[Hindu Only] Yoga Vasistha

[Aupmanyav]

No, parmArtha means A does not exist or is not "vAstaviktA". Therefore, pArmArthically speaking Bin Laden is mithya. The AtmA alone is satya. We cannot pin a BinLaden to the alipta AtmA.

I use the statement Z is Brahman' very restrictively, and only when Z is
(i) A Brahman'-JnAni , who is essentially the AtmA (knows who they are), but appear as Z to the outer world

(ii) When sAkshAt Shri Hari mUrtimanta Brahman' takes avatAr as Mukunda I say "Mukunda is [sAkshAt] Brahman'"

Mithya (Myth = not true, there must be a PIE root from which these words came up. I will check). There was a rope that seemed like a snake. So. What was it which seemed like Osama? That was Brahman.

Or perhaps even the rope was not there. That one can term as 'nihilism' (nothing exists). Who knows if Brahman is that? Something that goes beyond existence and non-existence, as mentioned in the 'Nasadiya Sukta' in RigVeda. Something like the virtual particles in Quantum Mechanics - exists now, does not exist the next moment.

 

[atanu]

It is the neo-advaitans who are usually criticized for advocating the line of thinking that you put over here.

Advaita says that the embodied Jiva has no distinct identity and is Brahman itself.

But it also emphasizes like Vishistadvaita, the importance of spiritual practices like meditation, study and contemplation of the scriptures, satsang or holy company for realizing this fact, and not mere intellectual realisation, unless such intellectual realization can generate conviction and enable one to abide constantly in the state of pure consciousness or present moment awareness, realizing it to be the truth.

Yes. Shankara himself prescribes 'Vivekachudamani' as guideline for discriminating the atma. The advaitic tradition teaches 'drigdrishya viveka' -- the discriminative sepration of the seer (the subject) from the seen (object). Without such discrimination and abidance, the meaning of 'tat tvam asi' will remain obscure. Mere intellectual reading of Gaudapada cannot uproot the effects of beginning-less ego identification (wrong knowledge).

Agree.

Sadhana, imo, is required, till mind is cleaned of impurities or till karma residue lasts. It is true that Ātman does not require sadhana or purifification, yet mind that has to reflect the Ātman, requires cleaning.

Shravana-manana-niddhidhyasana is the standard advaitic prescription for the sadhana, niddhidhyasana being the unbroken meditation on the mahavakya and the infinite truth. Ultimate experience of samadhi is not in the power of ego self. Some may get it with shravana. Some may not even get it with niddhdhyasana. It is said that effort of ego self may hinder realisation, since the latter means absolute destruction of the former. The notion “I am doing sadhana’ is said to be the biggest obstruction towards annihilation of the ego self.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Sadhana, imo, is required, till mind is cleaned of impurities or till karma residue lasts.

Oh, that way one cannot get 'jnana' even in thousand births, because there will always be 'karmas' all the time. I do not think that is the situation. One can get 'jnana' even with all the 'karmas'; and when that happens, all the 'karmas' are destroyed by themselves.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hey, AmeyaAtma, you gave me a like! I can't believe it.

 

[ameyAtmA]

I have given you likes in the past also, but not for the "rope does not exist" part.

 

[bharti]

Agree.
Sadhana, imo, is required, till mind is cleaned of impurities or till karma residue lasts.

Oh, that way one cannot get 'jnana' even in thousand births, because there will always be 'karmas' ..

It seems that you are intentionally selective about quoting others and you are fixated on your ideas. You disregarded the red part altogether.

 

[bharti]

Right. So where does God come in? Of course, variety is interesting.

Are you the ego self or are you the Turiya? You may shout hoarse 'advaita' but all your actions-posts are of an old egotist.

As long as i acts as an ego self, i is controlled by deities hidden in Shushupti and ultimately controlled by the Turiya-Prabhu.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It seems that you are intentionally selective about quoting others and you are fixated on your ideas. You disregarded the red part altogether.

You are correct. I did not notice that; and I agree meditation can do that. My problem is with Gurus who say that enlightenment is extremely difficult and it necessarily requires their help. That is BS. Enlightenment is a matter of five minutes once you abandon your prejudices (previously held false beliefs). - (That is why my title line: "Be your own guru")

It took me time to abandon the idea of deity worship. The question came up "Do I abandon all that myself and Hindus have believed over thousand of years, no Gods or Goddesses?" I found a middle-way. Respect deities, not because they will grant you boons, but because Hindu society follows them and considers them as ideal. They are the beacons for Hindu society.

Are you the ego self or are you the Turiya? You may shout hoarse 'advaita' but all your actions-posts are of an old egotist.

You are correct again. I can go into (what you term as) Turiya, at will. It is a factual statement (like that of Buddha) - I am enlightened, it is not an ego statement.

 

[SalixIncendium]

But then is 'A' (an illusory Bin) equal to B (brahman -- the truth, intelligence, infinity)?

Inasmuch as the dream self is equal to the waking self.

That is why it is said that brahman is beyond mind and word.

On this we agree. While the mind may be able grasp the concept of Brahman, it cannot know Brahman. There are no words that I've found that can accurately describe Brahman.

 

[ajay0]

Agree.

Sadhana, imo, is required, till mind is cleaned of impurities or till karma residue lasts. It is true that Ātman does not require sadhana or purifification, yet mind that has to reflect the Ātman, requires cleaning.

True, as long as the ego is involved, vasanas or egocentric impressions is created, germinating desires in the form of cravings and aversions, and consequently karma is generated.

Awareness or meditation or total love destroys the vasanas and karma.

All duties done in awareness or Self-consciousness, rather than from egotistic tendencies, creates proper action free of karma as well, and prevents the creation of vasanas ( egocentric impressions).

 

[shivsomashekhar]

It is the neo-advaitans who are usually criticized for advocating the line of thinking that you put over here.

False. All neo-advaitins recommend actions (along the same lines as you) such as meditation, Sat-Sangha, etc.

For your education -
Neo-Vedanta - Wikipedia

Advaita says that the embodied Jiva has no distinct identity and is Brahman itself.

And therefore, the question. If there is no distinct identity, who gets liberated? It is a very simple question that I have asked multiple times, which both you and @atanu have consistently failed to answer. Without an answer to this fundamental question, your thesis on meditation, awareness and everything else is rendered moot.

But it also emphasizes like Vishistadvaita, the importance of spiritual practices like meditation, study and contemplation of the scriptures, satsang or holy company for realizing this fact, and not mere intellectual realisation, unless such intellectual realization can generate conviction and enable one to abide constantly in the state of pure consciousness or present moment awareness, realizing it to be the truth.

Ramana, for instance, - by his own admission - did none of the above and yet saw the truth. These tools can help one think clearly, but are not to be taken as gospel prerequisites. However, I digress, for that is not the point in contention here. The point is the only meaningful (and logical) interpretation of Advaita is that Moksha is intellectual realization - significantly different from Moksha as described by schools of Vedanta, which are predicated on time and involve transformation.

Paramarthika is not a separate realm. Paramarthika is a concept signifying the absolute lack of ignorance that veils the truth from mind. And when there is no veil-no ignorance, there are no A and B.

There is no A and B for whom? There is no such thing as "no A and B". Simple because there is no entity that exists in such a state or attains such a state or observes it from an external point.

There is only the non dual, the eko advittiyam. Even in vyavarika state of mind (ignorant state) the eko advittiyam is true but not known due to attachment to form etc.

Not known to whom?

 

[atanu]

Not known to whom?

Who is asking the question?
...

 

[ajay0]

False. All neo-advaitins recommend actions (along the same lines as you) such as meditation, Sat-Sangha, etc.

For your education -
Neo-Vedanta - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Vedanta

Thank you for your kindness...

For your education as well...

Neo-Advaita - Wikipedia

Neo-Advaita, also called the Satsang-movement and Nondualism, is a New Religious Movement, emphasizing the direct recognition of the non-existence of the "I" or "ego," without the need of preparatory practice.

Neo-Advaita makes little use of the "traditional language or cultural frames of Advaita Vedanta", and some have criticised it for its lack of preparatory training, and regard enlightenment-experiences induced by Neo-Advaita as superficial.

And therefore, the question. If there is no distinct identity, who gets liberated? It is a very simple question that I have asked multiple times, which both you and @atanu have consistently failed to answer. Without an answer to this fundamental question, your thesis on meditation, awareness and everything else is rendered moot.

But if everyone are already liberated and enlightened, why the need to ask such a question ! Also why are there criminals, rapists and murderers ! How come they are doing such vile stuff even though they are liberated and enlightened as per you.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

But if everyone are already liberated and enlightened, why the need to ask such a question ! Also why are there criminals, rapists and murderers ! How come they are doing such vile stuff even though they are liberated and enlightened as per you.

But you did not answer the question again!

1) Advaita says that the embodied Jiva has no distinct identity and is Brahman itself.

2) If there is no distinct identity, who gets liberated?

#1 is Advaita in your own words and I am in agreement. It clearly distinguishes Advaita from all other streams of Vedanta (where distinct identities are real and permanent). The natural followup question to this premise is #2.

I am doubling down, Sir. Please answer #2 - without contradicting #1.

 

[SalixIncendium]

But you did not answer the question again!

1) Advaita says that the embodied Jiva has no distinct identity and is Brahman itself.

2) If there is no distinct identity, who gets liberated?

#1 is Advaita in your own words and I am in agreement. It clearly distinguishes Advaita from all other streams of Vedanta (where distinct identities are real and permanent). The natural followup question to this premise is #2.

