Bhedabheda vs. Advaita

[Aupmanyav]

Other people only exist when you think about them.

I think that stance has a Buddhist tinge in it.

.. with the consequent unveiling of the true Self, termed as Moksha in the relative realm.

True. So, Moksha is not going to some heaven to be with some deity. It is the process of understanding. When the understanding is complete, it is moksha, nirvana, jhana, enlightenment, deliverance, salvation. It could happen in 10 years or one year or even one hour.

That is what the books also said, 'Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati' (Verily, one who knows Brahman, becomes Brahman).

The false self obscures Brahman to the jivatma, as the false self arises out of identification with the mind and body.

Yeah, for this reason - deny jivatma completely, no soul - as I do. These are traps (of duality) before enlightenment. As my signature says in another forum:

"Eko sad, dwitīyo nāsti; nāsti, nāsti, nā nāsti kinchana."
There is one, no second; no, no, no not in the least.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I still believe my body is going to die someday, in your opinion is this thinking wrong?

There is no question of believing. All things, all forms, living or non-living, even rocks, are born, age and die - change. The thinking is natural and not wrong. But go a step beyond it and see nothing can be destroyed, nothing dies. The second chapter of BhagawadGita has answers to all questions in the world:

"Na tu evāhaḿ jātu nāsaḿ, na tvaḿ neme janādhipāḥ;
na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ, sarve vayam ataḥ param." BG 2.12
- Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
"Dehino asmin yathā dehe, kaumāraḿ yauvanaḿ jarā;
tathā dehāntara-prāptir, dhīras tatra na muhyati." BG 2.13
- As the embodied (Brahman) continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, it similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.
"Nāsato vidyate bhāvo, nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ;
ubhayor api dṛṣṭah antah, tu anayah tattva-darśibhiḥ." BG 2.16
- Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent there is no endurance and of the eternal there is no change. This they have concluded by studying the nature of both.

 

[ajay0]

In short, there are multiple true selves that attain moksha and also retain their identities after moksha (if they are not distinct, we will be contradicting the idea of x, y and z finding their own mokshas at different times). With this idea of multiple and permanent true selves, you have strayed far from Shankara's Advaita. However, it does not matter as Shankara's Advaita is not logically consistent, anyway.

The correction I would put here is that the dissolution of multiple false selves , unveils the Brahman within in them.

As Vivekananda stated, "Vedanta formulates no universal brotherhood, but universal oneness."

The relative is many , but the absolute is one.

Hence the reason why perception of multiplicity is considered a sin or error in vedanta while perception of unity in the midst of variety is considered correct and proper perception.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

I think that stance has a Buddhist tinge in it.

The way I see it, there is nothing religious or spiritual about this. It is purely an intellectual thing. Unfortunately, over time, this was turned into something mystical and bloated and distorted into a form and shape that is incomprehensible to people.

It is a very simple thing. But this mystification and obfuscation makes it impossible for people to see it. Ironically, the books that have been read on this subject and the Gurus that have been followed have become the obstacles. I call it irony because these books and Gurus were actually supposed to bring clarity and understanding. Instead, their association takes the individual in the opposite direction.

The correction I would put here is that the dissolution of multiple false selves , unveils the Brahman within in them.

Unveiled to whom? For this to happen, there must be someone to whom Brahman is unveiled. And for your other statements on this to hold true, there must be many of them (one per Jiva). So, you are indeed claiming multiple true/permanent selves - to whom Brahman is unveiled. And these will happen at different times (Yajnavalkya, Shankara, Ajay, etc.,).

I know what you are trying to say (I think) haha, but what I witness is that I am aging and that I'm changing physically, it's hard for me to understand what happens then, I still believe my body is going to die someday, in your opinion is this thinking wrong??

How can you die?

As I said earlier, you cannot witness your own death. A state where you somehow exist after the death of your body/memory is also not possible. Your memory defines you. Without memory you do not exist and so, you cannot be a witness to a state where you exist without your body/memory.

So, you have no death. This does not mean, forever. I would say, the concept of time goes away, but that is not accurate either as you cannot witness time going away.

 

[Aupmanyav]

As I said earlier, you cannot witness your own death. A state where you somehow exist after the death of your body/memory is also not possible.

