Hindu: The fallacy of 'Hinduism'

[Surya Deva]

Religion can also be a way of life, its basis will be culture and history associated with it, there are many who call them self Hindu but are not even Indian, nor follow the cultures of India.

That is as valid as Americanism and Spanishism is a religion then

Yes they are just people, people no matter what they follow or are can be biased in any form toward anything that goes against what they believe.

You are stating a tautology. Yes, people can be biased, that is why there is a peer-review process and a scientific methodology of for collecting data. Like with any scientific theory even historical theories need to be falsifiable and must explain all of the observable historical data. As argued earlier, a scientific theory is not perfect, but it is the best method we have of forming independent knowledge. Faith is not equally valid to science and reason.

lot of people believe in Islam, that does not make Islam infallible. any idea started with intent to subjugate/divide on which theories are based using the original idea cannot be counted as unbiased.

Comparing apples and oranges fallacy. The field of professional research is a scientific discipline which is evidence based and like with any scientific theory it is has to undergo falsification and peer-review. Faith is not a scientific discipline, it is not evidence based, it is unfalsifiable and it is not peer-reviewed through independent testing.

No offense, but you yourself are sounding like a Christian creationist now, you are citing pretty much the same fallacies they do like equating faith to science.

Does not matter what it means, the names suggest a unified concept of a place of residence, Indians have always called their homeland by this name, until recently that is. We are not talking about Political but religious unity, there is no substantial proofs of that states that India was divided religiously prior to the advent of the Moghuls.

Yes there is, even the Mauraya Empire did not come into being before it defeated the previous Nanda Empire. It is accepted historical consensus that India has for most of its history never existed as a single unified political body

There are no great Wars specifically started out of religious difference.

Difficult to prove because different kingdoms had different state religions and we know that kingdoms were constantly at war with one another. However, I can concede that it never reached the extremes it did in Abrahamic religions like crusades. This is because, in India religious and philosophical issues were settled in debates rather than on battlefields.

Who says it only belongs to India only, all im saying is it does not belong to you.

Ok, but when did I say it belongs to me?

Its not Universal if it excludes even one individual.

Universal means that the truths are objectively true and can be tested and independently discovered by anybody. Universal does not mean that all truths are accepted as equally valid. Flat Earth is not equally valid to Spherical Earth; Aristotle mechanics is not equally valid to Newtonian mechanics.

Vedas were prior to the Upanishads, why would you be looking for Upanishad Philosophy in the Vedas???, when upanishads are them selfs the Philosophy on the Vedas???

Right, the Upanishads come after and they introduce a new philosophy which was not present in the Vedas - in much the same way the NT comes after the OT and introduces a new philosophy which is not present in the OT.

I don't think Vedas are polytheistic.

What you think doesn't really matter, as we can clearly see in Samhitas and Brahmanas clear proof of an IE religion worshiping many gods and doing ritual sacrifices to them, like all other IE religions and even the gods are the same. So the scholarly consensus on the preponderance of evidence is unanimous the Vedic people were polytheistic.

All religions claim Universal truths.

But that does not mean all claims are true.

So consciousness produces Maya

No, Maya emanates from consciousness like a field of radiation emanates from the sun. They are both part and parcel of one another.

So you don't know what Maya is, you says its nether real nor unreal but is a source of reality, from Ishvara, which begs the question, is Ishvara real or unreal. anything with Nama-Rupa is real because it has a name and a form. Action is not possible to come from something which is unreal, or non existent, only from the real and existent. If the world is an illusion, why would it hold any practical significance, the practical significance in a illusion becomes itself a illusion of significance.

