I came across an article by Sister Gayatriprana in the
Sri Sarada Society Notes.

Sister Gayatriprana's observation regarding the
unique teachings of Swami Vivekananda comes across as

Quoting from the article:

"All this is verily Brahman, Ramakrishna - Vivekananda Vedanta
has brought a new approach, applying the core truth of Vedanta
not only to spiritual (i.e. subjective) realms, but also to the objective
facts of experience, what we have thus far called the world of science"

End of quote.

This observation goes to the heart of the matter.
Very few devotees of Sri Ramakrishna or Swami Vivekananda
can spot this aspect of his teachings. There is a very
'old fashioned idea' that what we call external world is somehow
'secondary'. What nonsense!
There stands Brahman in all its glory - but we do not want that!!
We want some ' - mystical - magical - speculative, debating -
Brahman... hiding in a subtle manner in some ancient scriptures..

This century will replace these old ideas with a more direct
approach through science. An approach that will benefit
mankind in the grandest manner. Spirituality is not something
that just belonged to some ancient golden Vedic age... It is alive
and kicking and will continue to manifest itself in a more vibrant
and unusual manner in the days to come.


jay
Vivekananda Centre London

Vivekananda Centre wrote:
>
> Sister Gayatriprana's observation regarding the
> unique teachings of Swami Vivekananda comes across as
>
> Quoting from the article:
>
> "All this is verily Brahman, Ramakrishna - Vivekananda Vedanta
> has brought a new approach, applying the core truth of Vedanta
> not only to spiritual (i.e. subjective) realms, but also to the objective
> facts of experience, what we have thus far called the world of science"
>
> End of quote.
>
> This observation goes to the heart of the matter.
> Very few devotees of Sri Ramakrishna or Swami Vivekananda
> can spot this aspect of his teachings. There is a very
> 'old fashioned idea' that what we call external world is somehow
> 'secondary'. What nonsense!
> There stands Brahman in all its glory - but we do not want that!!
> We want some ' - mystical - magical - speculative, debating -
> Brahman... hiding in a subtle manner in some ancient scriptures..

___________________

hariH OM! jayji-

*this* is what i've been waiting to hear!!

*this* is what i've been trying to say for over 4 years on this
and our prior advaita-L list! and evidently failing miserably!!

except for a few people in a few instances, no-one really wanted
to openly, *elaborately directly* discuss this point (with the
noted exception of colette-ji)! this most ancient and entrenched
misconception in what i will refer to as the orthodox approach to
the vedas.

sri ramana repeatedly referred to this very point, and capsulized
it in a single statement THAT CANNOT POSSIBLY BE MISINTERPRETED!!

sorry about raising my voice. :-)

i had posted the statement i'm referring to, if not once, i'll bet
almost a dozen times over the years.. it made no difference.
the idea that the world is maya, which is *interpreted* as being
thus a point-blank illusion on every conceivable level, sticks
deep in the psyche of the common vedantin--if i am permitted to
phrase it so.

although other statements made by the maharshi reinforce the popular
idea that the world is, indeed, merely an illusion. i believe he
had said that under conditions appropriate to *most* listeners, who's
developed mindset needed to have that reinforced. there's also the
matter of economy in transmitting given insights/teachings.

however and interestingly enough, the compellingly powerful factor
in the subjectmatter here is, as far as i see it, that one can
literally be a jnani and still somehow fail to see this point.
then why am i speaking so strongly about it? i can explain this,
but it would in itself take an elaborate dissertation.

below is what i had wrote just last week, in response to someone's
post, but decided to not send it, because at that point i felt the
futility in doing so. i'll post it now, because it tackles the
the matter from yet another and hopefully more comprehensive angle.

