brahman and maya

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

what a heady combination. On the surface brahman would seem to be obvious choice between the two as regards power and intelligence. But think about this. do you know what is maya doing ? It takes head on the omnipotence and omniscience of brahman and strip them off and make into pieces each piece struggling to finds it way to peace and bliss. And it does that in a very intelligent way. It always does one upmanship whenever each piece of brahman thinks it has got the better of maya. what a way to consistently keep deflating the ego. It does this with brilliant strategizing showing each time who is the boss in the world of maya. Finally it lets brahman off the hook after making it plod through the maze making sure brahman gets its ego under control. but anyway kudos to brahman too for making it an interesting contest and for the innumerable number of times it rose from the ashes.

 

[sravna]

folks a truth now. the fight is not real. brahman cannot be without maya and maya cannot be without brahman. they are one. it is only to fool us and together teaching us a lesson on reality.

Moral: A piece does not make a whole till it embraces all other pieces.

 

[sravna]

The power of failure, the power of pain and sufferings actually help us and also meant to propel us forward. Failure etc., are sought to be avoided because quality of existence deteriorates. The high quality of existence after removing the effects of failure happens by our own design for success. So it adds to our evolving. Success without failure preceding it happens by accident or good luck . It really does not add to our learning or evolution. It may even cause temporary regression because of complacency.

 

[renuka]

Dear Sravna,

I was improving my knowledge in Grantham script and the text for it was from Buddhanusmirti and some link to Mulamadhyamakakarika of Nagarjuna.

Grantham is a really nice script to write Sanskrit in especially if one is using a brush calligraphy pen to write it.

Now...writing down the shlokas from the Buddhist text as practice there is a word called Advaya(Non Dual) and these texts seem almost identical to Advaita of Adi Shankara but with less emphasis on Maya(not much of a Mayavadin) but more emphasis how to reach the Non Dual state.

It seems almost as if Adi Shankara had recycled some of these texts and from Advaya its renamed Advaita when he wanted to re-establish Vedicism again.

To me these text seem much better cos it doesnt get caught up with Maya in a never ending manner.

 

[sravna]

Till our last breath on this plane of existence learning will happen. So there will always be failures, pain and sufferings. So it is necessary to see them in this light, learn, improve yourself and keep moving on.

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

Can you state the essence of the non dual philosophy without maya? should be very interesting.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

Can you state the essence of the non dual philosophy without maya? should be very interesting.

It emphasizes on the state on Non Dualism without the need to give Maya much importance.

Maya anyway can not be known..so why do we actually need to talk about it in overdoses instead of focusing on the goal.

example of stanzas,

"Everything is real and is not real,
Both real and not real,
Neither real nor not real,
This is Lord Buddha's teachings"

"Whatever comes into being dependent on another
Is not identical to that thing.
Nor is it different from it,
Therefore it is neither nonexistent in time nor permanent"


You can see for yourself..its goes direct to the point without giving Maya importance.

 

[sravna]

It emphasizes on the state on Non Dualism without the need to give Maya much importance.

Maya anyway can not be known..so why do we actually need to talk about it in overdoses instead of focusing on the goal.

example of stanzas,

"Everything is real and is not real,
Both real and not real,
Neither real nor not real,
This is Lord Buddha's teachings"

"Whatever comes into being dependent on another
Is not identical to that thing.
Nor is it different from it,
Therefore it is neither nonexistent in time nor permanent"


You can see for yourself..its goes direct to the point without giving Maya importance.

everything is brahman and is maya
both brahman and maya
neither brahman nor maya
This is Sankara's teachings

The fact is in this physical plane nothing is purely real or purely unreal. Sankara's teachings clarifies the above aspects of Buddha's teachings in a conceptual way though even Sankara's teaching is not easily understood. With Sankara's teachings I personally believe one has more leeway in making the concepts understood by the layman. What do you think?

 

[sravna]

I would say the more perfectly interconnected or more synchronized things are the more real they are and vice versa. In between the two extremes there may not be a consensus about the nature of the thing and so different views happen. Perceptions begin to matter more in the normal range. One person's perception may be closer to reality in one case and the other's in another case. Interactions between these two pave way for knowledge and in the whole duration of the physical plane exchanges and interactions abound for this purpose to finally align everything with the ultimate reality.

 

[renuka]

everything is brahman and is maya
both brahman and maya
neither brahman nor maya
This is Sankara's teachings

The fact is in this physical plane nothing is purely real or purely unreal. Sankara's teachings clarifies the above aspects of Buddha's teachings in a conceptual way though even Sankara's teaching is not easily understood. With Sankara's teachings I personally believe one has more leeway in making the concepts understood by the layman. What do you think?

Its not about Adi Shankara's teachings are hard to understand but at times followers of Advaita tend to get into the Maya Matrix which is no doubt a good intellectual work out but it can just stop there.

Shams of Tabrizi said

The intellect takes you to the door but it does not get you into the house.

 

[renuka]

Another gem from Shams of tabrizi ...he explains the difference between bhakti and intellect

Intellect and love are made of different materials. Intellect ties people in knots and risks nothing, but love dissolves all tangles and risks everything. Intellect is always cautious and advises, ‘Beware too much ecstasy’, whereas love says, ‘Oh, never mind! Take the plunge!’ Intellect does not easily break down, whereas love can effortlessly reduce itself to rubble. But treasures are hidden among ruins. A broken heart hides treasures.

 

[sravna]

the right mix of intellect and love is there in brahman as the ultimate reality. renuka, both are required in the right mix. that is the reason I have begun to believe there is merit to each philosophy.

 

[renuka]

the right mix of intellect and love is there in brahman as the ultimate reality. renuka, both are required in the right mix. that is the reason I have begun to believe there is merit to each philosophy.

Its fine to have both intellect and love but just leave Maya out of the equation.
Its finally union with Brahman not Maya.
So Maya can remain unknown..Maya is like husk of a coconut...we discard it...its totally not needed though it has a function.

 

[sravna]

No maya is very much a central component of the equation. It is only by getting past maya one can reach brahman. And it has to be understood to know brahman because unless you remove obscurity you cannot have clarity.

 

[sravna]

A logical way of coping up with problems is to try to develop a set of beliefs that cannot be changed. for this the premises on which you build these beliefs should be unchanging. Get rid of those premises that can change, one by one.

Let me give an example

I love my neighbour

If the premise is "I love wealthy people" and your neighbour is wealthy, this would make your conclusion shaky because your neighbour's wealth may disappear any moment

but if the premise is " I love any human". This would make your conclusion unshakeable.


Maya has a field day when you have such changing premises. Make the premises impregnable and that will pave way for greater success and happiness.

 

[sravna]

At the highest level all positive traits merge. For example intellect merges with the feeling of love. The reason automatically inheres in love.

 

[jaythakar]

what a heady combination. On the surface brahman would seem to be obvious choice between the two as regards power and intelligence. But think about this. do you know what is maya doing ? It takes head on the omnipotence and omniscience of brahman and strip them off and make into pieces each piece struggling to finds it way to peace and bliss. And it does that in a very intelligent way. It always does one upmanship whenever each piece of brahman thinks it has got the better of maya. what a way to consistently keep deflating the ego. It does this with brilliant strategizing showing each time who is the boss in the world of maya. Finally it lets brahman off the hook after making it plod through the maze making sure brahman gets its ego under control. but anyway kudos to brahman too for making it an interesting contest and for the innumerable number of times it rose from the asheS

 

[sravna]

Each guru I believe separated one aspect of the ultimate reality such as love or intellect or something else and emphasized that aspect. This happens in accordance with the prevailing place and time and also based on the fact that each one responds better to a certain aspect than another.

 

[jaythakar]

Sravna: Maya is nothing but the Brahman in action. Brahman is gunatit! This is more suitably expressed in Shaivat philosophy of creation. Shiva is Gunatit and symbolically expressed as a bindu or a dot. Maya which is the other half of Shiva, or called as Shakti is the expressed universe. Sometime I call Shakti as a gate-keeper. She checks you, examines you and makes sure you are worthy of Shiva unity! Thus credit to Maya, we evolve!

 

[renuka]

Each guru I believe separated one aspect of the ultimate reality such as love or intellect or something else and emphasized that aspect. This happens in accordance with the prevailing place and time and also based on the fact that each one responds better to a certain aspect than another.

Sufism blended both bhakti and jnana well.
Somehow it got the best of both worlds and with formless worship and no Varna ashrama its a very ideal "Non Dual"

 

[sravna]

It would fine at least for some if God descends and be with all of us and help us directly with our problems. Why does he chose not to do it? The reason is he wanted to keep the spirit of learning alive. He made the physical reality as different as possible from the spiritual reality. Whereas spiritual reality is a still and constant reality, change is the only constant in the physical reality. He constantly sends His men to guide and help all of us. Some chose to take the help while some others are too arrogant and reject the help. He lets the latter also to have their way but subtly influences them to let them eventually arrive at the truths. Now and then he actually descends as an avatar but makes sure to hide His identity when He knows people will be awed by His presence.

 

[sravna]

Sravna: Maya is nothing but the Brahman in action. Brahman is gunatit! This is more suitably expressed in Shaivat philosophy of creation. Shiva is Gunatit and symbolically expressed as a bindu or a dot. Maya which is the other half of Shiva, or called as Shakti is the expressed universe. Sometime I call Shakti as a gate-keeper. She checks you, examines you and makes sure you are worthy of Shiva unity! Thus credit to Maya, we evolve!

Well said Sir. I agree

 

[sravna]

Since everything is ultimately of divine origin there is room for a number of interpretations . So the need to have clarity on the purpose of creation, form concepts based on the purpose and the modus operandi and try to be consistent.

 

[sravna]

I would say to folks to follow one's native philosophy but be sympathetic to other philosophies by understanding that God is one. For the atheists I would say that they need to understand that truth is one for all and place truths above anything else.

 

[jaythakar]

Well said Sir. I agree

Shakti we worship as Mother Goddess. As one finds in real life, they govern all the important aspects oif living as Saraswati, Laxmi and Durga.
Here is my view of modern science and our ancient philosophy working in harmony:

According to Saivat philosophy Shiva is the creator and is represented by a bindu that is formless or has no attributes. Shiva is unexpressed form or Purusha and Shakti is his other half, a dynamic presentation of the universe.
Shakti literally means ENERGY. According to biochemical science we know that we the human beings derive energy by metabolizing food through cellular processes. The end stages of this takes place in subcellular organelles called MITOCHONDRIA. These organelles in us are derived from mother only. Father does not contribute mitochondria at birth. Hence, no matter what we do, it is the female Shakti, in the dynamic form in universe that allows us to enjoy and appreciate the world! This emphasizes our understanding of Shakti which is so ancient!