Maya is neither real or unreal, because Maya is just a projection from the only real existent reality of Brahman. So Maya has a dependent existence on Brahman and is not a real substance herself. Hence why Maya is said to neither real or completely unreal. Maya is not a source of reality from Ishvara, Ishvara is a product of Maya and Ishvara is unreal because Ishvara is a product of Maya's power of illusion. Anything with Naam-Rupa is not real, because it has only name for its existence and name is arbitrary and depends on how you differentiate a form. For example how does one distinguish an atom from a molecule? DNA from a cell? Up from down? Planet from a moon. Star from a sun? They are purely arbitrary divisions and hence why any kind of classification system has a problem of definition

The same form viewed by multiple observers can be given any name. For instance one sees a dot in the sky, one person says "it is a moon" another person says "it is a bird" another person says "it is a plane" thus we create reality through language. Even a very trivial statement like "Here is a spoon" is based on differentiating a particular form and assuming it to be a separate real object with common properties, but such a conclusion is not logically demonstrable, because it based on an induction that assumes the spoon that we see now is the same spoon.

Another example, a much better explanation is to divide a single system like the body into separate parts based on arbitrary division like head, torso, legs, lungs, heart. These separations are arbitrary and imposed by language, for the body functions as a single unit.

We now actually have physical proof from quantum physics now that no such thing as objective reality exists and thus the theory of naam-rupa is now empirically confirmed

artha, karma, dharma, these are only possible in a real world, otherwise its meaningless if the world itself is a illusion.

If one knew they were in a Matrix but could not get out of the Matrix, then it would not matter if one knew the matrix was an illusion, for as long as one is inhabiting the illusion one has to live by its laws. Its a catch 22.

How can you escape eternal Maya, its impossible.
So Brahman is non real.

Maya is eternal, but her products Ishvara, Jiva etc are not. The Jiva being a product of Maya with the reflected consciousness of Brahman, eventually realizes that it is really Brahman in essence, and then acts in order to attain knowledge to cease the illusion(to escape the matrix)

Impossible, if Maya is a aspect of Brahman, then any one in Moksha cannot ever escape from Maya.

After Moksha there is nobody to escape for all individuality disappears and Jiva merges into Brahman. As the Upanishads say itself, "Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman"

Answered to your self, not to me, i still am ignorant.

It is a complex philosophy and cannot be understood straight away. It has taken me more than a decade to digest it.

But the Dhamah of any Child is to always respect and honour their mother.

Not necessarily. It is not binding on the child. Some children disown their mothers. Buddhism disowned its mother the Vedic religion for instance.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Surya Deva;3070787]That is as valid as Americanism and Spanishism is a religion then

hmmm, So you don't like "Hinduism", because its got something to do with Indian people.

You are stating a tautology. Yes, people can be biased, that is why there is a peer-review process and a scientific methodology of for collecting data. ..........

Yes, same goes for Advaita.

Comparing apples and oranges fallacy. The field of professional research is a scientific discipline which is evidence based and like with any scientific theory it is has to undergo falsification and peer-review. Faith is not a scientific discipline, it is not evidence based, it is unfalsifiable and it is not peer-reviewed through independent testing.

Well dont put faith in the Upanishads then.

No offense, but you yourself are sounding like a Christian creationist now, you are citing pretty much the same fallacies they do like equating faith to science.

Damm got me.

Yes there is, even the Mauraya Empire did not come into being before it defeated the previous Nanda Empire. It is accepted historical consensus that India has for most of its history never existed as a single unified political body

Again political difference do not equate to religious one.

Difficult to prove because different kingdoms had different state religions and we know that kingdoms were constantly at war with one another. However, I can concede that it never reached the extremes it did in Abrahamic religions like crusades. This is because, in India religious and philosophical issues were settled in debates rather than on battlefields.

And that what its i think Hinduism is. Debate on Philosophy, not wars against different Philosophies or demoralising a specific sect or cultures

Ok, but when did I say it belongs to me?

From What i infer of what i read of what you say.

And you specifically want to exclude Most of Hinduism/Indian and other Philosophies from Advaita, while Advaita itself says that we are all Brahman.
I have not heard any great Advaita Philosopher declared that we need to remove Hinduism from Indians to save it.
But you seem to be doing it, and so i think you have either a hatred for Indians or All other forms of Philosophy Apart from what you think is correct Advaita, hence I assumed you think you have all the answers to the problems within Hinduism.