____________


sri ramana stated clearly, with the all important distinction
[paraphrasing]: "upon Self-realization, the world disappears as
the world *as such*.

the distinction [or special circumstance] in the words 'as such'
being: that the appearance is STILL there, yet the witness sees
beneath its relative saguna [or phenomenal] Effect, the ineffable
nirguna [or noumenal] Cause.

to me, the prevailing ideology that manifestation is utterly an
illusion that will eventually disappear into thin air, never to
be apprehended again on *any* level by the jivatman, is preaching,
point-blank, the mayavada of *dvaitam*! this [popular] idea
associated with maya is really an exclusive sanctioning of nihilism
itself, and only serves to set up an antagonism, hence establishing
and/or maintaining an obstacle that the sadhaka is bound to trip
over again and again..

this idea is so entrenched in hindu thought, that the whole world
associates it with what they consider hinduism to represent: that
life is an illusion to be overcome, and the goal to achieve is
when you die to never be reborn again. this is *everyone's* view.
the librarian, the store clerk, the architect, the executive
secretary...from every walk *of western life*, people hold this
view about what hinduism is! if the common [and let's say, thus,
'profane'] ideology is this, then what is advaita--the very crown
of hindu metaphysics--*really* all about??

i say this is NOT what the sanatana dharma is all about! quite the
contrary, it's about coming to terms with the inherently permanent
and inescapable *necessity* of the cycles of brahma(m). which are,
in turn, the product of Desire.

Desire is the Creator.
Desire is the Sustainer.
Desire is the Destroyer.

Desire exists as a permanent seed of potentiality in brahman;
creating, sustaining and destroying Life.

none of *whatever this all is*, would be here at all, if this
weren't the truth.

consider this: is the so-called liberated jnani *above* brahman
Itself, where his/her jivatman is permanently liberated from ever
coming into manifestation again...yet brahman Itself remains NOT??!
no. brahman Itself will eternally project Itself into manifestation,
recapitulating waves of Itself in the form of jivatma-s [who are
nevertheless naught BUT That brahman Self]. this recapitulation
process is part of Its inherent mayashakthi. who can really deny
this eternal cycle? all the sastras from rg veda to the upanishads,
speak of it. to philosophically play the ostrich and bury the head
in the ground, pretending life doesn't manifest...is thus merely
some illusion to get over...is quite frankly ridiculous!

this Life is Itself the infinite beauty of brahman. manifest in
Relativity, which precludes positives and negatives (such comes
with the territory): it's the *only format possible* wherein Beauty
can be experienced: where its contrast in Ugly is inescapable!
**HOWEVER**, if we are trained/focused on its Substratum, we are
the master of maya, and not its victim. the point here is, though,
that maya is an *eternal* dynamic.

we (brahman) willed this World. its very substance is made out of
Desire. to deny this, is to deny our own Gift to our Self! can we
conceive all this to be here simply for the purpose of suffering for
eons of time in space, until we *get* it, to disappear forever??!
why this is so difficult for so many to even consider--especially
metaphysicians!--is, to me, the mystery of mysteries.

when i started out developing a working understanding of this, my
friend [singer] richie havens was very adamant about the fact that
this world *was* real. his idea kept playing on me for a number of
years, until it finally hit, and i was able to incorporate it into
the greater scheme of my understanding. i then set out to find it
explained in the way i was seeing it. when i conducted a more
thorough investigation into sri ramana's teachings, and discovered
that he held this same view, i leaped for joy...especially since it
was so observed by a jagatguru--who was and still is, to me, the
singlemost reliable source of all!

_______________

-----Original Message-----
From: BTA SAGAR [mailto:btasagar@...]
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 11:21 AM
To: advaitin (AT) egroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Swami Vivekananda's teachings...

The Sacred Vishnusahasranamam rightly starts with the opening :

Hari om Viswam =Lord You are all this Universe

The problem is not this universe.The problem is what my ignorant mind of
limited perception thinks what the universe is in daily experience and
interaction.______________________________________ __________________________
_________________________
Who knows what the problem is? Perhaps the problem is that one thinks there
is a problem. This makes one all uptight. And if one does think like that,
its still okay. No problem! :-).

