pUrNamadah pUrNamidam... revisited (April 04 topic)

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskarji.

 

Your post 21829.

 

Sorry for the delay.

 

I can understand your concern about the real and unreal. I do

remember the profound debate you and Chittaranjanji had on that topic

some time back and that then Chittaranjanji recommended postponing

further discussions to a later date for a scheduled month-long

discussion.

 

Without, therefore, jeopardizing the prospect of a wonderful

discussion guided by Chittranjanji later, may I say a few words about

the real and unreal to the extent relevant to pUrNamadah.

 

There seems to be some confusion about the way you use the word

unreal. Let us begin from real.

 

Advaitically, the Ultimate is the only Real. That is the THAT (adah)

of pUrNamadah, i.e. Brahman. The idam (idam sarvam or idam viswam –

universe) that appears to spring forth from adah is non-real, not

unreal. The word for non-real in vEdAnta is miTyA. Even a mirage is

miTyA as it is an experienced objectification when it lasts. Our

internal world is also miTyA. All these constitute the universe

(idam).

 

Something that doesn't have existence even as miTyA is to be known as

unreal – like the son of a barren woman. But, we have to remember

that the thought of the impossible son of a barren woman, when it

occurs in our mind, is miTyA by virtue of being a thought like other

thoughts which are all miTyA.

 

Thus, the non-real is neither real nor unreal. It is an apparence

that has full vyAvahAric validity. What sustains its validity is the

essence of it – which is the Real. So, Brahman is, miTyA is or the

universe is; like gold is, ornaments are. The reverse miTyA or

universe is, Brahman is cannot be true.

 

When I say "this one-without-a-second universe", what I actually mean

is the advaitic Real (Brahman) in and behind the seeming plurality of

the universe that seems to give birth to the universe and sustains

it. It is not the plurality of miTyA that is called one-without-a-

second. It is the inherent infinity that is unity remaining hidden

in and behind the plurality of miTyA that is one-without-a-second.

Thus, when the sense of plurality in miTyA resulting from non-

apprehension of Reality is negated or removed, the erstwhile miTyA

itself shines forth as the Real.

 

Once we have this advaitic understanding, then we can't help seeing

that infinity in all the seeming divisions. Thus, the mountain is

Real or Brahman, the ant is Brahman, all names and forms are verily

Brahman. Then what to speak of the universe logically understood as

one infinite unity. Since there can't then be several universes,

that infinte universe is verily Brahman and, therefore, one without a

second. Thus, idam is pUrNam.

 

I see that you have quoted an awesome lot from a variety of sources.

I am not very comfortable with the English translations provided.

Neither am I competent with the Sanskrit originals. I would,

therefore, expect knowledgeable seniors like Sadaji and Sunderji to

help you correlate the import of your quotes with the general

advaitic understanding elaborated by me above, that is, if at all, I

am right'.

 

You are absolutely right in expecting the nAma-rUpa miTyA to vanish

without a trace at the dawn of Truth like the snake is no more when

the reality of the rope is apprehended. From recorded testimonies by

our rishIs, that I believe is what happens in nirvikalpa samAdhi.

Nirvikalpa samAdhi therefore is a pointer for the ignorant like us

that the Truth lies in the direction of advaita. The million dollar

question that bothers you then is why those who enter such samAdhi

returns to the world of duality - why not duality immediately and

irreversibly erased.

 

In my opinion, that is a very irrelevant question. Who is asking the

question? Bhaskarji. Bhaskarji witnesses a so-called self-realized

being going into samAdhi and later coming out claiming that the world

disappeared during samAdhi. In other words, Bhaskarji sees another

person pointing at a snake and assuring him that it is just a rope.

However, Bhaskarji still sees a snake and is petrified. Stop seeing

the snake Bhaskarji. You will see the rope. When you see the rope,

will you try in vain to tell me that there is no snake. I don't

think you will because then you don't have to `tell' me as I will be

you.

 

What I am trying to say is that even nirvikalpa samAdhi belongs to

the realm of miTyA. So also all teachers of vEdanta, claimants to

jnAna, all the enlightened ones because 'unrealized' Bhaskarji sees

them all. But Bhaskarji IS, the miTyA they all together constitute

is. It is not the other way around. Thus, Bhaskarji is the

Reality. As long as 'unrealized' Bhaskarji runs about looking for a

satisfactory resolution to his non-existent apparent problem, he will

remain alienated from the Real Bhaskarji. The apparent problem is

erected and sustained by Bhaskarji. Its resolution, therefore, is

within him and not in an apparent outside inhabited by

Chittaranjanji, Nairji et al. VedAntA can only say this much. It

cannot give him a vyAvahAric solution to the problem in the manner of

a mathematical work-out.

