Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Namaste, Sri Sadanandaji and Sri Dennisji, Thank you very much for the clarification. From what you have mentioned, am I to understand that MOKSHA is not an event, taking place in time, but it is a fact to be assimilated and recognized? If that be the case, i.e. Moksha is not an event, any experience like deep sleep, waking, dream, various types of samaadies, etc., and also all emotions, like love, hatred, jealousy, anger, etc., has nothing do with Moksha, but at the same time recognizing this fact in all experiences, is the wisdom gained by self-knowledge. I wonder whether my conclusion requires correction. With kind regards, R.S.Mani R. S. Mani Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel http://in.travel./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 From : H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy Pranams to all. advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote: " From what you have mentioned, am I to understand that MOKSHA is not an event, taking place in time, but it is a fact to be assimilated and recognized? " Dear Sri Mani, Moksha is one's own TRUE SVARUPA. One's true svarupa is HERE and NOW. Moksha is ETERNAL. It has no beginning. It has no end. This is what has to be realized by a sincere mumukshu. This is What Sri Shankara has stated in his commentaries. I am sure you can draw the right conclusions from the above statement and get answers to all your doubts . If you need I will post the relevant passages from Sri Shankara. With warm and respectful regards, Sreenivasa Murthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Dear Maniji, I'm not sure how you have derived this conclusion from what has been said. If, by mokSha, you mean 'enlightenment', then it is an event in the mind of a person, taking place at a particular time. Before that time, he/she was unenlightened; after, he/she is enlightened. If, by mokSha, you mean 'liberated', then, from the standpoint of absolute reality, there is only ever brahman, ever-unlimited, ever-free and there never actually was a person needing to be liberated. Best wishes, Dennis advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of R.S.MANI Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:29 AM group Namaste, All, a Question for all! Namaste, Sri Sadanandaji and Sri Dennisji, Thank you very much for the clarification. From what you have mentioned, am I to understand that MOKSHA is not an event, taking place in time, but it is a fact to be assimilated and recognized? << >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 If, by mokSha, you mean 'enlightenment', then it is an event in the mind of a person, taking place at a particular time. Before that time, he/she was unenlightened; after, he/she is enlightened. If, by mokSha, you mean 'liberated', then, from the standpoint of absolute reality, there is only ever brahman, ever-unlimited, ever-free and there never actually was a person needing to be liberated. praNAms Sri Dennis prabhuji Hare Krishna Kindly dont think this is mere sarcastic remark...I am seriously having this doubt after reading your above mail : Can there be two mOksha-s in advaita?? ..one is vyAvahArik time bound event that took place in mind, that can be called *enlightenment* in vyavahAra and another one which is ever-unlimited, ever-free *liberation* from absolute point!! Can we say 'enlightening knowledge' can be comparmentalized and stored in one of the various bins in mental warehouse!! If enlightenment is an event that is time bound then it has the beginning...that which has the beginning can not be last long, it has to meet its end one fine day is it not?? The perceiver of real rope cannot think before cognizing the rope there was snake & now after realizing the true nature of rope I am perceiving the rope..His knowledge of rope reveals him the fac that there was/is/will be always rope...is it not?? Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 --- On Thu, 5/21/09, R.S.MANI <r_s_mani wrote: From what you have mentioned, am I to understand that MOKSHA is not an event, taking place in time, but it is a fact to be assimilated and recognized? If that be the case, i.e. Moksha is not an event, any experience like deep sleep, waking, dream, various types of samaadies, etc., and also all emotions, like love, hatred, jealousy, anger, etc., has nothing do with Moksha, but at the same time recognizing this fact in all experiences, is the wisdom gained by self-knowledge. I wonder whether my conclusion requires correction. Maniji - PraNAms There is always confusion in terms of what self-realization is. Dennisji has provided an answer. Ignorance is anaadi - beginningless. Knowledge is eternal. But knowledge appears to be covered by ignorance. Hence to reveal the knowledge ignorance has to be removed. For that a pramANa a means of knowledge is required. This is true for ignorance of anything including the self-ignorance. Although I am beyond knowledge and ignorance, right now the state of affairs is that I take myself what I am not and suffer the consequence of that misunderstanding. Scripture says that misunderstanding arises due to lack of understanding of my true nature. Only way for way-out is to find out my true nature by rejecting what I am not. There are two segments in this. I am a subject different from an object and I can therefore dismiss anything that I objectify as I am not. For this much, I do not even need scriptures. This is where people who claim to have direct paths fall into this trap. I am subject different from object and objectless is my nature. The second part comes from the scriptural understanding -the nature of that I am - I am the all pervading principle that pervades as sat-chit-ananda or ananta even this that I reject as I am not, I am that too as the very substantive of jiiva-jagat and Iswara. That