brahman and Ishvara

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

> Namaskarams Sri Shastriji and Sitaraji,

>

> I want to attempt a slight clarification to Shastriji's statement.

>

> Jiva is a vyavahaarika concept, defined by the upadhis of body,

mind,

> etc: clearly not omnipresent. Ishvara or saguna Brahman is

> omnipresent. And to say " nirguna Brahman " is omnipresent is

> meaningless since that is paramaarthika (no duality to pervade).

>

> So when we say jiva is omnipresent, we mean that it is Ishvara who

> projects Himself as jiva; it is Ishvara when further restricted by

> body-mind upadhi identifies in that mind as jiva. Thus the Reality

of

> jiva (i.e. minus the nama-rupa limitations) is the same nirguna

> Brahman that in the vyavahaarika sense pervades all existence as

> saguna Brahman. Through the common non-dual reality, we are

> interchanging the attributes of the superimpositions; it is valid

so

> long as we remember that the connection to nirguna Brahman is

> emphasized.

>

> thollmelukaalkizhu

 

Dear Shri Putran,

You say that " jIva is clearly not omnipresent " . By making this

assertion you are effectively saying that Shri Shankara does not

know advaita Vedanta.

 

In my post No. 40639 I had stated that the jIva is omnipresent. This

was not an expression of my own opinion. I had stated there that

this was a quotation from the bhAshya on brahma sutra, II. iii. 29.

Please read that bhAshya before expressing your own views on such

matters. In vedanta we have to go by what authoritative works say.

 

You have further said: " it is Ishvara who projects Himself as jiva;

it is Ishvara when further restricted by body-mind upadhi identifies

in that mind as jiva "

 

According to vedanta it is brahman who appears as jIva. Ishvara

himself is an appearance of brahman due to mAyA.

 

Best wishes,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> Dear Shri Putran,

> You say that " jIva is clearly not omnipresent " . By making this

> assertion you are effectively saying that Shri Shankara does not

> know advaita Vedanta.

>

> In my post No. 40639 I had stated that the jIva is omnipresent.

This

> was not an expression of my own opinion. I had stated there that

> this was a quotation from the bhAshya on brahma sutra, II. iii. 29.

> Please read that bhAshya before expressing your own views on such

> matters. In vedanta we have to go by what authoritative works say.

>

> You have further said: " it is Ishvara who projects Himself as jiva;

> it is Ishvara when further restricted by body-mind upadhi

identifies

> in that mind as jiva "

>

> According to vedanta it is brahman who appears as jIva. Ishvara

> himself is an appearance of brahman due to mAyA.

>

> Best wishes,

> S.N.Sastri

>

 

 

Sri Shastriji,

 

You are correct; I am quite deficient in direct study of most

scriptures.

 

I was not actually saying you are wrong. I tried to clarify why one

might think of jiva as omnipresent, inspite of its basic definition

and its implications. You said jiva is in reality Brahman and like

Brahman it is omnipresent.

 

You statement sounds to me like " the movie character is in reality

the screen and like the screen the movie character is omnipresent " ;

this can be confusing. So I have to ask why might this be said and

present it in an acceptable manner to my mind. Otherwise there will

never be a connect with Shankara and I will be just reading words

without understanding (since some such things may not be explained

thoroughly).

 

As for Ishvara, Ishvara is saguna Brahman. So statements

like " Brahman appears as jiva due to maya " , or " has eyes everywhere "

can be related to the saguna Brahman who projects shrishti by His

power of Maya. That is how the jiva will relate to Brahman. My point

is that the discussion is at the level of appearance so long as we

talk about the jiva (the movie character); BUT when we talk of the

jiva being omnipresent, the discussion actually traces back to the

reality of nirguna Brahman, beyond the appearance.

 

For how can the movie character be omnipresent like the all-pervading

screen-display? Because the reality of the so-called movie character

as well as the whole movie is the non-dual substratum of Screen, ...

There may be some problems with my interpretation, but I don't think

it is creating a new philosophy. (However I will try to keep myself

to question-mode rather than preaching-mode, in such discussions.)