Harsha

The Sacred Vishnusahasranamam rightly starts with the opening :

Hari om Viswam =Lord You are all this Universe

The problem is not this universe.The problem is what my ignorant mind of limited
perception thinks what the universe is in daily experience and interaction.This
creates Samsara or Samsriti which is the root cause of misery and fear etc.


f maiello <egodust@...> wrote:




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hariH OM! murthyji-

this is precisely what i've been trying to say, down
to the finest nuance and detail. truly definitive!

namaskaar,
frank
_________________

Gummuluru Murthy wrote:
>
> namaste.
>
> There are two aspects to the jagat. The one, of name and form,
> created by Ishwara. There is absolutely no problem with that
> jagat. In addition to that, we have the other one created by
> us, the one of pairs of opposites. This is the problem jagat,
> the problem being taking these pairs of opposites to be real.
> Even if we do not take them to be real, still swayed by them
> because of our avidyA.
>
> Now, coming to what shri Frank (and earlier Vivekananda Centre)
> was saying: Shri Frank and I had this discussion many times;
> the following is my understanding.
>
> Jagat as brahman is real; jagat as jagat (viewed in isolation
> apart from brahman) is one of names and forms and that is not
> real. Now, when we see jagat, how do we see it? Is it as jagat
> (of names and forms) or as brahman? Our immediate instinct is
> to see it as jagat only. Even when we constantly contemplate
> on brahman, even then, unless our ignorance is fully and
> permanently removed, our instinct is to see jagat as jagat
> only, and not as brahman. We have intellectual knowledge that
> it is brahman. But that knowledge is still not a digested
> Knowledge. There may be some blessed souls among us who see
> brahman when they see jagat. But such are exceptions.
>
> What shri shankara is saying when jagat is mithyA (as I understand)
> is jagat, apart from brahman, is mithyA. Jagat as brahman exists,
> because brahman exists. Brahman is homogeneous with no separations.
> So, names and forms do not exist in brahman. If we see jagat as
> without names and forms, yes, it is real. But if we see jagat as
> of names and forms, then it is mithyA.
>
> In spite of what shri Sadananda said earlier (in another thread)
> about re-incarnation of debates, I am sure he agrees this debate
> is the essence of advaita and is useful for clarifications.
>
> Regards
> Gummuluru Murthy

namaste.

There are two aspects to the jagat. The one, of name and form,
created by Ishwara. There is absolutely no problem with that
jagat. In addition to that, we have the other one created by
us, the one of pairs of opposites. This is the problem jagat,
the problem being taking these pairs of opposites to be real.
Even if we do not take them to be real, still swayed by them
because of our avidyA.

Now, coming to what shri Frank (and earlier Vivekananda Centre)
was saying: Shri Frank and I had this discussion many times;
the following is my understanding.

Jagat as brahman is real; jagat as jagat (viewed in isolation
apart from brahman) is one of names and forms and that is not
real. Now, when we see jagat, how do we see it? Is it as jagat
(of names and forms) or as brahman? Our immediate instinct is
to see it as jagat only. Even when we constantly contemplate
on brahman, even then, unless our ignorance is fully and
permanently removed, our instinct is to see jagat as jagat
only, and not as brahman. We have intellectual knowledge that
it is brahman. But that knowledge is still not a digested
Knowledge. There may be some blessed souls among us who see
brahman when they see jagat. But such are exceptions.

What shri shankara is saying when jagat is mithyA (as I understand)
is jagat, apart from brahman, is mithyA. Jagat as brahman exists,
because brahman exists. Brahman is homogeneous with no separations.
So, names and forms do not exist in brahman. If we see jagat as
without names and forms, yes, it is real. But if we see jagat as
of names and forms, then it is mithyA.

In spite of what shri Sadananda said earlier (in another thread)
about re-incarnation of debates, I am sure he agrees this debate
is the essence of advaita and is useful for clarifications.


Regards
Gummuluru Murthy
---------------------------------------------------------------------