 

Let us, therefore, contemplate on and understand the common-sense and

logic inherent in vEdAntic statements, have full faith in them and

endeavour to be everything in this Infinity called the universe.

There is nothing to hope or look for beyond that because then we are

one with our real nature from/to which there is nothing to take

away/add. Thus the nAma-rUpa universe is not removed. It resolves

into our being. Only the misunderstanding that erects nAma-rUpa on

the ever Infinite universe creating separation thereby is done away

with, when it shines as the Real, which is me.

 

Hope I am clear, Bhaskarji.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Namaste Dennisji.

 

Thank you for sending in the extract from your book. It is a great

help to those who would like to dissect, think and assmilate the

profound import of the verse.

 

Both Sw. Chinmayanandaji and Sw. Dayananadaji have interpreted the

word AdAya to imply subtraction and addition. You seem to have

accepted only subtraction. Opposing meanings, in my opinion, adds

to the profundity of the verse. But, is it grammatically justified?

Would you or Sunderji like to elaborate on this?

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

___________________

 

 

advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@a...> wrote:

.....AdAya at the end of a

> word has the sense of 'taking or seizing' so the two words together

> literally mean 'taking the perfect of perfect'. ................

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Bhaskarji.

>

> Your post 21829.

> to

> help you correlate the import of your quotes with the general

> advaitic understanding elaborated by me above, that is, if at all,

> I am right'.

 

Namaste,

 

It cannot be emphasised enough that the clarity of

understanding the identity of the efficient and material cause or

('jIvaH brahma eva na aparaH'), progresses proportionally to the

perfection of one's 'sadhana-chatushtaya', and only the individual

oneself can know of this progress.

 

Gita 2:52-53

 

yadaa te mohakalilaM buddhirvyatitarishhyati .

tadaa gantaasi nirvedaM shrotavyasya shrutasya cha .. 2\-52..

 

shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa .

samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogamavaapsyasi .. 2\-53..

 

This is followed by Arjuna's question on how one of steady wisdom

(sthitaprjna) behaves, and Krishna's reply.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

The beauty of this Shanti Mantra from the Isavasya Upanishad has been

well stated by Sri Nair and other participants of this month's topic.

This Shanti mantra spells out the manifested and un-manifested forms

of Truth without using names and forms. "This is perfect. That is

perfect. Perfection is manifested from the Perfect. When this

perfection is taken from the Perfect, the Perfect still remains."

Besides the above literal translation of the verse, we can

interchange the equivalent words – perfect, complete and truth

appropriately. Two potential translations are provided below to

illustrate the depth of the buried truth under the above powerful

Shanti Mantra:

 

Alternate version 1: "This is Truth. That is Truth. Truth is

manifested from the Truth. When any part of Truth is taken from the

Truth, Truth still remains!"

 

Alternate version 2; "Truth is Perfect and Perfect is the Truth.

Perfect is the manifestation of the Truth. When Perfect is manifested

from the Truth, Truth still remains"

 

Our mission of life is to become `perfect' and everyone appreciates

the art of perfection. I believe that the art of communicating our

ideas without offending someone though difficult is feasible and

beneficial. More important, any efforts that we put on this direction

can help us to develop the attitude to mutually respect other

viewpoints whether we agree or disagree. Perfection in discussions do

not imply that we agree on everything someone says or writes.

Perfection in the art of communication implies that we should express

our disagreements politely and firmly. When we read someone's

viewpoint posted on the list, if it appears with a flaw, there can be

three potential possibilities – (1) the expressed viewpoint is

erroneous, (2) the expressed viewpoint is valid but our understanding

is erroneous, and (3) the expressed viewpoint is valid within a

restricted framework of understanding. The art of perfection is to

read others' viewpoints more carefully and less critically! As a

matter of fact, mistakes or stupid ideas do not stay all the time

with one person and they have the tendency to move from person to

person at every opportune moment! Intelligent ideas also do not

become the sole property of one person. The person who is considered

the most intelligent is equally liable to become the most stupid. As

seekers of the Truth, we are obligated to take special efforts to

get `full' understanding of the viewpoints expressed by others.

 

Historically it was a common practice for Vedic scholars (including

Shankara) to participate in philosophical debates in the public. The

scholars engaged in meaningful discussions and debates have undergone

formal training in `tarka sastra' (expression of viewpoints with

logical coherence and consistency). In all public debates, rights and

wrongs are openly exchanged and expressed. The point-counter points

and the extent of tarka sastra that went in the analysis have been

well documented in the Vedantic literature. There is nothing unusual

in pointing out someone is wrong using logical means where

appropriate. The scholars were fully aware that logic alone can

never resolve all the outstanding philosophical issues.