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

> power of Maya. That is how the jiva will relate to Brahman.

 

I should not say that the jiva must relate to Brahman as Ishvara.

Rather so long as the jiva is in ignorance, for all practical purposes,

the saguna existence keeps appearing as real. Due to that fact, Brahman

appears saguna to the jiva whether or not it relates to That as Ishvara

or nirguna Brahman. (And to the jiva, that Brahman appearing saguna due

to maya has brought forth its existence. In this sense, I said Ishvara

projects jiva.)

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

The discussions under this thread were quite exhaustive, thought

provoking and mind bang ling. Jiva as jiva (identified with body,

mind and intellect (BMI) lives, thinks and SPECULATES in ignorance.

Only the Brahman knows the Brahman, Ishvara knows the Ishvaran and

Jiva can only speculate. One of the lessons of these discussions is

just the confirmation that we are still in IGONARANCE. The scriptures

(especially the entire Bhagavad Gita) spells out why it is impossible

for the Jiva (Arjuna) not to understand and appreciate either the

Ishvara or the Brahman. From the advaitic standpoint, neither Jiva

nor Jiva can have an " Independent Existence " and they fully DEPEND on

Brahman. Only the Brahman alone exists is the conclusion that we can

derive from the scriptures. The scriptures do not describe the

nature of the Brahman and that is in confirmation with the

fundamental axiom of Advaita that " the Brahman only knows the

Brahman. "

 

This may partly explain why it is impossible to rule out the

proposition supported from the excerpts from Paramacharya that

Ishvara is as REAL to the Jiva as that of the Brahman. There is no

way for the Jiva with ignorance to understand Nirguna Brahman.

Bhagwan Sri Krishna could describe Arjuna (Jiva) using name and form

through chapter 10. In chapter 11 Gita illustrates the difficulty of

Arjuna in grasping Ishvara while witnessing the Visvarupa Darshanam.

The message of Gita in subtle terms illustrate the impossibility for

the Jiva to grasp and understand Ishvara and there is no wonder that

we couldn't agree or accept the conjectures speculated during the

discussions. Intellectually it is impossible to make a conclusive

statement on the nature of either Ishvara or the Brahman. But these

discussions do help us to recognize why our focus should be

on " removing our ignorance. "

 

As a person with a mathematical background, I see the problem of

knowing the Brahman is like finding the unknown x which couldn't

described by an equation relating x with a known entity. Suppose we

have an equation x = 3 + a and if a is known to be equal to 5 then x

will be exactly equal to 8.

 

Our equation of Brahman is Brahman = Brahman!

Our equation of Ishvara is Ishvara = Brahman + Maya where Maya is

unknown!

Our equation of Jiva is Jiva = Brahman + Ignorance

 

Equation 1 has no clues and no solution within the intellectual

dimension.

Equation 2 provides the solution that Maya distinguishes between the

Saguna and Nirguna Brahman.

Equation 3 provides the solution that with the removal of ignorance,

Jiva becomes the Brahman.

 

I am of the opinion that Sadaji, Sastriji and Shyamji have made very

valuable contributions to the core of this thread and I have no means

to judge who is right. Definitely their contributions were quite

helpful for me in enhancing my understanding of advaita.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

Re: brahman and Ishvara

 

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

> power of Maya. That is how the jiva will relate to Brahman.

 

I should not say that the jiva must relate to Brahman as Ishvara.

Rather so long as the jiva is in ignorance, for all practical

purposes,

the saguna existence keeps appearing as real.

[Guest guest]

--- On Fri, 5/23/08, Ram Chandran <ramvchandran wrote:

 

PraNAms -

 

just for some amusement -

 

RAm wrote:

Our equation of Brahman is Brahman = Brahman!

Our equation of Ishvara is Ishvara = Brahman + Maya where Maya is

unknown!

Our equation of Jiva is Jiva = Brahman + Ignorance

 

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

The first is the identity equation.

 

The second actually maya is known but Brahman and Iswara is unknown or

unknowable! Whatever we KNOW is maaya only and Brahman cannot be known- only

thing is we do not know that what we know is maaya! If we know it is maaya then

whatever we know is Brahman only although Brahmnan cannot be known!

 

The third equation is also is of the same fate - I know ignorance - What I do

not know is the fourth equation -

 

4. Jiiva = Brahman

 

which also is Iswara since maaya and ignorance are un-accountable or uncountable

since they both are maaya only.

 

I hope this has confused enough - But do not worry - all this confusion is only

maaya. What cannot be confused is the one who is getting confused - that I am

who can never get confused since everything should get cleared in the

understanding of I am.

 

 

 

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

Equation 1 has no clues and no solution within the intellectual

dimension.

Equation 2 provides the solution that Maya distinguishes between the

Saguna and Nirguna Brahman.

Equation 3 provides the solution that with the removal of ignorance,

Jiva becomes the Brahman.

 

---------

That is when eq. 4 crystalizes or understood rather jiiva becoming Brahmman, he

realizes that He ever IS - which is Brahman.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

hare krishna namaskarams

 

at last a simple beutiful answer to brahman and ishwara

 

who is " sarvam brahma mayam jagath "

 

baskaran

kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote:

--- On Fri, 5/23/08, Ram Chandran <ramvchandran wrote:

 

PraNAms -

 

just for some amusement -

 

RAm wrote:

Our equation of Brahman is Brahman = Brahman!

Our equation of Ishvara is Ishvara = Brahman + Maya where Maya is

unknown!

Our equation of Jiva is Jiva = Brahman + Ignorance

 

 

Equation 1 has no clues and no solution within the intellectual

dimension.

Equation 2 provides the solution that Maya distinguishes between the

Saguna and Nirguna Brahman.

Equation 3 provides the solution that with the removal of ignorance,

Jiva becomes the Brahman.

 

---------

That is when eq. 4 crystalizes or understood rather jiiva becoming Brahmman, he

realizes that He ever IS - which is Brahman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BASKARAN.C.S

 

 

 

What is your Emotional Quotient? Find out.

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin <advaitin > ,

kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote:

> ---------

> That is when eq. 4 crystalizes or understood rather jiiva becoming

Brahmman, he realizes that He ever IS - which is Brahman.

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

 

PraNams to all,

 

Excellent thread and thanks to all for educating us. As always,

questions remain.

 

1. If Iswara (Saguna Brahman) is limited by Maya, how can he control

Maya? Can Iswara be separate from Maya and be part of Maya as well?

2. Can Iswara be equated to " Purusha " of Sankhya.

3. Since both Jiva and Iswara are limited by Maya, which is Avidya,

what differentiates Jiva and Iswara, other than Iswara having infinite

auspicious attributes and can be Karma phala daata.

4. And, to satisfy shades of Atheist in many of us, can Iswara truly

be karama phala daata and effect a positive (or negative) change in us

or is it Jiva's perception that Iswara can do that?

 

Thanks to all gurus in Advaitin,

 

Sudesh

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- On Sun, 5/25/08, Sudesh Pillutla <sudeshpillutla wrote:

 

1. If Iswara (Saguna Brahman) is limited by Maya, how can he control

Maya? Can Iswara be separate from Maya and be part of Maya as well?

 

KS:This is my understanding:

 

Iswara is not limited by maaya - Iswara uses maaya to create. Maaya is same as

prakRiti. The basis for creation is the samaShTi karma of all the jiivas put

together - Hence Iswara does not create randomly - as Einstein said God does not

play dies - he uses samaShTi vaasanas of all jiivas as the basis for creation of

the next cycle. mayaa adhyakshena prakRitiH suuyate sa caraacaram - under my

presidentship the prakRiti manifests into manifold. Maaya is not separate from

Iswara as it is his Shakti- That is maaya has no separate or independent

existence. Maaya is sat asat vilaxanam - is of the type of maaya only, while

Iswara is chaitanya swarauupa Brahman. Maaya depends on Iswara for its existence

while Brahman with maaya is Iswara.

---------

2. Can Iswara be equated to " Purusha " of Sankhya. -

KS:

No. in Sankhya the pradhaana is the cause for creation - in Vedanta - Iswara

himself becomes many - not makes pradhaana into many. bahusyaam - let me become

many - prajaayeya - He became many. Both nimitta kaaraNa and Upaadana kaaraNa

are one and the same for Vedantin.

 

-----------

3. Since both Jiiva and Iswara are limited by Maya, which is Avidya,

what differentiates Jiiva and Iswara, other than Iswara having infinite

auspicious attributes and can be Karma phala daata.

KS:

Avidya is only at the jiiva level and Maaya is at the Iswara level. Maya

deludes the jiiva with avaraNa and vikshepa. While Iswara wields maaya as his

shakti. Hence as he is omniscient, and omnipresent also.

---------

 

4. And, to satisfy shades of Atheist in many of us, can Iswara truly

be karma phala daata and effect a positive (or negative) change in us

or is it Jiva's perception that Iswara can do that?

KS:

If I take myself as I am jiiva, then Iswara is as real as jiiva and he can do

anything as he is omniscient, by definition. Jiiva's perception includes his own

limitations as well as the limitless powers of Iswara. He is anantakalyaana Guna

aashraya as Bhagavan Ramanuja describes.

 

But Vedanta points out for the mature seeker that Tat tvam asi - you are that -

hence Iswara is not separate from the jiiva since He is there in everyone’s

heart as the very core of individual - The heart of the individual is - I AM

which is the basis for all the bio-data that describes the individual.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

> Iswara is not limited by maaya - Iswara uses maaya to create. Maaya

Maaya is sat asat vilaxanam - is of the type of maaya only, while

Iswara is chaitanya swarauupa Brahman. Maaya depends on Iswara for

its existence while Brahman with maaya is Iswara.

> ---------

> Avidya is only at the jiiva level and Maaya is at the Iswara

level. Maya deludes the jiiva with avaraNa and vikshepa. While

Iswara wields maaya as his shakti. Hence as he is omniscient, and

omnipresent also.

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

 

PraNams Sada Ji.

 

Your post helped in incremental understanding. So far I am of the

opinion that Maya is cosmic advidya and influences Iswara in the same

way as avidya limits jiva.

 

Thanks

 

Sudesh

[Guest guest]

Sudesh Pillutlaji - PraNams

 

Here is the picture.

 

I as a jiiva, because I do not know who I am, take myself I am a local entity

separate from the world that I am experiencing.  Hence universe is separate from

me is the notion due to ignorance at the jiiva level. Since I am asking how did

this universe come from - to me - the jiiva - Upanishads teache - what is there

is before creation was ONLY pure sat-chit-ananda, Brahman. Now what is there

sat-chit-ananda brahman with superimposed (adhyaasa) creation. Hence the

teaching itself is to the one who is currently ignorant of  his own nature and

the nature of the world too.

 

Since infinite sat chit ananda, Brahman cannot create (since creation is an

action - or technically vikaara), we bring in Brahman as Iswara who has the

capacity to create. Since he needs the material and basis for creation, which

cannot be separate from Brahman at the same time cannot be integral part of

Brahman (since Brahman is part less) we bring in maaya as Iswara shakti using

which he can create the multitudes. Iswara is omnipotent and omniscient too

since He is nothing but pure Brahman but now with maaya.  Maya being maayaa

cannot considered as real - since if it is real then Brahman cannot be Brahman

(who is one without a second).  Maaya cannot be unreal since unreal shakti

cannot be used to create - Hence we bring in mithyaa aspect.