involves understanding all this is nothing but mithyaa naama ruupa and I am as pure existence-consciousness is the substantive of even this or the world too. Moksha is clear abidance in this knowledge of I am. Even when I am ignorant of myself I am Brahman only. Now I recognize that I am not this but I am substantive of all this - this include even the ahankaara which is nothing but the notion that I am = this. Clear abidance is firm understanding as a fact not as just a thought. For that there is Mr. Jones story that Swami Chinmayanandaji told which I posted long time ago. But the essence here again. Mr. Jones for some reason began to think that he is a rat. When that happened we do not know - let us say from our point it is anaadi. Since he is a rat, he used to hide behind the closet whenever he sees a cat. His wife took him to a psychologist and after many sitting and learning that I am man and not a rat, he returned back. But when he say his cat waiting form him, he rushed back to the doctor and said I know I am man and not a rat but I am not sure if my cat knows that I am a man and not a rat. He is ever free from cat-hood but in this story Mr. Jones still has a problem of cat-hood that he needs to get rid of. So firm abidance in the knowledge means there will never ever be any doubt during any transactions that takes place that I am a jiiva or samsaari. The knowledge is I am ever free and all this is my glory. In Taittiriiya Sikhssavalli , 10th anuvaaka, there is trishanku Rishi who after realization declares and Upanishad asks to use this as japa. It starts with…aham vRikshasya reriva| .. etc. I am the very supporter for this tree of samsaara, that kathopanishad also talks about. Bhagavaan Ramana in Sat Darshanam takes about jnaani and ajnaani dehaatma bhaave jna jaDau samaanou ekasya dehe hRidi diipta aatmaa| aakramya deham ca jagacca puurNaH parasya meyam tanu maatramaatmaa|| - 19 He says - I am body notion is there for both jnaani and anjaani. Hence Vedanta does not solve the biological problems – one will be still hungry, thirsty, etc. Vedanta solves psychological responses to the biological problems which is called samsaara. One, ekasya, that is jnaani, knows that it is a notion only and for him who has realized that I am the very consciousness that enlivens this body and the world, he realizes that I pervade both the body and the world. – aakramya deham ca jagacca which he perceives and realizes that I am puurnam in spite of the apparent perceptual duality. Where as the ajnaani who also has the notion that I am the body, takes that as real and therefore Bhagavaan says – parasya aatmaa tanu maatra meyam – I am only of the size of the body. And in the next sloka he reinforces the above statements saying that ajnasya vijnasya ca vishvamasti puurvasya dRishyam jagadeva satyam| prasya dRisyaashrayabhuutam ekam satyam prapuurNam pravibhaasyaruupam|| 20 For both ajnaani and jnaani – the world is there. Bur for ajnaani’s vision the world is real – in fact the world is indeed real. Whereas in jnaani’s vision the substantive of the whole world is only one that I am and that is the real truth and it is of the nature of infiniteness shines everything but without any finite forms reminding us Krishna’s statement – maayaa tatam idam sarvam jagat avyakta muurtinaa… I pervade this entire universe in unmanifested form. Salutations to that great Rishi of Arunaachala. Hari Om! Sadananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote: > > > > Namaste, Sri Sadanandaji and Sri Dennisji, > Thank you very much for the clarification. > From what you have mentioned, am I to understand that MOKSHA is not an event, taking place in time, but it is a fact to be assimilated and recognized? > If that be the case, i.e. Moksha is not an event, any experience like deep sleep, waking, dream, various types of samaadies, etc., and also all emotions, like love, hatred, jealousy, anger, etc., has nothing do with Moksha, but at the same time recognizing this fact in all experiences, is the wisdom gained by self-knowledge. > I wonder whether my conclusion requires correction. > With kind regards, > R.S.Mani > > R. S. Mani > > > Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with India Travel http://in.travel./ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Dear Bhaskar-ji, It seems that you are not reading what I wrote. What you say is precisely why I phrased my comment in the way that I did. Since I do not know what Maniji meant by the word, I have offered the alternatives, which as you point out are dependent upon which standpoint you take. If you want to be pedantic, as you know I often like to be :-), when you ask " Can there be two mokSha-s in advaita " , the answer would be that there can be *no* mokSha-s in advaita, since brahman is non-dual and undifferentiated. Best wishes, Dennis advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of Bhaskar YR Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:21 PM advaitin RE: Namaste, All, a Question for all! Kindly dont think this is mere sarcastic remark...I am seriously having this doubt after reading your above mail : Can there be two mOksha-s in advaita?? .. << >> .. <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=4 5141/stime=1242908580/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: > Can there be two mOksha-s in advaita?? .. BhaskarJi, how are you?, Namaste! Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. The one we have and the one we think we don't. All, my PraNams, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote: > > Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr@> wrote: > > > Can there be two mOksha-s in advaita?? .. > > BhaskarJi, how are you?, Namaste! > > Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. > The one we have and the one we think we don't. > > All, my PraNams, > Mouna > Namaste,IMO, In the first place we all have moksha now, but for arguments sake lets give illusion some validity. Realisation is dual there are two mokshas but they happen simultaneously. Full realisation of Saguna Brahman results in the full realisation of NirGuna and that is the natural state or truth or whatever----there only is or is it isn't NirGuna....Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote: > > > > Namaste, Sri Sadanandaji and Sri Dennisji, > Thank you very much for the clarification. > From what you have mentioned, am I to understand that MOKSHA is not an event, taking place in time, but it is a fact to be assimilated and recognized? > If that be the case, i.e. Moksha is not an event, any experience Maniji, I think you may want to ask for specific scriptural references from the respondees. It is possible you are being given a certain viewpoint, which although maybe ultimately correct, is undermining other standpoints as if they don't have any basis. I am not knowledgable enough to give a thorough analysis. Punarjanma, krama-mukti, etc. are also relevant in our traditions. Ask also in the other list (of the below link) if there are other ways to approach this question. See for instance. http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/1999-September/032497.html thollmelukaalkizhu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 " Mouna " <maunna wrote: > Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. > The one we have and the one we think we don't. > Dear BhaskarJi, me again! last thought. And what is the difference between these two Mokshas? The difference is that they are both concepts! Pranamas to All, Mouna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote: > Punarjanma, krama-mukti, etc. are also relevant in our traditions. > Ask also in the other list (of the below link) if there are other ways to approach this question. > > See for instance. > http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/1999-September/032497.html > Couple of more links thanks to google search: Swami Krishnananda: http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/realis/realis_6a.html Swami Chinmayananda: http://living.oneindia.in/yoga-spirituality/swami-chinmayananda/2009/subtle-body\ -rebirth-self-realisation-030209.html See also: http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad_faq.html#9 thollmelukaalkizhu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Very good! I wish I had thought of that one! Dennis advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of Mouna Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:34 PM advaitin Re: Namaste, All, a Question for all! Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: > Can there be two mOksha-s in advaita?? .. BhaskarJi, how are you?, Namaste! Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. The one we have and the one we think we don't. All, my PraNams, Mouna .. <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=4 5149/stime=1242920074/nc1=4507179/nc2=3848585/nc3=5191953> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote: > If one is given an option between: > > a)Moksha, i.e. liberation from Punarjanma, and > > b)Punarjanma with self knowledge, > > what one should choose? > Namaste Maniji, I looked at your first question here. I think the principle of seeking liberation is accompanied by the idea that punarjanma is not such a good thing. That is the maturity, of feeling disgust with believing in the unreal, that is the test of fitness for seeking jnana. (Most of us may not be there yet, hence keep wavering.) If you read the first part of the Upadeshasahasri, the disciple is greatly pained by this ignorance-based existence, he feels the running-about like a slave after the three gunas, not to mention the fear of death and constant concern over the body. He wants to know if this is his own nature or if it is causal, owing to something else and he infact is free. Of course, the guru proceeds to teach him that it is causal - owing to ignorance which can be removed through self-knowledge. Typically as I understand, punarjanma can take place only if there are prarabdha karmas that need to be resolved. So long as there is any attachment to living through a body, one does not have self-knowledge and hence punarjanma is guaranteed. For one is seeking a " completion " of the Self through experience - one is seeking to " establish identity " through reflecting in Maya. You should revert your analogy as follows: one wants to dream in sleep for fear that not thinking would annihilate him. While such idea persists, no doubt so will our dream - but it will include the mix of pain and happiness. For the jivan-mukta, this desire is gone as also identification with experience, and when the gross body falls, the subtle body dissolves with no vasanas to propel it forward to next janma. A classic example of jnani is Shuka Maharshi, and that example of him walking naked with the bathing women not at all disturbed. We can probably say *that* is a jnani and such will have no punarjanma nor the want for experiencing. thollmelukaalkizhu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote: > > " Mouna " <maunna@> wrote: > > Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. > > The one we have and the one we think we don't. > > > > Dear BhaskarJi, me again! last thought. > > And what is the difference between these two Mokshas? > The difference is that they are both concepts! > > Pranamas to All, > Mouna > Most beautifully put, Mounaji. You have got the crux of the matter. Sometimes I feel westerners catch the subtleties better than us. (I hope no one will be horrified by this statement). S.N.Sastri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 praNAms Sri Mouna prabhuji Hare Krishna BhaskarJi, how are you?, Namaste! > namO namaH...By the (vyAvahArik) god's grace I am fine...thank you :-)) Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. The one we have and the one we think we don't. And what is the difference between these two Mokshas? The difference is that they are both concepts! > though my mind is not matured enough to catch the subtleties of these statements...I should say, you have given politically correct, diplomatic answer :-)) My praNAms to you onceagain prabhuji. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Dear Mani-ji, Dennis-ji has already answered your question. Confusion arises because the word moksha is used in two different senses in advaitic works. We see such statements as, " moksha is not something to be attained because it is identical with the Self and (the Self) is one (without a second). (br.up.3.3.1, bhAShya). In such statements moksha means `being brahman'. You are brahman even now, when you still identify yourself with your body, and so you do not have to become brahman. So moksha is not something to be attained. It is your very nature and so it is eternal. In this sense moksha is ever present and is clearly not an event in time. But the word moksha has also another meaning, and that is `realization' or `enlightenment'. Though I am brahman even today, I have not realized that I am brahman and am identifying myself with my BMI. People who have not studied Vedanta do not even know that they are brahman. We who have studied Vedanta know that we are brahman and not the body, but this is only intellectual knowledge at present. When a person completely gives up his identification with his BMI and remains established in the knowledge that he is brahman and not the BMI, he can be said to have attained realization, or moksha in the second sense of the word. In this sense moksha is something to be attained in the future. This is clearly an event which has to take place at a particular time. In this sense of the word, moksha is an event in time, as Dennis-ji has already explained. This moksha is nothing but destruction of ignorance. punarjanma means taking another gross body. On death the subtle body departs from the physical or gross body. It goes to other worlds according to its karma and takes birth again in another gross body which may be that of a human being or animal or bird or plant according to the prarabdha karma which begins to fructify. This cycle of repeated births and deaths goes on until the subtle body also perishes on the dawn of Self-knowledge. Thereafter there will be no birth for that subtle body. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote: Shastriji, thanks for the excellent post: it puts both sides very clearly. I had missed that post of Dennisji. thollmelukaalkizhu > > Dear Mani-ji, > > Dennis-ji has already answered your question. > > Confusion arises because the word moksha is used in two different senses in advaitic works. We see such statements as, " moksha is not something to be attained because it is identical with the Self and (the Self) is one (without a second). (br.up.3.3.1, bhAShya). > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote: > > advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri@> wrote: > > Shastriji, thanks for the excellent post: it puts both sides very clearly. I had missed that post of Dennisji. > > thollmelukaalkizhu > > > > > Dear Mani-ji, > > > > Dennis-ji has already answered your question. Namaste, Another aspect that may be explored with reference to Mani-ji's original question: " Message #45027 Sat May 16, 2009 If one is given an option between: a)Moksha, i.e. liberation from Punarjanma, and b)Punarjanma with self knowledge, " ------------------- b) would in effect be 'avatAra' Itself, as declared by Sri Krishna in Gita 4:6 & 8; and 9:8 & 10. It is 'svecChA'('Self-willed')- ...................................................... prakR^iti.n svaamadhiShThaaya sambhavaamyaatmamaayayaa .. 4\-6.. by subjugating My Prakriti, I take birth by means of My own Maya. ---------------- ........................................................ dharmasa.nsthaapanaarthaaya sambhavaami yuge yuge .. 4\-8.. for establishing virtue fully;-for that purpose, sambhavami, I manifest Myself; --- prakR^iti.n svaamavaShTabhya visR^ijaami punaH punaH . ...................................................... 9\-8.. avastabhya, keeping under control; svam, My own; prakrtim, Prakrti, which is charcterized as nescience; visrjami, I project forth; punah, punah, again and again; --------------------------- mayaadhyakSheNa prakR^itiH suuyate sacharaacharam.h . hetunaanena kaunteya jagadviparivartate .. 9\-10.. mayaa, under Me; adhyaksena, as the supervisor, remaining changeless as a mere witness under all circumstances; prakrtih, the Prakrti, My maya consisting of the three gunas and characterized as ignorance; suyate, produces; the world sa-cara-acaram. of the moving and the none-moving things. Thus there is the Vedic text, 'The one divine Being is hidden in all beings; He is amnipresent, the indwelling Self of all bengs, the Supervisor of actions, the refuge of all beings, the witness, the one who imparts consceiousness, unconditioned Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna@> wrote: > > Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr@> wrote: > > > Can there be two mOksha-s in advaita?? .. > > BhaskarJi, how are you?, Namaste! > > Yes!, there are two Mokshas in Advaita. > The one we have and the one we think we don't. > > All, my PraNams, > Mouna > Namaste,IMO, In the first place we all have moksha now, but for arguments sake lets give illusion some validity. Realisation is dual there are two mokshas but they happen simultaneously. Full realisation of Saguna Brahman results in the full realisation of NirGuna and that is the natural state or truth or whatever----there only is or is it isn't NirGuna....Cheers Tony. --- End forwarded message --- 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.