Universal means that the truths are objectively true and can be tested and independently discovered by anybody. Universal does not mean that all truths are accepted as equally valid. Flat Earth is not equally valid to Spherical Earth; Aristotle mechanics is not equally valid to Newtonian mechanics.

Universal also means that every Individual has the right to decide weather the truth is actually true, and if one Philosophy is said to be more truth then another, while that Philosophy still claims to be Universal, in turn excludes other modes of finding out the truth.

Right, the Upanishads come after and the they introduce a new philosophy which was not present in the Vedas - in much the same way the NT comes after the OT and introduces a new philosophy which is not present in the OT.

This is not Christianity we are talking about, In the Abrahamic sects Ishvaras (GOD) Knowledge is not complete, and needs to be revised by mere mortals.

Plus you still don't seem to understand, the Upanishads did not introduce anything new, the Philosophy of Upanishad is What is in the Vedas.

What you think doesn't really matter, as we can clearly see in Samhitas and Brahmanas clear proof of an IE religion worshiping many gods and doing ritual sacrifices to them, like all other IE religions and even the gods are the same. So the scholarly consensus on the preponderance of evidence is unanimous the Vedic people were polytheistic.

No, no proof from the Vedas, I have read them, cant see nothing of that sort.

But that does not mean all claims are true.

Exactly, my point.

No, Maya emanates from consciousness like a field of radiation emanates from the sun. They are both part and parcel of one another.

Ahh another package deal,

So Maya comes from Consciousness?

I don't get it, How can Consciousness (real) emanate Maya (Illusion).

Or are you saying that Consciousness is an illusion?

The Sun is real and so is the Radiation, but Maya is Illusion, not real??

Maya is neither real or unreal, because Maya is just a projection from the only real existent reality of Brahman. So Maya has a dependent existence on Brahman and is not a real substance herself. Hence why Maya is said to neither real or completely unreal. ........

So Brahman is the cause of Illusion, hence Brahman is not perfect.
How does a perfect all knowing being get illusioned?

The same form viewed by multiple observers can be given any name. For instance one sees a dot in the sky, one person says "it is a moon" another person says "it is a bird" another person says it is a "plane" thus we create reality through language. Even a very trivial statement like "Here is a spoon" is ........

That is just talking about individual perception, does not mean that there is no spoon, or the dot in the Sky is Illusion, what we observe differently is in fact a great example of Individuality of the observer, not the illusion of what is being observed.

Another example, a much better explained is to divide a single system like the body into separate parts based on arbitrary division like head, torso, legs, lungs, heart. These separations are arbitrary and imposed by language, for the body functions as a single unit.

Just like Hinduism. :yes:

We now actually have physical proof from quantum physics now that no such thing as objective reality exists and thus the theory of naam-rupa is now empirically confirmed

Link please.

If one knew they were in a Matrix but could not get out of the Matrix, then it would not matter if one knew the matrix was an illusion, for as long as one is inhabiting the illusion one has to live by its laws. Its a catch 22.

If the Matrix is eternal, then there is no getting out of the Matrix, all perceptions of freedom will be just another Illusion of getting out.

Maya is eternal, but her products Ishvara, Jiva etc are not. The Jiva being a product of Maya with the reflected consciousness of Brahman, eventually realizes that it is really Brahman in essence, and then acts in order to attain knowledge to cease the illusion(to escape the matrix)

A product of gold contains the gold, hence a product of Maya will be Maya.

After Moksha there is nobody to escape for all individuality disappears and Jiva merges into Brahman. As the Upanishads say itself, "Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman"

Hmm, it does not say the Individuality disappears, it just says we merge with Brahman.

Not necessarily. It is not binding on the child. Some children disown their mothers. Buddhism disowned its mother the Vedic religion for instance.

Buddhism never disowned the Vedic religion.

