ranjeetmore Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 I would like to ask a series of questions in an earnest spirit,to the Mayavadis.I hope Mayavadis,except kaisersose(He thinks that Sri Shankaracharya's Brahm can perform work-(I know!)),will reply and invite anyone else you would like to. Please try to answer the immediate question as briefly as possible.Since it is generally expected from us(Vaishnavas) to quote scriptures,it would be expected from the mayavadis that they quote at least shankaracharya ESPECIALLY when sensational claims (Like that of Kaisersose) are made. I am positive that the end of this discussion shall culminate in an intense,if not life changing,conclusion. Mayavadis,Hear Hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranjeetmore Posted January 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 According to Mayavada, What happens to the personalities who are eligible for liberation after leaving the body ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Mayavada Bhasya Sunyo Haya Sarva-nasha. (Chaitanya Mahaprabu). Eng: By hearing Mayavada you become a Mayavadi. And you are destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 After the soul leaves the body, all personality (ego) should disappear. The soul then becomes consciously aware of its actual position: 'one with Brahman'. At this point, all individuality as we know it has disappeared. The individual Jiva, Soul or Atman returns to its source from which it will not return of its own volition. However, certain souls may return for reasons understood only by Narayana/Krishna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimfelix Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 I don't think I am a mayavadin, although you would have to define the term before I could be sure. But in answer to your question, I would suggest that in Shankara's view moksha is not a matter of going anywhere different to where you are now. You are atman, and as the Mandukya Upanishad (v2) says, ayam atma brahma, the atman is Brahman. We perceive ourselves as existing in this world because we believe ourselves to have an individual identity , when we realise our true identity we cease to exist in that way and come to exist in terms of our true identity, Brahman. I think that is the advaita teaching as I understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranjeetmore Posted January 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 So jeevatma is Brahm .Undifferentiated,Non divisible,Unlimited Brahm who is ONE ? Yes.Or no ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimfelix Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 That is the way in which Shankaracharya interprets statements of the Upanishads such as 'ayam atma brahma', 'aham brahmasmi', 'sarvam khalv idam brahma' and 'tat tvam asi'. I would not say that the only way to understand these injunctions is in terms of the absolute identity of atman and brahman, but to do so is not an unreasonable mode of exegesis and seems to be in line with the spirit of these shruti texts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctor82 Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 I am not used to the term Mayavada. I know Shankaracharya was an exponent of Advaita philosophy. It has nothing to do with Maya in the spiritual sense. Advaita philosophy is something that a jnani realizes at the end of his spiritual exercises. I would go with "kimfelix" and my understanding of the topic is similar. Only people with higher levels of understanding can go for Advaita philosophy. A layman should always begin his spiritual journey by bhakti yoga - Dualism. So it is pointless to discuss Advaita with a non initiated or a not so advanced in spiritual path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 So jeevatma is Brahm .Undifferentiated,Non divisible,Unlimited Brahm who is ONE ? Yes.Or no ? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amlesh Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I am not used to the term Mayavada. I know Shankaracharya was an exponent of Advaita philosophy. It has nothing to do with Maya in the spiritual sense. Advaita philosophy is something that a jnani realizes at the end of his spiritual exercises. I would go with "kimfelix" and my understanding of the topic is similar. Only people with higher levels of understanding can go for Advaita philosophy. A layman should always begin his spiritual journey by bhakti yoga - Dualism. So it is pointless to discuss Advaita with a non initiated or a not so advanced in spiritual path. And when did you ever start your Bhakti Yoga - Dualism path and how did you end up with Advaita? Explain? How and when did you find it more important on listening to Shankara than Krishna? Illuminate this ignorant soul. Is there any step greater than a Mahatma... since the term is given to one who is surrendered to Krishna. And mahatma is the last step in the phase of spiritual quest. If there is another then please show me the light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambya1 Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 I would like to ask a series of questions in an earnest spirit,to the Mayavadis.I hope Mayavadis,except kaisersose(He thinks that Sri Shankaracharya's Brahm can perform work-(I know!)),will reply and invite anyone else you would like to. Please try to answer the immediate question as briefly as possible.Since it is generally expected from us(Vaishnavas) to quote scriptures,it would be expected from the mayavadis that they quote at least shankaracharya ESPECIALLY when sensational claims (Like that of Kaisersose) are made. I am positive that the end of this discussion shall culminate in an intense,if not life changing,conclusion. Mayavadis,Hear Hear. before i answer i would like to mention that it was a disgusting way to start a thread with personal sarcasms . secondly what do you mean by 'life changing conclusions" ?? whose life ? mine ? yours ? all in this forum ? life needs to be changed for what ? are advaitists terroroists or drug addicts ? or is it because they are inclined to search out for impersonal god ??? please answer . ANSWER-- firstly quoting from scriptures is absolutely non essentiall in advaita belief . scriptures hold their significance only to make people understand what their goal of life should be . after focusing your goal(realization) sadhana is more important . while you call for a discussion you must folllow the common rules . quoting may be important to you but maybe idiotic to me . you cannot expect your 'opponent' to folow your personal rules , isnt it ???!!! According to Mayavada, What happens to the personalities who are eligible for liberation after leaving the body ? no one knows . nirvikalpa experience cannot be described . even those rare ones who came back after nirvikalpa couldnt explain it because explanation demands minimum ego and nirvikalpa is absolutely egoless. we can at the best say that they become what they were ( brahman) or they realise what they are(brahman) . still better would be they realise that they only exist. So jeevatma is Brahm .Undifferentiated,Non divisible,Unlimited Brahm who is ONE ? Yes.Or no ? yes , correct but such claims can only be made after realizing that stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranjeetmore Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Can you SCOOP or separate out a small portion of Brahm ?? Or ' Can a liberated "jeevatma" become a Jeevatma again ?? Answer yes or no. (Sambya,Don't give me your holy epositions.Anwser yes or no,simple.