Why Would God Want Us to Praise Him?

[a-TB]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Could you kindly give evidence that Adi Shankara did not write all stotrams?
As far as I know only Bhajo Govindam was a combined effort with him and his shishyas.

Adi Shankara did install the idol at Mukambika too.
He had no issues for murti worship too.

Do you know when Adi Sankara lived? Scholars do not even agree on when he roamed the earth. People who have studied Bhashya have told me that based on linguistic analysis (nature of Sanskrit language) that he has not written a lot attributed to him He probably lived BCE almost 1000 years earlier than what the western scholars think

All stories about him are just mythological stories. We have a member here who argued passionately how Adi Sankara disliked certain grammarians. All these are nothing but imaginations.

The only concrete things available are the Bhashyas and some mantras (like Prarasmarana stotram) with Vedantic content, I am repeating what I have heard and do not have first hand knowledge of these. But I trust the scholarship of the sources.

Adi Shankara did not install any Murthis. Murthi worship was pervasive much later than his time in earth. Idol is not a good word to use since it means satan for Christian and Islamic faith.

I noticed that Mr Prasad has given specific examples to your question

 

[renuka]

To me it appears there is no basis to interpret anything like and call it Karma theory.

Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous.

Making an effort to improve will not change the outcome of Karma Phala. Period

I looked up the verse. It is not talking about Karma but about Karma yoga which is NOT the same as Karma.

Certainly singing praise of some imagined godhead is NOT Karma yoga.

I did say in my post that making effort to improve would NOT change the Karma phala BUT it would make someone make balanced choices and handle ups and downs of live in a conducive manner.

A simple example is this.

If one has a certain karma to undergo a disease which he genetically inherited he can either succumb to it by leading a reckless life in terms of health or take preventive measures to avoid the disease from expressing itself or even if the disease expresses itself he takes appropriate measures to keep it under check.

Likewise..a person who is seeking something from God might cry and beg for help..will help come?
Yes! Its self help..the effort taken to beg..cry and sing praises has an anti depressant effect on a human when he unloads even to an imaginary God...when one unloads the emotional burden lessens...his state of mind would improve and he would eventually be able to face the problem for which he is seeking help for.

Crying and begging might seem like futile to some but honestly it instills faith in self.

I learnt this from the stray cats I feed.
Daily they ask for food at least three times a day.

When they are hungry, they beg and tap the door..they keep mewing non stop till I feed them.

They have the confidence that I will never let them down and totally depend on me for food.
They seem happy and healthy too.
Its the simple act of having faith in something outside of us that releases endorphins for general well being.

Its simple math..like going to a confession box in a Church.
Does God forgive the sins when the priest says so?

We all know that its not so but again it acts like a place to unload and one reaps the benefit to feel less stressed up and eventully one might stop commiting non conducive actions and balance themselves.

 

[renuka]

Do you know when Adi Sankara lived? Scholars do not even agree on when he roamed the earth. People who have studied Bhashya have told me that based on linguistic analysis (nature of Sanskrit language) that he has not written a lot attributed to him He probably lived BCE almost 1000 years earlier than what the western scholars think

All stories about him are just mythological stories. We have a member here who argued passionately how Adi Sankara disliked certain grammarians. All these are nothing but imaginations.

The only concrete things available are the Bhashyas and some mantras (like Prarasmarana stotram) with Vedantic content, I am repeating what I have heard and do not have first hand knowledge of these. But I trust the scholarship of the sources.

Adi Shankara did not install any Murthis. Murthi worship was pervasive much later than his time in earth. Idol is not a good word to use since it means satan for Christian and Islamic faith.

I noticed that Mr Prasad has given specific examples to your question

Idol is not satan in any religion.

In Islam, one who performs Idol worship is called a Mushreekun( one who ascribes partners to Allah)

The word for Devil is Shaitan.

The meanings are poles apart.

 

[a-TB]

Idol is not satan in any religion.

In Islam, one who performs Idol worship is called a Mushreekun( one who ascribes partners to Allah)

The word for Devil is Shaitan.

The meanings are poles apart.

Some references from Google search. But the thoughts below are widespread in my experience.

Gods - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Sometime ago, a Russian Bishop called Krishna “Satan”. Many Christians say Hindus are devil worshipers. Many Muslims say Hindu gods are animals and worshipers are infidels. Atheists would call Indian gods primitive. In their...

udaypai.in

Idols and Icons: Why Murti Should Be Used Instead

Representational Forms in Religious Worship Most of the religions and spiritual traditions of the world - with the general exception of Protestant Christians, Muslims and Jews - use images, representational forms or statues in their worship. Roman

www.vedanet.com

A well known TV evangelist, Pat Robertson used to say 'Hindus are devil worshippers'

 

[a-TB]

I did say in my post that making effort to improve would NOT change the Karma phala BUT it would make someone make balanced choices and handle ups and downs of live in a conducive manner.

A simple example is this.

If one has a certain karma to undergo a disease which he genetically inherited he can either succumb to it by leading a reckless life in terms of health or take preventive measures to avoid the disease from expressing itself or even if the disease expresses itself he takes appropriate measures to keep it under check.

Likewise..a person who is seeking something from God might cry and beg for help..will help come?
Yes! Its self help..the effort taken to beg..cry and sing praises has an anti depressant effect on a human when he unloads even to an imaginary God...when one unloads the emotional burden lessens...his state of mind would improve and he would eventually be able to face the problem for which he is seeking help for.

Crying and begging might seem like futile to some but honestly it instills faith in self.

I learnt this from the stray cats I feed.
Daily they ask for food at least three times a day.

When they are hungry, they beg and tap the door..they keep mewing non stop till I feed them.

They have the confidence that I will never let them down and totally depend on me for food.
They seem happy and healthy too.
Its the simple act of having faith in something outside of us that releases endorphins for general well being.

Its simple math..like going to a confession box in a Church.
Does God forgive the sins when the priest says so?

We all know that its not so but again it acts like a place to unload and one reaps the benefit to feel less stressed up and eventully one might stop commiting non conducive actions and balance themselves.

Yes, I can resonate with the post.

Prayer when one is in distress is useful to gain strength to face the issues.

But people predominantly pray due to their greed and have all kinds of wants. Hence they praise. Praying genuinely when one is in distress cannot be a praise (which is the topic of this thread)

Many mantras have all kinds of praise of God because 'praising to get something' is ingrained in the society.

 

[renuka]

Some references from Google search. But the thoughts below are widespread in my experience.

Gods - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Sometime ago, a Russian Bishop called Krishna “Satan”. Many Christians say Hindus are devil worshipers. Many Muslims say Hindu gods are animals and worshipers are infidels. Atheists would call Indian gods primitive. In their...

udaypai.in

Idols and Icons: Why Murti Should Be Used Instead

Representational Forms in Religious Worship Most of the religions and spiritual traditions of the world - with the general exception of Protestant Christians, Muslims and Jews - use images, representational forms or statues in their worship. Roman

www.vedanet.com

A well known TV evangelist, Pat Robertson used to say 'Hindus are devil worshippers'

In Islam the terminologies are very clear.

 

[renuka]

Yes, I can resonate with the post.

Prayer when one is in distress is useful to gain strength to face the issues.

But people predominantly pray due to their greed and have all kinds of wants. Hence they praise. Praying genuinely when one is in distress cannot be a praise (which is the topic of this thread)

Many mantras have all kinds of praise of God because 'praising to get something' is ingrained in the society.

Yes and No.

Not all pray for greed.
Some of us pray for a recharging feeling as to align self.

After a while the prayer becomes our nature and introspection happens.

We must not forget that it ISN'T wrong for anyone to pray for whatever reason.

When a doctors see dying patients, family members beg the doc to save them..its human nature to seek help and comfort.

Everyone seeks something, seeking is hardwired in us only then seeking answers can happen.

If going by what Prasad ji and you say..what do you expect a person in distress to do?

Do you know how much stress is in the human mind if they dont find an outlet to destress?
Praying..begging for help..crying..making transactional prayers do help calm the mind and lessen the risk of depression and suicide.

Last but not least..since you mentioned that some evangelists say Hindus prays to Devils...techincally how different is it from saying "Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous?"

Both opinions just shoot down belief of others.

