their deep- rooted conviction. But the bystanders who carefully follow arguments with an open mind usually get most of the benefits. Vitanda: Vitanda is the fourth and also the least recognized and used among the four. The sole purpose of vitanda is only to defeat the opponent. In contrast to Jalpa, those who employ Vitanda do not have any conviction and only purpose of the discussion is to invalidate any established position. Those who engage in Vitanda often use `Kutarka – applying irrational logic or twisting the logic.' There is no leaning experience for the discussant and the bystanders when one engages in vitanda. In discussions groups such as `advaitin list' we should not permit any one to engage in vitanda. ======= advaitin, Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4> wrote: > Namaste Madathilji > > pls tell me then why the man has dug the well and himself jumped into it....is there any resason ? > man cannot be foolish to dug the well and jump in it.... > so we are foolish to think that man has dug the well and jumped in it....he has only fallen in the well accidentally.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 24, 2003 Report Share Posted August 24, 2003 Hari Aum Sadanand Ji, Thank you for this beautiful answer. Deepak - "kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada <advaitin> Friday, August 22, 2003 7:43 AM Re: reincarnation - advaita and sankhya > > --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > > > A simple question. > > does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? > > reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha karma > > etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully > > explained in sankhya philosophy) > > how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) and > > advaita(based on single soul) ? > > Vishalji, > > Your simple question is loaded! To answer simply, advaita is not based > on any single soul - There is no soul and not-soul at that ultimate > understanding - there is only one non-dual - sat chit and ananda. > Existence-consciousness-ananda canot be divided. If one sees divisions > they are only apparent and not real. If one takes the apparent real, > then all others factors you mentioned become as real. > > Jiiva (what you call as soul) itself is notion and when that notion is > taken as real - all those problmes that you mentioned become as real as > jiiva. Hence reincornation and tranmigration of soul all real in that > frame. > > Look at this way - if gold and iron and copper looks different if these > difference as taken as real - they can exist in differnet forms - now as > ring now as bangle not as chain now as braclet - gold undergoing > tranmigration or reincornation in to different forms. > > If one understands all are nothing but just electron-protons-neutrons > etc then from that perspective gold, iron, copper are just one buch of > electrons-protons and neutrons -which themselves are nothing but > energy-states. > > I can understand as a scientist they are all one - yet I can transact in > the world taking gold as gold different from iron and copper. > Transactions are done at one level while understanding is at the > ultimate level - there is no confusion if one undestands correctly. I > know that sun neither raises not sets but I can still appreciate the > beauty of sun raise and sunset. > > That is adivatia inspite of dvaita - that is no-incornation inspite of > reincornation. Karma is at the transactional level at the absoulte > level I realize that I am never a kartaa. That my friend is adviata. > Advaita inspite of dvaita. > > Hari OM! > Sadananda > > > To make advaita complete, i think, we have to incorporate sankhya in > > it somehow.(i.e to show prakriti and purush are none other brahma) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. > > > > > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 Vishalji, I am official vacation (I mean business) in Budapest and would be back to US on Sept. 7. It is difficult to get on to internet. I may be able to address the questions if other have not answered you. Hari OM! Sadananda --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > > > kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > > --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > > Sadananda > > But then if advaita says reincarnation is not real at ultimate > level, > > then all the dharma and ethichs will collapse. > > No - all dharma and adharma operate at the transactions level only. > They > are as real as jiiva and Iswara. There is nothing to collapse since > eventhing is included in that one - which is real from the absolute > point. > > > > > > as per advaita it is assumed that there is ekmevadvitiya > brahma(there > > is only brahma and nothing else ) > > so i am nothing else than brahma. > > so i am brahma (aham brahmasmi) > > Yes in 'I am', 'I' stands for consciousness aspect and 'am' stands for > existence as pect - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ' I ' STANDS FOR WHOSE CONSCIOUSNESS ?? MY OWN OR > OTHERS?? > > I am + this where there is confusion of > identification of subject with object 'this' - that is due to error > which is due to ignornace of not knowing who that 'I am' - Right now ' > I > am 'a jiiva' is the notional understanding - I am Brahman is the > vision > of my self according to Upanishads. That true I am has to realized or > recognized. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > WHO WILL REALIZE THE "true I am" ? > FROM VYAVAHARIK(transactional) VIEW POINT JIVA(SOUL) WILL REALIZE THE > "true I am" > BUT FROM PARAMARTHIKA(transcedental) VIEW POINT I AM BRAHMA.. > OK...I AGREE FOR TIME BEING..... > > NOW SUPPOSE I AM LIBERATED....I AM BRAHMA.....BUT I SEE MY FRINED > 'xyz' NOT YET LIBERATED....BUT I KNOW I AM HE AND HE IS ME...FROM MY > VIEW POINT HE TRIES HARD BUT FAIL TO GET LIBERATION...HE DIES...TAKES > ANOTHER BODY..AGAIN STRIVES TO GET LIBERATED...AGAIN FAILS AND DIES > AND AGAIN TAKES NEW BODY... > NOW EACH TIME THE OLD BODY IS CAST OFF AND NEW BODY IS TAKEN.... > WHO CASTS OFF THE OLD BODY AND TAKES THE NEW BODY ??? > FROM MY VIEW POINT (ALL IS BRAHMA)...I CAST OF OLD BODY AND TAKE NEW > BODY INSPITE OF BEING LIBERATED....... > HOW WILL YOU JUSTIFY THIS...? > > > > ok now pls justify my query------ > > suppose a body named ' vishal ' dies in its current life(now) > without > > attaining liberation....what will happen to the owner of that > > body(brahma) > > will it take up another body (of say lizard...due to body's sins > done > > here)?? > > Body is only a vehical or instrument provided to exhaust my vasana-s. > I > take suitable body that is required to exhaust my vasana-s. > Essentially > vasana-s decide the type of body required - man or woman or white, > brown > or black skin etc. I, the jiiva gravitate towards the environment > that > is conducive to my vaasana-s. Hence they are called 'kaarana > shariira' > or causal body. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > 1) 'kaarana sharira' BELONGS TO WHOM ? IF IT BELONGS TO JIVA THEN > JIVA CANNOT BE BODY...SO IT SHOULD BE SOUL > SINCE MY 'kaarana sharira' BELONGS TO ME(JIVA) AND MY FRIEND'S > 'kaarana sharira' BELONGS TO HIM(JIVA)...THERE ARE DIFFERENT > JIVAS...SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT SOULS.. > > > > Hence what birth I take next depends on the most powerful vasana-s > that > are ready to germinate next - There is total bank account of jiiva > (sanchita karma) - of which I brought in this life only those that can > be exhausted - these are prarabda karma and if in the process I make > now > ones which cannot be exhuasted in this life they are deposited to my > account and they are aagaami karma. Until all vasanas get neutralized, > I > will continue taking births in one form or the other. By yoga or > sadhana > I neutralize the vaasanas. When I realize who I am - I am not this > not > this etc since I the subject that can never be an object 'this' - I > recognize that I am that sat chit ananda - there there is no more > ownership to any karma too. All are transcended in that knowledge of > who I am. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > 1) IN THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH WHAT DOES ' I ' REPRESENT ???? > ' I ' REPRESENTS JIVA...AND JIVA IS NOTHING BUT SOUL.... > SO MULTIPLICITY OF SOULS IS ESTABLISHED > 2) sanchit karma BELONGS TO WHOM ? VASANA BELONGS TO WHOM ? > WHERE ARE VASANAS STORED ? > > > > > if YES...then how will brahma decide which new body to take > > up...(because karmashaya....vasana..etc are un-real as per advaita) > > NO you are switching from one reference to the other. As long as I > think I am a jiiva - the notions are recognized as facts and the > Brahman > does not come into picture- I am Brahman is only from the state of > absolute knowledge - but until that is recognized as a fact not as a > thought - jiiva-hood is there and vasana-s operate. So karma and its > kshaya is there as long as you are there to question as the > questioning > is done by a jiva. As long as I am dreaming that I am being chased by > a > tiger - that dreamer tiger is as real as the one who is being chased - > I > have to run away as fast as I can to save myself from that tiger. > Only > when I am awakened to the higher state of conscisness, the tiger and > the > one whom the tiger is chasing as well as the forest and the gound I am > running are all resolved in to my own mind. The dreamer thinks that > the > dream world is real until he is awakened to higher state where there > is > only one mind that projects the world of plurality. The plurality is > real as long as dream lasts. The problme in your questions is you > want > to place one leg in the waking state and one leg in the dream state > and > question the validity of each from the other reference. Please think > it > over - the confusion gets slowly resolved. > > > if NO ...then thats it.....no other body after destruction of this > > current body....then there is no need to gain liberation....my body > > will enjoy sensual gratification without any fear of ethics because > > there will be only one life...enjoy is to the fullest....no need of > > liberation. > > death of body will itself be liberation. > > I think I have answered your questions above - please think it over > and > let me know if some more clarification is needed. Please think from > what > reference one is asking the questions. Brahman is absoltue non-dual > inspite of duality since even this duality is nothing other than > Brahmna > - sarvam khalidam brahma - all this is brahman says Upanishad. Any > questions from Brahman point sitting at jiiva positions are like > dreamer > asking about the waking mind. Waking mind is one - adivata - the > pluarality of the dream world is from the point of dreamer who thinks > he > is different from the tiger and the treas in the forest and the inert > ground that both tiger and the subject are running. Please think it > over. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > ONE MORE QUESTION A BIT DIFFERENT... > IF ALL IS BRAHMA ??? HOW IS THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL IS BONDED IN FIRST > PLACE ?? > IT IS LIKE BRAHMA ITSELF GETS BONDED AND ITSELF WITH THE HELP OF > ITSLEF GETS LIBERATED FROM ITSLEF...... > WHY IS BRAHMA DOING ALL THIS UNNECESSARILY :-))) ???? > > Hari OM! > sadananda > > > > > vishal > > > > kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > > > > --- Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: > > > > > A simple question. > > > does advaita Vedanta believe in reincarnation ? > > > reincarnation is based doctrine of karma ( karmashaya, prarabdha > > karma > > > etc...) which in turn assumes multiplicity of souls. (beautifully > > > explained in sankhya philosophy) > > > how to reconcile this doctrine of karma(based on multiple souls) > and > > > advaita(based on single soul) ? > > > > Vishalji, > > > > Your simple question is loaded! To answer simply, advaita is not > based > > on any single soul - There is no soul and not-soul at that ultimate > > understanding - there is only one non-dual - sat chit and ananda. > > Existence-consciousness-ananda canot be divided. If one sees > divisions > > they are only apparent and not real. If one takes the apparent real, > > then all others factors you mentioned become as real. > > > > Jiiva (what you call as soul) itself is notion and when that notion > is > > taken as real - all those problmes that you mentioned become as real > > as > > jiiva. Hence reincornation and tranmigration of soul all real in > that > > frame. > > > > Look at this way - if gold and iron and copper looks different if > > these > > difference as taken as real - they can exist in differnet forms - > now > > as > > ring now as bangle not as chain now as braclet - gold undergoing > > tranmigration or reincornation in to different forms. > > > > If one understands all are nothing but just > electron-protons-neutrons > > etc then from that perspective gold, iron, copper are just one buch > of > > electrons-protons and neutrons -which themselves are nothing but > > energy-states. > > > > I can understand as a scientist they are all one - yet I can > transact > > in > > the world taking gold as gold different from iron and copper. > > Transactions are done at one level while understanding is at the > > ultimate level - there is no confusion if one undestands correctly. > I > > know that sun neither raises not sets but I can still appreciate the > > beauty of sun raise and sunset. > > > > That is adivatia inspite of dvaita - that is no-incornation inspite > of > > reincornation. Karma is at the transactional level at the absoulte > > level I realize that I am never a kartaa. That my friend is adviata. > > Advaita inspite of dvaita. > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > Sponsor > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity > of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste Vishalji. > > I explained my understanding of reincarnation in the first post > itself. I have nothing more to add. > > My second post was just a simple rejoinder since you repeated your > question picking on an example I quoted just to drive home the > futility of asking unanswerable questions. In fact, that post > contained the answer all teachers give when the question who is > deluded is addressed to them. The asker of the question is the > deluded one. He is in the well of delusion. > > Why does he get deluded? Well, get out of the delusion and realize Namaste, It seems to me that the construct of the jiva or entity is misnamed 'Soul', for the Jiva can only be part of the mind. There is only one Soul in the Universes. As we are not really our dream neither is Brahman the dream. So there is no point of mixing apples and oranges at the lower level. It is real whilst one is in it, one has to realise it isn't real that's the problem. A problem which is veiled by karmas and samskaras that do not allow the intellect to drop and realisation to occur. So although I feel I know all I need to know intellectually about Advaita and Brahman, I do not realise it in fact. This indicates my obstacle is my mind itself. This final step of crossing the river is the hardest, for even living in the present one still has karmas and samskaras interfering, What I'm trying to say is I don't know how to overcome this, in any easier way than sadhana........ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: As we are not really our dream > neither is Brahman the dream. So there is no point of mixing apples > and oranges at the lower level. It is real whilst one is in it, one > has to realise it isn't real that's the problem. A problem which is > veiled by karmas and samskaras that do not allow the intellect to > drop and realisation to occur. So although I feel I know all I need > to know intellectually about Advaita and Brahman, I do not realise it > in fact. This indicates my obstacle is my mind itself. > This final step of crossing the river is the hardest, for even living > in the present one still has karmas and samskaras interfering, > What I'm trying to say is I don't know how to overcome this, in any > easier way than sadhana........ONS...Tony. Excellent, Tony. I think you have said everything that has to be said about it. And to the point. My praNAms, Tony. PraNAms to all advaitins profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 Namaste. Toniji says: "This final step of crossing the river is the hardest, for even living in the present one still has karmas and samskaras interfering, What I'm trying to say is I don't know how to overcome this, in any easier way than sadhana." Simply stated, there is an interference, there is a knowing of interference and there is somebody who is interfered with. Standing apart from them as the dispassionate, independent knower of them then is the soul of sAdhana. For that knower there is no river and final step of crossing, which all belong to the transactional and which are because the knower is. The river and final step are a problem only for the one who indulges in the interference. PraNAms. Madathil Nair ___________________________ advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste. > > Toniji says: > > "This final step of crossing the river is the hardest, for even > living in the present one still has karmas and samskaras interfering, > What I'm trying to say is I don't know how to overcome this, in any > easier way than sadhana." > > Simply stated, there is an interference, there is a knowing of > interference and there is somebody who is interfered with. Standing > apart from them as the dispassionate, independent knower of them then > is the soul of sAdhana. For that knower there is no river and final > step of crossing, which all belong to the transactional and which are > because the knower is. The river and final step are a problem only > for the one who indulges in the interference. > > PraNAms. > > Madathil Nair Namaste Madathil et al, Yes this is true, as Ramana says 'Who am I'? However the Sadhana is that and does take time to come to fruition due to samskaras. Our Moksha is written, I believe for there is really no time. For understanding your last sentence has not made one a Mukti. Knowing what a King is doesn't make one a King..Unfortunately.....ONS..Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Namaste all, First of all I would like to apologize if i have offended anyone knowingly or unknowingly in this forum. I agree the way of expressing my views was wrong, maybe due to my imperfect english and also i am new to this kind of forums. I am grateful to Sadaji, Madathilji and all others who have taken so pains to explain the subtle concepts of Advaita.But unfortunately I could not get much of it either may be due to misunderstanding or my limited intellect. I have read Advaita and Sankhya (but i dont claim to be master in anyone !!!) Both are logically very sound. But i can say that I belive in advaita because it is the superset of sankhya(and all other dualist philosophies that originated from sankhya) And in reality also, i.e at the point of aparoksha anubhuti, the experience should be the same (of all is brahma..the pure existence) to a seeker irrespective of the path followed by him (sankhya, Raja yoga, karma yoga, bhakti...etc). So essentially the reality is one but different schools see it differently (advaita being the correct one). So such a philosophy should be developed (which should be LOGICALLY STRONG as nyaya scahool) with the base as advaita(since it is most correct one) and which encompasses all the correct things from other philosophies. In this endeavor the first difficulty advaita faces is the DOCTRINE OF KARMA ( getting out of the cycle of birth-death-birth), which essentially is the aim of human life, the purpose of liberation. This is exactly what i was trying to point out during the debates. To logically prove the doctrine of karma in advaita. It should be like einstein's relativity which is not only is perfect at high speeds and large scale, but also approximates to newston's theory at low speeds and small scales !!!! If this doctrine of karma has already been thought over by the great teachers of advaita (shri gaudapadacharya, shri shankaracharya, shri madhusudan...), then please let me know where can i find their works. Hope i am successful in driving home my point. If any clarifications needed pls let me know. Regards Vishal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Namaste Sri Vishal: We all make mistakes and many times we do it inadvertantly and thanks for the clarification. We come from a culture, where we humility takes precedence over scholarship and it is our duty to preserve this great tradition while exchanging our views. It is quite possible that I might have overreacted to your reply to Sri Nair without giving the benefit of doubt and my intention was also not to offend you. Please keep continue with your questions and sooner or later you will be able to recognize that no one other you can resolve your doubts to your complete satisfaction. The purpose of this forum is help all of us to spiritually grow and to recognize our True Divine Nature! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4> wrote: > Namaste all, > > First of all I would like to apologize if i have offended anyone knowingly or unknowingly in this forum. > I agree the way of expressing my views was wrong, maybe due to my imperfect english and also i am new to this kind of forums. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Namaste Tonyji. I am afraid we are talking at cross-purposes. The intent of my post was to drive home the point that witnessing the river and obstacles is the essence of sAdhanA. SAdhanA minly is the constant remembrance of one's status as witness and performing such acts that strengthen this remembrance in an unbinding manner. I didn't say sAdhanA is not required. Without the logical understanding of one's status as pure witness and its constant remembrance, any amount of sAdhanA is soul-less and cumbersome. With that firm knowledge, sAdhanA becomes not only purposeful but easier. The furious river with all its churning whirlpools then becomes a silent pond. The future date of 'liberation' then is not a worry to be entertained at all because, as witness (or the king in your post), one is already liberated. It is one's role as samsAri (the beggar on the street) that craves for liberation as it is bound to samsArA. Whenever the thought of 'liberation' bothers, the best solution, therefore, is to get back to the rememberance mentioned above (that I am the King), first deliberately and then, in course of time, spontaneously. That remembrance is the only abode where one can find permanent solace. Let 'liberation' (purely from the samsAri's or beggar's point of view) then take place, if at all, at its own convenience. Why bother? Isn't such botheration (beggarliness) counter-productive to the very kingly sAdhanA we are talking so very much about? PraNAms. Madathil Nair _________________ advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: > Namaste Madathil et al, > > Yes this is true, as Ramana says 'Who am I'? However the Sadhana is > that and does take time to come to fruition due to samskaras. Our > Moksha is written, I believe for there is really no time. For > understanding your last sentence has not made one a Mukti. Knowing > what a King is doesn't make one a King..Unfortunately.....ONS..Tony. 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.