 

Since even Iswara cannot create baseless or randomly, we bring in the samaShTi

vaasanaas as the basis for creation - Hence in the Giita 8th Chapter - Krishna

says when the (four-headed) Brahma goes to sleep all the beings and the world

that he created during the day goes back into him which we call as pralaya, and

they go back into in potential form, just as when we go to sleep all the world

of experiences go back into us in potential form to be projected again when our

minds are awaken, exacly in the same way as it was  before they were existing

before I went to sleep. In the same way when he gets up from his sleep he

projects the entire  universe based on the previously stored vaasanaas as the

basis. Hence the macroscopic model is exactly like the macroscopic model at

jiiva level. This is what MAnDUkya Upanishad emphasizes too. 

 

Hence from Iswara point he is using prakRiti or maaya to create.  Iswara is

brought in since from Brahman point there is no creation.  And the creation and

the creator, both, are brought in only because, I consider myself as jiiva,

separate from the creation. Thus the entire jig-saw puzzle fits exactly and

precisely.  Hence as long as I have a jiiva notion, and therefore do not see

myself pervading this entire universe, I have to bring in Iswara as creator and

jagat, the creation. If I give Iswara also ignorance, then He is no better than

me and He will alsohas to  look for some other Iswara who does not have

ignorance to create him and the rest of the Universe. This will lead to infinite

regress. Hence buck stops at Iswara.  But who is that Iswara - remember I

brought him, only for me to understand the creation that I assumed is separate

from me.

 

Mahaavaakyas  - as shree Sastriji presented in the mayaavaakya vichaara - are

'jiiva-Iswara aikya bodhaka vaakyams - or more correctly - akhanDaartha bodhaka

vaakyams - the statements that teach the unity of the jiiva and Iswara or more

correctly those that teach the indivisible nature of the jiiva and Iswara. And

through these scripture asks us to reexamine correctly who I am, before I make a

judgment call about myself, Iswara and jagat or the universe.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

--- On Tue, 5/27/08, Sudesh Pillutla <sudeshpillutla wrote:

 

 

Your post helped in incremental understanding. So far I am of the

opinion that Maya is cosmic advidya and influences Iswara in the same

way as avidya limits jiva.

 

Thanks

 

Sudesh

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

> Sudesh Pillutlaji - PraNams

>  

> Here is the picture.

>  

>  

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

>

 

Sashtanga PraNams Sri Sada ji. Excellent picture that you have drawn.

You said these in many of your posts and it is my limitation not to

grasp it. I still need to reflect on what you said to internalize it.

 

I guess the confusion and problem comes in my mind on roughly

equating Iswara with avatara purushas like Rama, Krishna, Baba(s) or

even for that matter named forms like Vishnu and Siva etc and

attributing miracles to them and human like qualities like giving us

punya or/paapa based on our prayers.

 

Your post proves that Adviata needs constant reflection on saadaka's

part.

 

Thank you

 

Sudesh

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

> Here is the picture...

 

 

 

Dear All:

 

A mind that can produce such a clear, essential and effulgent posting

as this one, can only do so from facing the Clarity of the Self Itself.

 

Thank you Sadaji for consistently sharing your understanding.

(No wonder why your Guruji said that you could speak about ANYTHING!!!)

 

My humble prostrations to that Clarity... (that dwells in all of us,

but makes its way through in some of us, sometimes)

 

Mouna

[Guest guest]

PranAms Shastri-ji and Shri Putran-ji,

 

If I may interject here, I think what Putran-ji is

saying here is the term " jiva " itself refers to the

entity that is limited by avidya, while in essence, of

course, the jivA is limitless being non-different in

reality from the vastu.

 

On a related note, in the Siddhanta-bindu, Swami

Madhusudana Saraswati says (translated by none other

than " our " Pujya Shastri-ji!) (- Putran-ji perhaps you

were trying to frame your post in a similar context?)

 

" Pure consciousness not limited by avidya is Ishvara.

Consciousness limited by avidya is the jiva.

This is the main Vedanta theory, known as the theory

of a single jiva.

This itself is called ‘drishtisrishtivaada’.

In this view the jiva himself is the material and

efficient cause of the universe through his own

avidyA.

All the objects perceived are illusory (like things

seen in dream). The delusion that there are many jivas

is only due to there being many bodies. Liberation is

attained by the single jiva on realization of the

Self.

