'This Sun is brahman and I too am brahman'

[Guest guest]

Namate all

 

Recently I met a new friend at a party gathering. He spoke to me on

how he likes dvaita more than advaita. I think the conversation will

be relevant to readers of this list. So I am reporting a gist of it

and my comments on it. These comments, of course, were not given to

him by me at the time, since there was no time and since the whole

atmosphere was charged with light and trivial conversations full of

worldly jokes.

 

The gentleman was and is a devotee of Shri Raghavendra. Raghavendra

is considered by almost all Hindus as an avatAr. His superb devotion

and supreme spirituality have no equal. This gentleman started this

topic as soon as I replied to a question of his on how I was spending

my time. No sooner I mentioned that advaita as well as Mathematics

which are the two things nearest to my heart are giving me enough

work, he gave me a big lecture, the gist of which is as follows:

 

" I was myself born in a family of Tanjore District Brahmins, seeped

in the cause of advaita, and devoted to Kanchi Mahaswamigal. But I am

also a devotee of Raghavendra. Somehow advaita does not appeal to me.

Think of 9-11. How can Osama's Atman and my Atman be the same? There

are several people who kill others without any feeling of guilt. How

can all those Atmans be the same as my Atman? The killer and the

killed cannot have the same Atman. I am a devotee of Raghavendra.

When I think of him I get peace. Dvaita is the right thing. Devotion

is the only thing that is needed. I do my Sandhya-Upasana every

day. `asau AdityO brahma brahmaaivAham-asmi': (This Sun before me is

brahman, I too am brahman). As soon as I say this I get total peace.

…… "

-----------------------

Thus he went on expatiating on this theme for full ten minutes or so,

but mostly repeating himself. Before I could even interrupt him and

think of replying, our conversation had to end since there were other

things going on.

 

There is no question about the soundness of the logical capabilities

of this new friend of mine. He introduced himself as a Mechanical

Engineer, living in the U.S. and doing good work for the past two

decades. His speech and thinking are all very clear and he seemed to

be really scholarly, in terms of his religious equipment.

 

With this background about him, let me add my comments now, for the

benefit of my advaitin friends on this list. In spite of his obvious

clarity of speech and understanding, the subtle slip is in his

observation " How can *his* Atman and *my* Atman be the same? " The

words `his' and `my' constitute the Freudian slip. Our non-advaita

friends always fall into this colossal slip of thinking that `he' has

an Atman which he can call `his' and `I' have an Atman which I can

call `mine'. It is partly due to the English connotations of `his

soul' and `my soul'. The classic prayer `May his soul rest in peace'

has a built-in non-advaita factor in it.

 

There is no `his' and `mine'. Atman (or Brahman) is everywhere,

without parts, without divisions, without boundaries. This we all

know. But still we slip into these errors.

 

Our good leader Sadaji has oftentimes contended with these dvaita-

vAdins and has also written remarkable essays on this list on this

topic. Still I thought of adding this note on this topic.

 

And, finally, mark this! My friend above says the Vedic mantra " This

Sun before me is brahman and I am also Brahman " is what gives him

total peace. Do you know why it does so? Because, it is the truth!

Without resorting to the fact that everything is brahman, there is no

way of resting in peace. That is why all the Hindu purification

mantras bring brahman into the chanting. And the dvaita thinking

which chants this mantra and finds peace, has reservations on the

truth of the mantra! This is the tragedy of human life. This can be

overcome only by seeking the very Light within us whose luminiscence

we refuse to recognise because of our own Ignorance! Seeking this

Light is Devotion. And that is where even the dvaita thinking is

right!

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

What a wonderful post!

 

Language trips us up all the time. Languages are by

nature dual, can never express the non dual.

 

I just can't get away from it. " I'm confused. "

Everytime I say I=x, I'm wrong. " I'm confused " really

means I'm aware of confusion. " I'm happy " means I feel

happy. I'm the witness of happiness. I can't be the

same as happiness or I couldn't know the happiness.

 

If I say " This Sun is Brahman and I too am Brahman " I

must be beyond, apart from the Sun and Brahman in

order to say it or think it. If I'm the witness of it

I can't BE it...at least so I think. Of course, I am

Brahman but why do I need to say it or think it? I'm a

man (relative concept), do I have to keep saying it or

thinking it? What's the use of that? How does it make

a difference? Who or what is it that can say " I am the

Sun, Brahman? "

 

In Alcoholics Anonymous, when people stand up to

speak, they start with " Hi, I'm an alcoholic " . I

disagree. I see a human being--whatever that is

(relative concept)-- standing before me, not an

alcoholic. The person may drink too much, need

alcohol, be in a mess because of the alcohol, but s/he

can never be an alcoholic. Just as I can never be an

Advaitan. I can study/think/practice/align with

Advaita, but I can never BE anything in particular.

Everytime I try to identify with anything, any role,

any institution, religion, I'm trying to add something

on that will always be just an add on. How can one be

devoted when s/he is identified with anything?

 

And language seems to cause us to think we can

identify with the not-self. As if by merely saying

" I'm an Advaitan/Buddhist/Hindu " could make it so! Ha!