In Sutta Nipat 192, Mahatma Buddha says that:

Vidwa Cha Vedehi Samechcha Dhammam Na Uchchavacham Gachhati Bhooripanjo.

People allow sense-organs to dominate and keep shuffling between high and low positions. But the scholar who understands Vedas understands Dharma and does not waver.

Now as for Hinduism.

The Vedic philosophy of ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ (Entire world is my own family but extended to ‘entire world’s philosophy is my own philosophy’) that forms basis of this all-encompassing panorama of Hinduism is indeed a noble concept.

The very name ‘Hinduism’ testifies this.

 

[Surya Deva]

hmmm, So you don't like "Hinduism", because its got something to do with Indian people.

I never said that. If we define Hinduism as the culture, way of life and history of India, it is as valid as Americanism and Spanishism is a religion.

Yes, same goes for Advaita.

Advaita is not a faith-based system, it is a philosophy based on formal reasoning. Hence it is also based on methodology, its arguments can be tested by any logician and be falsified. However, even the best logicians like the famous British logician whitehead called it the best metaphysics the human mind has ever conceived.

The Darsana systems are rather similar to science in fact, because they have a pramana system which is based on primarily means of perception and reasoning. Hence all their conclusions must be supported with evidence and formal arguments. It differs from the modern scientific method in that the modern method is an empirical based epistemology and the Darsanas are a rational based epistemology, but both are equally valid and produce the same truths. For instance the Vaiseshika darsana are able to establish the existence of not only atoms, but the principles of how atoms combine, chemical reactions and the states or phases of matter as a function of kinetic energy. The Vaiseshiks is also able to determine the theory of sound propogation and the existence of gravity to explain the falling of objects - based on some evidence from perception and primarily reasoning. The Samkhya are able to establish the existence of quantum matter(moolaprakriti) the interaction between matter and observers, the theory of evolution and involution of the universe and organic and organic matter, again on some evidence from perception and primarily reasoning. Advaita borrows the entirety of Samkhya(based on perception and reasoning) and is able to unify it into a theory of everything. Therefore Advaita is purely an evidenced-based system.

I have noticed Indian Hindus don't at all appreciate how sophisticated their rational schools of thought are, and prefer faith and mythology. It is really unfortunate and this is why I have ruled that Indian Hindus are the weakest link in Hinduism. It is better we separate Hinduism from India. This is why I have personally started to regard Indian Hindus as illegitimate children of the Vedic tradition, and regard modern scientists and philosophers the true offspring of the Vedic tradition, doing exactly what the Vedic tradition told us to do "Know the string within the string" "know the self" "know the science of reality" This makes people like Schrodinger more Hindu than anybody claiming to be Hindu.

We can see that modern scientists and philosophers appreciate what the Vedic tradition has to give us, evidenced in the proclamations of great modern physicists like Oppenheimer, "The Access to the Vedas is the greatest privilege the 20th century has over other proceeding centuries" Whereas the actual birth of the Vedic tradition does not appreciate it, and this is why they have lost it. Today, 90% of courses on Hinduism, Sanskrit, Indian studies, Yoga etc are studied by non-Indians and taught by non-Indians. Practically all of the academic literature written in these areas comes from non-Indians.

Indian Hindus are the weakest link. They tend to be ignorant, stubborn and arrogant, practicing a form of Hinduism which is primitive, superstitious, dogmatic and stuck in a time-warp going back to traditions going back stone age times. They are mostly irrational, and I am finding this true with the majority I meet with, in the kind of things I have been told: Krishna had 16,000 wives; Eternal Veda Vyasa wrote the Puranas in 3000BCE; Risis had electric cars, nuclear weapons; homosexuality is punishable and forbidden; Lord Rama existed millions of years ago; Krishna is the one true God and must be worshiped Why am I the only Hindu that is embarrassed by all of this?

I have tried to dialogue with Indian Hindus, but it is futile really. I personally think India is a doomed country having witnessed the ground reality myself. A country so fragmented, divided, chaotic, polluted, dirty cannot possibly survive. It is a sinking ship, and we need to save Hinduism from sinking with it.

