Does 'prakriti' disappear??

[Viraja]

Namaste,

I have a question, not sure if it qualifies to be a Vedanta question, nevertheless it is more attuned to philosophy than not...

They say, nothing in nature disappears... that energy/matter only changes form from one state to another, but essentially 'stays there' in some form eventually...

So, when we talk about prakriti - the ego of the individual self -- the 'maya' and we say 'the wise have conquered their ego', their maya, what does that imply?

Does that mean maya in them has changed state to some other form? Or has it disappeared (which cannot be as per laws of nature)?

Thanks.

 

[Shantanu]

Namaste,

I have a question, not sure if it qualifies to be a Vedanta question, nevertheless it is more attuned to philosophy than not...

They say, nothing in nature disappears... that energy/matter only changes form from one state to another, but essentially 'stays there' in some form eventually...

So, when we talk about prakriti - the ego of the individual self -- the 'maya' and we say 'the wise have conquered their ego', their maya, what does that imply?

Does that mean maya in them has changed state to some other form? Or has it disappeared (which cannot be as per laws of nature)?

Thanks.

Ego is not a material thing and so does not lend itself to analysis in terms of laws of nature. It is an attribute of ourselves when we are absorbed in our self importance.

When one knows God, and one does this through surrender in which one gets to know how great God is in terms of might, knowledge and intelligence one has no choice but to give up ones ego, that is the self importance that makes us want to be famous through wealth or through other activities.

Maya to me is the unimaginable creative power of God that can do anything in this universe. We humans are not endowed with maya. But when we are devoted to God God uses His maya powers to do anything that is in the best interests of the jiva, including taking away his or her ego.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So, when we talk about prakriti - the ego of the individual self - the 'maya' and we say 'the wise have conquered their ego', their maya, what does that imply?

Does that mean maya in them has changed state to some other form? Or has it disappeared (which cannot be as per laws of nature)?

'Maya' means missing the truth and considering it something else. Maya means the effect of ignorance. Even if the wise have conquered their egos, it does not give them 'jnana', 'enlightenment', 'nirvana', 'moksha', etc. That is more than just overcoming ego. But sure, ego, bias, vitiates understanding. Without abandoning ego, there is no chance of understanding.

As for 'prakriti', no one has understood it in full measure. The main question, as you said, is whether at any time it disappears. If it disappears, then it will be the case of 'Creation ex-nihilo' - (All things arise from absolute nothing). Existence is an interchangeable form of existence. Theoretically, Quantum mechanics may say that it is possible, but we do not know it for sure if it happens like that. It is like Schrodinger's Cat. Dead! Alive! Or both dead and alive at the same time!

Mahavira's Anekanta vada, Syada vada, non-Absolutism comes to mind.

1. Syād-asti – “in some ways it is”,
2. syād-nāsti - “in some ways it is not”,
3. syād-asti-nāsti - “in some ways it is and it is not”,
4. syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ - “in some ways it is and it is indescribable”,
5. syād-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ - “in some ways it is not and it is indescribable”,
6. syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ - “in some ways it is, it is not and it is indescribable”,
7. syād-avaktavyaḥ- “in some ways it is indescribable”

Philosophical skepticism - Wikipedia
Anekantavada - Wikipedia

 

[Viraja]

Ego is not a material thing and so does not lend itself to analysis in terms of laws of nature. It is an attribute of ourselves when we are absorbed in our self importance.

When one knows God, and one does this through surrender in which one gets to know how great God is in terms of might, knowledge and intelligence one has no choice but to give up ones ego, that is the self importance that makes us want to be famous through wealth or through other activities.

But ego does not go away just like that. It takes considerable amount of time, effort and practice, if not, even devotion, to make the ego melt away... It is almost like a tangible thing in this perspective after all.. We mold and shape the ego! From tamasic ahamkara, it becomes rajasic, then Sattwic, and then finally perhaps goes away (some say it never does but always a certain percent of it that remains). So aren't we looking that something that is almost available to us as a tangential reality to play around with, that changes its qualities with sadhana? Therefore this something must be a 'real thing' and not just a perceived thing? May be the answer to the question, 'where does the realized soul place his ego on' will help with the answer?