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bija Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 where are you heading with this ranjeet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Scoop of ice-cream? Not very nice. 2 scoops is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Can you SCOOP or separate out a small portion of Brahm ?? Or ' Can a liberated "jeevatma" become a Jeevatma again ?? Answer yes or no. These are actually 2 separate questions (a common error in questionnaires) that cannot be answered by a single yes or no. In advaitic thought, the answer to the first question is obviously: no. And as I understand it, the answer to the second question must be: yes. Material consciousness isn’t separate from Brahman, it is just ignorant of Brahman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambya1 Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Can you SCOOP or separate out a small portion of Brahm ?? Or ' Can a liberated "jeevatma" become a Jeevatma again ?? Answer yes or no. (Sambya,Don't give me your holy epositions.Anwser yes or no,simple.) i thought i had asked you a simple question as to whose life you want to change and why ? when you asked your first question i answered it nicely . but when i put forward a question you cared little to answer it and put back another one . is that your own 'dualistic' conception of courtesy ? anyways here goes the answer.......... to the first one the answer is no. to the second one there can never be a single word answer because the question itself is wrong in advaitic terms . advaita makes no distinction like jeevatma and paramatma . atman is one which is brahman . this question clearly shows your classical ignorance while dealing with things as tough as advaita . now i realize why advaita is rumoured to be not for kanishta-adhikaris !!! tell me something .......... do you think that something like brahmatattwa is really that easy to be answered in a 'simple yes or no' ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaea Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 As soon as you started this thread it was inevitable which way the conversation was gonna go. What's the point? What do you expect people to post here that hasnt already been posted a thousand times on this forum? Yes, we get it - Dualists hate the idea of Oneness, etc., etc. Honestly, get over it, dude. Get on with Bhakti if it makes you so happy (it should!) - don't worry about what "Mayavadis" think or believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaisersose Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Hear, Hear! As soon as you started this thread it was inevitable which way the conversation was gonna go. What's the point? What do you expect people to post here that hasnt already been posted a thousand times on this forum? Yes, we get it - Dualists hate the idea of Oneness, etc., etc. Honestly, get over it, dude. Get on with Bhakti if it makes you so happy (it should!) - don't worry about what "Mayavadis" think or believe. Clearly, in the case of young and energetic Ranjeet, time engaged in Mayavada/Shankara bashing is more delightful than time engaged in Bhakti. If he (and the other Mayavada bashers) could only do this directly on the Advaita forum, then it would be more fun for everyone, but he is too chicken to try that. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Scoop of ice-cream? Not very nice. 2 scoops is better. Beautiful as well as funny. Yes dualism (two scoops) is much better than one. "One is a lonely number" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Beautiful as well as funny. Yes dualism (two scoops) is much better than one. "One is a lonely number" No. The dualist is separate (alone). The monist is an integral part of the universe and everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bija Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Quote: <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Lotusflower Scoop of ice-cream? Not very nice. 2 scoops is better. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> Beautiful as well as funny. Yes dualism (two scoops) is much better than one. "One is a lonely number" by theist Quote: <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist Beautiful as well as funny. Yes dualism (two scoops) is much better than one. "One is a lonely number" </td> </tr> </tbody></table> No. The dualist is separate (alone). The monist is an integral part of the universe and everything. by primate One and Two go together to make three - such as me. Zero is inconceivable...but still it be. Polemics or harmony? Why dare to call mayavadi... But instead seek the complete non-dual truth - where one, two, and three - can be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Prabhupada explains about the soul in chp2 Gita. (vedabase.net), giving examples of Mayavada thought in his purports. AND KRISHNA kills the conception in a few verces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raghu Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Advaita philosophy is something that a jnani realizes at the end of his spiritual exercises. I would go with "kimfelix" and my understanding of the topic is similar. Only people with higher levels of understanding can go for Advaita philosophy. A layman should always begin his spiritual journey by bhakti yoga - Dualism. I here this same pompous claim being repeated over and over, the idea that accepting Advaita somehow makes your understanding "higher" or "more advanced." The fact of the matter is that most "Advaitins" on forums like this are just crass sentimentalists who want to appear learned and intelligent. Rather not unlike the iskcon preachers they often clash with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I here this same pompous claim being repeated over and over, the idea that accepting Advaita somehow makes your understanding "higher" or "more advanced." The fact of the matter is that most "Advaitins" on forums like this are just crass sentimentalists who want to appear learned and intelligent. Rather not unlike the iskcon preachers they often clash with. To me fundamental oneness is actually the simplest solution to the puzzle of origin and human conscious existence, which is intuitively (and scientifically) the best solution. And apart from Iskcon’s emphasis on a personal god, I don't see much difference between non-duality in Advaita Vedanta and Iskcon's notion of 'inconceivable oneness and difference'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I don't see much difference betweennon-duality in Advaita Vedanta and Iskcon's notion of 'inconceivableoneness and difference'. There is a great deal of difference primate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts