Advaita - For Layman

[ozone]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

A side question?
What would happen if at some point of time all the atma's gets liberated? there will no world? no jivatmas?

 

[sarma-61]

So far,

1. Physical reality is a Projection of brahman. Projection by its nature produces a lesser reality.
2. Projection is accomplished through maya.
3. Physical reality is also called relative reality because it is real only from the point of view of jivatma

Shri sravna sir,

I very much appreciate your intention in starting this thread and another for scholars. But permit me to say that you seem to be interpreting advaita in your own way, which has no connection with the real advaita. Thus, your advaita looks like a "relative reality" because it is 'advaita' only from your point of view. May be a new brand of mAyA is at work here

Specifically, will you be able to cite any authority in support of of your statements at 1 and 2 above, not from English books but original Sankara bhAshyas or statements by Indian advairin scholars or their English translation?

If you deem yourself to be one among the New Age Advaitins, please state that clearly.


(Indeed, these days, the descent to a hell of mankind's own devising seems > to be the routine 'American Way', as proved by many 'New Age' teachers of > 'Advaita' or non-dualism !)
[Advaita-l] Gayatri?

 

[sarma-61]

A side question?
What would happen if at some point of time all the atma's gets liberated? there will no world? no jivatmas?

Shri ozone,

According to one school of advaita, the jeevAtmas are infinite and also anAdi, beginningless. They will be endless also except that they can get liberated and thus merge into nirguNa brahman. Therefore, by inference the mAya, avidya, adhyAsa, etc., (all referring to the same idea) are also anAdi. To the doubt whether therefore, brahman can be considered the only reality when jeevAtmas and avidyA/mAyA are also existing from the very beginning, advaita does not have a convincing answer except that mAyA is sat-asat vilakShaNa, something whose existence cannot be clearly defined - may be quantum entity!

What seems to be getting served here is sravna's own version of advaita.

 

[amala]

Doesn't advaita also not have clear convincing answers about Brahman as well? It is not this, not that, not nothing, not something (neti neti, not very different to anatta it seems!). When one asks more one is told you cannot perceive it with your senses as Brahman is beyond what we can perceive in this physical world. So can one "realise" something that one cannot perceive? Can we realise something that is beyond our perception?

 

[sravna]

I am consciously ignoring certain detractors who seem to put a lot of thought into dissuasion rather than into constructive purposes. Advaita IMO is like any other school of thoughts open to interpretations and not something that should remain ossified as a rigid philosophy. Especially in the age of scientific and technological advancements, the ancient philosophies won't survive the assault of times if not kept abreast with them.

I agree that the spirit should be maintained and I think that is enough and prudent care to protect the philosophy. So decrying every now and then that the beauty of the philosophy is being spoiled when different interpretations are attempted, the detractors don't understand that they are only sounding the death knell of what they seek to protect.

 

[amala]

Externalized “bhakti” – towards an object which is ouside of the seeker after AtmajnAna is not at all helpful. Hence, the group bhajans, mantra chantings, elaborate and showy poojas, both in temples and by individuals/groups, will not be helpful. But praying, singing bhajans or worshipping god in any form with the clear central idea that god is “within one” and not external to us, is very much necessary and a must. (It is said that the Tamil word “kaDavuL” tries to remind us that we have to ‘enter inside’ (uLLE kaDa) to find God.

This makes complete sense to me. I have always thought having a Saguna/sakara Brahman is more of a hindrance than a help in understanding Advaita. Because when we go to the temple, pray, worship, do bhajans and other bhakti stuff for me anyway it feels like Brahman is "other", "that over there", rather than "that is I". It reinforces duality rather than nonduality. But duality is far more comforting and consoling in times of crisis', when God is the other out there rather than in me.

 

[sravna]

Now comes the million dollar question, which is why should brahman use maya?

I base my answer on the words of none other than Adi Sankara who says that creation is a lila or an act of sport for brahman. So it can be interpreted that physical reality is intended to form the basis of brahman's blissful experience.

On the one hand the events a soul goes through in the physical world can be taken as self observation of brahman of the realization of the ultimate truth because jivatman is basically brahman. So jivatma realizing the truth is nothing but brahman's knowledge being filled with that truth.

On the other hand, the explanation of blissful state of brahman is this: as the realized soul experiences a blissful state we can premise the eternal state of brahman is also blissful. The realized soul achieves that state after going through innumerable and varied experiences and so brahman's bliss can said to have the basis on the physical reality.

 

[renuka]

This makes complete sense to me. I have always thought having a Saguna/sakara Brahman is more of a hindrance than a help in understanding Advaita. Because when we go to the temple, pray, worship, do bhajans and other bhakti stuff for me anyway it feels like Brahman is "other", "that over there", rather than "that is I". It reinforces duality rather than nonduality. But duality is far more comforting and consoling in times of crisis', when God is the other out there rather than in me.