Advaita isnt about my way or the highway...its about a very personal journey of self exploration and not minding what others do be it begging or praising.

 

[prasad1]

Yes praising some other human being is transactional. Humans want to be praised, and corrupt the system.
One can not equate god with a human being.
If god is another human with human feelings, passions, and ego, that is not a god.

I do not know how much false hope is advantageous in mental health.
Suppose a patient is on their deathbed with few hours to live, and you assure his relatives that you can cure him because he praised you and begged you, The relative will become quiet and hopeful. But when the patient dies, that same relative will be angry at you and suit you.

Brahan is beyond such ego-centric behavior.

 

[KRS]

Srimathi Dr. Renuka Ji,

You responded to Sri prasad1 Ji:

“You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.”

Maha Periaval often said that one mistake people who misunderstand Advaitha make is to think that Maya is somehow different from Brahman. Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha.

Karma as well as it’s phala are the results of Maya, and thus part and parcel of Brahman.

we have to remember Krishna’s Vishwaroopam. All universe is Brahman.

Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

 

[a-TB]

Yes and No.

Not all pray for greed.
Some of us pray for a recharging feeling as to align self

+++ I said predominantly. It could be greed or for a transactional advantage

After a while the prayer becomes our nature and introspection happens.

Not for all. Introspection can happen with or without prayer. Neither prayerful person *always* does introspection not non-prayerful person always do not do introspection. There is no causal link here.

We must not forget that it ISN'T wrong for anyone to pray for whatever reason.

+++ Prayer as a praise of God to extract an advantage is a human weakness. There is nothig right or wrong. There is nothing great about such prayers or any religion that promotes it. In fact most such practices lead to hypocrisy, Genuine prayer tends to be personal

When a doctors see dying patients, family members beg the doc to save them..its human nature to seek help and comfort.

Everyone seeks something, seeking is hardwired in us only then seeking answers can happen.

If going by what Prasad ji and you say..what do you expect a person in distress to do?

Do you know how much stress is in the human mind if they dont find an outlet to destress?
Praying..begging for help..crying..making transactional prayers do help calm the mind and lessen the risk of depression and suicide.

+++ As I implied earlier, prayer during distress is not the topic here. Prayer as praise of God to exact advantage in a transaction is the issue of the thread

Last but not least..since you mentioned that some evangelists say Hindus prays to Devils...techincally how different is it from saying "Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous?"

+++It is ludicrous to interpret Karma yoga as prayer (as in praising God). Karma in the model will always yield fruits and cannot be offset by any prayer. This has nothing to do with the evangelicals reacting to the usage of the word Idol. Many muslims hold similar views and so the suggestion is to use the word Murthis because that is more accurate being a Sanskrit term and cannot lead to confusion. Best not to translate that word to idol since that word idol has gotten a new meaning these days.

Both opinions just shoot down belief of others.

+++ I said a while ago in this thread that I do not respond to beliefs unless it is presented as a reason or the belief is a harmful belief to a society.

Logic and beliefs cannot mix . If a belief is passed off as a reason it is right to shoot it down.

But one believer (like evangelicals) shooting down another believer (Hindu) is just madness.

Advaita isnt about my way or the highway...its about a very personal journey of self exploration and not minding what others do be it begging or praising.

+++ I am not a scholar or claim any expertise in Advita or any other philosophy. I just find a lot of logically inconsistent statement made in this forum in name of Advita. I only point out the issues when it is stark. If it is a personal journey and exploration keep it personal and not broadcast it.

 

[a-TB]

Srimathi Dr. Renuka Ji,

You responded to Sri prasad1 Ji:

“You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.”

Maha Periaval often said that one mistake people who misunderstand Advaitha make is to think that Maya is somehow different from Brahman. Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha.

Karma as well as it’s phala are the results of Maya, and thus part and parcel of Brahman.

we have to remember Krishna’s Vishwaroopam. All universe is Brahman.

Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

1. "Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha." - Responding to this line below:

I am not a scholar or anything. But my understanding is that Maya being associated with Brahman has no creation. Both Maya and Brahman cannot be described by words and cannot be mentally comprehended. One (Maya) is borne of the other (Brahman) and that too at the time of creation. Creation of what?