All above is just one guy's opinion! I always welcome

disagreement and other's viewpoints. I may be right or

wrong but I'm not attached to current perceptions.

See? I just did it in that sentence... " I may be right

or wrong... " I does not equal right or wrong. Best

wishes from an opinionated (did it again) guy who

values other's opinions and who can't get away from

the duality of language!

 

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Take the Internet to Go: Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news,

photos & more.

http://mobile./go?refer=1GNXIC

[Guest guest]

--- Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote:

 

>

> And language seems to cause us to think we can

> identify with the not-self. As if by merely saying

> " I'm an Advaitan/Buddhist/Hindu " could make it so!

 

Steve Stoker - PraNAms

'advaita' is also communication of negating dvaita - a

- dvaita - non-duality.

 

That is required for communication for the one who

thinks dvaita is real, since he 'sees'. Advaita is

therefore a teaching from the point of apparent dvaita

which falls within the realm of experience.

 

From the point of Brahman - there is no-thing other

than Brahman nor can there be anything other than

Brahman, since Brahman being what it is. From the

point of Brahman, then there is nothing to communicate

or to whom it can be communicated.

The communication by the teacher to the taught is also

in the apparent regime where teacher knows the

apparent nature of the teaching, while the student

thinks it is real since he is still sees the duality

as real.

 

Therefore care is to be exercised with language too

also since from what reference the statements are

valid. These are only pointers and not the goals that

are pointed. Scripture says Brahman cannot be

described since any description falls short- yet it

provides a means of knowledge or pramaaNa - through

language that which is beyond any language - by using

the words that takes the mind beyond the words - neti

- neti - not this - not this, as any 'this' is an

object, and the subject 'I' cannot be objectified.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Professorji:

 

Thank you for sharing this.

 

After reading your post, i am reminded of the following lines from a

famous Thyagaraja Kriti in Reethi Gowlam sung by Semmangudi

Sreenivasa iyer and also by Balamurali Krishna !

 

Pallavi

 

Dwaitamu Sukhama ? A – Dvaitamu Sukhamaa ?

 

(Which conduces to beatitude ( " sukhamaa " ), Dvaita or Advaita ?

Dvaita which declares that Jivaatma is different from the Paramaatma

or Advaita which asserts that they are identical ?)

 

Anupallavi

 

Chaitanyamaa Vinu Sarva Saakshi

 

Vistaaramugaanu Delpumu Naato

 

(As the Eternal Witness ( " saakshi " ) of cosmos ( " saarva " ), please

enlighten me ( " maa vinu " ), Lord ( " Chaitanya " ). Throw light

( " delpumu " ) on this mystery ( " vistaaramugaanu " ) so that I comprehend

( " naato " ) it beyond any doubt.)

 

 

Charanam

 

 

 

Gagana Pavana Tapana Bhuvanaa Dyavanilo

 

Nagadharaaja Sivendraadi Suralalo

 

Bhagavad Bhaktha Varaagresarulalo

 

Baaga Raminche Tyaagaraajaarchita

 

( Supreme and Omnipresent, you are declared to be equally manifest

( " dyavanilo " ) in all the worlds ( " gagana, pavana, tapana, bhuvanaa " )

and to delight in sporting in the five elements, Trinity, the

celestials and cream of devotees ( " bhagavad bhaktha

varaagresarulalo " ). O worshipped ( " archita " ) by Tyagaraaja ! Do

enlighten ( " raminche " ) me !)

 

http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/Homepages/shivkuma/music/dwaitamu.htm

 

Here, the Saint Composer Thyagaraja is pleading with his ishta-

nishta Sri Rama himself to enlighten him as to which path is more

rewarding Dwaita or Adwaita?

 

SO , WHAT DOES THAT TELL US?

 

PS Incidentally , Sri Raghavendra Swamigal is the family guru of my

mother-in-law ! Smile ;-)

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " dhyanasaraswati "

<dhyanasaraswati wrote:

>

> Respected Madam,

This post you have sent is superb,Excellant example. Had

there been this Kriti as sung by any one of them,it would be better

to send it by E-mail to us.We can record it on our hard disk so that

we can hear it repeatedly. I have some other kruitis with me.

Than q very much.

Madam I am hearing your voice like Asareera vani Frequently,With

due respects to your wisdom if u dont think otherwise may I request u

to let me know your postal address.Excuse me for this request

HARIOHM

bagawan_sastry

>

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk

wrote:

>

> Namate all

>

> Recently I met a new friend at a party gathering. He spoke to me on

> how he likes dvaita more than advaita. I think the conversation

will

> be relevant to readers of this list.

 

Namaskarams to all,

 

`asau AdityO brahma brahmaaivAham-asmi': (This Sun before me is

> brahman, I too am brahman)

 

Here the very meaning of this verse supports advaitam. The Sun is

Brahman and I too am Brahman by saying this you include yourself in

the Sun. So where is Dvaitham?. I fully agree with Prof. V.K. in

this regard. 'Vasudaiva Kudumbakam' i.e. all are within the God and

God is one. This verse also echos the same meaning.

