• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Supersoul vs Individual soul

K

krish

Member
Both advaita and dvaita stress that God is qualitatively the same yet quantitatively different from indvidual souls.

God's primary attributes are all knowing, all powerful, all present. We all know the power of the subconscious mind or the soul which is doing million of process in the body automatically. We can also see the knowing aspect pf the soul when it can "wake you up at the hour you ordered".

so my questions is this....

Both agree that god is infinite while the individual soul is finite. Obviously we can cross of "all present" because the soul is localized in the body. But what about omniscience and omnipotence.

Is being qualitatively the same meaning that the soul is also "all knowing and all powerful" but limited in quantity?

all means "everything". so let's say that we own every type of ice cream in the world but we have finite quantities of it. so does the soul also have every power and form of knowledge but only limited in quantity since it is not the super soul?

i have heard the subconcious mind refered to as "omnipotent" and "omniscient" many times by spirtual books/ so i am asking what do they mean?

what is it to be one yet different? being one in quality would mean the indvidual soul should have every power because that is a attribute of god. It would not mean some power or powers right? If it did it would violate the quality of property of that being?
 
ametist

ametist

Active Member
There is the connection of individual soul to other souls. It is same for everyone, everyone is connected that way. the more the awareness of this connection, the more the feeling of godliness, but to what degree, i can not tell that nor can i tell if that realization when done in ultimate level,means to have the total properties of god soul.
 
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Souls accrete over time into larger souls, like cosmic dust coalesces into suns and planets.
 
George-ananda

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Spirit/Consciousness is all omni-everything and if we have a spirit in us then why are we and are souls not omni-everything? Good questions krish.

The answer is we have bodies that limit consciousness and spirit. Even what is commonly called a soul is a body made of matter of a higher spiritual plane. And thus the soul has limited consciousness but more than a physical body.

So, eventually we will advance even beyond our souls and merge in pure Consciousness/God/Brahman/Spirit. Then we are omni-everything but will find we are really all the same 'we'.

The game is to grow beyond the limited 'I' and see it all as 'we'.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
You can mentally create any reality you can conceive of. Practice and imagine living within this world of your creation. Focus well enough bring in the existence of senses. Create people to exist in it.

In this world of your creation you are omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient. If you can consistently focus on the existence of this world you'd be the God/creator of this worlds existence.

I suspect it is not so much different for God.

“Once upon a time, I dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was myself. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.”
 
zenzero

zenzero

Its only a Label
Friend krish,

"all knowing and all powerful" but limited in quantity?
Click to expand...
Guess over time everyone develops that to a certain level for certain tasks which they can accomplish without dropping an eyelid; is that not IT?

Love & rgds
 
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No critical mass. Just a unified, pan-consiousness, Aupmanyav.
You know its name...
 
Aupmanyav

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
krish said:
Both advaita and dvaita stress that God is qualitatively the same yet quantitatively different from indvidual souls.
Click to expand...
Your information is not correct for 'dvaita'. The following is the view of 'Madhvacharya', the propounder of 'dvaita' philosophy:

"According to Madhva there are primarily two tatvas or categories of reality - svatantra tatva (independent reality) and asvantantra tatva (dependent reality). Broadly, Īśvara as cause of the universe is the independent reality, and the created universe is the dependent reality. The created universe consists of jīva and matter. Jīvas are sentient and matter is non-sentient.

Madhva further enumerates the difference between dependent and independent reality as a fivefold division between Īśvara, jīva and matter. These differences are: (1) Between matter and matter; (2) Between matter and jīva; (3) Between matter and Īśvara; (4) Between jīva and jīva; and (5) Between jīva and Īśvara. This difference is neither temporary nor merely practical; it is an invariable and natural property of everything. For such is the law of nature: One is not two; two is not one. There is no object like another.

There is no jīva like another. No man's nature is like that of another. Underlying everything and every individual person, there is a unique individuality or speciality. The sea is full; the tank is full; even water-pots may be full (of water). But that fullness is not identical in all these. The volume varies according to the variation in size. Everything is full, yet each fullness is different. In fact, even in liberated jīvas, the difference prevails such that the degree of knowledge and enjoyment of bliss of each soul varies."
Madhvacharya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
K

krish

Member
The difference between the two schools is that one absorbs the individuality and the other states that it persists. They both still use the same analogy of the "drop of ocean vs ocean itself" to describe the qualitative oneness and quantitative difference. I am not concerned with other things. jiva vs jiva difference is obvious as we all make our karma.

random thought.......

why do advaita, adharma and asura all have this "a" infront of them? It makes me feel like these concepts are a perversion of the natural concepts of dvaita, dharma and sura.

Just poking fun =)
 
K

krish

Member
I asked this because i want to figure out the power of the indvidual soul. There is a technique which yogis use to make requests to the subconcious before sleep and the subconscious carries it out. I would rather use the 90% of brain power untapped to benefit myself rather than do everything with concious mind. affirmations are exhuasting and subconcious commands seem better. This is for self improvement purposes. i wanted a feel of the capability.

Thomas Edison "never sleep without a request to subconscious mind".

i am trying to master the "creator of my reality part". I know karma interferes but i try to do tapas and use this technique.
 
Aupmanyav

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
krish said:
The difference between the two schools is that one absorbs the individuality and the other states that it persists. They both still use the same analogy of the "drop of ocean vs ocean itself" to describe the qualitative oneness and quantitative difference. I am not concerned with other things. jiva vs jiva difference is obvious as we all make our karma.
Click to expand...
I think you have still not understood the difference. 'Dvaita' 'is not' 'drop of ocean vs ocean itself'. It is two/many which cannot be one.
krish said:
why do advaita, adharma and asura all have this "a" infront of them? It makes me feel like these concepts are a perversion of the natural concepts of dvaita, dharma and sura. Just poking fun =)
Click to expand...
Hinduism never made fun into a sin. You are welcome. It is like a-biogenesis in English. 'a' indicates the opposite (Indo-European). So, 'advaita' is 'not two' (davaita is duality) and 'adharma' is action in contravention of 'dharma'.

'Asura' is dicey. It began as an epithet of Aryan Gods, remained Godly with Zoroastrians, but partly turned evil in Hinduism. The opposite occurred with 'devas' or 'suras'. With Hindus, it remained Godly, but Zoroastrians turned it into evil.

Sagar Manthan (Churning of the ocean - Devas/Suras on one side of Mount Menaka, Asuras on the other side)

2734Sagar+Manthan.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top