Well dont put faith in the Upanishads then.

I don't. The Upanishads are relatively quite primitive in their articulation compared to the Darsanas, thus I base my knowledge on the Darsanas, because they are scientific evidence-based. The systems of Samkhya, Advaita, Vaiseshika, Nyaya and Yoga, as well upavedas like Ayurveda, Vykarana and Chandha are simply brilliant and all rational people appreciate them. The development of science and philosophy in the West in the 20th century owes a lot to these. However, Indian Hindus prefer literally cowdung to these great rational systems of knowledge. They only become aware of these systems when a non-Indian appreciates them. Indian Hindu did not even care for their Yoga until Yoga became a multibillion dollar industry in the world, and now all of a sudden they want their Yoga back Indian Hindus did not even appreciate their Sanskrit language and great grammarians like Patanjali and Bharathari, until non-Indian logicians, linguists and computer theorists in the West did. Indian Hindus?

Again political difference do not equate to religious one.

Okay, it is difficult to prove either way whether wars between kingdoms in India were political, religious or both.

And that what its i think Hinduism is. Debate on Philosophy, not wars against different Philosophies or demoralising a specific sect or cultures

Absolutely, and that is what I am doing. There are many Indian Hindus here, who are hopelessly confused about their religion who think Hinduism is a radical univeralist religion and accepts all faiths/beliefs/philosophies as valid paths

From What i infer of what i read of what you say.

And you specifically want to exclude Most of Hinduism/Indian and other Philosophies from Advaita, while Advaita itself says that we are all Brahman.
I have not heard any great Advaita Philosopher declared that we need to remove Hinduism from Indians to save it.

Advaita declares that everything is in essence(svarupa) Brahman, but our empirical world is the result of ignorance or avidya where we mistake the world to be real and misidentify consciousness with it, not realizing that in fact this reality is purely consciousness. This is an ontological philosophy.
Advaita says nothing about accepting all faith systems as equally valid, because if that were the case, Advaita would not have been constantly debating with rival schools.

Indian Hindus are not the problem themselves, it is their ignorance, arrogance and stubbornness that is the problem. They are confused and clueless about what their religion teaches, they engage in blind faith and ritualism(exactly the opposite of what it teaches) they are following death traditions like caste system, worshiping god/s, idol worship, slaving after gurus and Smriti traditions. They are refusing to grow up. They don't even realize how badly their civilization has fallen due to their attitude, and today they inhabit a mess of a country - but they are still are far too proud to notice. Many modern intellectuals have had some very critical things to say about Indians, once said "The Hindus are a civilization that has degenerated" The proof is Indian has been for the last 2000 years under foreign occupation. Enough said.

So many reformers have tried to get Hinduism back on track, to save the Indian people like Swami Vivekananda, Aurobindo going back to Guru Nanak, Mahavira and Buddha, but Indians seem to be a people hellbent on their own destruction. I can't see India surviving into the 22nd century. I can see Hinduism surviving into the 22nd century. Like great Hindu visionaries like Vivekananda, I can see it become the religion of our future in the form of Advaita.

But you seem to be doing it, and so i think you have either a hatred for Indians or All other forms of Philosophy Apart from what you think is correct Advaita, hence I assumed you think you have all the answers to the problems within Hinduism.

I know Advaita very well and it presents the most clearest description of metaphysics we have in the world, according to great logicians like Whitehead, it presents the most scientific account of reality according to great physicists like Schrodinger, and it is the most elevated and sublime philosophy of the world according to Schopenhauer.

Universal also means that every Individual has the right to decide weather the truth is actually true, and if one Philosophy is said to be more truth then another, while that Philosophy still claims to be Universal, in turn excludes other modes of finding out the truth.

That is not universal, rather that is political. Universal knowledge is based on absolute proven principles and laws. I agree with you that we should allow a free thinking environment where everybody can put forward their arguments, ideas and evidences, and we have one such environment today in our modern scientific community. