From my files

[Guest guest]

beautifully said......

hats-off to sadanandaji.

 

kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote:

 

Logic of Spirituality

 

Dr. K. Sadananda*

Disciple of H.H. Swami Chinmayanandaji

 

 

We are all born in this universe, whether we like it or not. We did not

seem to have much choice in terms of the place where we are born, in the

selection of parents, type of bodies we want, male or female, choice of

siblings, etc. Decisions seem to have been made by forces beyond our

control. We continuously struggle hard throughout our lives, from birth

to death, from womb to the tomb, trying to acquire things we like and/or

trying to get rid of things we dislike; ultimately taking nothing with

us when we leave. That seems to be the tragedy of not only ours, but

also of every life form. In response to a question by a Yaksha as to

what is the greatest wonder in the world, YudhishhTara answers in

Mahaabhaarat, - we see everyday people being born and people dying, yet

everyone feels and acts as though he is going to live for ever – and

that is the greatest wonder.

 

What is life? Is there a purpose for this life? What is this Universe

that I have to deal with? Who am I? Where from I came and where am I

going? Is this universe a creation? Is there a creator? Why did he

create such a defective universe where everyone seems to be more

miserable than happy? Where is he now? Even if he wants to create, why

me? What is my relationship with Him? – these are some of the questions

a rational intellect cannot but ask at sometime or other during his

life-struggles. We will explore some of these questions here. We, being

the children of modern science, cannot accept unless it is perfectly

logical and of course unless it is provable, deductively or inductively.

 

 

Is this Universe a Creation? – Since universe exists, its existence is

not a question but we still need to know wherefrom it came – is it a

creation or is it a product of some random event? All Science can tell

us is that it is a product of a big bang of highly concentrated matter.

But that is not a complete answer, since we are still faced with

questions of, what was there before the bang, what are the governing

physical laws for the bang, what or who is the source of these laws,

what is the source of the matter that concentrated to give that bang, is

this a random process or is it a deterministic system with intelligence

behind all these effects. We have no answer from Science for any one of

these. We turn to religion to see if we can get any better answers.

All religions proclaim that universe is a creation and that there is a

creator, that we call God, who is in heaven. Every religion describes

Him as omnipotent and omnipresent, who is the Lord of this entire

universe, an originator, supporter and destroyer. A rational intellect

cannot easily accept such statements, which cannot be proved. Since He

is in heaven and not here and we don’t know where that heaven is and if

exists at all. Hence we have more non-believers than believers in this

age. Actually both are believers, one believes that there is God and

the other believes that there is no God. David Hume in “Dialogue

Concerning Natural Religions’ looking at so much evil seen in the world

raises concern about God– “Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?”-From Dennis Book.

These are not invalid questions that can be easily brushed aside.

 

What constitutes a creation? Let us first address the question whether

this universe is a creation or not. Christian fundamentalists question

the teaching of Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools since it is

against their religious doctrine of creation. They want creation theory

(biblical version of creation) to be taught in schools where Darwin’s

theory is taught. If one looks carefully, ‘Evolution’ presupposes

‘Creation’, since something has to be there, to begin with, for it to

evolve. We cannot bring a big stone on the hill and say that is a

creation. But suppose, if one carves out of that stone a beautiful

image of Lord Ganesha, then we admire the beauty and say that is a

beautiful creation. Beauty and order in that image transformed a simple

stone into a creation. Order provides the beauty. Whether it is music

or dance, there is an order, which we call raga-s and taala-s or

repeated ordered patterns. In addition, we can predict what is going to

be next based on that order. In the language of thermodynamics, we call

this as ‘ a well-behaved system’. Creation of any order, according to

laws of thermodynamics involves expenditure of energy, i.e. work has to

be done to create that order. From these, we gather that for something

to be called a creation, a) it should be a well-behaved system, b) it

should be highly ordered system c) it requires higher energy involving

work. Now let us take a close look at the universe.

 

Universe is indeed a highly ordered well-behaved system. From atomic

orbitals to planetary motion, there is a perfect order, with electrons

orbiting around the nucleus and planets orbiting around the sun. One

can predict the position of the planets precisely where they are going

to be in future based on the mechanics of the moving bodies. A

scientist sitting in a corner of laboratory able to discover the

Universal laws of physics that are applicable to tinniest particles in

nature to gigantic bodies, galaxies and galaxies away shows that

universe is an ordered and thermodynamically a well-behaved system. If

this is a creation, to create such a ordered universe, the creator, if

there is one, has to be very highly intelligent and skillful.