 

All discussants in forums like the advaitin list should also become

familiar with two key terms – kutarka and vitanda. Here is my

understanding of these terms: Kutarka is the technique generally

applied by ego centered scholars to use their knowledge and skills of

communication to discredit the viewpoints expressed by others. Mostly

the kutarkis (those who apply the kutarka) will not hesitate to

change their logic quite often because their only goal is to

discredit others. From the Vedic time peirod, discussions are

classified by Samvada, Vada, Jalpa and Vitanda. Vitanda is the least

preferred and recognized among the above four employed with the sole

purpose to defeat the opponent. Those who employ Vitanda do not have

any conviction and only purpose of vitanda is to invalidate any

established position. It is important for all of us to know the

pitfalls of kutarka and vitanda so that we avoid employing those ill-

suited techniques for discussions focusing on `Seeking the Truth.'

 

Hopefully, our understanding of the Isavasya Shanthi Mantra will help

us recognize that `perfection' is our True Divine Nature!

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri sri Ramachandra !

 

spoken like a true jnani!

 

I take my 'hats' off to you for stating your views in this wonderful

manner!

 

Yes! Indeed! communication is an 'art' and you just made it into

a 'science' as well!

 

please read my earlier post where i have hinted that we should

avoid 'vivadam' and only indulge in 'samvadam' and we shoulkd engaze

in 'tarka' and not kutarka ! you have even gone a step further and

presented your ideas beautifully as a moderator without taking sides!

 

This a beautiful forum and i am so glad to be part of it

where 'ignorants' like me learn so much from knoweldgeble people like

Sadanandaji, Harshaji, benjaminji, nairji, maniji, ranjitji,

chitranjanji, michaelji, my own balaji, professorji, kathiresanji and

others whose names i cannot readily recall!

 

folks, only a lit candle can light another ! in this cyber temple

dedicated to shri shankara bhagvadapada, let us be a Guiding light

for one another in the spiritual path!

 

love always

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Dennisji.

>

> Thank you for sending in the extract from your book. It is a great

> help to those who would like to dissect, think and assmilate the

> profound import of the verse.

>

> Both Sw. Chinmayanandaji and Sw. Dayananadaji have interpreted the

> word AdAya to imply subtraction and addition. You seem to have

> accepted only subtraction. Opposing meanings, in my opinion, adds

> to the profundity of the verse. But, is it grammatically justified?

> Would you or Sunderji like to elaborate on this?

 

Namaste Madathilji,

 

Grammatically it would appear not justified! avashiShyate means

remains; remainder can only be applied to subtraction! If addition

were to be implied, a different verb is needed to replace it.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Thank you sri sri Ramachandranji fir a well-written post.

 

Nectarean words.

 

Communication is an art, as you so rightly pointed out.By this post,

you have demonstrated that Communication is a science as well.

 

Forums like these exist beacause different members can come forward

and express their views fearlessly. No only that for an exchange of

ideas and transfer of knowledge . WE may all agree to disagree .

There is a famous saying which goes thus" whenever there are six

economists, there are seven opinions."

 

Everyone has their own needs and expectations and they join such a

group to serve their own needs.

 

I had also pointed out in an earlier post that we should encourage "

samvadam" (meaningful dialogue) and avoid Vivadham( arguments) and we

can indulge in Tarka (debates) but not in KU-TARKA ( VERBAL

BATTLES) . You have also expressed this same sentiment but more

eloquently.

 

Who is intelligent and who is stupid? WE all know the story of

Anandagiri, one of adi shankara's disciples. He was considered

rather 'slow on the uptake' and other disciples of shankara used to

ridicule him . But Anandagiri was a 'model' disciple who served his

master well. HE always walked behind adi shankara reverentially and

served Adi shankara day and night .One day Anandagiri was late for

class and adi shankara refused to begin the Class without

Anandagiri. One day, Anandagiri took longer than usual time for his

bath, keeping everyone waiting for him. His co-disciples kept on

prodding Sri Shankaracharya to start the lesson, but the teacher

insisted that they all wait. When Sri Anandagiri finally arrived, the

teacher asked him to recite what he has learned till then. At this,

Sri Anandagiri composed 8 beautiful verses extempore in the rather

difficult Totaka meter, summarizing the entire doctrine of Advaita

Vedanta in a very skillful manner. All his co-disciples were

wonderstruck, and Sri Shankaracharya proved his point--that they

should not have judged Sri Anandagiri from his mere demeanor. The

last verse might be considered as an allusion to the supposed

mediocre scholarship of Sri Totakacharya and his teacher's grace upon

him.