Funnily, you do (I do not take it as scary), but for a short time. During this time, there is no pain because the pain perceiving center in the brain is the first to die. It is something like a sink overflowing. The first thing that one does is to turn the tap off. The brain dies piece by piece.

"Death just became even more scary: scientists say people are aware they’re dead because their consciousness continues to work after the body has stopped showing signs of life. That means that, theoretically, someone may even hear their own death being announced by medics.

Some of those studied say they had awareness of full conversations and seeing things that were going on around them, even after they were pronounced dead. These accounts were then verified by the medical and nursing staff who were present at the time."
The mind still works after you're dead, say scientists

 

[ajay0]

Unveiled to whom?
For this to happen, there must be someone to whom Brahman is unveiled.

The Self is dehypnotised from its identification with the 'I' - thought and its primary identification with the mind-body complex and its secondary identifications of religion, ideology, race, nationality, sexuality and so on.

Through this disidentification with false identities, the mental-emotional patterns of thought and emotion they generate incessantly comes to an end . The cessation of mental activity reveals the Self within.

As Jac O' Keeffe stated," Stopping unnecessary mental doing allows the natural state to arise. Deep stillness always rests under an agitated mind. "

And for your other statements on this to hold true, there must be many of them (one per Jiva). So, you are indeed claiming multiple true/permanent selves - to whom Brahman is unveiled. And these will happen at different times (Yajnavalkya, Shankara, Ajay, etc.,).

Brahman is one, but the multiple false selves are many. The dissolution of the false selves reveal Brahman.

The multiple false selves are like the waves of the ocean claiming a seperate existence for itself and thinking itself to be a seperate, special entity. When this illusion vanishes, the waves realize they are one with the ocean , and identify with the ocean instead.

 

[DanielR]

Isn't Turya or Brahman supposed to be Jagrat Susupti (wakeful dreamless sleep), so just like dream sleep bliss but only that you're conscious of it??

 

[Aupmanyav]

Won't know about Jāgṛta Suṣupti, only giving here the correct pronunciation and spelling : Tūrīya.

 

[ajay0]

Isn't Turya or Brahman supposed to be Jagrat Susupti (wakeful dreamless sleep), so just like dream sleep bliss but only that you're conscious of it??

Turiya is pure consciousness that is the fourth state which is the background of the three states of consciousness, namely waking (jagrat), dreaming(swapna), deep sleep (susupti).

Yogananda elaborates on the Turiya state here.

Deep sleep is dreamless, and we find ourselves to be refreshed and invigorated after such dreamless deep sleep compared to sleep filled with dreams which often leaves one tired upon waking up.

Deep sleep corresponds to the causal body, which is closer to the Self than the gross or subtle bodies. Hence the better perception of the Self’s bliss in deep sleep than in the other states. In meditation or Awareness, the Self’s bliss is experienced directly.

Dreams are all stored psychological impressions in memory, and all that which is suppressed or repressed during waking hours surfaces as dreams.

Awareness during waking hours can bring about deep sleep without dreams as it obliterates all impressions made on the mind leaving no mental residue.

An insightful article by Jiddu Krishnamurti on the nature of dreams .

Isn't it possible to be aware of your own responses when you are getting into the bus, when you are with your family, when you are talking to your boss in the office, or to your servant at home? Just to be aware of all this - to be aware of the trees and the birds, of the clouds and the children, of your own habits, responses and traditions - is to observe it without judging or comparing; and if you can be so aware, constantly watching, listening, you will find that you do not dream at all. Then your whole mind is intensely active; everything has a meaning, a significance. To such a mind, dreams are unnecessary. You will then discover that in sleep there's not only complete rest and renewal, but a state which the mind can never touch. It's not something to be remembered and returned to; it's entirely inconceivable, a total renewal which cannot be formulated.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Brahman is one, but the multiple false selves are many. The dissolution of the false selves reveal Brahman.

Your view also includes multiple permanent true selves. So, you have multiple false selves, multiple true selves and Brahman.

The multiple false selves are like the waves of the ocean claiming a seperate existence for itself and thinking itself to be a seperate, special entity. When this illusion vanishes, the waves realize they are one with the ocean , and identify with the ocean instead.

