Guest guest Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 --- 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 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 ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 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 > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 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 ** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 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: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2007 Report Share Posted June 28, 2007 advaitin , " dhyanasaraswati " <dhyanasaraswati wrote: > > Namaste ! Sri Bhagawan Sastry ! Namaste. Please see #25910 on Appayya Dixit PraNAms to all advaitins. profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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 ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 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./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 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 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 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... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2007 Report Share Posted July 2, 2007 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 ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2007 Report Share Posted July 3, 2007 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, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2007 Report Share Posted July 3, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2007 Report Share Posted July 3, 2007 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 > 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.