 

viditá na mayá viùadaikakalá

na ca kimcana káòcanamasti guro

drutameva vidhehi køpám sahajám

bhava ùañkara deùika me ùaraïam.(8)

 

Not even a single branch of knowledge has been understood by me

correctly. Not even the least wealth do I possess, O Teacher. Bestow

on me quickly Thy natural grace. Be thou my refuge, O Master Sañkara!

 

THE POINT IS with guru's grace, even a stupid disciple can become

knowledgeble...

 

In vaishnavism, it is said whenever you take God's name, one should

be humbler than a 'straw' (trinapi sunichena)

 

As long as there is 'vinaya(humility) , one can gain knowledge and

understanding .... and what is dry knowledge anyway? if i can quote

all adwaita scriptures, does it mean I am more adwaitic than somebody

who cannot quote adwaitic texts? I don't think so!

 

we are all here to enjoy the full benefits of a SAT-SANGH! in a

satsangh, there will be different personalities - some over-bearing,

some know-it-all types, some meek and some daring, some boring etc...

The idea is to be like a 'swan' take the Good, ignore the bad and be

indifferent to negativity!

 

love and blessings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <RamChandran@a...>

wrote:

> Namaste:

>

> The beauty of this Shanti Mantra from the Isavasya Upanishad has

been

> well stated by Sri Nair and other participants of this month's

topic.

> This Shanti mantra spells out the manifested and un-manifested

forms

> of Truth without using names and forms. "This is perfect. That is

> perfect. Perfection is manifested from the Perfect. When this

> perfection is taken from the Perfect, the Perfect still remains."

> Besides the above literal translation of the verse, we can

> interchange the equivalent words – perfect, complete and truth

> appropriately. Two potential translations are provided below to

> illustrate the depth of the buried truth under the above powerful

> Shanti Mantra:

>

> Alternate version 1: "This is Truth. That is Truth. Truth is

> manifested from the Truth. When any part of Truth is taken from the

> Truth, Truth still remains!"

>

> Alternate version 2; "Truth is Perfect and Perfect is the Truth.

> Perfect is the manifestation of the Truth. When Perfect is

manifested

> from the Truth, Truth still remains"

>

> Our mission of life is to become `perfect' and everyone appreciates

> the art of perfection. I believe that the art of communicating our

> ideas without offending someone though difficult is feasible and

> beneficial. More important, any efforts that we put on this

direction

> can help us to develop the attitude to mutually respect other

> viewpoints whether we agree or disagree. Perfection in discussions

do

> not imply that we agree on everything someone says or writes.

> Perfection in the art of communication implies that we should

express

> our disagreements politely and firmly. When we read someone's

> viewpoint posted on the list, if it appears with a flaw, there can

be

> three potential possibilities – (1) the expressed viewpoint is

> erroneous, (2) the expressed viewpoint is valid but our

understanding

> is erroneous, and (3) the expressed viewpoint is valid within a

> restricted framework of understanding. The art of perfection is to

> read others' viewpoints more carefully and less critically! As a

> matter of fact, mistakes or stupid ideas do not stay all the time

> with one person and they have the tendency to move from person to

> person at every opportune moment! Intelligent ideas also do not

> become the sole property of one person. The person who is

considered

> the most intelligent is equally liable to become the most stupid.

As

> seekers of the Truth, we are obligated to take special efforts to

> get `full' understanding of the viewpoints expressed by others.

>

> Historically it was a common practice for Vedic scholars (including

> Shankara) to participate in philosophical debates in the public.

The

> scholars engaged in meaningful discussions and debates have

undergone

> formal training in `tarka sastra' (expression of viewpoints with

> logical coherence and consistency). In all public debates, rights

and

> wrongs are openly exchanged and expressed. The point-counter points

> and the extent of tarka sastra that went in the analysis have been

> well documented in the Vedantic literature. There is nothing

unusual

> in pointing out someone is wrong using logical means where

> appropriate. The scholars were fully aware that logic alone can

> never resolve all the outstanding philosophical issues.

>

> All discussants in forums like the advaitin list should also become

> familiar with two key terms – kutarka and vitanda. Here is my

> understanding of these terms: Kutarka is the technique generally

> applied by ego centered scholars to use their knowledge and skills

of

> communication to discredit the viewpoints expressed by others.