To identify itself with the ocean, the wave has to continue to exist as a wave. For you to find liberation, there is something in you that is different from Yajnavalkya and Shankara - something other than the false self. That is your true self, which again has to be different from Shankara's true self. So, we have three categories - false self, true self and Brahman.

Isn't Turya or Brahman supposed to be Jagrat Susupti (wakeful dreamless sleep), so just like dream sleep bliss but only that you're conscious of it??

Who is conscious of Brahman/Turiya?

 

[Aupmanyav]

A dreamless sleep would not be refreshing for mind, it is as if you would not allow a child to play. Dreams are a necessary part of the refreshment of mind.

Yes, waves (individualities) may continue to exist, but in spite of them you have to find Brahman, the least common denominator. That is enlightenment.

The individual is conscious of Brahman. No individual, no consciousness.

 

[ajay0]

Your view also includes multiple permanent true selves. So, you have multiple false selves, multiple true selves and Brahman.

I have spoken about multiple false selves or false 'I's being dissolved to reveal the true Self or 'I' or Brahman within.

There is no multiple true selves. The Self within each is one and the same.

To identify itself with the ocean, the wave has to continue to exist as a wave. For you to find liberation, there is something in you that is different from Yajnavalkya and Shankara - something other than the false self. That is your true self, which again has to be different from Shankara's true self. So, we have three categories - false self, true self and Brahman.

Does the wave which rises and falls through crests and troughs have a seperate existence as a wave in the ocean !

I have seen rising and falling waves, but never seen a wave with a label depicting itself as Ajayo, Shivasomashekhar or Aupmanyav or Danielr or any other names.

As Ramana Maharshi stated, " The universe exists within the Self (pure consciousness). Therefore, it is real, but only because it obtains its reality from the Self . We call the universe unreal, however, to indicate changing appearance and transient form, whereas we call the Self (pure consciousness) real because it is changeless."

In the beginning [all] this verily was Atman ( pure consciousness) only, one and without a second. -
Aitareya Upanishad


The world with all its multiplicity of shapes, colors, smells tastes and so forth is nothing but pure consciousness in substance, like variously-shaped jewelry which is nothing but gold. Names and forms which distinguish the phenomenal universe are superimposed upon Atman or pure consciousness.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

There is no multiple true selves. The Self within each is one and the same.

This is inconsistent with your other statements. By our own admission, the false selves do not find liberation. Therefore,

1. Please explain how this one true self is finding enlightenment again and again? Once for Yajnavalkya, once for Shankara, etc.,?

2. When you talk about newly revealed awareness and bliss, who is this for?

Please be specific.

I have seen rising and falling waves, but never seen a wave with a label depicting itself as Ajayo, Shivasomashekhar or Aupmanyav or Danielr or any other names.

I explained clearly, that in your model, there is someone/something that finds enlightenment. That is not the false self and it also not Brahman. So what is it? That is the third entity, the true self that you have talked about several times and there have to be many of them. If there was only one true self, it found liberation a long time ago with Yajnavalkya and no one else needs to get liberated. Because the false selves are not the ones to find liberation (they are illusory)

The world with all its multiplicity of shapes, colors, smells tastes and so forth is nothing but pure consciousness in substance, like variously-shaped jewelry which is nothing but gold. Names and forms which distinguish the phenomenal universe are superimposed upon Atman or pure consciousness.

Jewelry is both Jewelry and Gold. This is bhedabheda and not advaita. If you want to apply this analogy to advaita, then you are claiming that the Jewelry is unreal; an illusion.

The earliest known commentator for bhedabheda is Bhartrprapancha (5th Century CE). Please look up his parinama vaada and how Shankara severely criticized it in his Brhadaranyaka bhashya and also in his BSB. I can look up specific quote numbers, if you need.

 

[ajay0]

This is inconsistent with your other statements. By our own admission, the false selves do not find liberation. Therefore,

1. Please explain how this one true self is finding enlightenment again and again? Once for Yajnavalkya, once for Shankara, etc.,?

Enlightenment is just the understanding that the ego or false self is a delusion. There is no one who is getting enlightened. Brahman or the Self is always present, while the false self obscures it. The dissolution of the false self or false 'I' unveiled the Self, for both Yajnavalkya and Shankara. It is just the dissolution of the false selves taking place, nothing else.

