All Hindus Wake up!!

[Jainarayan]

Brahman exists, but the empirical world is not an illusion. It is temporary.

True, ask any gunshot victim if it's an illusion. Or ask me if the pain of having a 5 mm kidney stone this week is an illusion. Both are temporary, but no less real.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

The material world is not Brahman. That is the illusion.
The material world is not not Brahman. This is the real.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Quarks, protons and electrons are creations of the mind too.

True, but which mind? It is not the personal mind, it is not the subjective mind save that of the ultimate Aham, in which the external world is withdrawn through the wheel of energies. This subjective is the universal objective, nondifferent than the objective reality and its consciousness.

For all practices the world is real, but limitedly real. This is the real advaitic stance, both the foundation of vyavaharika (provisional & practical world-view) and the pinnacle of ajativada. (in which the unreal and real lose distinction, one being within the other.)

It is the prathibhasika (delusional, individual view born of sense-mind and ahamkar, the personal local of avidya) that is truly false and unreal, asat.

 

[Pleroma]

Monism does not imply solipsism.

I'm not a solipsist, Adviata Vedanta recognizes a noumenal numinous world of God made up of only five elements called the Panchaboothas i.e. earth, fire, air, water and ether. This is not maya, this reality is real whether it is manifested or not it exists somehow physically.

 

[Pleroma]

True, but which mind? It is not the personal mind, it is not the subjective mind save that of the ultimate Aham, in which the external world is withdrawn through the wheel of energies. This subjective is the universal objective, nondifferent than the objective reality and its consciousness.

For all practices the world is real, but limitedly real. This is the real advaitic stance, both the foundation of vyavaharika (provisional & practical world-view) and the pinnacle of ajativada. (in which the unreal and real lose distinction, one being within the other.)

It is the prathibhasika (delusional, individual view born of sense-mind and ahamkar, the personal local of avidya) that is truly false and unreal, asat.

Jiva is Brahman. There is no merging of the individual self with the Cosmic Self.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

True, ask any gunshot victim if it's an illusion. Or ask me if the pain of having a 5 mm kidney stone this week is an illusion. Both are temporary, but no less real.

Heh.

[SMBC] Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal

 

[Pleroma]

Quarks, protons and electrons are creations of the mind too.

Brahman is the physical world - there is nothing but Brahman.
It is only the unenlightened mind that sees the world seperate.
Read the teachings of Ramana Maharshi and you will understand.

I agree but how can you be sure that it is all a creation of the mind?

What if Advaita Vedanta is just a hallucination of the material Brain?

 

[Shuddhasattva]

There is no merging of the individual self with the Cosmic Self.

Withdrawal of the senses is withdrawal of the phenomenal reality, which involves into the Self - which is the noumenal. This dissolution of the phenomenal into the noumenal is samadhi, and effected by yoga.

This is a basic advaitic practice. The wheel of energies refers to the matrikas, which is the agamic practice as present in the paradvaita.


The practical efforts affect a merger, yet the character of the merger is itself the realization of no substantial differentiation, and thus no substantial merger, ever taking place.

Advaita is a difficult philosophy to wear for literalistic or legalistic minds unless these tendencies are tamed through realization of the emptiness and 'non-literalness' of lettered reality - the vachya, as that which attributes (and thus differentiates, incurring avidya) vachaka is withdrawn through the invoking of the letters/matrikas in reverse order - the withdrawal.

But advaita, or beliefs such as this, are not really necessary for realization of self and god, all the other gates open this gnosis as suited for the different minds.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

What if Advaita Vedanta is just a hallucination of the material Brain?

Of course it is. All philosophies are, they have not a grain of substantial self-existence. Hence the monism, a good philosophy dissolves itself. This is the burning away of the house built of vidya and avidya into the brahmagyan which resides in no particular way of thought, axiomatic system, or viewpoint.

 

[Pleroma]

It doesn't mean that everything is an illusion.

The illusion is that the physical world that we see and feel is IT. That we are just our bodies. When you understand what lies behind, maya is destroyed and you will know that you are pure consciousness and part of it ALL, not just a fleshy body.

The manifestation is real, it will still be here when you understand.

Maya

Its important to specify which manifestation is real. The material manifestation which we see through our sense organs is not real, it is an illusion where as the divine manifestation of the first-born God is real, Agni, Soma, Pushan, Prana all these Gods exist in this divine manifestation.