 

Creation involves two entities: Any creation involves two essential

aspects. Suppose if I want to create a watch, I should have first a

know-how of how to create a watch, and second all the materials needed

to create. The first one is called ‘intelligent cause or ‘nimitta

kaaraNa’ and the second one is called ‘upaadana kaaraNa’. Actually I

should be not only a good designer but also good technician too to be

able to assemble things properly. The intelligent and the instrumental

causes are included in the first. The gears, screws and bolts that I

need are all the material cause.

 

Now extending this to Universe, if there is a creator, he has to be most

intelligent since he should know everything that exists in the universe.

All scientific laws that are discovered and that are yet to be

discovered are all within the universe. Hence he is called ‘sarvaj~na’.

He should have all the skills too, ‘sarvashaktimaan’. Now the problem

comes in terms of material to create the universe. Where can he go and

get material to create the Universe. In my case, I had the luxury of

going to shop and buying all the materials needed to create the watch.

If there is material available somewhere, then we ask who created that

material, etc. Only choice He has, is that he has to be material cause

as well. Hence it is unlike any other creation that we are familiar

with since both material and intelligent cause has to be one and the

same. Upanishad provide a simple example to illustrate this. It says

that just as a spider is both material and intelligent cause for the

creation of its net so is the Lord.

 

Where is that Lord Now? A typical question an atheist asks is ‘show me

where is that God who created this universe”. Since he is both material

and intelligent causes, he cannot be inside the creation, and he cannot

be outside the creation. He cannot be outside the creation, since

outside has to be created first for him to be outside. In that case the

so-called outside become part of the creation or inside the creation

only. This implies that creation has to be infinite.

 

He cannot be inside the creation also since he becomes limited by the

creation. Hence anything inside the creation cannot be the cause for

the entire creation. Only choice we have is He and the creation cannot

be separated. So where is He Now? – Everywhere – whatever I see, I

touch, I smell, I hear, I taste is nothing but He or Him only. He

pervades this entire universe – VishNu – (vyaapakatvaat vishNuH) -hence

he is ‘sarva vyaapaka’ –Omnipresent says all scriptures.

 

If He is everywhere, then why do we need a temple, asks a smart Alec.

True, in that case we should see His temple everywhere. Since we do not

have that vision of viswaruupa that Arjuna got with the grace of Lord

Krishna, we need to have a temple – so that we can gain that vision of

seeing Him everywhere including in the temple through shravana, manana

and nidhidhyaasana, by constant listening to the scriptures and the

teachers, constant reflection on the truths expounded in the scriptures

and contemplation on those truths. All the questions that have been

raised in the beginning have been logically answered in the scriptures.

It is our obligation not only to learn these but also pass them on to

our next generation. We do not want our children to come and ask –

“Dad! Am I a HinDu?” They should feel proud that they have come from

such a rich tradition with vast knowledge.

 

We have now understood that the universe is a peculiar creation unlike

any other, in the sense that both material and efficient causes are one

and the same. In taittiriiya upanishad Brahman is defined in both ways.

“satyam-j~naanam-anantam Brahman’ – existence-knowledge-infiniteness is

Brahman, thus defining the intelligent cause and “yatova imaani bhuutani

jaayante, yena jaataani jiivanti, yat prayam tyabhisam visanti| tat

vij~naasaswa| tat brahmeti.” that from which this world arose, is

sustained and into which it goes back- is Brahman. Just as all

ornaments arose from gold, sustained by gold and go back into gold –

implying that gold is the material cause for all the ornaments;

similarly Brahman.

 

Law of Conservation: Before we proceed further we need to bring another

important law that we are all familiar with in Science. This is the law

of conservation of matter and energy. We may be surprised to learn that

this Law was given out by Lord Krishna himself. He says in Ch. 2

“naasato vidyate bhaavo naabhaavo vidyate sataH|” – that which is

non-existent never comes into existence and that which exists never

ceases to exist – this is an absolute universal law of conservation.

Krishna applies this not only to matter but even to subtler entities

such as individual souls when He tells Arjuna that you are grieving

unnecessarily since everything get re-cycled only and nothing gets

destroyed in any process involving change.

 

Applying this law to creation process, we can immediately see the

implications. Creation cannot be something out of nothing, since that

violates the law of conservation. It should only be a transformation of

that which is already there – just as the example we gave as carving of

Lord Ganesh’s image out of the pre-existing stone.