Ishvara is metaphorically described as the cause of

the universe because of being the substratum of the

jivas, avidyA and the universe. "

 

Putran-ji please do not let this interaction dissuade

you from freely projecting your views - after all we

are all here only to learn, absorb and assimilate, and

words from our respected elders, such as Shri

Shastri-ji, can only be beneficial in this regard.

 

Humble pranAms,

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam

--- snsastri <sn.sastri wrote:

 

> advaitin , " putranm "

> <putranm wrote:

> > Jiva is a vyavahaarika concept, defined by the

> upadhis of body,

> mind,

> > etc: clearly not omnipresent. Ishvara or saguna

> Brahman is

> > omnipresent. And to say " nirguna Brahman " is

> omnipresent is

> > meaningless since that is paramaarthika (no

> duality to pervade).

> >

> > thollmelukaalkizhu

>

> Dear Shri Putran,

> You say that " jIva is clearly not omnipresent " . By

> making this

> assertion you are effectively saying that Shri

> Shankara does not

> know advaita Vedanta.

>

[Guest guest]

Humble pranAms dear Sada-ji and Ram-ji

I greatly enjoyed both your stimulating posts.

 

If I may submit the following just to complete the

confusional amusement.

 

" What is known is mAyA " is itself mAyA because the

very knowing is mAyA and the knower pertaining to this

knowing is also mAyA alone! - in fact only the eternal

knowing which illumines the knower can be really

" known " as only that knowing is Real, but to " know "

that knowing is also mAyA alone - such knowing can

only be owned up - by rejecting the knowership of the

knower!

 

Brahman cannot be known! - Brahman need not know! -

there is nothing other than Brahman that can know! -

Brahman " alone " can be truly known!

 

In these seeming paradoxes alone lies the truth of

truly knowing!

 

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah,

 

Shyam

 

--- kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada

wrote:

 

>

> --- On Fri, 5/23/08, Ram Chandran

> <ramvchandran wrote:

>

> PraNAms -

>

> just for some amusement -

>

> RAm wrote:

> Our equation of Brahman is Brahman = Brahman!

> Our equation of Ishvara is Ishvara = Brahman + Maya

> where Maya is

> unknown!

> Our equation of Jiva is Jiva = Brahman + Ignorance

>

> ---------------

> The first is the identity equation.

> The second actually maya is known but Brahman and

> Iswara is unknown or unknowable! Whatever we KNOW is

> maaya only and Brahman cannot be known- only thing

> is we do not know that what we know is maaya! If we

> know it is maaya then whatever we know is Brahman

> only although Brahmnan cannot be known!

>

> The third equation is also is of the same fate - I

> know ignorance - What I do not know is the fourth

> equation -

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shyamji:

 

The spell of mAyA has generated a very productive thread with more

insights on the nature of Brahman. As you rightly pointed out that

Brahman " alone " can be truly known and that again only to the

Brahman. In my last post, I have stated 3 equations to distinguish

between the Brahman, the Ishvara and the Jiva using algebraic

equations. Unfortunately, the Brahman, the Ishvara or the Jiva can't

be described using the algebra of real numbers.

 

Mathematicians were quite careful while resolving numbers that are

finite, infinite and complex. A complex number is an ordered pair of

real numbers (a,b).

We write that new number as a + bi

The '+' and the i are just symbols for now.

We call 'a' the real part and 'bi' the imaginary part of the complex

number.

Ex : (2 , 4.6) or 2 + 4.6i ;

A complex number can be represented geometrically in a plane by using

the horizontal axis as the real line and the vertical axis

representing the imaginary line. Those interested in knowing the

operational mechanisms can visit Wikepedia homepage. The following

link is more elegant:

http://home.scarlet.be/~ping1339/complget.htm#A-complex-number

The algebraic operations are different for finite, infinite and

complex numbers. If anyone is interested in entertaining confusion

and amusement, they can try the `finite algebra' with infinite

numbers and/or complex numbers.