 

Hope everybody will agree with me.

 

With Pranams

Raaghavan

 

** Note from moderators - would members please remember to delete uncommented

parts of previous messages **

[Guest guest]

Namaste ! Sri Bhagawan Sastry !

 

i just finished listening to a one hour cd on ,commentary

by Sadaji of this group at the Chinmaya Mission. It is so beautiful -

i would love to share it with you if Sadaji gives me permission - !

Sadaji also narrates the story from Keno Upanishad where Uma , the

Goddess, identifies the 'spirit' as Brahman ! This cd is worth

listening to if you need to haave a balanced perspective on what

constitutes higher and lower Love! Btw , at the end of his

commentary , Sadaji recites the 'Poornamidam sloka' from the

upanishads with Ha bhava that teas came into my eyes!

 

on another note, have you heard of Appaya Dikshitar 1520-1593 )?

Appayya Dikshitar in his devotional work 'Sivarkamani Dipika 'that

through the grace of the personal God alone could Men/women get a

taste for the study of Vedanta Philosophy. Appayya dikshitar has

also written a learned commentary on Vedanta called Parimala ' In

'Anandalahari chandrika', Appayya Dikshitar tries to narrow

down the differences between the apparently divergent schools of

thought and tries to show that the advaita of Sankara is the real

eternal truth to which all others try to approximate.

 

Sastryji ,to learn more about this Great Scholar-Saint, go to

 

http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/saints/appayya.htm

 

Then there is the Other 'Dikshitar ' known as Muthusamy Dikshitar (

1776-1835) one of the doyens of Carnatic Music) - He was a Staunch

advaitin also - in many of his kritis , he has used Advaitam

(Oneness) is his ultimate goal. It is evident in the usage of

Advaitic words like, Kaivalya, Satchidanada,Chit, Parabhrama,

Ekaagra Manolayam,etc. in many of his compositions. But believe it

or not , Muthuswamy Dikshitir breathed his last when his disciples

were singing dikshitir's famous composition 'Meenakshimemudam

dehi', and at the Anupallavi line 'Meenalochani pasa mochani',

Dikshitar's life came to an end! Yes! when his life was ebbing

away , the name of his ishta ( SRI MADURAI MEENAKSHI Amman ) WAS

ECHOEING IN HIS EARS! A PARAMA JNANI AND A SRI VIDYA UPASAKA - Sri

Muthuswamy Dikshitar !

 

Sastryji , if you like to listen to the Kritis of Thyagarsaja and

dikshitar go to

 

http://www.musicindiaonline.com

 

AND CLICK UNDER CARNATIC VOCAL MUSIC!

 

Enjoy the 'silence' in the company of Music!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin , " bagawan_sastry "

<bagawan_sastry wrote:

>

> advaitin , " dhyanasaraswati "

> <dhyanasaraswati@> wrote:

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " dhyanasaraswati "

<dhyanasaraswati wrote:

>

> Namaste ! Sri Bhagawan Sastry !

 

 

Namaste.

 

Please see #25910 on Appayya Dixit

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

Om Santhi

 

Even though it looks so simple, it is not so.

 

The point should be observed with clarity.

 

He says, Sun is Brahmam.

 

Then he says, I too brahmam.

 

But he is not saying, I am Sun.

 

And also, he is not saying, Sun is me.

 

So, logically, even though he says both are Brahmam, he is not ready to claim,

he is Sun. Here the distinction of the fine line comes. This is the essence of

Advaitam, as I think. We are similar, but are not same.

 

Dr. Hari Krishna

Om Santhi

 

bvraaghavan <bvraaghavan wrote:

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk

wrote:

>

> Namate all

>

> Recently I met a new friend at a party gathering. He spoke to me on

> how he likes dvaita more than advaita. I think the conversation

will

> be relevant to readers of this list.

 

Namaskarams to all,

 

`asau AdityO brahma brahmaaivAham-asmi': (This Sun before me is

> brahman, I too am brahman)

 

Here the very meaning of this verse supports advaitam. The Sun is

Brahman and I too am Brahman by saying this you include yourself in

the Sun. So where is Dvaitham?. I fully agree with Prof. V.K. in

this regard. 'Vasudaiva Kudumbakam' i.e. all are within the God and

God is one. This verse also echos the same meaning.

 

Hope everybody will agree with me.

 

With Pranams

Raaghavan

 

** Note from moderators - would members please remember to delete uncommented

parts of previous messages **

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Answers

 

 

[Guest guest]

Peace,

 

" This Sun is Brahman and I too am Brahman " , if this is

maintained, then the knower is neither Brahman nor the

Sun. Seems no different than saying " This arm is the

body and I too am the body. " They both must be

separate from the knower in order to be known. It is

like saying " I am one with God " . If I am one with God

then how can I know it? God=I in that case. I would

have to be separate from God in order to know God...So

it seems to me. And I could be wrong! But I simply

have to ask " Who thinks I/he/she/it is Brahman and who

the Sun? " Neither the concept of Brahman nor the

concept of the Sun can inquire and once I enquire

deeply the mind turns away from such statements.

