Guest guest Posted August 7, 2009 Report Share Posted August 7, 2009 Namaste Subbu-ji, The interesting thing is that you think you have answered my question so I'll put it again in a slightly different way. Let's try and think outside the snake, so to speak. If the relative plane is irredemibly mithya then how can the individual seeker transcend it? There can be no bridge between the absolute and the relative plane. Those analogies trade on an equivocation surrounding the word 'real'. The word used in relation to mundane reality has a range of uses which we can easily master but that does not mean that we know what reality is on the absolute plane. What is it that is unsublatable/kuthasta in everyday life? What is it that survives even Deep Dreamless Sleep? Is it not consciousness itself or consciousness as such, that even in the waking state retains its self-luminous immediacy. That is the core reality that makes sadhana intelligible. " The teacher said to him, " I told you the right thing. The very fact (that you know simultaneously all the mental modifications) was adduced by me as the reason why you are eternally immutable. " (from Upadesasahasri, Chap.II, para.83) Shankara thinks that we can move from the epistemological consideration of the plane of mental modifications to the eternally immutable. The assertion that all this that we are acquainted empirically with is mithya needs to be put into context. Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2009 Report Share Posted August 7, 2009 Dear Michael, Apologies for the interruption. I nearly did after your last post but forgot about it. I think maybe there are some deeper concerns in your questions but, superficially at least, you ask: " If the relative plane is irredeemably mithyA then how can the individual seeker transcend it? There can be no bridge between the absolute and the relative plane. " Isn't this analogous to asking 'how can the dreamer wake up?'? 'vyAvahArika speak' is for the sake of convenience only, while we are in the midst of the delusion. In reality, there *is* no individual just as, from the vantage point of the waker, there is no dreamer. So there is no question of transcendence - the seeker already *is* the real, non-dual brahman. There is no bridge because there is no need of a bridge - there are not two places. Best wishes, Dennis advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of ombhurbhuva Friday, August 07, 2009 1:25 AM advaitin The Unreal Can Cause the Real Namaste Subbu-ji, The interesting thing is that you think you have answered my question so I'll put it again in a slightly different way. Let's try and think outside the snake, so to speak. If the relative plane is irredemibly mithya then how can the individual seeker transcend it? There can be no bridge between the absolute and the relative plane. << >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2009 Report Share Posted August 7, 2009 advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote: > > > Namaste Subbu-ji, > The interesting thing is that you think you have answered my question so > I'll put it again in a slightly different way. Let's try and think outside > the snake, so to speak. > > If the relative plane is irredemibly mithya then how can the individual > seeker transcend it? There can be no bridge between the absolute and the > relative plane. Those analogies trade on an equivocation surrounding the > word 'real'. The word used in relation to mundane reality has a range of > uses which we can easily master but that does not mean that we know what > reality is on the absolute plane. Dear Michael ji, Namaste. There does not seem to me any confusion in the method of Vedanta. Pl. have a look at this page on this link: _ http://tiny.cc/3rxrU The knowledge of the Atman is indeed the bridge to Immortality, the Relative plane. It is this knowledge that links, as it were, the relative plane to/with the absolute plane. If we do not admit of any such link, bridge, there will be no way to lift ourselves up from the relative plane. The very possibility of such a bridge is the foundation for the structure of Vedanta. It is with this bottom line the Upanishads endeavour to teach us Atman-knowledge. You have said all this in the following paragraphs, paraphrasing Shankara's words: > > What is it that is unsublatable/kuthasta in everyday life? What is it > that survives even Deep Dreamless Sleep? Is it not consciousness itself > or consciousness as such, that even in the waking state retains its > self-luminous immediacy. That is the core reality that makes sadhana > intelligible. > > " The teacher said to him, " I told you the right thing. The very fact > (that you know simultaneously all the mental modifications) was adduced by > me as the reason why you are eternally immutable. " (from Upadesasahasri, > Chap.II, para.83) > > Shankara thinks that we can move from the epistemological consideration of > the plane of mental modifications to the eternally immutable. The > assertion that all this that we are acquainted empirically with is mithya > needs to be put into context. > > Best Wishes, > Michael. Yes. Such an assertion is made only from the standpoint of the absolute and never by referring to the relative itself. In other words, it makes no sense in 'asserting that all this that we are acquainted empirically with is mithya' without defining a priori from what plane this assertion is made. In a way, we might say that the entire Vedantic literature is a sort of compare and contrast study between the relative and the absolute planes. Repeatedly they draw our attention to the 'this' vs. the 'That' so that the contrast sinks deep in our psyche. Your quote of the Up.SA. above itself is an example. Consciousness continues both in the presence as well as the absence of the mental modifications. This is the comparison. But Consciousness remains alone even when the modifications cease. This is the contrast. We also know that duality, bondage, samsara is experienced only in the wake of the presence of the mental modifications. The message finally emerging is: That which persists even in the absence of the mental modifications is the state that is free of bondage. That is the absolute. This knowledge of/about the unfailing Consciousness is therefore the bridge that helps us pass from the relative to the absolute. Regards, subbu > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2009 Report Share Posted August 7, 2009 advaitin , " subrahmanian_v " <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@> wrote: > > > > > > The knowledge of the Atman is indeed the bridge to Immortality, the Relative plane. > Regards, > subbu > > A correction is needed in the above: The word 'Relative' is to be read as Absolute. The error is regretted. subbu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2009 Report Share Posted August 7, 2009 The knowledge of the Atman is indeed the bridge to Immortality. This knowledge of/about the unfailing Consciousness is therefore the bridge that helps us pass from the relative to the absolute. praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji Hare Krishna I've an additional doubt here (not entirely relevant to the context of on-going discussion). Kindly clarify whether knowledge of the Atman (in absolute sense) is merely a 'road' to the 'destination' i.e. immortality?? Is these two (knowledge of Atman and immortality (amrutatva) are separate niche like bridge & destination?? Kindly clarify whether there is any time gap between absolute jnAna & attainment of immortality. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2009 Report Share Posted August 7, 2009 Namaste Michaelji: From the logical point of view using what we have learnt from " Aparavidhya " you are quite correct in your assertion that " There can be no bridge between the absolute and relative plane. " From Sankara's advaitic point of view " an invisible bridge do exists between the absolute and relative plane. " This invisible bridge can only be explained when learn to accept what our buddhi declares as `NONSENSE! " This paradox and your doubts (all our doubts) can be cleared when we transcend beyond our " SENSES. " The moment that we try to explain using language, words and apply language we can never resolve this problem. We are better off assuming the irrefutable fact – " The Brahman ONLY KNOWS the Brahman! " With my warm regards, Ram Chandran Note: Aparavidhya includes the entire collection of the work of Sankara and all scholars and saints of the past and present including all the books, collections of papers and discussions (over 46000 in this list) that are available in all languages. advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote: > > If the relative plane is irredemibly mithya then how can the individual > seeker transcend it? There can be no bridge between the absolute and the > relative plane. Those analogies trade on an equivocation surrounding the > word 'real'. 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.