Guest guest Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Namaste Kris, > Am I right in thinking that the contraction of > nirguna Brahman is, in fact, Shakti and the further > contraction of Shakti is our ego-mind? The modification of Nirguna Brahman (formless Self) to create a field of duality is Shakti. All further modifications in that field of duality to create various forms is also Shakti only, in Her various aspects. > Would you say that the 'witness', mind, consciousness > or whatever " label " we apply, is the state of nirguna Brahman, > Shakti or (at different times) both? The ego-mind or consciousness that experiences various objects in the field of duality is an aspect of Shakti. However, it is Nirguna Brahman too, just as everything else in the field of duality in reality is. So it is both! When the consciousness is in the state of Shakti (or modified Brahman), it experiences various dual objects in the field of duality and is aware of " self " also as an object in the same field. When the consciousness is in the state of unmodified nirguna Brahman, it is no longer aware of self as an object in the field of duality. It no longer experiences any objects in the field of duality. There is no longer any objectification and it no longer experiences a field of duality at all. After switching between the two states, the consciousness may reach a different state. In this state, consciousness is in the state of Shakti and unmodified nirguna Brahman at the same time. The consciousness experiences various objects in the field of duality and interacts with them. Yet, it is firmly rooted in the understanding that all those objects and their field of duality are actually modifications of nirguna Brahman only. This is a very very tough state to reach. Of course, even the state of nirguna Brahman (second state mentioned above) is tough to reach, but the third one is tougher. * * * Rishis do not denounce Maya ( " field of duality " which is the basis of all " experience " ). The very word Maya is translated as " delusion " , which has a negative connotation. In fact, there is no perfect equivalent of that word in English. While some may look down upon Maya, a rishi does not dismiss Maya and does not talk about " overcoming " Maya! A rishi talks about realizing that Maya is just a modification of nirguna Brahman. A rishi looks to reach the third state I mentioned above. Thus, one can operate in the field of duality without losing the understanding of the underlying nondual Self. Such a person does not give up action in the field of duality and acts and interacts with the objects of that field (and yet free from reactions to those actions and the bondage caused). Just as a bird flies with two wings, such a person flies with the dual wings of knowledge and action. Neither knowledge is compromised nor action (in the field of duality) is sacrificed. Vasishtha taught the same to Rama in " Yoga Vaasishtham " . Krishna taught the same to Arjuna in " BhagavadGita " . If " action " is sacrificed or " Maya " is trivialized/denounced and the second state mentioned above is over-emphasized, the order in this dual world will be disturbed. That perhaps happened to some degree in the last couple of millennia. * * * I realize that this discussion may be difficult to follow for some. After all, it is not easy the express the essence of " Yoga Vaasishtham " in a few emails, though I tried like a fool. Please ignore this email then and instead read Yoga Vaasishtham and Upanishats. Experience is more important than scholarship or theoretical discussions. Certain things are only experienced and not learnt by reading or hearing. Yoga Vaasishtham is one rare book reading which can actually take a prepared person close to experiencing, but most books are not like that. Thus, spiritual sadhana is far more important than typing and reading emails like this. Satsang (good company) and discussions with learned people may help if one is also doing some sadhana. But sadhana is the key. Best regards, Narasimha ------------------------------- Homam manual and audio: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- - " shrivajra " <shrivajra <sivacharya > Wednesday, July 11, 2007 10:53 AM [sivacharya] Re: On Adwaitism, Shiva's Worship and Different Paths > Namaste Narasimha, > Many thanks for your clear reply - free > of metaphysical speculation and aimed at the > heart of the matter. > > I am beginning to understand where you stand > on this, but on one thing I am still unclear. > > Would you say that the 'witness', mind, consciousness > or whatever " label " we apply, is the state of nirguna Brahman, > Shakti or (at different times) both? > > Am I right in thinking that the contraction of > nirguna Brahman is, in fact, Shakti and the further > contraction of Shakti is our ego-mind? > > It seems our 'being' is capable of both contracting > to an individual ego or expanding through more > subtle levels of duality to the infinite. > > Best Regards > Kris > > sivacharya , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr wrote: >> >> Dear Kris, >> >> The Female element represents the Energy (Shakti). The desires, actions >> and >> knowledge of each being are caused by the movement of life force within >> that >> being, which is personified