 

Creation as a phase-transformation: From thermodynamics we learn that

there are two types of transformations: reversible and irreversible

transformations. For example, ice melting into water is a reversible

transformation, while milk becoming curd is an irreversible

transformation. Vedanta provides a third alternative for creation.

Creation is an apparent transformation and not real transformation. In

Chandigya Upanishad it provides three examples to illustrate the point.

For our purpose we discuss here one example. ‘ekena lohamaninaa sarvam

lohamayam vij~naataa| syaat vaachaarambanam vikaaro namaadheyam|

lohamityava satyam|| Creation is just as gold transforming into many

ornaments. Here ornaments such as ring, necklace, bangle etc are all

different from one another, each with its own guNa, jaati and kriya;

attributes, family and function. Yet there are all nothing but gold.

Gold remains as one without plurality–ekam eva advitiiyam – inspite of

transforming into many varieties of ornaments. Law of conservation is

preserved in the transformation, which is only apparent, since from gold

point there is no real transformation. Transformation is only in terms

of name and form with attributes, such as thickness, diameter etc for

the ring. Gold will laugh at us if we ask when it became a ring or

necklace or bangle. It was gold before it became a ring, it is gold

even we call it as a ring and it will be gold even if the ring is

transformed into bangle. Hence upanishad declares ‘loham iti eva satyam’

–just as Gold alone is real or truth. The apparent transformation is

not a real transformation for one to be concerned about, unless one

takes it as real; and that can create problems.

 

Hence the Upanishad declares “what was there before creation is only

Sat, which is existence. It is one without a second.” That means it is

unlimited or infinite which is the same as anandam or happiness, since

any limitation causes sorrow. Upanishad goes on further to declare that

the existence is of the nature of consciousness –it says ‘tat aikshata’

– it saw. Since inert things cannot see, the statement indicates that it

is of the nature of consciousness. Since there is nothing else to see

other than itself – it is of the nature of self-consciousness – swayam

jyotiH. Hence what was there before creation was of the nature of

‘sat-chit-ananda swruupam’- of the nature of

‘existence-consciousness-bliss’. Since creation is only an apparent

transformation – it remains as such even after transformation without

undergoing any mutations. Hence what is there after creation is also

sat-chit-ananda swaruupam only.

 

Fundamental Error: Two things remain to be accounted for if everything

is of the nature of existent-consciousness, which is one without a

second. Contrary to the cause which is of the nature of consciousness,

the effect, the universe, is jadam or inert. How can consciousness

entity produce inert entity. Second if the nature of the source is

eternal unlimited happiness or ananda swaruupa, how came most us of feel

miserable most of the time. These two things are not unrelated.

Shankara accounts for these as due to adhyaasa or fundamental error of

superimposition. If one sees two moons in the sky, then the fault is not

with the moon but with the eyes that are seeing two when there is one.

What everybody seems to be searching for in all our pursuits is

happiness. If I am already of the nature of happiness and still I am

searching for it, it only means that I do not know that I am already

that what I am searching for. Ignorance of my own nature is the

fundamental problem. If the source of happiness is my own self, any

search for happiness outside is going to be a failure. Only solution to

the problem is to recognize my true nature – that is I am already that

what I am searching for – Hence upanishads declare – tat tvam asi – you

are that what you are longing for. Thus non-apprehension of myself

causes misapprehension of myself. When I don’t know who I am, I take

myself to be what I am not, and suffer the consequences of that

misapprehension. I take myself to be this body, this mind and/or this

intellect which are by nature limited or finite. I superimpose the

limitations of the body, mind and intellect on to myself and suffer

unnecessarily as a consequence of that superimposition. When I don’t

know that it is a rope (non-apprehension of the rope), I take it as a

snake (misapprehension) and suffer the consequence of seeing the snake

there. Since I am afraid of the snakes, my blood pressure goes up, my

breathing is rapid and I become nervous. Should I blame the rope for my

suffering? Should I sit down and do japa that is not a snake but it is a

rope etc., so that snake will disappear or should I take a stick and

kill that snake so that it would not bother anybody. How can snake, a

living entity, come out of an inert rope? Shankara says when I do not

know rope as a rope, I take it as a snake. When the light is shown on

the rope, I see the rope as a rope and the snake vision disappears.