Dear Amala,

Saguna Brahman is not a hindrance to understand Advaita.
I will give you a simple example, to teach a child A for Apple we have to show him/her what an apple is ..isnt it?

Once we know what an apple looks like and even tasted it we know everything about an apple.
The next time we do not even need to see or taste an apple to know what its all about becos our mind has been conditioned to it.

Even for example..if we are in a dark unknown room we will be walking into many objects and stand the risk of falling or injury.

If that dark room is our own room we already have a mental image where things are and we can still walk in the dark without falling or injuring ourselves.

Thats the function of Saguna Brahman..to condition the mind and lets us focus to help us out in the dark world of ignorance.

I feel all of us switch from Dvaita mode to Vishistadvaita(VA) Mode most of the while..hardly anyone of us lesser mortals are in Advaita mode unlike realized souls who are not affected by the dualities of the world.

When everything is going fine most of the while we are happily praying, enjoying bhajans in the VA mode..singing the glory of God that He is in me and feel God within us.

When trouble strikes us and we are in despair then all of us switch to Dvaita mode..seeking God externally "O God Please help me I need You to help me"
All of us have been through this several times and will still be going through this in cyclical fashion.

Only the Jnaani who is beyond duality can be in Advaita mode all the while.

 

[amala]

Exactly Renu! We are at times of crisis at dwaita mode. So how does Advaita even help? And thats what i meant by Saguna Brahman is a hindrance. Being too much in dwaita mode is not going to help us "get" adavitic realisation. I think Mr Zebra is right too. Real seeking as opposed to this internet thing...internet thing won't be of much help. More confusions only!

 

[renuka]

Exactly Renu! We are at times of crisis at dwaita mode. So how does Advaita even help? And thats what i meant by Saguna Brahman is a hindrance. Being too much in dwaita mode is not going to help us "get" adavitic realisation. I think Mr Zebra is right too. Real seeking as opposed to this internet thing...internet thing won't be of much help. More confusions only!

Dear Amala,

Advaita mode is the final mode of Self Realization.
When someone reaches that stage he is verily Brahman.Thats the final stage where one merges with Brahman.
At that stage who needs help? Does Brahman ever need help?

 

[amala]

Thats why i feel the atheist and the monist (advaitins) are so courageous. To not start hoping and believing in an external God in times of despair...only the for the brave!

 

[renuka]

Thats why i feel the atheist and the monist (advaitins) are so courageous. To not start hoping and believing in an external God in times of despair...only the for the brave!

Dear Amala,

We can only believe in a philosophy or try to understand it but that doesnt automatically qualify us as being one with Brahman.

Fear only arises when there is duality, a realized soul has gone beyond that stage and for him all that exists is Brahman.

An atheist can be brave,fearless etc for all the right reasons or even for all that wrong reasons.
Most true atheists believe in themselves and do not despise God in any manner cos for all practical purposes God is not in their vocabulary and believing in one self without harming another is also a form of worship.

But an Atheist who keeps despising God is still stuck in duality like anyone else.

 

[renuka]

[h=1]The Master Course[/h][h=4]The lesson of the day from Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami's trilogy: Dancing with Siva, Living with Siva and Merging with Siva

Lesson 306 from Living with Siva[/h][h=3]Monistic Theism[/h]In India's spiritual traditions there have been for ten thousand years or more two major streams of thought, one called advaita in Sanskrit, or monism in English, and the other called dvaita or theism. Our own tradition, known by many names--monistic theism, Advaita Siddhanta, monistic Saiva Siddhanta or Advaita Ishvaravada--embraces them both fully. I discovered that the path of monism and theism is the whole of life. As my satguru explained, it is the entire path. He compared it to an orchestra and an audience. Playing in an orchestra and being in the audience are two different experiences. The audience without the orchestra is not complete. They would be just sitting hearing nothing. The orchestra without the audience is not complete. They would be entertaining no one. So it is in the plane of duality. We have to practice duality in an intelligent way. Satguru Yogaswami had the full advaitic realization of the Self, Parasiva, but at the same time he had the fullness of dvaitic devotion toward God, the Gods and his guru.