What you called pure consciousness is beyond this divine manifestation, you need to first understand this divine manifestation which is described in the Vedas first. This is what the Isha Upanishad teaches us.

But many advaitins influenced by Buddhist thinking do not take the gods of the Vedas seriously, they do exist and they are real, if not Advaita Vedanta is not true and it doesn't make any sense.

 

[Pleroma]

Of course it is. All philosophies are, they have not a grain of substantial self-existence. Hence the monism, a good philosophy dissolves itself. This is the burning away of the house built of vidya and avidya into the brahmagyan which resides in no particular way of thought, axiomatic system, or viewpoint.

I don't think you got what I said, if Advaita Vedanta is just a hallucination of the Brain then not only the house built of vidya and avidya is not true, Brahman is also not true and it has no basis in reality. It will be proved once for all that it was all made up by humans.

 

[Pleroma]

Withdrawal of the senses is withdrawal of the phenomenal reality, which involves into the Self - which is the noumenal. This dissolution of the phenomenal into the noumenal is samadhi, and effected by yoga.

This is a basic advaitic practice. The wheel of energies refers to the matrikas, which is the agamic practice as present in the paradvaita.


The practical efforts affect a merger, yet the character of the merger is itself the realization of no substantial differentiation, and thus no substantial merger, ever taking place.

Advaita is a difficult philosophy to wear for literalistic or legalistic minds unless these tendencies are tamed through realization of the emptiness and 'non-literalness' of lettered reality - the vachya, as that which attributes (and thus differentiates, incurring avidya) vachaka is withdrawn through the invoking of the letters/matrikas in reverse order - the withdrawal.

But advaita, or beliefs such as this, are not really necessary for realization of self and god, all the other gates open this gnosis as suited for the different minds.

Isha Upanishad teaches us that to completely understand the Vedas and the Upanishads both the manifested and the unmanifested should be known. One cannot exist without the other. If you call yourself an Advaitin then you should believe in the existence of gods like Agni, Pushan, Soma, Prana etc, if you don't accept such things then please don't call yourself as an Advaitin. What you're espousing is your own philosophical doctrine, it cannot be called as Advaita Vedanta becuase it will be a false misrepsentation of Advaita.

You need to accept the existence of Vedic Gods if you want to be a Advaitin. This applies to everyone who call themselves Advaitis

 

[Maya3]

Isha Upanishad teaches us that to completely understand the Vedas and the Upanishads both the manifested and the unmanifested should be known. One cannot exist without the other. If you call yourself an Advaitin then you should believe in the existence of gods like Agni, Pushan, Soma, Prana etc, if you don't accept such things then please don't call yourself as an Advaitin. What you're espousing is your own philosophical doctrine, it cannot be called as Advaita Vedanta becuase it will be a false misrepsentation of Advaita.

You need to accept the existence of Vedic Gods if you want to be a Advaitin. This applies to everyone who call themselves Advaitis

Oh ok.

My teachers are very well educated and extremely well versed in scripture and in Sanskrit. I think I go with what they teach, they are a bit more humble too.

Maya

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Isha Upanishad teaches us that to completely understand the Vedas and the Upanishads both the manifested and the unmanifested should be known.

Atanu-ji has an excellent post on this in the vedanta subsection, but if you read more of Atanu-ji's posts, here and on HDF, you will see the same, I would consider him one of the few posting adepts in advaita. You will also see the same if you actually read the Isha Upanishad, and the other Mukhya upanishads, particularly the 4 in which the Mahavakya are drawn from.

One cannot exist without the other.

You are reading what I am saying, yes? That is ajativada in its essence.

If you call yourself an Advaitin then you should believe in the existence of gods like Agni, Pushan, Soma, Prana etc,
You need to accept the existence of Vedic Gods if you want to be a Advaitin. This applies to everyone who call themselves Advaitis

This is only nominally true. Yes, to be astika, for any Hindu, one need accept the Vedas, and with it, means accepting the existence of Vedic gods, but Vedantic belief/practice systems condense and simplify in the manner of the upanishads and the brahma sutra, subsuming also the other darshanas save, in the main, mimamsa which indeed was more oriented towards gross practice of the Vedas, rather than a subtle understanding and practice of their meaning, which is the internal richas, yajnas and homas performed by the yogi as hrid hotrin within his own subtle body.

Pushan, as well as all the other attribute-names of the paradevata, is transferred to the identity of Ishvara's emanations as represented in the Trimurthi.