2. When you talk about newly revealed awareness and bliss, who is this for?

Please be specific.

As stated earlier, the Self or awareness exists at all times, though it is usually veiled by the mental-emotional patterns of thoughts and emotions, arising out of belief structures that constitute the ego or false self. With the dissolution of the false self, the Self is revealed with its bliss. So simple.

However, mere intellectual understanding, as I explained earlier, is bound to result in imaginary delusion. It is in meditation that one confronts this fact clearly.

I explained clearly, that in your model, there is someone/something that finds enlightenment. That is not the false self and it also not Brahman. So what is it? That is the third entity, the true self that you have talked about several times and there have to be many of them. If there was only one true self, it found liberation a long time ago with Yajnavalkya and no one else needs to get liberated. Because the false selves are not the ones to find liberation (they are illusory)

As explained earlier, there is no one who finds enlightenment, as the false self is false and an illusory entity which veils Brahman or Self. Brahman is the true self or Self, and there is no third entity.

If there was only one true self, it found liberation a long time ago with Yajnavalkya and no one else needs to get liberated. Because the false selves are not the ones to find liberation (they are illusory)

As stated earlier, liberation or enlightenment is the dissolution of the false self. There is no one who attains enlightenment. Enlightenment is just the unveiling of the Self within, that is all.

In Yajnavalkya, enlightenment happened when the false self that he had identified as his mind-body complex and its secondary associations, dissolved.

Similarly too in Shankaracharya , where his false self dissolved into nothing. This revealed the omnipresent Self or pure consciousness within as the true 'I'.

Jewelry is both Jewelry and Gold. This is bhedabheda and not advaita. If you want to apply this analogy to advaita, then you are claiming that the Jewelry is unreal; an illusion.

At the absolute level jewelry is just gold. Its names and forms are irrevalent.

In the relative level they are relevant, as a gold chain for a child will not fit an adult and so on.

The earliest known commentator for bhedabheda is Bhartrprapancha (5th Century CE). Please look up his parinama vaada and how Shankara severely criticized it in his Brhadaranyaka bhashya and also in his BSB. I can look up specific quote numbers, if you need.

Bhedabheda deals with a relative aspect of reality or existence. It is not the ultimate truth or reality, and that may be why Shankara criticised it.

The bhedabheda states that the individual self (jivatma) is different and not different from the ultimate reality Brahman.

This could be a reference to temporary forms of samadhi or nondual perception like nirvitarka samadhi or nirvichara samadhi or kevala nirvikalpa samadhi, where the false self or 'I' returns due to the unburnt vasanas or samskaras within and veils the Self again, when the samadhi comes to an end.

While enlightened sages dwell in constant nondual perception, the saints come in and out of samadhi. They can be referred to being established in bhedabheda.

 

[ajay0]

A dreamless sleep would not be refreshing for mind, it is as if you would not allow a child to play. Dreams are a necessary part of the refreshment of mind.

Pleasant dreams or nightmares all prevent deep sleep which is refreshing and invigorating for the mind and body. This is my personal understanding and experience.

I know of people experiencing headaches and fatigue in the morning after having dreams at night. The mind's restlessness affects the body too, and this could be the cause of the fatigue. For some people, nightmares can even result in heart attacks or health issues.

The individual is conscious of Brahman. No individual, no consciousness.

The scriptures state that consciousness is not something related to the body or mind or produced by the body or mind, yet it pervades them, illumines them and gives them life. Its nature in the body is that of the witness, witnessing all our thoughts, feelings, emotions , as well as their absence.

A saying by Swami Ramakrishnananda Puri in this regard …

Consciousness is not limited by the boundaries of the body. It only seems to be because consciousness, being so subtle, is only perceivable when it has a reflecting medium, such as the body or mind. To explain this phenomenon, the example of light is often used. We can only ‘see’ light when it bounces off something – a wall, a face, a hand, etc. This is why outer space – where there are no objects for light to reflect against – appears black, i.e. devoid of light. Yet light certainly is there. The sun’s rays that illumine life on earth must pass through outer space in order to reach here. But as there is no reflecting medium, we cannot see them. It is the same with consciousness. As stated earlier, consciousness itself can never be an object for our perception. We only can perceive it when it reflects off some medium – like the body and mind.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What you consider as deep sleep carries dreams. In science they are known as REMs (Rapid Eye Movement).