There was a Vedantin in Jaffna, Sri Lanka, who was very pompous and looked down his nose at duality and temple worship. He did not have a great relationship with Siva Yogaswami, who was always having fun with him in one way or another. One day Yogaswami saw the Vedantin in the marketplace and, coming up from behind, tapped him on the shoulder. The man spun around and asked, "Who's there?" Yogaswami exclaimed, "What do you mean, 'Who's there?' Didn't you say there was only one!" Yogaswami had shown the Vedantin that he could not keep the top of the mountain--the highest realizations of truth--separated from the bottom of it, the day-to-day world. He was making the point that the man had reached the summit only intellectually, through reasoning out the Vedic truths. Therefore, according to the same reasoning process, he had to reject the bottom of the mountain to maintain his arguments. This is the simplistic Vedanta philosophy, sometimes called the path of words, the vak marga, expounded by people who can eloquently explain Vedanta but have had no personal spiritual experience. They have attained the power to live a completely ordinary life as philosophically perfect anava marga adepts.

By the example of his own life, Satguru Yogaswami showed that, having reached the top through realization, the seer cannot reject any part of the mountain, because he remembers his experiences at the bottom, his experiences in the middle and his experiences at the top. Yogaswami taught that we cannot reject direct experience. No one can take that away from us. It is recorded in the akasha forever. Therefore, realization is not synonymous with the word understanding.

When a musician is playing an instrument in an orchestra, he is having the experience of moving his fingers, arms and hands. The musician is hearing what he is playing and what everyone else is playing as well. Each player is realizing the unity of the entire orchestra. This is the experience of monism--that wonderful oneness. A member of the audience listening to the orchestra is not hearing just one instrument, but all playing together in unison. But he is only experiencing through his ears. That is the experience of theism--that wonderful twoness.

The orchestra can exist without the audience, but the audience cannot exist without the orchestra. That is why the monist can go on with his practices even if there is no temple close by to worship in. He can go on with his practices even without an image of God. The theist cannot do this. Without the image of God or a temple to worship within, he is lost.

Monistic theists are practical philosophers. They put the orchestra and the audience together. They have the grand experience of the fullness of life. They enjoy the top of the mountain and its bottom. They put monism into theism and bring theism into monism. They are the full persons on this planet. All the great yogis and sages wandered from temple to temple worshiping externally, and in their internal worship realized God and the Gods within themselves.

 

[sarma-61]

Now comes the million dollar question, which is why should brahman use maya?

I base my answer on the words of none other than Adi Sankara who says that creation is a lila or an act of sport for brahman. So it can be interpreted that physical reality is intended to form the basis of brahman's blissful experience.

Please furnish the words of Adi Sankara in any of his bhAshyas, and not from the thousands of slokas and stotras circulating in his name.

If Sankara has said in his bhashyas that the nirguna brahman makes an act of sport, then I will say he was cheating his adherents.

 

[renuka]

Now comes the million dollar question, which is why should brahman use maya?

I base my answer on the words of none other than Adi Sankara who says that creation is a lila or an act of sport for brahman. So it can be interpreted that physical reality is intended to form the basis of brahman's blissful experience.

In other words what was the need for Ekoham Bahusyam(I am One,let me become many)?

 

[sravna]

In other words what was the need for Ekoham Bahusyam(I am One,let me become many)?

Yes

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Yamaka,

I will address your question soon. Please bear with me

 

[sarma-61]

Thats why i feel the atheist and the monist (advaitins) are so courageous. To not start hoping and believing in an external God in times of despair...only the for the brave!

The bhakti cult and the espousing of an external god, suits people in the lower stages of spiritual evolution.

As a very general rule, people cannot admit, even to themselves, their shortcomings, mistakes or acts if ignorance. In short, they are incapable of facing themselves honestly. I read somewhere that when you talk to such people who behave according to a certain image of themselves for public consumption and adulation, you are, in effect, talking to that person's agent, not to the person, in truth. For such people, all their troubles are due to others (best scenario) or, due to their poorva janma karmas on which they now have absolutely no control, even though, they themselves (in their own opinion) evolved so much and become paragons of virtue and have done only the best of punya karmas in the current birth! So, for them the (external) god/s have to take notice of this (unjust) infliction of suffering on such a virtuous soul

In truth, all the sufferings and joys in our lives are due to our own karmas and vAsanas. If only we can analyze ourselves and improve our vAsanas and karmas, our life will develop better and better, but few people can do this. Despite all the outwardly prayers and show-offs of bhakti, the karma-vAsana rule reigns supreme, and will continue. The pseudo-people can say, "I prayed so much and then at last I got relief", or "even though I did such and such prayers and parihaarams, nothing happened; god decided otherwise. As they say, man proposes, but god disposes." and so on.

Atheists and true advaitins have to face their own true self squarely and understand their weak points and deficiencies.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Ozone,

My answer to your question is this:

There is a unit of time called kalpa at the beginning of which universe is created and which ends with the dissolution of the universe. I think it takes souls a fixed number of kalpas to get liberated. I am not sure on this. During each kalpa innumerable souls get liberated just as innumerable souls are injected into the universe at the time of creation.