Mostly

> the kutarkis (those who apply the kutarka) will not hesitate to

> change their logic quite often because their only goal is to

> discredit others. From the Vedic time peirod, discussions are

> classified by Samvada, Vada, Jalpa and Vitanda. Vitanda is the

least

> preferred and recognized among the above four employed with the

sole

> purpose to defeat the opponent. Those who employ Vitanda do not

have

> any conviction and only purpose of vitanda is to invalidate any

> established position. It is important for all of us to know the

> pitfalls of kutarka and vitanda so that we avoid employing those

ill-

> suited techniques for discussions focusing on `Seeking the Truth.'

>

> Hopefully, our understanding of the Isavasya Shanthi Mantra will

help

> us recognize that `perfection' is our True Divine Nature!

>

> Warmest regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sunderji.

 

Thanks for the clarification. You have a very strong case there

in 'avashiSyatE'

 

Sw. Dayananda Saraswathiji's words in this context are unambiguous.

He says:

 

"AdAya can mean either taking away from or adding to - both meanings

are in the *verbal root* (asterisks mine) and both meanings have

relevance in the verse."

 

Can any Member of this List having close association with Swamiji or

Arsha Vidya PeeT please get this point further clarified. I am also

trying my best. As Sw. Chinamayaji has also found the same meanings

in th word, a clarification from the Chinmaya Group or our Sadaji

will also be very helpful.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

___________________

 

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh>

wrote:

> Grammatically it would appear not justified! avashiShyate

means

> remains; remainder can only be applied to subtraction! If addition

> were to be implied, a different verb is needed to replace it.

[Guest guest]

Endaro mahaanubhaavaulu, andariki vandanamu,

 

may i please interpose?

i am hereby taking the liberty of interposing

into shri. ram chandran ji's excellent exposition.

 

 

> Alternate version 2; "Truth is Perfect and Perfect

> is the Truth.

> Perfect is the manifestation of the Truth. When

> Perfect is manifested

> from the Truth, Truth still remains"

 

the ultimate knowledge of the self alone is

truth. the one who realizes this knowledge [ truth]

becomes " realised", and then has the knowledge of the

BRAHMAN!

then he enters the state of "aham brahmaasmi".

knowledge of the " self" alone is "VIDYA".

EVERYTHING ELSE IS " AVIDYA".

if therefore, we extrapolate POORNAM to PERFECT,

thence to TRUTH, i will then extend it to " SELF ".

let me now re-render it as :

 

" self is perfect , and perfect is self.

perfect is the manifestation of self.

when perfect is manifested from the self,

self still remains. "

 

here, " self " could be read as " knowledge of

self", or the ultimate " consciousness", or shall i

venture to say " BRAHMAN "?

with pranams,

a.v.krshnan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_________

WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Mail Internet Cafe

Awards www..co.uk/internetcafes

[Guest guest]

praNAm Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Thanks for your kind reply. Since you have suggested subsequent month for

the more detailed discussion on jagat satyatva vAda in brahman, I'd just

like to make some points for your consideration. As you said, I do agree,

I may be having some fanciful ideas on unreality of jagat as against

shankara's advaita siddhAnta. But, I earnestly request the learned members

of this list to guide me the exact references of shankara where he says

jagat is pUrNa & has the eternal reality. If the members interested, I'd

like to take up this topic with the help of GaudapAdAchArya's mAndukya

kArika, shankara's kArikA bhAshya & sureshwara's vArtika on bruhadAraNyaka

upanishad. I think, before arriving any tangible solution to this problem,

we've to study the avasthAtraya prakriya in detail.

 

Further prabhuji, I agree with what you have detailed in your mail. It is

possible to reconcile the apparent contradictions in the major upanishads

with regard to the model of creation only & only we realise that the main

purport of shruti is Atmaikatva & not holding the eternal reality of jagat.

The same has been justified through the method of adhyArOpApavAda by

shruti-s & shankara has elaborated this in his bhAshya-s. The substratum,

Brahma or Atma is "Sat." The world is only relatively real - it has only

transactional reality from the *empirical point of view. The defination of

Sat vastu is: "that which remains the same in the three periods of time -

past, present, and future.(trikAla abhAdita satyam)" As we all know, only

Atma/Brahma satisfies this defination. World is constantly changing - that

which keeps changing is known as "Jagat!" As you said, world is not

"unreal." - it is apparently real! - just as a dream is real as long as one

is dreaming! What remains unchanged (sat) in the three states (waking, deep

sleep, and dream) is only the witness - the sAkshi chEtaH i.e. Atman! That

is why shruti gives us the example of a pot, in that the name & form is

impermanent, but the material of which the pot is made is "sat."