as a Female deity. If there is no energy, >> there >> is no movement of life force and there is nothing to desire or despise, >> nothing to do or avoid and nothing to know or ignore. We just have the >> singular non-duality and there is no field of duality then. It is the >> Shakti >> that gives birth (Mother!) to all desires, actions and knowledge and the >> field of apparent duality in which all desires, actions and knowledge >> operate. >> >> * * * >> >> >> Shiva is essentially nirguna Brahman, while Shakti is the energy that >> causes >> a movement in Brahman and gives birth to a field of duality. >> >> While Brahman (nondual reality) is ONE and only one, the field of duality >> has a lot of variety. The field of duality (also known as " maya " or >> " delusion " ) has scope for different types of desire, action and >> knowledge. >> The energies that cause different desires, different actions and >> different >> aspects of knowledge is personified as different female deities. >> >> You can also trace all those energies to the primordial energy that is >> the >> root of all energies in Brahman. However, at that stage, we are almost >> beyond names, gunas and depictions. >> >> * * * >> >> Even within each person, there are different Energies that cause >> different >> desires, actions and knowledge. But there is one root energy that causes >> a >> distinct identity in that person. All other energies stem from that >> energy. >> >> It is that root energy that creates the entire field of duality in which >> THAT person operates. This energy is the cause of the self-awareness or >> ego-consciousness in that person. This energy (that causes >> ego-consciousness) is also called " Kundalini shakti " . Instead of having >> no >> concept of self and no objectification and being immersed in the non-dual >> Brahman, due to this shakti, one views a part of Brahman as " self " with >> certain attributes, certain vasanas (mental conditioning) etc. This >> energy >> can either " bind " one to a limited concept of self or " liberate " one with >> an >> infinite concept of self. In most people, it is the former. >> >> One can view this shakti as a microcosmic representation of the Divine >> Mother within oneself. >> >> Best regards, >> Narasimha >> ------------------------------- >> Homam manual and audio: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam >> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net >> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org >> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org >> ------------------------------- >> >> - >> " shrivajra " <shrivajra >> <sivacharya > >> Monday, July 09, 2007 3:48 PM >> [sivacharya] Re: On Adwaitism, Shiva's Worship and Different >> Paths >> >> > Dear Narasimha, >> >> In both the paths, one overcomes the simple and finite concept of >> >> I-ness >> >> with something more infinite. >> > >> > Well said. >> > >> > May I ask another question? >> > >> > Whilst it seems that Shiva is a given constant his >> > partner is depicted in different ways. I have found >> > descriptions and images of Shiva in the company of >> > Shakti, Parvati and Kali. What is the significance of >> > the female in these various depictions? >> > >> > Regards >> > Kris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Namaste Mahahradanatha, You do not sign at the end of your emails and hence I do not know who you are. I am guessing your name from the email ID. If I am addressing you incorrectly, I am sorry. >> Many thanks for both replies which give a slightly >> differing perspective. > > It is not a slight but a a huge difference whether you consider shakti > as providing liberation from the fetters (as in the agamas) or as > being the cause and embodiment of ahamkara, i.e. avidya and delusion. > (as in vedanta) To be exact it is an 100% percent opposite view. The Shakti that binds one also liberates one. She is the one who puts a veil and she is the one who removes it. Thus, the vedantic view is not " 100% opposite " , but it actually encompasses the view you mention and captures additional aspects of Shakti ignored in the view you mention. Though She is referred to as " vidya avidya swarupini " (embodiment of all knowledge and ignorance), one may be comfortable worshipping certain aspects of Her and ignore others. Agamas are selective and offer a limited picture for practical utility, while vedanta is comprehensive and offers the big picture. I maintain that what you referred to as " vedanta viewpoint " , i.e. the teachings of maharshis, is actually the big picture that covers the essence of everything. Because it is very complex to understand and appreciate, some great teachers have taken limited aspects of the big picture and elaborated them so that more people can understand and appreciate it and make progress. Thus, I suggest that seemingly different viewpoints of different religious traditions originated from the same teachings of maharshis. Instead of approaching these view points with a " this OR that " attitude, I suggest approaching them with a " this AND that " attitude. The teachings of maharshis are the key in synthesizing everything. If you are convinced that the teachings of vedanta and the teachings of aagamas are totally different and that there