To say at the time of creation, time would have to be created.

So a non-entity is borne by another non-entity at the time of creation when time itself is not created. You can see how these statements come across as meaningless (at least to me). I do not know if non-entity is a correct usage for referring to Brahman.


2. How can Karma be part and parcel of Brahman when it is stated that this non-entity Brahman is supposed to be part-less?

 

[renuka]

Srimathi Dr. Renuka Ji,

You responded to Sri prasad1 Ji:

“You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.”

Maha Periaval often said that one mistake people who misunderstand Advaitha make is to think that Maya is somehow different from Brahman. Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha.

Karma as well as it’s phala are the results of Maya, and thus part and parcel of Brahman.

we have to remember Krishna’s Vishwaroopam. All universe is Brahman.

Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

Dear KRS ji,
At a certain point we all would understand that there isnt a rigid right or wrong understanding.
Our perceptions and data of understanding of any aspect of " Reality" are just bytes that take up the storage space of our mind.

This is where knowledge could prove a hindrance at times that it doesnt allow us to align ourselves with the Universal Consciousness/ God.

Its like this...in order for us to download and install new updates on our phone we need to have sufficient storage space.
So if our mind is filled with our personal perception data and information,how are we going to allow any update to be downloaded into our system?

Chapter 1, Sutra 43 Patanjali Yoga Sutra



Smriti-Parisuddhau-Svarupasunya-Iva-Arthamatra-Nirbhasa-Nirvitarka

When The Memory Is Purified, The Mind Appears To Be Devoid Its Own Nature (i.e. Of Reflective Consciousness ) And Only The Object ( On Which It Is Contemplating) Remains Illuminated . This Kind Of Engrossment Is Called Nirvitarka Samapatti.
Taken from The Yoga Institute Website.

In the above stanza its about clearing the memory card of our mind so that only the object that we are contemplating on is illuminated.

If this stanza is understood we would come to understand that no matter what our understanding about Brahman or Maya or God or religion ...it does not really make a difference finally..cos all we have to do is clear up the memory card a be a new card and let the download in the NOW auto update us.

 

[KRS]

1. "Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha." - Responding to this line below:

I am not a scholar or anything. But my understanding is that Maya being associated with Brahman has no creation. Both Maya and Brahman cannot be described by words and cannot be mentally comprehended. One (Maya) is borne of the other (Brahman) and that too at the time of creation. Creation of what?

To say at the time of creation, time would have to be created.

So a non-entity is borne by another non-entity at the time of creation when time itself is not created. You can see how these statements come across as meaningless (at least to me). I do not know if non-entity is a correct usage for referring to Brahman.


2. How can Karma be part and parcel of Brahman when it is stated that this non-entity Brahman is supposed to be part-less?

Sri a-TB Sir,

Firstly, I am probably less scholarly than you. But let me try to explain.

In Advaitha, Avidhya, which is same as Maya indeed is not ‘born’ at the time of creation. That is why I intentionally used the word, ‘borne out of’, which has a whole different meaning.

One can have endless conversations of Avidhya till cows come home, as some scholarly Advaitins and Visishtadvaitins do. I am just not interested in such polemics. In the end, what matters is to throw away the books and start practicing. The travel itself is worth it for the peace and serenity, and whether one reaches the destination does not matter.

Logic can only take one so far, because the data it draws from is limited. Also, one does not need to know Newton’s laws to know that there is gravity, Experience and observation tells you that.

But, what is important to know is that the ultimate Truth is Brahman, everything else is relative truth. But what we need to keep in mind is that the relative truth is real within the existence of this Universe and that is also Brahman.

There is a beautiful explanation for the question, why God creates - in our tradition, it is the endless divine stage play, or a peek-a-boo, take your pick.

Also, by the way, one can come to realization only through one’s mind, according to Adi Shankara, and the method is Jnana Yoga.

By the way, I asked your response for my question in the other thread. If you respond, we can have a discussions about the questions you raised, including my views on Astrology. Thanks.

 

[KRS]

Dear KRS ji,
At a certain point we all would understand that there isnt a rigid right or wrong understanding.
Our perceptions and data of understanding of any aspect of " Reality" are just bytes that take up the storage space of our mind.