Varuna-Mitra is subsumed into Vishnu, with aspects of Indra & Prajapati added, along with Antariksha. Thus are the Vasus and Aditis represented.

Soma, Surya and Agni are subsumed in Tryambhakam Rudra Shiva (these 3 are the 3 eyes of Moon, Sun & Fire, essential in the internal yogas retained in the vedanta and agamas) along with, again, Indra & Prajapati, and thus are the Rudras represented.

Prajapati/Hiranyagarbha is subsumed into Brahma.

The real Vedas are thus written in the sushumna - they are to be experienced there as the song of creation - in short the wheels of matrikas, and is the parallel mirror, to the objective world. Kundalini is universal, sarvakulakundalini. The sushumna is the universe.

That said, I do read the Vedic samhitas, brahmanas and aranyakas, and work to develop my understanding of the Vedic system of mandala yoga - the arrangement of the deities through the invocations - richas, which has descended in a new form to the agamic yantras.

We should certainly enhance our understanding of the Vedic gods and yogas.

if you don't accept such things then please don't call yourself as an Advaitin. What you're espousing is your own philosophical doctrine, it cannot be called as Advaita Vedanta becuase it will be a false misrepsentation of Advaita.

I've spoken from two traditions in this thread: paradvaita and advaita, noting which when I speak from it. It is indeed authentic advaita, gleaned from Shankaracharya's works and the feet of my guru.

I would like to ask you some candid questions and we may both appreciate straight answers.

1. Have you been reading Agniveer perchance?
2. How recently have you converted to hindu dharma? Are you born in it, but recently rededicated to it? There is none so zealous as a recent convert.
3. Have you read Shankaracharya's bhasya of the Brahma Sutras or the Upanishads?
4. Have you read his other works, such as the Viveka Chudamani?

 

[Pleroma]

Oh ok.

My teachers are very well educated and extremely well versed in scripture and in Sanskrit. I think I go with what they teach, they are a bit more humble too.

Maya

Devudu Narasimha Shastry studied the scriptures for 20 years and he was chosen for the honour of being 'worshiped' in the ceremonial way as one among the hundred traditional scholars by the first president of India, Babu Rajendra Prasad, in the sacred Varanasi.

One of his triology Mahadarshana is based on the Isha Upanishad. Aurobindo wrote voluminous works on the Isha Upanishad and critcized the scholars for not realizing the true meaning of this upanishad.

Just because I'm tough doesn't mean I'm not humble. Advaita teaches us that the God who resides in me is the same God residing in a prostitute, a black man, in a beggar and in everyone and everything. If this is the case where is the place for Moha and Shoka.

The world is the Avastha sthana of Ishvara, all glory and pride should go to him. It is you people who don't want to research what I say and showing pride and acting as experts of Advaita Vedanta and misrepresenting its true form.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

same God residing in a prostitute, a black man, in a beggar

:sarcastic:areyoucra

 

[Andal]

The material world and Brahman are not mutually exclusive. There are three categories that exist- Ishvara, Cit (living beings), and Acit (the material world). Brahman is the substance that flows through everything and belongs to Ishvara. Both Brahman and Acit are equally valid experiences.

Then again we Sri Vaishnavs don't really accept the advantage view of things

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Maya3]

:sarcastic:areyoucra

Yeah really!

 

[Shuddhasattva]

I also want to point out three things that may be of interest in understanding the essence of advaita.

1. Maya means "Not this." Ma = No, Non, Not. Ya = That.
2. Brahman is described, and self-inquired, in terms of "Neti, neti." Not this thought construct, not that material sensation, not the limited view. Mahamaya is Brahman, Para Mula Prakriti, Akula Kundalini; Shiva.
3. As you have spoken of the Hiranyagarbha as Ishvar, let us not forget that the bija / true name is Ka as in the sukta which I assume you've read many times. Who? Who? Who?


And a question: what might mean "evam maya srutam"? As we have previously discussed in passing the advaitic connection to Buddhism...

 

[Pleroma]

:sarcastic:areyoucra

Yes, Ishavashyam idam sarvam. God resides in everyone. Everyone means everyone including a prostitute, a black man, a beggar etc.

And to give you straight answers to your questions I'm a born Hindu and I have studied extensively about the Isha Upanishad but I don't like to be called myself as a Hindu. It is the foreigners who called us as Hindus. We are Aryas, the Vedic seers were Aryans and this is our true religion.

I'm niether crazy nor I'm sarcastic and I don't speak lies.