 

Further, in dreamless sleep, had I identified Being

with the Sun or Brahman while awake, I no longer do

so. So any identification is broken in dreamless

sleep, it's transitory, discontinuous and therefore

unreal since the identification is subject to change.

Ha! Well, if I'm not the Sun or Brahman, then what am

I?

Best wishes,

Steve

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

The fish are biting.

Get more visitors on your site using Search Marketing.

http://searchmarketing./arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php

[Guest guest]

hi Steve

 

" Further, in dreamless sleep, had I identified Being

with the Sun or Brahman while awake, I no longer do

so. So any identification is broken in dreamless

sleep, it's transitory, discontinuous and therefore

unreal since the identification is subject to change.

Ha! Well, if I'm not the Sun or Brahman, then what am

I? "

 

even in sushupthi (dreamless sleep), feeling of " I " ness will be

experienced...but if you want to know who is your real self is to go a step

ahead of this, that is turiya...here where our little " i " merges with

complete " I " . no words, no duality can describe this state. because Words

are finite. and finite words cannot describe fully the infinite. This state

is anirvachaneeya as Taittiriya Upanisad says, Yato Vaco Nivartante, aprapya

manasa saha,anandam brahmano vidvan, na bibheti kadacaneti, (shruthi

pramana)

 

Shankara in this commentary on Brhadaranyaka Upanisad says , to that

infinite, name cannot be given. For our convienent we say as brahman meaning

(Big). So wen v think intellectually v say that brahman alone is real.

Wen u reach to that state of higher consciouness, u alone remain. this is

shoonya, means existence of nothing. i.e; the pure self. It is devoid of

form.(Nirguna). U cant understand this by mere logic with ur mind and

intellect, for this one needs to experience than simply arguing for sake of

arguing.

 

bhava shankara dEshika mEsharanam

 

Narendra

 

 

On 6/29/07, Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote:

>

> Peace,

>

> " This Sun is Brahman and I too am Brahman " , if this is

> maintained, then the knower is neither Brahman nor the

> Sun. Seems no different than saying " This arm is the

> body and I too am the body. " They both must be

> separate from the knower in order to be known. It is

> like saying " I am one with God " . If I am one with God

> then how can I know it? God=I in that case. I would

> have to be separate from God in order to know God...So

> it seems to me. And I could be wrong! But I simply

> have to ask " Who thinks I/he/she/it is Brahman and who

> the Sun? " Neither the concept of Brahman nor the

> concept of the Sun can inquire and once I enquire

> deeply the mind turns away from such statements.

>

> Further, in dreamless sleep, had I identified Being

> with the Sun or Brahman while awake, I no longer do

> so. So any identification is broken in dreamless

> sleep, it's transitory, discontinuous and therefore

> unreal since the identification is subject to change.

> Ha! Well, if I'm not the Sun or Brahman, then what am

> I?

> Best wishes,

> Steve

>

> ________

> The fish are biting.

> Get more visitors on your site using Search Marketing.

> http://searchmarketing./arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php

>

>

 

 

 

--

cheers

Narendra P. Sastry,

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk wrote:

>

> Namate all

>

> Recently I met a new friend at a party gathering. He spoke to me on

> how he likes dvaita more than advaita...

 

>...he gave me a big lecture, the gist of which is as follows:

>

> " I was myself born in a family of Tanjore District Brahmins, seeped

> in the cause of advaita, and devoted to Kanchi Mahaswamigal. But I

am

> also a devotee of Raghavendra. Somehow advaita does not appeal to

me.

> Think of 9-11. How can Osama's Atman and my Atman be the same?

 

 

Suppose the friend's words were phrased differently. Such as, " How is

it possible that the One Taste can manifest in such diverse appearances

as Osama and as Gandhi? "

 

For my own edification, what would be a reasonable response to this

question?

 

Thank you.

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

 

" IT IS BRAHMAN APPEARING AS SUN AND AS ME.

 

IN REALITY THERE IS NEITHER SUN NOR ME.

 

THIS IS THE FINAL TRUTH. "

 

The correctness of the above statement can be verified by

applying to oneself by oneself the methodology of TRI BASIC VIEW OF

LIFE as taught by Sruthi and LIFE which provide the genuine seeker

with the necessary means to realize.

 

with warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy.

[Guest guest]

Hi Richard

 

" How is it possible that the One Taste can manifest in such diverse

appearances

as Osama and as Gandhi? "

 

any ones natuer is nothing to do with the souls inner nature, else it is

totally depends on ones prarabdha karmas...

we have a saying 'buddhi karmanu sarini " , ones intellect works based on his

prarabda karmas....Osama bin laden had much bad karmas in his previous

births, will force him to think the way he is reacting.....(here one should

not be confused based on his material richness, any ones mental status also

depends on his previous karmas only)....but Gandhi had a different thinking

based in his previous birth karmas. then you can ask me, even Gandhi had

also some naughty activities done before to his realisation....

for this what we can interpret as, man is a mixture of good and bad karmas,

one must reap what he/she has sowed in his previous births, but the

percentage of either bad or good varies on the intensity of relative of that

one had in his previous births.