is no commonality, then we can respectfully agree to disagree. Best regards, Narasimha ------------------------------- Homam manual and audio: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- ----- Original Message 2 ----- " mahahradanatha " <mahahradanatha <sivacharya > Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:25 PM [sivacharya] On Shakti and Brahman (Re: On Adwaitism...) > sivacharya , " shrivajra " <shrivajra wrote: >> >> Namaste Narasimha and Mahahradanatha, >> Many thanks for both replies which give a slightly >> differing perspective. > > It is not a slight but a a huge difference whether you consider shakti > as providing liberation from the fetters (as in the agamas) or as > being the cause and embodiment of ahamkara, i.e. avidya and delusion. > (as in vedanta) To be exact it is an 100% percent opposite view. > But too realise this is maybe also only possible when the Ahamkara is > absent and the blessing of anugraha shakti and shiva present in the > jiva. > > You can get futther insight into the basics of shaiva darshana here: > > http://www.bhagavadgitausa.com/primer_in_saiva_siddhanta.htm ----- Original Message 1 ----- " mahahradanatha " <mahahradanatha <sivacharya > Thursday, July 12, 2007 6:04 AM [sivacharya] On Shakti and Brahman (Re: On Adwaitism...) >I think it is necessary to remark that this exposition of yours is > based on the vedanta philosophy and only about 10% of all shaivas are > vedantins, the overwhelming majority has been and is following the > authority of the agama which differs considerably from the vedanta > viewpoint. > > In the agamas shakti is carrying out fivefold activity of shiva and > as the actor cannot be discerned from the act shakti is therefore non > differnt from shiva. > > The cause of maya (delusion) is avidya, (lack of knowledge) the cause > of avidya is ahamkara (ego). > > In the Agama Shakti is not the cause of maya or duality nor is shiva > it is a natural law that gives rise to ahamkara and avidya, > attachment aversion etc. > > If out of his fivefold activity he decides to veil his nature, > shakti appears as if she is deluding, if shiva decides to unveil his > nature this act appears in a form of shakti bestowing his grace > and knowledge. > > These rhytmic acts of unveiling and veiling his nature are a natural > phenomena like our heartbeat or breath, symbolised by the sound of > his damaru. > > That is why one needs only to return to ones own nature,and be > content, one cannot add or subtract anything from what is and all > that exists verily is only shiva. > > Following a natural cause delusion apears in the mind and will fall > of the mind on its own accord by that shakti (act) of grace of > shiva, (the actor and the act being one as said before) > > Qualification to realise the union of Shiva Shakti in this way (of > the agama) is not reached by ones own effort it will appear by the > act of the shakti alone in the field of consciousness no human effort > (of the ahamkara) whatsoever can generate it on the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Namaskaram, I apologize if I gave the impression that I was calling something " superior " and something else " inferior " . That was not my intention. I was only trying to say that seemingly different views in various Hindu traditions are not contradictory, but it is possible to synthesize all into one coherent understanding, based on the teachings of maharshis. One insect may sit on the trunk of an elephant and describe the elephant as it sees. Another insect may sit on the back of the same elephant and describe what it sees. Yet another insect may sit at the end of the tail of the same elephant and describe what it sees. And so on. Each insect may think that it is describing the elephant accurately. One can view the descriptions as being totally different and just select what one likes. Or one can synthesize them all into one understanding. In any case, I see your subtly made point about discussing Vedanta on a Shaiva list. So I will respectfully withdraw. However, before I withdraw, I want to point out that some views I have mentioned were explicitly taught by Lord Shiva Himself to Maharshi Vasishtha. My apologies if I ruffled any feathers with the Vedantic discussions in the last few days. Best regards, Narasimha ------------------------------- Homam manual and audio: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- - " mahahradanatha " <mahahradanatha <sivacharya > Friday, July 13, 2007 1:35 PM [sivacharya] On Shakti and Brahman (Re: On Adwaitism...) I don´t belive it is neccessary to discuss whether one darshana is superior and another one inferior it is sufficent for us to note that there are indeed great differences of opinion and practical approach between the darshanas. Because our discussion is happening in a mailing list called sivacharya i thought it is appropriate to remark that vedanta darshana is not the same as shaiva darshanas regarding their viewpoint on maya and shakti and less appropriate to praise the superiority of vedanta over agam. For a scholarly exposition on the differences please consult this webpage: http://www.koausa.org/Glimpses/Maya.html sivacharya , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr wrote: > > Namaste Mahahradanatha, > > You