Therefore,only the substratum of this univerese, Brahma/Atma, is "sat."

nothing else. After all, the striking simple question before advaitin is

*where is this world in sushupti??*

 

We can discuss this in a more comprehensive manner when this topic comes

for month long discussion.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

PS: In the meanwhile, Sri Ramachandra prabhuji replied in this same thread

by saying some valuable points about kutarka & vitanda vAda. prabhuji, I

really donot know what makes him to bring these points when asked for

senior members intervention. Prabhuji, if at all my mails giving such an

impression kindly pardon me. I am raising these points with an earnest

hope to learn intricacies of advaita in a detailed manner. I humbly

request moderators of this forum to let me know if my mails are out of

context & sprout out of kutarka/vitanda, I'd stop my postings at once.

[Guest guest]

adi shakti ji, nair ji,

the flame in the deepam has no

direction. as an archa murthy, the deepam has no

attribute.

more than any moortham, more than any

picture, it is the upright flame of the deepam that

one worships as representing the form.

in chidambaram, the moortham is the

chid aakasha-- the nirguna brahmam-- nay the aakasa of

the mind- - the consciousness.

in Oachira mahadevar kshetram in

kerala, the moortham again is formless, just empty

space!.

THE SANATANI starts his schooling by

playing with unni krishnan/nanda lala/ the baby

balakrishna / promotes himself for loving with raadha

and krishna ,a-la-jayadeva's ashtapadi /, graduates to

manhood with rama and lakshmana and sita devi /gets

into grihastaashrama with siva and parvati and ganesha

and suBRAHMANya / enters enlightenment with

mahaavishnu / and attains nirguna brahmam with

vanaprastham. and all along, he has his kind mother

,SHRI MATHA PARAASHAKTI guiding AND SUPPORTING him !.

no need, therefore benjamin ji to

wonder where from comes this ease OF SWITCHING BETWEEN

saguna and nirguna brahman!.

 

a.v.krshnan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_________

WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Mail Internet Cafe

Awards www..co.uk/internetcafes

[Guest guest]

Thank you so much for this lovely analogy -

 

the flame in the deepam has no direction. as an archa murthy, the

deepam has no attribute.

more than any moortham, more than any picture, it is the upright

flame of the deepam that one worships as representing the form.

 

I can relate to what you are staying.

 

FROM SAGUNA WORSHIP ONE PROCEEDS TO NIRGUNA WORSHIP AS SHRI

RAMAKRISHNA PARAMAHAMSA DID ...

 

OR

 

from nirguna worship one can revert to saguna worship as Totapuri

(ramakrishna's guru) did ...

 

Para-bhakti and para-jnana are one and the same!

 

 

akShayam karma yasmin pare svarpitam

prakShayam yAnti duhkhAni yannAmatah |

akSharo yo'jarah sarvadaivAmRtah

kukShigam yasya viSvam sadAjAdikam |

prINayAmo vAsudevam

devatAmaNDalAkhaNDamaNDanam ||

 

By dedicating work to Whom it becomes imperishable, by uttering Whose

names miseries melt away, Who is indestructible, undecaying, the

nectar of divinity, in Whose belly lies the universe beginning with

Brahma, and Who is the integral ornament of the assemblage of all

gods, we propitiate that VAsudeva.

 

Aum namo bhagvate Vasudevaya!

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskar Prabhuji:

 

Please note that my posting was focusing on this month's theme -

perfection and I chose to explain 'perfection in communication.'

Your query confirms that I need to pay more attention to improve my

communication skills! My comments were very general and it was more

like 'helpful hints for meaningful discussion.' My posting was not

pointing to any individual in particular and let me aplogize if that

gave such an impression.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

>

> PS: In the meanwhile, Sri Ramachandra prabhuji replied in this

same thread

> by saying some valuable points about kutarka & vitanda vAda.

prabhuji, I

> really donot know what makes him to bring these points when asked

for

> senior members intervention.

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

Here is another version to suit the preference of my friend, Sri

Benjamin:

 

"Consciousness is perfect, and perfect is consciousness. perfect is

the manifestation of consciousness. When perfect is manifested from

the consciousness, consciousness still remains!"

 

Also,

"Consciousness is Self, and Self is consciousness. self is the

manifestation of consciousness. When self is manifested from the

consciousness, consciousness still remains!"

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, av krshnan <avkrshnan> wrote:

> " self is perfect , and perfect is self.

> perfect is the manifestation of self.

> when perfect is manifested from the self,

> self still remains. "

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskarji,

 

My comments are in parentheses .

 

 

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

> But, I earnestly request the learned members

> of this list to guide me the exact references of shankara where he

says

> jagat is pUrNa & has the eternal reality.

 

[isn't the 'pUrNamidam' statement in the verse under discussion

sufficient? I am sure Sankara had also chanted that verse umpteen

number of times with full conviction!]