Maya to me is the unimaginable creative power of God that can do anything in this universe. We humans are not endowed with maya. But when we are devoted to God God uses His maya powers to do anything that is in the best interests of the jiva, including taking away his or her ego.

In my OP, I was referring to the ego of the individual jeeva/soul as 'maya'. The individual comes to be, as part of prakriti, and prakriti is the same as 'maya'.

 

[Viraja]

As for 'prakriti', no one has understood it in full measure. The main question, as you said, is whether at any time it disappears. If it disappears, then it will be the case of 'Creation ex-nihilo' - (All things arise from absolute nothing). Existence is an interchangeable form of existence. Theoretically, Quantum mechanics may say that it is possible, but we do not know it for sure if it happens like that. It is like Schrodinger's Cat. Dead! Alive! Or both dead and alive at the same time!

Mahavira's Anekanta vada, Syada vada, non-Absolutism comes to mind.

1. Syād-asti – “in some ways it is”,
2. syād-nāsti - “in some ways it is not”,
3. syād-asti-nāsti - “in some ways it is and it is not”,
4. syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ - “in some ways it is and it is indescribable”,
5. syād-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ - “in some ways it is not and it is indescribable”,
6. syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ - “in some ways it is, it is not and it is indescribable”,
7. syād-avaktavyaḥ- “in some ways it is indescribable”

Philosophical skepticism - Wikipedia
Anekantavada - Wikipedia

I think your answer is profound. But even if we were not to consider disappearance or dissolution of the ego in the complete sense, it only remains as a fact that some form of a 'changed ego' prevails in the jnani. So what is this ego directed at, in the jnani? Where does he center this ego in?

They talk about 'altered state of ego' -- i wonder if this is relevant to my question.

 

[Shantanu]

But ego does not go away just like that. It takes considerable amount of time, effort and practice, if not, even devotion, to make the ego melt away... It is almost like a tangible thing in this perspective after all.. We mold and shape the ego! From tamasic ahamkara, it becomes rajasic, then Sattwic, and then finally perhaps goes away (some say it never does but always a certain percent of it that remains). So aren't we looking that something that is almost available to us as a tangential reality to play around with, that changes its qualities with sadhana? Therefore this something must be a 'real thing' and not just a perceived thing? May be the answer to the question, 'where does the realized soul place his ego on' will help with the answer?



In my OP, I was referring to the ego of the individual jeeva/soul as 'maya'. The individual comes to be, as part of prakriti, and prakriti is the same as 'maya'.

It is true that one can shift ones guna-attribute from even tamasic to rajasic and to sattvic guna, but guna melts away on its own when one surrenders to God in all ones activities because God transcends the gunas. One does not have any ego (tamasic, rajasic or sattvic) left when one has wholeheartedly surrendered to God in everything that one does from the moment one wakes up to when he retires to bed. God through his maya powers makes this happen in the jiva for he has been freed of all attachments, expectations and desires. Only knowledge and truth is his guide and salvation. The truth is that he is in God's hands to do as God pleases.

 

[Aupmanyav]

A 'Jnani' by definition has no ego. He is the Tathagata (Thus arrived), the Tirthankara (the Ford-Crosser). He is king Janaka. He is Sage Shukracharya. He/She is none other than Brahman (Brahma veda Brahmaiva bhavati).
For whatever worth my argument is.

 

[Shantanu]

I think your answer is profound. But even if we were not to consider disappearance or dissolution of the ego in the complete sense, it only remains as a fact that some form of a 'changed ego' prevails in the jnani. So what is this ego directed at, in the jnani? Where does he center this ego in?

They talk about 'altered state of ego' -- i wonder if this is relevant to my question.