do not sign at the end of your emails and hence I do not know who you > are. I am guessing your name from the email ID. If I am addressing you > incorrectly, I am sorry. > > >> Many thanks for both replies which give a slightly > >> differing perspective. > > > > It is not a slight but a a huge difference whether you consider shakti > > as providing liberation from the fetters (as in the agamas) or as > > being the cause and embodiment of ahamkara, i.e. avidya and delusion. > > (as in vedanta) To be exact it is an 100% percent opposite view. > > The Shakti that binds one also liberates one. She is the one who puts a veil > and she is the one who removes it. Thus, the vedantic view is not " 100% > opposite " , but it actually encompasses the view you mention and captures > additional aspects of Shakti ignored in the view you mention. > > Though She is referred to as " vidya avidya swarupini " (embodiment of all > knowledge and ignorance), one may be comfortable worshipping certain aspects > of Her and ignore others. Agamas are selective and offer a limited picture > for practical utility, while vedanta is comprehensive and offers the big > picture. > > I maintain that what you referred to as " vedanta viewpoint " , i.e. the > teachings of maharshis, is actually the big picture that covers the essence > of everything. Because it is very complex to understand and appreciate, some > great teachers have taken limited aspects of the big picture and elaborated > them so that more people can understand and appreciate it and make progress. > > Thus, I suggest that seemingly different viewpoints of different religious > traditions originated from the same teachings of maharshis. > > Instead of approaching these view points with a " this OR that " attitude, I > suggest approaching them with a " this AND that " attitude. The teachings of > maharshis are the key in synthesizing everything. > > If you are convinced that the teachings of vedanta and the teachings of > aagamas are totally different and that there is no commonality, then we can > respectfully agree to disagree. > > Best regards, > Narasimha > ------------------------------- > Homam manual and audio: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > ------------------------------- > > ----- Original Message 2 ----- > " mahahradanatha " <mahahradanatha > <sivacharya > > Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:25 PM > [sivacharya] On Shakti and Brahman (Re: On Adwaitism...) > > > > sivacharya , " shrivajra " <shrivajra@> wrote: > >> > >> Namaste Narasimha and Mahahradanatha, > >> Many thanks for both replies which give a slightly > >> differing perspective. > > > > It is not a slight but a a huge difference whether you consider shakti > > as providing liberation from the fetters (as in the agamas) or as > > being the cause and embodiment of ahamkara, i.e. avidya and delusion. > > (as in vedanta) To be exact it is an 100% percent opposite view. > > But too realise this is maybe also only possible when the Ahamkara is > > absent and the blessing of anugraha shakti and shiva present in the > > jiva. > > > > You can get futther insight into the basics of shaiva darshana here: > > > > http://www.bhagavadgitausa.com/primer_in_saiva_siddhanta.htm > > ----- Original Message 1 ----- > " mahahradanatha " <mahahradanatha > <sivacharya > > Thursday, July 12, 2007 6:04 AM > [sivacharya] On Shakti and Brahman (Re: On Adwaitism...) > > > >I think it is necessary to remark that this exposition of yours is > > based on the vedanta philosophy and only about 10% of all shaivas are > > vedantins, the overwhelming majority has been and is following the > > authority of the agama which differs considerably from the vedanta > > viewpoint. > > > > In the agamas shakti is carrying out fivefold activity of shiva and > > as the actor cannot be discerned from the act shakti is therefore non > > differnt from shiva. > > > > The cause of maya (delusion) is avidya, (lack of knowledge) the cause > > of avidya is ahamkara (ego). > > > > In the Agama Shakti is not the cause of maya or duality nor is shiva > > it is a natural law that gives rise to ahamkara and avidya, > > attachment aversion etc. > > > > If out of his fivefold activity he decides to veil his nature, > > shakti appears as if she is deluding, if shiva decides to unveil his > > nature this act appears in a form of shakti bestowing his grace > > and knowledge. > > > > These rhytmic acts of unveiling and veiling his nature are a natural > > phenomena like our heartbeat or breath, symbolised by the sound of > > his damaru. > > > > That is why one needs only to return to ones own nature,and be > > content, one cannot add or subtract anything from what is and all > > that exists verily is only shiva. > > > > Following a natural cause delusion apears in the mind and will fall > > of the mind on its own accord by that shakti (act) of grace of > > shiva, (the actor and the act being one as said before) > > > > Qualification to realise the union of Shiva Shakti in this way (of > > the agama) is not reached by ones own effort it will appear by the > > act of the shakti alone in the field of consciousness no human effort > > (of the ahamkara) whatsoever can generate it on the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.