Now the question arises that how do we represent the Vedantic Truth

for easy understanding. To reduce confusion, we should recognize

that the symbols in the representations are all imaginary!

The statements that are either directly or directly derived from the

scriptures can be summarized as the following:

1 Brahman = Brahman (identity symbolically states that Brahman only

knows the Brahman)

2 Ishvara = (Brahman, mAyA) (symbolism of Ishvara and Brahman)

3 Jiva = (Brahman, Avidya or Ignorance) (symbolism of Brahman and

Jiva)

4 World = (Ishvara, Avidya) (symbolism of Ishvara and World)

They are just symbolic representations and should not be treated as

equations. Just like the algebraic systems in mathematics, Vedanta

distinguishes between the Paramarthika and Vyavaharika level of

reality. At the Paramarthika level only `1' exists. At Vyavaharika

level, 2, 3 and 4 provide us with some `clues' on the nature of the

Brahman. Only the Brahman can dispel mAyA and Avidya and that is the

reason for the statement in the scriptures that Brahman alone knows

the Brahman. The representations 2, 3 and 4 symbolically state that

Ishvara, Jiva and the World has no `independent' existence and their

existence depends totally on the Brahman. mAyA and Avidya both are

symbols that are useful just similar to the `i' of the complex number

x + i y. The `i' in the complex number was helpful for enhancing the

field of mathematics and similarly, mAyA and Avidya has enhanced our

understanding of Advaita Vedanta. These symbols will disappear when

the Brahman is known (Vidya) and only the Paramarthika Satya will

become the eternal unchanging reality.

Please forgive me and understand that this entire post is the

combined product of mAyA and Avidya!

With my warmest regards,

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , Shyam <shyam_md wrote:

>

> " What is known is mAyA " is itself mAyA because the

> very knowing is mAyA and the knower pertaining to this

> knowing is also mAyA alone! - in fact only the eternal

> knowing which illumines the knower can be really

> " known " as only that knowing is Real, but to " know "

> that knowing is also mAyA alone - such knowing can

> only be owned up - by rejecting the knowership of the

> knower!

>

> Brahman cannot be known! - Brahman need not know! -

> there is nothing other than Brahman that can know! -

> Brahman " alone " can be truly known!

>

> In these seeming paradoxes alone lies the truth of

> truly knowing!

>

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

 

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran wrote:

 

> Namaste Shyamji:

Please forgive me and understand that this entire post is the

> combined product of mAyA and Avidya!

 

Dear Sri Ramachandran,

 

Why present a post which is product of maya and avidya which is

confusing even though bewitching?

Why not present a post which is a combined product of genuine and

true vidya , understanding and anuBava from which new entrants like

us will vastly benefit ! This posting is a genuine request from one

who sincerely longs to come out of the snares of maya and avidya.

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

>

> Namaste Shyamji:

 

 

 

At the Paramarthika level only `1' exists. At Vyavaharika

> level, 2, 3 and 4 provide us with some `clues' on the nature of the

> Brahman.

mAyA and Avidya has enhanced our

> understanding of Advaita Vedanta.

> With my warmest regards,

> Ram Chandran

 

Namaste Ram Chandran-ji,

I found your mathematical representation quite interesting. I took my

M.A. Degree in Mathematics with Statistics and Complex Variables as

special subjects way back in 1942 from Madras Christian College. But

since I went into an entirely diffent line I have forgotten all the

maths that I had learnt. I remember only that i stands for the square

root of minus one and it is therefore an imaginary number. I therefore

thought you would equate maya with i, since it is also imaginary. Your

statement that at the paramarthika level only i exists has therefore

puzzled me. Could you please elaborate on this, so that I can

understand your point of view?

Regards,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

Pranams Sastriji:

 

Thanks for bringing the typo to my and list's attention. I was trying

to type '1' implying statment or the identity that Brahman= Brahman

or Brahman alone exists.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

Note to Sri Sreenivasa Murthy: We are all at the spell of mAyA and

that is the reason for all these discussions!