 

what about plants and animals?

plants and animals will take birth to reap only the prarabhda karmas, they

dont acquire sanchita karmas....for eg: lion will not be punished for

killing other animals, and monkey will not be rewarded for having only

fruits....

 

so lord Krishna very kindly adviced that, " Karmanyevadhi karasthe maa

phaleshu kadaachana " (neglect the desire on the results of karmas, else to

do karmas for the sake of doing karmas) so that one can get rid of the

bondage of this I ness of reaping karmas, also for this Adhi shankara says,

" chitta shuddhayet karmaha natu vasthum upa labdhayet " (karmas should be

done such way that it should clean up means should not accumulate sachita

and agami karmas, not in urge of earning some material benefits).....even

Ramana maharshi confirms this, " nechhaya krutham karmaha mukthi sadhakam

bhavathi " (un desired on result karma will lead source for salvation)...this

is because, what so ever we do as karma eg: mental and physical activities

with thinking of I am the doer of the karma,all leads to sanchita karmas,

then for that we must reap the result of such karmas....there is no karma

which will be left as it is without the result, that must influence us to

act to reap that results....

 

then any one questions, why god will not influence us to do only good karmas

why he is force us to do bad karmas and later punish us for that?

for this what i can say, God will not interfear in our freedom that has been

given us, but HE will directly or indirectly reminds in some or the other

way not to do bad karmas, but we neglect them and do bad karmas boldly later

on we claim the responsibilities on god, for eg: duryodana after loosing war

with bheema, claimed that it is kirshna alone held responsible for all his

bad deeds because krishna is antaryaami, so what so ever bad karmas that he

has done must be held responsible on krishna himself.....for that krishna

says that he had instructed duryodhana not to do bad karmas

through gandhari, bheeshma, drona, krupa also even once krishna himself,

but due to his prarabhdha karmas he never listens to krishna, and every one

know what he has done...

 

we cant say osama bin laden has a bad soul, gandhi had a good

soul....because, soul is antaryaami which is saakshi..which can never be

bad...which is like a light, under which light, one can read bhagavad

geetha, another writes false application to take bribe, ... (thus spake

Ramakrishna )...we cant say it is due to bad light or due to good

light...same in case of soul....

 

learned members plz correct me where ever i am wrong

bhava shankara dEshika mEsharanam

Narendra

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Wow! i luv this thread ! Why? The Sun is often used as a metaphor

for enlightenment ! How often have we not heard this

expression 'when the Sun of Knowledge shines , all darkness (

ignorance) is dispelled !

 

For example , read this verse 143 from Viveka Chudamani ( crest

jewel of discrimination)

 

" Just as, on a cloudy day, when the sun is swallowed up by dense

clouds, violent cold blasts trouble them, so when the Atman

is hidden by intense ignorance, the dreadful Vikshepa Shakti

(projecting power) afflicts the foolish man with numerous griefs. "

 

Yes! Dear hearts - the 'Sun' is a Synonym for Divine Awareness or

Wakefulness !

 

Now , HOW IS 'SUN' BRAHMAN ?

 

'

 

HERE ARE THE CHARECTERISTICS OF SUN..

 

1)It shines continuously ( except when there is Surya grahanam- even

then , it is only hodden - it does not disappear)

 

2)It never changes ( unlike moom - which waxes and wanes)

 

3) The sun's brightness is infinite - it lights up the whole world !

There is no such thing as an English Sun Or an Indian sun!

 

4) The sun is eternal !

 

5) The sun shines on its own - it does not need the help of any

other !

 

No wonder , the ancients worshipped Sun as Brahman itself! and

compare the above characteristics of Sun to Brahman ! yes! Brahman

IS ALSO ETERNAL, UNCHANGING, INFINITE AND SHINES IN ITS OWN LIGHT!

Once Brahma gyana is obtained , there is no more avidya!

 

It is for this reason , when Adi shankara established his Shanmata ,

he included the 'sun' or surya as one of the deities to be

worshipped!

 

in this context , i would like to share a verse written by none

other than Anandaji !

 

Showing and Hiding

 

When the sky is clear at night,

the stars appear as points of light .

but , as light dawns and brings the day,

the daylight hides the stars away.

 

Whatever light may show or hide

is only light , seen from inside

All shades of color -black or white

or in between -are made of .

 

Whatever color may appear ,

whatever seems to disappear ,

is made of light -adds nothing eklse

to that which shines as light itself.

 

 

http://www.advaitin.net/Ananda/

 

Yes! Brahman is that self efflugent 'light' like the Sun!

 

so , let us stop playing 'hide and seek' with this topic for Sun is

Brahman and so is 'all' --- how can there be a 'me ' when there is

no I !