This is where knowledge could prove a hindrance at times that it doesnt allow us to align ourselves with the Universal Consciousness/ God.

Its like this...in order for us to download and install new updates on our phone we need to have sufficient storage space.
So if our mind is filled with our personal perception data and information,how are we going to allow any update to be downloaded into our system?

Chapter 1, Sutra 43 Patanjali Yoga Sutra



Smriti-Parisuddhau-Svarupasunya-Iva-Arthamatra-Nirbhasa-Nirvitarka

When The Memory Is Purified, The Mind Appears To Be Devoid Its Own Nature (i.e. Of Reflective Consciousness ) And Only The Object ( On Which It Is Contemplating) Remains Illuminated . This Kind Of Engrossment Is Called Nirvitarka Samapatti.
Taken from The Yoga Institute Website.

In the above stanza its about clearing the memory card of our mind so that only the object that we are contemplating on is illuminated.

If this stanza is understood we would come to understand that no matter what our understanding about Brahman or Maya or God or religion ...it does not really make a difference finally..cos all we have to do is clear up the memory card a be a new card and let the download in the NOW auto update us.

Thank you. I asked the question, only because of Sri prasad1 Ji’s statement. Please see my response above to Sri a-TB Ji’s response.

By the way, I agree with you.

 

[renuka]

Thank you. I asked the question, only because of Sri prasad1 Ji’s statement. Please see my response above to Sri a-TB Ji’s response.

By the way, I agree with you.

Dear KRS ji,

I understand that you asked the question as a response to the statement by Prasad ji but its just that I dont seem to able to get into details of Maya/Brahman etc as if my mind doesnt open the url for details which dont really matter anymore.

Evidence based is not the operating system that is conducive as previously thought but Experience based seems a lot more balancing and alignining and Jnana isnt logic or information but rather clearing our memory space to receive personalized updates.

 

[KRS]

Dear KRS ji,

I understand that you asked the question as a response to the statement by Prasad ji but its just that I dont seem to able to get into details of Maya/Brahman etc as if my mind doesnt open the url for details which dont really matter anymore.

Evidence based is not the operating system that is conducive as previously thought but Experience based seems a lot more balancing and alignining and Jnana isnt logic or information but rather clearing our memory space to receive personalized updates.

I understand.

 

[renuka]

Yes praising some other human being is transactional. Humans want to be praised, and corrupt the system.
One can not equate god with a human being.
If god is another human with human feelings, passions, and ego, that is not a god.

I do not know how much false hope is advantageous in mental health.
Suppose a patient is on their deathbed with few hours to live, and you assure his relatives that you can cure him because he praised you and begged you, The relative will become quiet and hopeful. But when the patient dies, that same relative will be angry at you and suit you.

Brahan is beyond such ego-centric behavior.

No doctor gives false hopes.
But when things get critical mostly tell patients relatives that the situation is critical and we would do the best and leave the rest to God.

Yes..false hope is advantages at least in the beginning.
Its like this...contaminated water isnt safe to drink but when a person is dying of thirst he would drink any water he can get his hands on..his focus is hydration and he can deal with the contaminants later.

But when situation is stable he would only drink clean water.

Like how we give a person who is planning to commit suicide some false hopes just to stop the suicide.

 

[a-TB]

Dear KRS ji,
At a certain point we all would understand that there isnt a rigid right or wrong understanding.
Our perceptions and data of understanding of any aspect of " Reality" are just bytes that take up the storage space of our mind.

This is where knowledge could prove a hindrance at times that it doesnt allow us to align ourselves with the Universal Consciousness/ God.

Its like this...in order for us to download and install new updates on our phone we need to have sufficient storage space.
So if our mind is filled with our personal perception data and information,how are we going to allow any update to be downloaded into our system?

Chapter 1, Sutra 43 Patanjali Yoga Sutra



Smriti-Parisuddhau-Svarupasunya-Iva-Arthamatra-Nirbhasa-Nirvitarka

When The Memory Is Purified, The Mind Appears To Be Devoid Its Own Nature (i.e. Of Reflective Consciousness ) And Only The Object ( On Which It Is Contemplating) Remains Illuminated . This Kind Of Engrossment Is Called Nirvitarka Samapatti.
Taken from The Yoga Institute Website.

In the above stanza its about clearing the memory card of our mind so that only the object that we are contemplating on is illuminated.

If this stanza is understood we would come to understand that no matter what our understanding about Brahman or Maya or God or religion ...it does not really make a difference finally..cos all we have to do is clear up the memory card a be a new card and let the download in the NOW auto update us.

Mind is in the domain of logic , illogic, emotions, beliefs and superstitions all of which can come in the way of realizing the ultimate truths. I can sort of get that part of the teaching,

But to say that mind has no role will be wrong. Why should scriptures are presented as dialogs. No teaching or any engagement is possible if mind is a problem because all its content has to be dumped.

Scriptures are often misquoted and used to support an often blind belief system. If it is a belief then so be it. no further comments,

Patanjali was a dualist. He is talking about a specific experience of the mind in contemplating on one thing. So what?

Universal conciousness is but another mental model. I think the memory dump has to dump that too

 

[renuka]

Mind is in the domain of logic , illogic, emotions, beliefs and superstitions all of which can come in the way of realizing the ultimate truths. I can sort of get that part of the teaching,

But to say that mind has no role will be wrong. Why should scriptures are presented as dialogs. No teaching or any engagement is possible if mind is a problem because all its content has to be dumped.

Scriptures are often misquoted and used to support an often blind belief system. If it is a belief then so be it. no further comments,

Patanjali was a dualist. He is talking about a specific experience of the mind in contemplating on one thing. So what?

Universal conciousness is but another mental model. I think the memory dump has to dump that too

Agreed.

 

[a-TB]

Sri a-TB Sir,

Firstly, I am probably less scholarly than you. But let me try to explain.

In Advaitha, Avidhya, which is same as Maya indeed is not ‘born’ at the time of creation. That is why I intentionally used the word, ‘borne out of’, which has a whole different meaning.

One can have endless conversations of Avidhya till cows come home, as some scholarly Advaitins and Visishtadvaitins do. I am just not interested in such polemics. In the end, what matters is to throw away the books and start practicing. The travel itself is worth it for the peace and serenity, and whether one reaches the destination does not matter.

Logic can only take one so far, because the data it draws from is limited. Also, one does not need to know Newton’s laws to know that there is gravity, Experience and observation tells you that.

But, what is important to know is that the ultimate Truth is Brahman, everything else is relative truth. But what we need to keep in mind is that the relative truth is real within the existence of this Universe and that is also Brahman.

There is a beautiful explanation for the question, why God creates - in our tradition, it is the endless divine stage play, or a peek-a-boo, take your pick.

Also, by the way, one can come to realization only through one’s mind, according to Adi Shankara, and the method is Jnana Yoga.

By the way, I asked your response for my question in the other thread. If you respond, we can have a discussions about the questions you raised, including my views on Astrology. Thanks.

Dear Mr KRS Sir

I responded to the other thread. I am not a frequent visitor and hence missed reading your question.

I understood the the usage of borne vs born but my question was about creation.

I am only asking questions based on terms used here . I am not interested in endless discussion of any term but if a word is used I am trying to seek clarity on what is said.

Main point I understand from you is the travel to reach peace and serenity is all that matters. That makes sense.

Logic can take one only so far, but for that logic is needed to establish that. Otherwise it is just another belief and no discussion is possible.

Ultimate truth is Brahman - OK - what is it? It cannot be expressed in words , logic fails to reach it, no mental models are possible but it is important to know this ? How will this give peace and serenity?

You say, one can realize only through the mind but mind operates in logic and illogic, beliefs, emotions etc. Mind has questions and it has to be shut down ? How can this be Jnana yoga. I am not questioning anything by Sankara - I have no qualifications for that . Just responding only to the statements made here.

Hope you dont mind the engagement with this style . I have not engaged with many and it is a breath of fresh air to have quality engagements. Thank you for that

 

[Iyest]

One can have endless conversations of Avidhya till cows come home, as some scholarly Advaitins and Visishtadvaitins do. I am just not interested in such polemics. In the end, what matters is to throw away the books and start practicing. The travel itself is worth it for the peace and serenity, and whether one reaches the destination does not matter.