I am doubling down, Sir. Please answer #2 - without contradicting #1.

I know this wasn't directed at me, but please allow me to try...

The salt water in a glass will remain salt water in the glass. It will only know existence as "salt water in the glass" because of being contained by (attached to) it. It will not be liberated to realize it is the ocean until it is no longer attached to the glass.

The jiva is mired in ignorance of Brahman because of attachments to maya. Advaita states that the "embodied jiva" (the subtle body) will remain in samsara until it removes these attachments and sheds its ignorance of being of Brahman.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

I know this wasn't directed at me, but please allow me to try...
...

The jiva is mired in ignorance of Brahman because of attachments to maya. Advaita states that the "embodied jiva" (the subtle body) will remain in samsara until it removes these attachments and sheds its ignorance of being of Brahman.

1. You say 'until'. This is a specific point in time when the transition (from ignorance to wisdom) occurs. For this to be true (pre-moksha, moksha, post-moksha), time has to be real or outside Maya. Is that your position?

2. There is a specific entity here that moves from ignorance into wisdom. For this entity to know that it was formerly ignorant and is now wise, it has to retain its identity. Else, who was ignorant and who is now wise?

3. If the number (a combination of ignorant and wise) of such entities is greater than zero, how is this Advaita?

 

[ajay0]

But you did not answer the question again!

1) Advaita says that the embodied Jiva has no distinct identity and is Brahman itself.

2) If there is no distinct identity, who gets liberated?

#1 is Advaita in your own words and I am in agreement. It clearly distinguishes Advaita from all other streams of Vedanta (where distinct identities are real and permanent). The natural followup question to this premise is #2.

I am doubling down, Sir. Please answer #2 - without contradicting #1.

Shankaracharya also states thus...

'Atman is an ever-present Reality. Yet, because of ignorance it is not realised. On the destruction of ignorance Atman is realised.'

'The Soul appears to be finite because of ignorance. When ignorance is destroyed the Self which does not admit of any multiplicity truly reveals itself by itself: like the Sun when the clouds pass away.'

Shankara here states the presence of ignorance and does not ignore it. It is because of ignorance or lack of self-knowledge that the unconscious ego comes into being, with its cravings and aversions resulting in vices. Self-knowledge comes with Shravana ( listening or reading of knowledge), Manana ( contemplation of knowledge ) and Nidhidhyasana ( application of knowledge understood ).

Without the requisite austerity in this regard, there is no respite from ignorance and bondage.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Shankaracharya also states thus...

'Atman is an ever-present Reality. Yet, because of ignorance it is not realised. On the destruction of ignorance Atman is realised.'

Realized by whom?

You have agreed that Advaita distinguishes itself from other brands of Vedanta by denying distinct identities.

If there are no distinct identities, who is this realizer?

 

[ajay0]

Realized by whom?

You have agreed that Advaita distinguishes itself from other brands of Vedanta by denying distinct identities.

If there are no distinct identities, who is this realizer?

“When our false perception is corrected, misery ends also.”
― Adi Shankaracarya, Shankara's Crest Jewel of Discrimination

“Once we become conscious, even dimly, of the Atman, the Reality within us, the world takes on a very different aspect. It is no longer a court of justice but a kind of gymnasium. Good and evil, pain and pleasure, still exist, but they seem more like the ropes and vaulting-horses and parallel bars which can be used to make our bodies strong. Maya is no longer an endlessly revolving wheel of pain and pleasure but a ladder which can be climbed to consciousness of the Reality.”
― Adi Shankaracarya, Shankara's Crest Jewel of Discrimination

Shankaracharya himself talks about Maya and ignorance, and thus it follows that he was not merely embarking on an abstract philosophy that negates relative existence, but functions within it to attain nondual perception through austerities.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

“When our false perception is corrected, misery ends also.”
― Adi Shankaracarya, Shankara's Crest Jewel of Discrimination

“Once we become conscious, even dimly, of the Atman, the Reality within us, the world takes on a very different aspect. It is no longer a court of justice but a kind of gymnasium. Good and evil, pain and pleasure, still exist, but they seem more like the ropes and vaulting-horses and parallel bars which can be used to make our bodies strong. Maya is no longer an endlessly revolving wheel of pain and pleasure but a ladder which can be climbed to consciousness of the Reality.”
― Adi Shankaracarya, Shankara's Crest Jewel of Discrimination

Shankaracharya himself talks about Maya and ignorance, and thus it follows that he was not merely embarking on an abstract philosophy that negates relative existence, but functions within it to attain nondual perception through austerities.

I asked 'who is this realizer?' and once again, you are avoiding the question.

As an Advaitin, you should be able to answer this fundamental question and yet you are unable to. Ask yourself why and see where it takes you. Good luck.