[Guest guest]

Hi Narenda,

 

And thanks for the comment. When in the state of deep

sleep, I've so far been unaware of BEING in that

state. However, logically there can be no break in

being, therefore I exist in the dreamless state. So at

this point, for me, this is a matter of logic and

conviction. I do have the conviction that it is so

even though " i " don't have the experience or knowledge

of it. " I " and " i " seem to be different. " i " would

like the experience of awareness in deep, dreamless

sleep although, i've not yet experienced it. So I

don't know what to do about it other than to continue

to inquire, acknowledge the logic and admit that I

have the conviction.

 

Best wishes,

Steve

 

 

______________________________\

____

Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the

Auto Green Center.

http://autos./green_center/

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk wrote:

>

> Namate all

 

>

> With this background about him, let me add my comments now, for the

> benefit of my advaitin friends on this list. In spite of his obvious

> clarity of speech and understanding, the subtle slip is in his

> observation " How can *his* Atman and *my* Atman be the same? " The

> words `his' and `my' constitute the Freudian slip. Our non-advaita

> friends always fall into this colossal slip of thinking that `he' has

> an Atman which he can call `his' and `I' have an Atman which I can

> call `mine'.

>

> There is no `his' and `mine'. Atman (or Brahman) is everywhere,

> without parts, without divisions, without boundaries. This we all

> know. But still we slip into these errors.

>

>

> PraNAms to all advaitins.

> profvk

 

Namaste all,

 

There is another interesting way to look at this.

 

It is true that there is only one Atma which is Brahman.

 

However is it truly wrong for the mind to refer to

the Atma, as 'my Atma', or to say that 'your Atma'

is the same as 'my Atma'?

 

I don't really think that it is entirely wrong, to say that

your Atma is my Atma, to personalize the Atma, and

for these reasons. The mind loves Atma. In fact,

the Atma *is* me. And the mind loves Atma more

than any other thing.

 

Why is that? Because the mind knows that Atma is

who I am. The mind may then go on and make the mistake

of taking the Atma to be a product of the body/mind,

which is called ajnanam, but the mind somehow knows that

this 'Atma,' (even not having differentiated it from

all changing phenomena), is 'me,' and is most beloved.

 

Further, if one has recognized that this Atma, which is

most beloved, is my Self, and then one considers

how much one loves that Self, and then one

considers, " This Atma, which I love above all

things, is the same Atma which all others love

above all things, " then IMO one develops great

empathy, love and compassion for all living beings.

 

That which I love, is that which every other

living being love equally loves. In the Kathopanishad

there is a verse, the gist of which is, 'Everything is

done for the love of that Self.'

 

Even wrong actions, through ignorance,

are undertaken for the love of that Self.

 

So in one way to personalize the Self, by

saying 'my Self' is not correct, but in another

way it is totally correct, because the Self is

who I am. It is what I do everything for the

sake of, whether I realize it or not.

 

I think the person you mention above had not differentiated

the Atma from the mind. Each individual mind is entirely

different. So if I (through Self-ignorance) take the Atma to

be the mind, I cannot say that your Atma is my Atma.

 

I will say, because of ignorance, `his Atma' cannot be

`my Atma,' when in fact what I mean is `his mind'

is not `my mind' (which is true), without knowing

all the while that that which everyone calls `me' is the

one same Atma, the most precious and beloved `my Atma,'

`my Self,' and everyone is entirely correct.

 

Pranams,

Durga

[Guest guest]

we cant say osama bin laden has a bad soul, gandhi had

a good

soul....

 

For myself, my mental atmosphere, my relative peace of

mind, my desire to do as little harm in the world as

possble, both physically and mentally.....For me

Osama, the Pope, Ghandhi, Jesus, Buddha, Hitler,

Atilla the Hun, Ghengis Khan, the Zodiak Killer,

Popeye, St. Francis, Mohammed, you, my mother,

father, Prime Minister Blair, Arjuna, the Mayor of San

Antonio, Krishna all have far more in common than

different. All want happiness, peace (according to

their definitions and what it will take to obtain it),

freedom from suffering, etc. All have to eat, excrete,

breathe, experience the senses and the affects of the

senses, experience the emotions, experience confusion,

certainty, etc etc etc.

 

This is a high ideal I have and I don't always succeed

in thinking like this, but where I'm starting to

project and condemn or praise someone, anyone, I bring

all the above into mind. For me it lessens the effect

of alienating my brothers and sisters from my mind.

 

Best wishes,

Steve

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with

FareChase.

http://farechase./

[Guest guest]

Durge, Namaste !

 

You ask

 

( However is it truly wrong for the mind to refer to

the Atma, as 'my Atma', or to say that 'your Atma'

is the same as 'my Atma'?)

 

Well, Durga-ji , it depends on which side of the platform you are

standing on! To a true bhakta ( SITUATED IN GOD-CONSCIOUSNESS)it is

wrong to claim that even 'atma is mine' ! There is a phrase which

is often repeated and that is *atma-para-buddhih.*( Srimad

Bhagvatam) Atma means " mine, " and para means " others. " What

is 'mine ' and what is 'yours' ? In reality , nothing belongs to

you not even one's atma !

 

In bhakti literature , it is said

 

Sravanam Kirtanam vishnum smaranam pada seva-nam archanam vandanam

dasyam, sakyam atma samarpanam iti Navalakshana!

 

Yes - surrendering one's atma at the altar of God is the ultimate

form of devotion among the nine steps!

 

Parama jnani Adi Shankara Bhagvadapada in a mood of total surrender

( and supplication) says in his shiva manasa puja

 

AND ADI Shankara himself says in a 'mood' of total surender i Siva

manasa puja

 

 

" Atma tvam Girija matih, sahacharaah praanaah, sariram griham,

Pujaa te vishayopa bhoga rachanaa, nidraa samaadhih stitih,

Sanchaarah padayoh pradakshina vidhih, stotrani sarvaa giro,

Yadyat karma karomi tattadakhilam Sambho! tavaaraadhanam " .

 

" My *self* is Shambhu (yourself); my intellect is Girija; my vital

breaths are your attendants; my body is your temple of residence; my

enjoying the objects of senses is your worship; my sleep is the state

of meditation; all movement with the pair of feet is doing

pradakshina to you and all my words are your praises. O Sambhu!

Whatever I do is entirely an act of worshipping you. "

 

Yes, to a parama bhaktha ( who is a parama jnani) even to claim

that 'atma' is mine is wrong because everything belongs to the

higher power! This is SHARANAGATI the highest form of surrender ! i

would of course invite Sadaji to give an adwaitic interpretation of

Sharanagati which he describes wonderfully in his CD on 'bhakti ' at

the chinmaya mission! Let Sadaji ex[lain this using the

Vivekachudamani verse!

 

Isha upanishad says

 

" the face of Truth is hidden behind your hidden behind your golden

lid, O Sun. May you remove the lid so that I may see the golden

Truth "

 

 

love and regards

 

 

>

[Guest guest]

One simple add-on to this post !

 

the Isha upanishad verse should :

 

" The face of Truth is hidden behind r hidden behind your golden

lid, O Sun. May you remove the lid so that I may see the golden

Truth "

 

and Folks , here the seeker is addressing Brahman as 'sun' - another

beautiful example of Sun being used as a metaphor for braHman!

 

HERE IS THE SURYA GAYATHRI

 

OM SRI BHAASKARAAYA VIDHMAHE

 

ADITYA DEVAAYA DHEEMAHI

 

THANNAH SUURYAH PRACHODHAYAATH

 

a free translation

 

we meditate on the divine radiance of the Sun to sharpen our

intellect !

 

The Golden colored Sun is Brahman!

 

O Surya ! Lead us to the path of Truth!

 

love and regards

[Guest guest]

Hi Narendra Sastry,

 

Thanks for responding to my question.

 

Regarding the portion of your reply below.... aren't these: the

thought 'I am the doer', and a separate God reminding a separate us

about anything, and any individual to be affected by karma; aren't

these all within the dualistic realm of Maya, illusory, and of no

concern or actuality?

 

Best wishes,

Richard

 

 

advaitin , " narendra sastry "

<narendra.sastry wrote:

>

>... what so ever we do as karma eg: mental and physical activities

> with thinking of I am the doer of the karma,all leads to sanchita

karmas,

> then for that we must reap the result of such karmas....there is

no karma

> which will be left as it is without the result, that must

influence us to

> act to reap that results....

>

> then any one questions, why god will not influence us to do only

good karmas

> why he is force us to do bad karmas and later punish us for that?

> for this what i can say, God will not interfear in our freedom

>that has been given us, but HE will directly or indirectly reminds

>in some or the other way not to do bad karmas...

[Guest guest]

Sri Richard sent this email off list to me ! i am sharing this with

you all hoping i will get a wonderful response from you all

regarding the eternality of 'Sun' !

 

Richard " richarkar

Re: 'This Sun is brahman and I too am brahman'

dhyanasaraswati

 

I liked your post in the Advaitin group.

 

One thing you said about the sun, perhaps it was poetic, is that it

is eternal. This is not so. Suns die and I think ours is due to

extinguish in about 8 billion more years (unless that figure has

been revised since I learned it).

 

The sun is hidden by clouds but from the viewpoint of the sun, it is

always unhidden, always self-shining.

 

Best wishes,

www.astrojyoti.com/adityahridayam.htm - 62k - Cached

Vedanta Shastras Library " Aditya Hridayam Richard

 

 

dEar Richard , i am not very 'scientific' by nature ! i am ruled

more by emotion than reason! so , i do not know about the fact

about 'sun' dying in 8 billion years but the poetess in me luvs

the 'sun' for its 'warmth and 'efflugence'! it is for this reason ,

every Sunday ( Bhanuvaram - a day dedicated to the worship of sun) i

luv to listebn to 'Suryashtakam' composed by Sri Raghavendra

swamigal and Sage Agastiyar's Adithya Hridayam !

 

for those of you who are interested , here are the links

1) suryashtakam

 

http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/sacredchants2

 

2) Aditya hridayam

 

http://www.astrojyoti.com/adityahridayam.htm

 

Richard, i am a worshipper of Sun - every morning i do Surya

namaskar as part of my daily yoga routine ! To me , Sun and Truth

are Synonyms! The Divine in me bows to the divine in the Sun!