"REM sleep (also known as paradoxical sleep), a smaller portion of total sleep time and the main occasion for dreams (or nightmares), is associated with desynchronized and fast brain waves, eye movements, loss of muscle tone, and suspension of homeostasis. ..

John Allan Hobson and Robert McCarley propose that dreams are caused by the random firing of neurons in the cerebral cortex during the REM period. Neatly, this theory helps explain the irrationality of the mind during REM periods, as, according to this theory, the forebrain then creates a story in an attempt to reconcile and make sense of the nonsensical sensory information presented to it. This would explain the odd nature of many dreams."
Sleep - Wikipedia

Science understands sleep and dreams to a great extent.

Again Swami this or that or Eckhart this or that. Ajay0, I do not go by that.

 

[ajay0]

What you consider as deep sleep carries dreams. In science they are known as REMs (Rapid Eye Movement).


"REM sleep (also known as paradoxical sleep), a smaller portion of total sleep time and the main occasion for dreams (or nightmares), is associated with desynchronized and fast brain waves, eye movements, loss of muscle tone, and suspension of homeostasis. ..

If it contains dreams, it is the dreaming state, not the state of deep sleep. Here I am using psychology as per the vedantic perspective with respect to the four states of consciousness. The deep sleep state is distinguished from the dreaming state in that it has no dreams or psychological content.

The above sleep charecterisation you have put is clearly that of the dreaming state.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You could also check this. Don't go just by the scriptures:

"The length of a dream can vary; they may last for a few seconds, or approximately 20–30 minutes. People are more likely to remember the dream if they are awakened during the REM phase. The average person has three to five dreams per night, and some may have up to seven; however, most dreams are immediately or quickly forgotten. Dreams tend to last longer as the night progresses. During a full eight-hour night sleep, most dreams occur in the typical two hours of REM."
Dream - Wikipedia

 

[ajay0]

You could also check this. Don't go just by the scriptures:

"The length of a dream can vary; they may last for a few seconds, or approximately 20–30 minutes. People are more likely to remember the dream if they are awakened during the REM phase. The average person has three to five dreams per night, and some may have up to seven; however, most dreams are immediately or quickly forgotten. Dreams tend to last longer as the night progresses. During a full eight-hour night sleep, most dreams occur in the typical two hours of REM."
Dream - Wikipedia

These are all varying aspects of the dreaming state.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Enlightenment is just the understanding that the ego or false self is a delusion. There is no one who is getting enlightened.

You are contradicting yourself. In the first sentence, you are saying that "Enlightenment is just the understanding..." and then in the next sentence you say that no one is getting enlightened. If no one is getting enlightened, then who is gaining this (new) understanding that the ego/false self is a delusion?

This is where your logic fails and I have pointed it out multiple times. In your model, someone is getting enlightened or is gaining some new understanding of the false self. Who is this entity? It is not the false self and it is not Brahman.

Brahman or the Self is always present, while the false self obscures it. The dissolution of the false self or false 'I' unveiled the Self, for both Yajnavalkya and Shankara. It is just the dissolution of the false selves taking place, nothing else.

And as explained before, if there are only false selves and Brahman, no such "unveiling" is possible. Your unveiling logic only works if you have a third entity - different from the false self and either different or different/non-different from Brahman. Only then can you say that this knowledge/truth, etc., is unveiled to this third entity. And this third entity contradicts advaita.

If you say there is no such third entity, then there is no one who finds enlightenment and therefore, there is no such thing as enlightenment. This contradicts advaita too. Check Shankara's moksha-sadhanopadesha-vidhya in the opening verse of his Upadesha Sahasri.

At the absolute level jewelry is just gold. Its names and forms are irrevalent.

In the relative level they are relevant, as a gold chain for a child will not fit an adult and so on.

There is only one level (the relative) and Jewelry is both jewelry and gold at the same time.

A non-relative/absolute level is not possible because there is no frame of reference and without a frame of reference, there is no gold, no jewelry.