Guest guest Posted February 3, 2010 Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Shastri ji: Pranaams! Is this world unreal? Or seemingly real? Is it a dream of the Brahman? Or is it our own dream? Why define the world as unreal and not impermanent? I understand that this terminology of " unreal " is used so that we will have a clearer understanding when we go deeper into the subject of Vedanta. I can understand that the " I " is self, simply by pointing at various parts of the body and saying, its not me, its not me and also that the body is not permanent. But when you see physical objects like a table or a tree or a mountain, these objects are very much real and tangible. They may not be permanent, as they will ultimately go back into the five elements. But for now they are real. Why equate reality and permanency? You might say that in a dream, the objects are also real, but upon waking up you realize it was a dream, hence ALL objects are unreal. But a dream is a play of the mind. Whereas this world is not a play of the mind. It does exist. Vedanta, I believe, encourages reflection and enquiry. So hopefully I am not out of line or out of context. Hari Aum! Sunil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Namaste. While Satriji will have his own dosage of comments, i would like to comment on this. Sorry for barging in. Shri Sastriji is a disciple of Brahmasri Goda Sastrigal and Brahmasri Krishnamurthy Sastrigal who are considered to be authority in Srividya & Advaita Vedanta. So, i hope you now understand who the Sastriji is!!! Now regarding the Reality / Unreality of the World, i would suggest you to go through the 1st Sloka of Dakshinamurthy Stotra (vishwam darpaNa ....) which clearly defines the state of the World. Also, if you have the patience of studying the entire stotram which runs about 200 pages, the files section has this in word form by Shri Subbuji. regs, sriram--- On Wed, 3/2/10, Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 wrote: Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 Real or Unrealadvaitin Date: Wednesday, 3 February, 2010, 8:55 PM Shastri ji: Pranaams! Is this world unreal? Or seemingly real? Is it a dream of the Brahman? Or is it our own dream? Why define the world as unreal and not impermanent? I understand that this terminology of "unreal" is used so that we will have a clearer understanding when we go deeper into the subject of Vedanta. I can understand that the "I" is self, simply by pointing at various parts of the body and saying, its not me, its not me and also that the body is not permanent. But when you see physical objects like a table or a tree or a mountain, these objects are very much real and tangible. They may not be permanent, as they will ultimately go back into the five elements. But for now they are real. Why equate reality and permanency? You might say that in a dream, the objects are also real, but upon waking up you realize it was a dream, hence ALL objects are unreal. But a dream is a play of the mind. Whereas this world is not a play of the mind. It does exist. Vedanta, I believe, encourages reflection and enquiry. So hopefully I am not out of line or out of context. Hari Aum! Sunil The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 I can understand that the " I " is self, simply by pointing at various parts of the body and saying, its not me, its not me and also that the body is not permanent. But when you see physical objects like a table or a tree or a mountain, these objects are very much real and tangible. They may not be permanent, as they will ultimately go back into the five elements. But for now they are real. Why equate reality and permanency? praNAms Hare Krishna It is strange that you are saying body is not permanent but world is real though not permanent!! But if you would like to hear the definition of 'real' from the non-dual perspective. From advaita we say, that alone is real which does not undergo any change under any circumstances. Can our objective world fulfil this criteria to assert it is real?? obviously the answer is big NO!! Hence world is real though it is a solid reality at one particular state!! Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 Hence world is real though it is a solid reality at one particular state!! praNAms Hare Krishna sorry an omission of an important word in the above sentence :-)) please read it as : Hence world is NOT real though it is a solid reality at one particular state!! this typo shows how even without our knowledge we deeply entangled in this 'real' world :-)) Anyway, you can wait for more scholarly answers from Sri Sastri prabhuji's desk. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 Dear Sunil-ji, Vedanta is a subject that has to be studied systematically under a teacher. One should not jump to conclusions. It is true, as you say, that vedanta encourages reflection. But reflection should be done after study and based on it and not before. Anyway, I shall try to answer your questions. Reality, by definition in Vedanta, is what never undergoes any change. Brahman is the only reality by this test. The world is not real in this sense, because it undergoes change all the time. The world includes your body and my body and all bodies. At the same time the world is not unreal like the horn of a rabbit. The world is therefore characterized as neither real nor unreal. This is what is known as mithya. When we use the words real and unreal we have to remember what exactly they mean in advaita vedanta. The world is compared to a dream for pointing out that, just as when you wake up the dream objects no longer exist, similarly when you wake up from the sleep of avidya or ignorance, the world will be found to have no reality. But it has been made clear that the objects of the waking state have a higher level of reality than those of the dream state. This distinction is maintained between the two states. All this you will come to know only when you make a detaied study of the subject. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri advaitin , Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29 wrote: > > Shastri ji: > > Pranaams! > > Is this world unreal? > Or seemingly real? > Is it a dream of the Brahman? > Or is it our own dream? > Why define the world as unreal and not impermanent? > > I understand that this terminology of " unreal " is used so that we will have > a clearer understanding when we go deeper into the subject of Vedanta. > > I can understand that the " I " is self, simply by pointing at various parts > of the body and saying, its not me, its not me and also that the body is not > permanent. > > But when you see physical objects like a table or a tree or a mountain, > these objects are very much real and tangible. They may not be permanent, as > they will ultimately go back into the five elements. But for now they are > real. Why equate reality and permanency? > > You might say that in a dream, the objects are also real, but upon waking up > you realize it was a dream, hence ALL objects are unreal. But a dream is a > play of the mind. Whereas this world is not a play of the mind. It does > exist. > > Vedanta, I believe, encourages reflection and enquiry. So hopefully I am not > out of line or out of context. > > Hari Aum! > > Sunil > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote: > > Dear Sunil-ji, > Vedanta is a subject that has to be studied systematically under a teacher. One should not jump to conclusions. It is true, as you say, that vedanta encourages reflection. But reflection should be done after study and based on it and not before. Anyway, I shall try to answer your questions. > Reality, by definition in Vedanta, is what never undergoes any change. Brahman is the only reality by this test. The world is not real in this sense, because it undergoes change all the time. The world includes your body and my body and all bodies. At the same time the world is not unreal like the horn of a rabbit. The world is therefore characterized as neither real nor unreal. This is what is known as mithya. When we use the words real and unreal we have to remember what exactly they mean in advaita vedanta. > > The world is compared to a dream for pointing out that, just as when you wake up the dream objects no longer exist, similarly when you wake up from the sleep of avidya or ignorance, the world will be found to have no reality. But it has been made clear that the objects of the waking state have a higher level of reality than those of the dream state. This distinction is maintained between the two states. All this you will come to know only when you make a detaied study of the subject. > Best wishes, > S.N.Sastri > > > advaitin , Sunil Goel <sunilgoel29@> wrote: > > > > Shastri ji: > > > > Pranaams! > > > > Is this world unreal? > > Or seemingly real? > > Is it a dream of the Brahman? > > Or is it our own dream? > > Why define the world as unreal and not impermanent? > > > > I understand that this terminology of " unreal " is used so that we will have > > a clearer understanding when we go deeper into the subject of Vedanta. > > > > I can understand that the " I " is self, simply by pointing at various parts > > of the body and saying, its not me, its not me and also that the body is not > > permanent. > > > > But when you see physical objects like a table or a tree or a mountain, > > these objects are very much real and tangible. They may not be permanent, as > > they will ultimately go back into the five elements. But for now they are > > real. Why equate reality and permanency? > > > > You might say that in a dream, the objects are also real, but upon waking up > > you realize it was a dream, hence ALL objects are unreal. But a dream is a > > play of the mind. Whereas this world is not a play of the mind. It does > > exist. > > > > Vedanta, I believe, encourages reflection and enquiry. So hopefully I am not > > out of line or out of context. > > > > Hari Aum! > > > > Sunil > > > 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.