 

" The Sun is, verily, the soul of all that moves, and that does not " -

Rig Veda: 1:115:1.

 

May the Sunshine of Truth shine upon us all !

[Guest guest]

Hi Richard

 

very good question, you are getting yourself confused with paramarthika

drushti on vyavaharika terms...these karmas all these are bounded only in

vyavaharika drushti which is maya....

so when you get the realm of jnana, all your sanchita and agami karmas are

burnt with that...so there the body remains just to get rid off prarabdha

karmas....

yes, dual word is there till the jiva has ignorance of thinking it self is

the body....till then all these karma...pasha...every thing is there....but

these things wont be seen predominant soon after you realise your

realSELF...

 

On 7/1/07, Richard <richarkar wrote:

>

> Hi Narendra Sastry,

>

> Thanks for responding to my question.

>

> Regarding the portion of your reply below.... aren't these: the

> thought 'I am the doer', and a separate God reminding a separate us

> about anything, and any individual to be affected by karma; aren't

> these all within the dualistic realm of Maya, illusory, and of no

> concern or actuality?

>

> Best wishes,

> Richard

>

> advaitin <advaitin%40>, " narendra

> sastry "

> <narendra.sastry wrote:

> >

> >... what so ever we do as karma eg: mental and physical activities

> > with thinking of I am the doer of the karma,all leads to sanchita

> karmas,

> > then for that we must reap the result of such karmas....there is

> no karma

> > which will be left as it is without the result, that must

> influence us to

> > act to reap that results....

> >

> > then any one questions, why god will not influence us to do only

> good karmas

> > why he is force us to do bad karmas and later punish us for that?

> > for this what i can say, God will not interfear in our freedom

> >that has been given us, but HE will directly or indirectly reminds

> >in some or the other way not to do bad karmas...

>

>

>

 

 

 

--

cheers

Narendra P. Sastry,

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sir

A very nice summarization of bhakti in Advaita, traditionally

Advaita is told to be that school of thought where gnana or knowledge

is held superior to bhakti. Here is proof enough to the excellent

concept of bhakti which Shankara expounded. It is true that bhakti

appeals more to the sadhaka than gnana and as bhakti takes one through

the realm of spirituality it leads to the birth of gnana.

Regards and please continue your insights

[Guest guest]

Dear Rakesh !

 

Thank you for your kind words. One small correction, however! in

this janma , i am endowed with a female body having mothered three

lovely children! smile :-)

 

Rakesh, btw , i am a devi upasika also!

 

Parama Jnani Siva himself says to Devi :

 

" Sakti-Jnanam Vina Devi Nirvanam Naiva Jayate—O Devi! Without the

knowledge of Sakti, Mukti cannot be attained " "

 

How can the Jiva do or accomplish anything ... He is living in the

body-mind-intellect complex ! Without the grace of the Divine mother

and the grace of the divine mother in the form of human guru , how

can jiva overcome all the fetters of Samsara and progress on the

path of sadhana ? The jiva thinks he is the doer and the enjoyer -

this is Ajnananam !

 

Why would a paramajnani Adi shankara bhagvadapada pray to Mother

Goddess bhavani thus ?

 

Na jânâmi dânam na cha dhyânayogam

Na jânâmi tantram na cha stotramantram

Na jânâmi pûjâm na cha nyâsayogam

Gatistwam gatistwam twam ekâ bhavâni

Na jânâmi punyam na jânâmi tîrtham

Na jânâmi muktim layam vâ kadâchit

Na jânâmi bhaktim vratam vâpi mâtah

Gatistwam gatistwam twam ekâ bhavâni

 

ADI SHANKARA BHAGWAN HIMSELF SAYS 'GATISTWAM TWAM EKA BHAVANI ' -

You alone are my path, you are my goal, O Bhavani!

 

Without the grace of Shakti , can you reach the lotus feet of Siva ?

to even think this is Ajnanam!

 

as per Tripura Rahasya

 

" This wisdom in perfection is the realisation of all as the Self.

Intelligence appears as objects by its own virtue, as a mirror

appears as the images on it. This is the whole essence of the

sastras. There is no bondage, no liberation, no aspirant, no process

of attainment. The transcendental Conscious Principle alone subsists

in the three states of being. She remains as the one uniform,

absolute being. She is ignorance; She is wisdom; She is bondage; She

is liberation and She is the process therefor. "

 

On this beautiful Tuesday dedicated to Deci , please join me in

offering salutations to 'Muni manasika Hamsini' ?( ONE JHO RESIDES

IN THE HEARTS OF YOGIS AS A SWAN)and Veda Garbini ( from whose womb

the vedas are born) and Sri Dakshinamurthy rupiniii ! ( guru

dakshinamurthy herself) !

 

ps - jnana and bhakti are two eyes of a Sadhaka! The third eye is

the vivekam!

 

 

love and regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin , " Rakesh " <raknath wrote:

>

> Sir

> A very nice summarization of bhakti in Advaita,

traditionally

>