Where did the snake go? There was never a snake to start with to go

somewhere. It was only in my mind and not out there. Just as an inert

rope did not create living snake for me to be afraid of, the

sat-chit-ananda swaruupa did not create a world of inert things for us

to explain how come etc. World is nothing but a mental projection with

me as one of the subjects along with other subjects and inert things.

Mandukya Upanishad says it is like my projection of the dream world with

dream subjects and objects along with myself as one of the subjects.

But all dream problems are real only for the dreamer who mistakes the

dream world of plurality as reality different from him. When he is

awakened he recognizes that all that he saw in the dream was only

apparent and not real. The truth is non-duality inspite of duality

just as gold is non-dual inspite of its existence as many ornaments.

Apparent plurality can cause only apparent problems and apparent

problems are only apparent and not real. Hence Shankara declares: na

yogena na saakhyena karmanaa no na vidyayaa| brahmaatmaikatya bodhena

mokshaH sidhyati na anyathaa|| Not by yoga, not by analysis, not by

action, not by studies one can gain the liberation. Only by learning

the identity of myself with the total self that one can gain liberation.

 

 

Lead me from the unreal to the real|

Lead me from darkness into light|

Lead me from death to immortality

--\

---

*Material Scientist, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington D.C.

 

An article written for Houston Temple souvenir at their request.

 

 

=====

What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift

to Him - Swami Chinmayananda.

 

 

 

The New with improved product search

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

The New with improved product search

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Respected Sadananda:

 

Thank you for sharing your wonderful thoughts.

 

Regards,

 

Dr. Yadu

 

 

advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada> wrote:

>

> Logic of Spirituality

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sadaji:

 

I would like to put this and some of your other writings on the HS website and

the magazine if it is all right with you. We can also create a link to the

Chinmaya mission where people can get your audio tapes as well as your book once

it is ready.

 

I already have a link to the Advaitin website there. It would be nice to have

more writings, essays, stories from other learned members here in Advaitin on

topics of their choice ranging from Advaita Vedanta, Yogas, Tantras, Goddess,

Shakti, and other related areas.

 

magazine, while retaining its traditional name has also adopted

the website name Nonduality-Advaita and can now be accessed in both the usual

way and also by clicking on www.nonduality-advaita.com.

 

As the HS mag develops, we remain committed to Advaita as being a large

component of the website that is represented by learned scholars here.

 

Love to all

Harsha

 

 

 

 

"Love itself is the actual form of God."

 

Ramana Maharshi

[Guest guest]

Namaste, all

 

Respected Sri Sadanandji’s article “Logic of Spirituality” is very absorbing and

most inspiring, to all, particularly new students of Vedanta. God vis-à-vis

Creation, as very intelligently covered in the article, is very logic and it

must remove the wrong notions and speculation about God, as an entity sitting

somewhere in Heaven, etc.

 

I am writing the following for a detailed analysis by the group members.

 

Superimposition involves the following:-

 

1) One who superimposes, i.e. Jeeva which is ignorant about its own nature,

 

2) An object, vishaya, on which superimposition takes place due to ignorance

about the object, not total ignorance but partial ignorance, of the object

 

3) Prior Knowledge of the thing superimposed

 

There are following questions that need to be addressed:-

 

a) When there is non-apprehension of a rope, only a person who had the

knowledge of a snake earlier, can superimpose/imagine a snake on the rope. A

person who has never had vision/knowledge of a snake earlier cannot superimpose

a snake on the rope. Of course he may project a garland or a stick. This is

because he has some knowledge of those things seen earlier by him. If it is

total ignorance, there will be no superimposition by him, but the knowledge that

“he does not know it” takes place. The point is, for any superimposition,

previous knowledge of the thing that is superimposed/imagined on another thing

has to be there, and also partial knowledge of the thing on which

superimposition takes place. (“Smrutiroopaha paratrapoorvadrushtaavabhasaha”)

 

b) In the case of dream, it is my projection of something/some events, etc,

which I had already seen or of which I already have prior knowledge during my

waking state. I cannot project anything in my dream about which I have never had

any knowledge. Of course in the dream there can be a mix up of my earlier

knowledge, i.e. I may appear in my dream with a tail and two horns. This is

possible because I have earlier knowledge of tail and horns. I can never project

a “gagabugau” in my dream. There is no superimposition in dreams.

 

c) During the waking state how can I project a world through

superimposition, outside me, unless I have had earlier knowledge of a world, and

also unless I have some knowledge of the world outside me on which I superimpose

now?