Logic can only take one so far, because the data it draws from is limited. Also, one does not need to know Newton’s laws to know that there is gravity, Experience and observation tells you that.

Yes sir. What we (mind) call logic is the mind's acceptance. By acceptance the mind becomes quiet. Otherwise it is agitated until a logical answer is found. So the search for logical explanations etc is really a search for peace. That is why it varies from person to person. What is logical to one (mind) may not be so for another. This thread is ongoing for 20 days. Answers to questions will only lead to further questions and there is no end to the process. The key is turning the question (mind) inwards, who is the questioner, who is the observer, who am I?

 

[KRS]

Sri a-TB sir,

I was a physicist once, so let me explain the way I always think. First, what is Brahman? There are two fold explanations, the existence of such an entity and so, then what is the nature of such an entity.

The existence of Brahman is very obvious. If one accepts science, the validity of ‘big bang’ theory, for it to have happened, creating both space and time, there must have been a cause. To me that cause is called Brahman. Even if one does not accept the ‘big bang’, one still needs to explain the existence of the physical universe we see and again, one needs to explain the cause.

So, then what is the nature of such an entity? Here, we can not use science to understand the nature. Because we are the ones that observe with our five senses to collect data, are ourselves part of the system. There is a well known theory that says that one can not understand what is outside an enclosed system, being part of the system. So, we can not perceive the nature of creator with our outwardly turned mind and senses.

But, then, as luck would have it, if we turn our focus inwards, through our mind, it is found that, we can indeed ‘know’ that creator. This is the concept of Advaitha.

But other ‘faiths’ say that there is a God as separate entity outside our universe who is all powerful, most excellent etc. But to ‘know’ that entity one has to wait till the end of time, when based on merits and demerits, one gets either eternal happiness or eternal suffering.

So, for my make up Advaitha makes sense. Not only because I am mentally constituted to like it, but because my genes come from a line of my ancestors who were all Advaithins and we all know how such ancestral thinking and behavior affect as to who we are today.

Secondly, Advaitha claims that one need not wait till the end of time to be in an eternal happy state, you can do it here and now. How? By understanding who we really are, that is permanent, that is universal and timeless. This is Brahman. Now, without going in to details about Maya, Atma, Ishwara, Karma, Dharma etc., to accept this lofty claim, one just needs to look for evidence, whether there is anyone who is believable who claimed to have achieved such a state of bliss. To one’s astonishment, one finds that such people are there, throughout history, to the present time in all cultures.

So, if one believes this, one has to take ‘instructions’ from one of those. For me again, because of my make up, it is Ramana Maharishi. Others follow others. I have faith that my guru achieved such a state and so whatever teachings that come out of such a person will not lead me astray.

This is all I can say. I do not know about the validity or the non validity of any other path. But since I started this mental journey more than a decade ago, I can attest to the fact that I am more and more at peace within myself.

This is a very long post. But I thought we can have a starting point, while answering some of your questions. Thanks.

 

[KRS]

Yes sir. What we (mind) call logic is the mind's acceptance. By acceptance the mind becomes quiet. Otherwise it is agitated until a logical answer is found. So the search for logical explanations etc is really a search for peace. That is why it varies from person to person. What is logical to one (mind) may not be so for another. This thread is ongoing for 20 days. Answers to questions will only lead to further questions and there is no end to the process. The key is turning the question (mind) inwards, who is the questioner, who is the observer, who am I?

Thank you Sri inestimable sir. You make an excellent point about mind and logic. Yes, we are all different. We forget that emotions color our logic as well. Thank you.

 

[Iyest]

Thank you Sri inestimable sir. You make an excellent point about mind and logic. Yes, we are all different. We forget that emotions color our logic as well. Thank you.

Yes sir. We are all different at the mind level. But we are all also identical since we are all seeking peace (quiet/end the mind). However most don't even realize it. Disagreements, theories and arguments are the result. Mind then gets more agitated. The grip of maya thus holds the mind in shackles.

 

[renuka]

The only solution to just BE in the NOW is to become an "idiot".
"Ignorance is bliss" is actually a true statement.