 

[sarma-61]

In other words what was the need for Ekoham Bahusyam(I am One,let me become many)?

Smt. Renuka,

I don't know in which scripture it is said as "EkOham, bahusyAm". TaittireeyOpanishad 2-6 states "sO/kAmayata | bahusyAm prajAyEya iti |". Here there is no mention of the brahman qualifying itself as EkOham. And bahusyAm prajAyEya will presuppose a saguNabrahman which "kAmayata" and "prajAyEya", both of which do not fit a NB.

 

[saidevo]

namaste shrI zebra16.

Post #7: regarding the 'anta' in 'vedAnta':
The term 'anta' also means (ref. MWD)
• 'inner part, inside', so vedAnta reveals what is inside the Vedas;
• 'conclusion', so vedAnta reveals what is the conclusion of the Vedas;
• even in the meaning 'end', we might say that Vedas are the 'means' to the 'end' revealed in the vedAnta.

 

[sarma-61]

I am consciously ignoring certain detractors who seem to put a lot of thought into dissuasion rather than into constructive purposes. Advaita IMO is like any other school of thoughts open to interpretations and not something that should remain ossified as a rigid philosophy. Especially in the age of scientific and technological advancements, the ancient philosophies won't survive the assault of times if not kept abreast with them.

I agree that the spirit should be maintained and I think that is enough and prudent care to protect the philosophy. So decrying every now and then that the beauty of the philosophy is being spoiled when different interpretations are attempted, the detractors don't understand that they are only sounding the death knell of what they seek to protect.

Shri sravna sir,

Though you have not identified the detractors, it is rather clear from your post that you don't want your brand of advaita to be questioned because probably you yourself know that it cannot withstand deep scrutiny and is only like the "panchu miTTAi" vended for small kids - lots of volume and appearance. and least matter!

Go ahead and spread your gospel of advaita which is in tune with "the age of scientific and technological advancements". May be you will be known by posterity as the SET Sankara

 

[Yamaka]

Awesome Power of Nature (APN) is the God of Yamaka!

Dear Shri Yamaka,

I will address your question soon. Please bear with me

Dear Sravna and others:

Here's my Personal Unifying View as a Naturalist:

1. Pantheistic Ishwara = Brahman = Jesus = Allah = Awesome Power of Nature (APN) = Not the Traditional Super Natural Agent.

2. APN is a Force or Power beyond the complete understanding of human mind as of today. This APN was the force that forced the formation of the Universe about 20 billion years ago.. this is the driving force of the Human Biological Evolution that started billions of years ago... the same FORCE that guided the Homo sapiens to evolve from the progenitor of monkey about two million years ago... and so on... so forth.

This APN is the the FORCE that turns this globe on its axis at a speed of 1000 miles per hour, and the same FORCE that pushes the globe to go around the Sun at a speed of 60,000 miles per hour.

3. Science, Engineering & Technology (SET) is harnessing a very small part of this APN to the betterment of the Society.

4. This APN can't be bribed in any way shape or form by prayers, poojas and bhajans (PPB). What all we, the hapless human beings can do is just admire it...therefore, PPB is a complete waste of time, energy and resources.

5. Janma Poorva Karma (JPK) is just hoax... all created by the mental bombast of a few men, perhaps the godmen who wanted to scare the Society to submission.

6. Most thinkers, Scientists are awed by the power of this APN, which is their God....

Nothing more, nothing else.

More later...

Cheers.

 

[sravna]

Shri sravna sir,

Though you have not identified the detractors, it is rather clear from your post that you don't want your brand of advaita to be questioned because probably you yourself know that it cannot withstand deep scrutiny and is only like the "panchu miTTAi" vended for small kids - lots of volume and appearance. and least matter!

Go ahead and spread your gospel of advaita which is in tune with "the age of scientific and technological advancements". May be you will be known by posterity as the SET Sankara

Dear Shri Sarma,

You have not questioned anything since if that were the case I would be happy. Additionally, you have not displayed any superior knowledge. So I am just dismissing your comments as feeble minded

 

[renuka]

Smt. Renuka,

I don't know in which scripture it is said as "EkOham, bahusyAm". TaittireeyOpanishad 2-6 states "sO/kAmayata | bahusyAm prajAyEya iti |". Here there is no mention of the brahman qualifying itself as EkOham. And bahusyAm prajAyEya will presuppose a saguNabrahman which "kAmayata" and "prajAyEya", both of which do not fit a NB.

Dear sir,

Its from Chandogya Upanishad ( 6.2.3.) which says :

Eko 'ham bahu syam prajayeya.

I am one. Let Me generate many.