 

d) Is the world I project out of my mind during waking state is the same

world others also project? Because the projection of my dream is only for me and

not for others? Similarly, the projection of a snake on rope is only for me and

not for others.

 

There is a detailed discussion on Superimposition and De-superimposition in

VEDANTA-SARA (Sri Sadananda), and the following is my understanding of the

subject:

 

(i) With regard to (a) above, it is apparent recognition of something previously

observed, in some other thing. That is, the act of falsely imagining one thing

as another, just as mistaking a rope for a snake, a stump of a tree for a man

etc. It is termed as “Adhyaropa or Adhyasa”. Here one thing is taken as another

thing due to ignorance.

 

(ii) With regard to © i.e. mind, or “i”, or Jeeva, projecting a world outside,

it is superimposition of reality to phenomenal things, i.e. avastuni vastu

budhi, and also vice versa.

 

After knowledge, the appearance of the world does not change, but my budhi, i.e.

knowledge of the world changes to avastuni avastu budhi. Avastu refers to

apparent appearances of vastu,(the substratum or adhishtana) i.e. nama, roopa,

kriya, sambandha, etc., tatasta lakshananas, or attributes, (changing

continuously) of the vastu, appearing on the vastu.

 

It is not the world of objects that binds one, but one’s sad-budhi of objects,

i.e. knowledge that the world he is confronting is real. Before rising of

knowledge, he took them as real and after rising of knowledge he realizes the

illusoriness of the world that he confronts, i.e. his earlier knowledge (?) was

false. What changes is only the knowledge, i.e. earlier notion about the world

of objects.

 

When Jeeva gets enlightened after removal of its ignorance about its own real

nature, and the illusoriness i.e. its earlier false knowledge about the world,

its whole attitude towards it, towards the world and Eswara, changes, as it

knows it is nothing but Brahman, which is the substratum for itself, as also for

all seen and unseen, including Eswara. It is this change in Jeeva, is

Jeevanmukti.

 

Of course, from the point of Absolute Truth, there is only homogenous

consciousness, on which all including Jeeva (i.e. self superimposed with

jeevatwam i.e. it is a separate independent entity, etc.), with its budhi,

manas, shareera and all its knowledge/notions, etc, world of objects, Eswara,

appear to float, like waves floating on ocean. Appears, because, all these

continuously change, like waves changing into whirlpools etc.

 

I may be totally confused and wrong, but I hope the learned members of the group

can correct me.

 

Hari Om

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The New with improved product search

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Maniji.

 

There is a subtle difference.

 

Rope-snake analogy and the removal of ignorance therein belongs

entirely to the phenomenal world where all its ingredients are

objectifiable as separate entities. At the end, the rope remains

separate from its seer when the snake is gone.

 

In contrast, Self-Knowledge encompasses the subject (jIVA as you

say), object (phenomenal world of duality) and the error. The three

are verily the Self alone. What is consumed on Self-Realization is

the separation between them whereby Unity results.

 

We can only say this much. Beyond that is beyond words. Hence, no

comments on the last part of your post. However, I wouldn't like to

call it a 'change' as I, the Whole, can never change. The

anticipation of a change, which is also Me, belongs to the phenomenal

with an anticipator, anticipating and anticipated. Who remains to

feel the change when separation is removed? If a jIvanmuktA remains

at the end to feel that he has changed, I should think that he

doesn't qualify to be called so. His knowledge of Reality is

academic still. The salt-doll getting dissolved in the ocean is

there no more to fret about its erstwhile salt-dollness. It could

have anticipated its dissolution (change) only till it plunged into

the sea, i.e. only as long as it was a salt-doll.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

________________________

 

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

> When Jeeva gets enlightened after removal of its ignorance about

its own real nature, and the illusoriness i.e. its earlier false

knowledge about the world, its whole attitude towards it, towards the

world and Eswara, changes, as it knows it is nothing but Brahman,

which is the substratum for itself, as also for all seen and unseen,

including Eswara. It is this change in Jeeva, is Jeevanmukti.

>

> Of course, from the point of Absolute Truth, there is only

homogenous consciousness, on which all including Jeeva (i.e. self

superimposed with jeevatwam i.e. it is a separate independent entity,

etc.), with its budhi, manas, shareera and all its knowledge/notions,

etc, world of objects, Eswara, appear to float, like waves floating

on ocean. Appears, because, all these continuously change, like waves

changing into whirlpools etc.