 

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> Your

> statement that at the paramarthika level only i exists has

therefore

> puzzled me. Could you please elaborate on this, so that I can

> understand your point of view?

> Regards,

> S.N.Sastri

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sastriji:

 

After the second reading of your post, I did notice that I should

elaborate your observation on connecting mAyA and i, the imaginary part

of the complex number (x + i y). It should be pointed out that the

square of (-1) represented by the symbol i does not exist as real (in

the real plane). But the square of i is real which is the mathematical

purification of converting the unreal 'i' to a real.

 

I am not sure whether we want to identify 'mAyA' with the 'i' because

we have no clues about what really it is. The 'i' of complex number is

defined well by the statement that i:square = -1. But it may be

possible to link Jiva as the complex number and Brahman as the real

number and it is possible to derive some parallel between mathematics

and advaita as follows:

 

In advaita, Jiva is similar to the complex number consisting of the

real (Brahman) and the unreal (identification through Body, mind,

intellect). Jiva due to his/her attachment to BMI chooses the imaginary

nonexistent identity i. Jiva after purification through Yoga get

converted from the unreal i to the real 'I.'

 

Real number is pure, simple and easy to understand and complex number

is hard to understand and work with. Similarly the Brahman is pure,

simple and hence with no attributes. On the otherhand, Jiva is impure,

complex with many attributes, notions. When the imaginary 'i' is

removed from the complex number, it becomes real. When the BMI

identification is removed from the Jiva, he/she also become the REAL

Brahman!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

 

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

 

> I remember only that i stands for the square

> root of minus one and it is therefore an imaginary number. I

therefore

> thought you would equate maya with i, since it is also imaginary.

> Your statement that at the paramarthika level only i exists has

> therefore puzzled me. Could you please elaborate on this, so that

> I can understand your point of view?

> Regards,

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

This is in continuation of my earlier post comparing Jiva as equivalent

to a complex number and Brahman as equaivalent to real number.

 

It should be pointed out that in relative terms, Ishvara can also be

cosidered as a complex number in comparison to Brahman treated as a

real number. It may be clear now that on relative terms, Jiva is more

complex than Ishvara. Brahman and Ishvara are differentiated by mAyA.

Sastriji's intuition is quite right that mAyA could be considered

similar to the 'i' which differentiates between the real and complex

number. Interestingly, if we remove the 'i' from the complex number

then it becomes a pure real number. Similarly, if mAyA is removed from

Ishvara, He becomes the pure nirguna Brahman.

 

One question often occurs - that is whether mAyA is real or unreal?

With the presence of Avidya, this question can't be answered. With True

Knowledge(wisdom or vidya and equivalently Self or God Realization)

Jiva-Ishvara-Brahman get superimposed. The appearance of mAyA and

Avidya get dissolved with the God-realization. The evaporation process

to get rid of mAyA and Avidya is Yoga which requires both Shraddha and

Sadhana!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

Note: An understanding Vedantic philosophy requires mathematical

intuition and most of the Hindu philosophers were well versed in

mathematics and the language of Sanskrit is most suitable for

mathematical learning. This may explain why the Panini the Sanskrit

Grammarian was considered as an accomplished mathematical genius.

Sanskrit language is also considered most suitable for developing

computer logic and Sanskrit language played a key role in developing

algorithms in Artificial Intelligence. See the following links for

some additional information.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanscrit

http://www.gosai.com/science/sanskrit-nasa.html

http://www.gosai.com/science/sanskrit-enlightenment.html

http://sanskritvoice.com/2007/04/24/artificial-intelligence-to-decipher-

vedas

 

 

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

See the following links for

> some additional information.

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanscrit

> http://www.gosai.com/science/sanskrit-nasa.html

> http://www.gosai.com/science/sanskrit-enlightenment.html

> http://sanskritvoice.com/2007/04/24/artificial-intelligence-to-

decipher-

> vedas

 

I noticed this forum link (did not read but of same topic).

 

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2543

 

thollmelukaalkizhu