There is no such thing as a jnani, for knowledge can only be acquired from detailed consultation with God as the know-all and someone who is willing to share that knowledge with the devotee. This is to say that without God guiding the individual he can never acquire knowledge sufficient to be known to the world as a jnani. And this is a constant endeavour. It is not that one has acquired knowledge so one can now do away with God. A jnani has to be constantly surrendering to God to attain the blessing of knowledge. He must have all the answers to all the questions that would satisfy everyone's investigations brought to him. A jnana yogi independent of God knows nothing of use.

 

[Valjean]

"The ego of the individual self?" That sounds more like "jivatman," or even purusham. I've always taken prakriti to refer to a sort of primordial stuff -- plasma or quarks or something.
As for maya, how does that equate with ego? An ego may be caught up in maya; may perceive itself as an individual because of maya, but I don't see it as identical to maya.

 

[Shantanu]

"The ego of the individual self?" That sounds more like "jivatman," or even purusham. I've always taken prakriti to refer to a sort of primordial stuff -- plasma or quarks or something.
As for maya, how does that equate with ego? An ego may be caught up in maya; may perceive itself as an individual because of maya, but I don't see it as identical to maya.

Wikipedia says that prakriti is a key concept in Hinduism, formulated by its Samkhya school, and refers to the primal matter with three different innate qualities (Guṇas) whose equilibrium is the basis of all observed empirical reality. Prakriti, in this school, contrasts with Purusha which is pure awareness and metaphysical consciousness. I subscribe to the Samkhya school in which ego of jivatman varies between the three gunas each person having a particular combination and choosing the right deities.

As for maya different people are definining it differently. In Vedanta there are two schools, a theistic and an atheistic one. In the atheistic one maya is the power of Brahman that creates an illusion of the universe being real. For the theist maya is the unimaginable indescribable creative power of God Sri Krishna in the manifestation of the universe which is real.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Brahma veda ..: "One who understands Brahman, verily becomes Brahman."

 

[Viraja]

Thank you for the replies, Aup ji, Shantanu ji. I'm convinced the ego in fact disappears, but I am still perplexed, what is the focus of one's existence, after realization? If he has no ego or maya left in him, how will he carry about his duties? I am not able to understand that properly.

I will get back little later to @Valjean.

 

[Valjean]

Thank you for the replies, Aup ji, Shantanu ji. I'm convinced the ego in fact disappears, but I am still perplexed, what is the focus of one's existence, after realization? If he has no ego or maya left in him, how will he carry about his duties? I am not able to understand that properly.

I will get back little later to @Valjean.

The universe/realized soul has no dharma or focus. It's awareness is universal; experiencing the consciousness of all beings.

I suppose if you get bored you could narrow your awareness and run one of the countless lives at your disposal.

 

[Shantanu]

The universe/realized soul has no dharma or focus. It's awareness is universal; experiencing the consciousness of all beings.

I suppose if you get bored you could narrow your awareness and run one of the countless lives at your disposal.

What are you or your soul aware of?

 

[Valjean]

What are you or your soul aware of?

"Awareness is structured in consciousness." -- Rig Veda.
Our perception of reality varies with our level of consciousness.

 

[Shantanu]

"Awareness is structured in consciousness." -- Rig Veda.
Our perception of reality varies with our level of consciousness.

According to the scriptures or otherwise what are the means for developing a heightened level of consciousness such that one becomes perfectly aware of the Ultimate Reality?

 

[Valjean]

According to the scriptures or otherwise what are the means for developing a heightened level of consciousness such that one becomes perfectly aware of the Ultimate Reality?

The Gita itself outlines several yogas suitable to different personalities.

 

[Shantanu]

The Gita itself outlines several yogas suitable to different personalities.

In the Gita Lord Krishna says surrender to Me/take refuge in Me: and also that ony one in a million will ever get to know the Ultimate Reality.

 

[Valjean]

In the Gita Lord Krishna says surrender to Me/take refuge in Me: and also that ony one in a million will ever get to know the Ultimate Reality.

We've always been in contact with Ultimate Reality, it's just a matter of realizing it; of waking up.

 

[Shantanu]

We've always been in contact with Ultimate Reality, it's just a matter of realizing it; of waking up.

Does the Ultimate Reality have intelligence of its own distinct from the intelligence of the human being?