 

> If the members interested, I'd

> like to take up this topic with the help of GaudapAdAchArya's

mAndukya

> kArika, shankara's kArikA bhAshya & sureshwara's vArtika on

bruhadAraNyaka

> upanishad. I think, before arriving any tangible solution to this

problem,

> we've to study the avasthAtraya prakriya in detail.

 

[We would be delighted if you do initiate such a discussion.

Sunderji, kindly note and grant Bhaskarji an appropriate date.]

 

>

> Further prabhuji, I agree with what you have detailed in your mail.

It is

> possible to reconcile the apparent contradictions in the major

upanishads

> with regard to the model of creation only & only we realise that

the main

> purport of shruti is Atmaikatva & not holding the eternal reality

of jagat.

 

[Why should we reconcile contradictions if they are only apparent?

Then, we need only see through them. I don't find any difference

between atmaikatva and the eternal reality of jagat. By using the

word eternal, you have implied jagat's infinitude. Infinitude is

fullness and, therefore, the one-without-a-second Atman!]

 

> The same has been justified through the method of adhyArOpApavAda by

> shruti-s & shankara has elaborated this in his bhAshya-s. The

substratum,

> Brahma or Atma is "Sat." The world is only relatively real - it has

only

> transactional reality from the *empirical point of view. The

defination of

> Sat vastu is: "that which remains the same in the three periods of

time -

> past, present, and future.(trikAla abhAdita satyam)" As we all

know, only

> Atma/Brahma satisfies this defination. World is constantly

changing - that

> which keeps changing is known as "Jagat!" As you said, world is not

> "unreal." - it is apparently real! - just as a dream is real as

long as one

> is dreaming! What remains unchanged (sat) in the three states

(waking, deep

> sleep, and dream) is only the witness - the sAkshi chEtaH i.e.

Atman! That

> is why shruti gives us the example of a pot, in that the name &

form is

> impermanent, but the material of which the pot is made is "sat."

> Therefore,only the substratum of this univerese, Brahma/Atma,

is "sat."

> nothing else. After all, the striking simple question before

advaitin is

> *where is this world in sushupti??*

>

> We can discuss this in a more comprehensive manner when this topic

comes

> for month long discussion.

 

[You were to lead an adhyAropa discussion. What happened? You

define sad-vastu because you are in the transactional, which now has

three apparent components - the sad-vastu sadly objectified and

defined in your effort to understand it, the asat jagat of plurality

and the asat limited you. If you are sure that only sad-vastu

remains when you go to sleep, you have then understood pUrNamadah

very well. It is the same sad-vastu that apparently presents before

you as the limited you in a limited, ever-changing jagat. If you

understand this, then the jagat with you in its fold, which cannot be

anything but infinite, is essentially full. This is the pUrNamidam.

The reason: Even as asat, it cannot have an existence aside or apart

from sat. If it has, then sat cannot be fullness. It, therefore,

derives that asat, but for its apparent dualistic appearance,

resulting from misapprehension on part of the limited you, who again

is a part of asat, is sat. Asat as such is not, therefore, to be

negated. Only the erroneous understanding of it as dual and other

than you needs correction. Then it is pUrNa. When you sleep, this

pUrNa jagat together with the limited you is taken away - yet, the

sad-vastu pUrNa remains. The truth is that at no time anything is

ever added or removed to or from pUrnA because that is an

impossibility. This means that there is no change actually taking

place. Perception of change and multiplicity is, therefore, an

error. Where is the changing jagat then that bothers you so much vis

a vis the unchanging sat? The changing jagat is the sad-vastu sadly

misunderstood. Remove the misunderstanding - then jagat is sad-

vastu. PUrNamidam!]

 

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Here is my 2 cent attempt ...

 

Bliss is Supreme, and Supreme is Bliss. Supreme is the manifestation

of Bliss. When Supreme is manifested from Bliss, bliss still remains.

 

here, i have equated Perfect with supreme ! who else is perfect

except The supreme paramatma?

 

 

 

advaitam achyutam anadim ananta-rupam

 

adyam purana-purusham navayauvanam cha

 

vedesu durlabham adurlabham atma-bhaktau

 

govindam adi-purusham tam aham bhajami

 

 

 

 

I worship Govinda, the Primeval Lord, Who is inaccessible to the

Vedas, but obtainable by pure unalloyed devotion of the soul, Who is

without a second, Who is not subject to decay and is without a

beginning, Whose Form is endless, Who is the beginning, Whose Form is

endless, Who is the beginning, and the eternal Purusha; yet He is a

Person possessing the beauty of blooming youth

 

enjoy the bliss !

[Guest guest]

PRANAMS TO All.

when one begins any pooja or ritual,

the first, opening worship is to the

self, aatma pooja, saying :

" aatmane nama ha

nityaatmane nama ha

sarvaatmane nama ha

paramaatmane nama ha ".

it is thence that one goes on to perform

the kalasha pooja, vighna vinayaka pooja -- and then

proceeds to the appointed pooja.

THAT IS,

ONE BEGINS THE DAILY WORSHIP WITH THE

WORSHIP OF THE NIRGUNA BRAHMAN,

DOES AAVAAHANAM AND WORSHIP OF THE SAGUNA

BRAHMAN,

AND CONCLUDES WITH SURRENDERING ALL FRUITS

OF THE WORSHIP TO THE NIRGUNA BRAHMAN, with the

CLOSING STATEMENT " BRAHMARPNAM ASTHU".

 

how wonderful!!

 

ALSO,

in continuation of my reply to sri ram

chandran,

in poornamidam -----

read " aatman idam ---" in place of "

poornamidam---- ",

and we find everything falling in place!!.

yes?

 

brahmaarpanamastu!

 

with pranams,

a.v.krshnan.

 

 

 

 

--- adi_shakthi16 <adi_shakthi16 wrote: >

Thank you so much for this lovely analogy -

>

> the flame in the deepam has no direction. as an

> archa murthy, the

> deepam has no attribute.

> more than any moortham, more than any picture, it

> is the upright

> flame of the deepam that one worships as

> representing the form.

>

> I can relate to what you are staying.

>

> FROM SAGUNA WORSHIP ONE PROCEEDS TO NIRGUNA WORSHIP

> AS SHRI

> RAMAKRISHNA PARAMAHAMSA DID ...

>

> OR

>

> from nirguna worship one can revert to saguna

> worship as Totapuri

> (ramakrishna's guru) did ...

>

> Para-bhakti and para-jnana are one and the same!

>

>

> akShayam karma yasmin pare svarpitam

> prakShayam yAnti duhkhAni yannAmatah |

> akSharo yo'jarah sarvadaivAmRtah

> kukShigam yasya viSvam sadAjAdikam |

> prINayAmo vAsudevam

> devatAmaNDalAkhaNDamaNDanam ||

>

> By dedicating work to Whom it becomes imperishable,

> by uttering Whose

> names miseries melt away, Who is indestructible,

> undecaying, the

> nectar of divinity, in Whose belly lies the

> universe beginning with

> Brahma, and Who is the integral ornament of the

> assemblage of all

> gods, we propitiate that VAsudeva.

>

> Aum namo bhagvate Vasudevaya!

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

__________

Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"

your friends today! Download Messenger Now

http://uk.messenger./download/index.html

[Guest guest]

Hi Nairji,

 

Swami Chinmayananda in his commentary on the Isavasya Upanishad translates

AdAya as 'is negated' in his word by word translation at the beginning of

his commentary. Later he quotes: "When this Whole is *taken out* of that

Whole, the Whole remains". In explanation, he says that when we see the

pluralistic finite world rising out of the infinite, we might be tempted to

think that perhaps the cause has died away in consequence, i.e. a

transformation of Brahman, the cause, into the world, the effect. He says:

"This great doubt is being negated by the seer of the Upanishad... even

after the production of the finite the Infinite remains uncontaminated and

unchanged". (He uses the metaphor of the ghost apparently being created out

of the post but being only a superimposition.)

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

 

<<

Sw. Dayananda Saraswathiji's words in this context are unambiguous.

He says:

 

"AdAya can mean either taking away from or adding to - both meanings

are in the *verbal root* (asterisks mine) and both meanings have

relevance in the verse."

 

Can any Member of this List having close association with Swamiji or

Arsha Vidya PeeT please get this point further clarified. I am also

trying my best. As Sw. Chinamayaji has also found the same meanings

in th word, a clarification from the Chinmaya Group or our Sadaji

will also be very helpful.

>>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Nair,

 

I refer to your post addressed to Sunderji of Apr 4 .." Thanks for your words of

caution ..."

Could you kindly clarify what you mean by " right direction " .. this would be

of interest to many humble sadhakas like me !

Warm regards and pranams

S. Mohan

Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

Namaste Sunderji.

 

Thanks for your words of caution.

 

 

Purity of character and insight, I believe, are strongly interlinked

and directly proportional. The more a sAdhaka endeavours in the

right direction, insights just begin pouring over him. He then

doesn't have to struggle like logicians and theorizers.

 

Win an evening with the Indian cricket captain: India Promos.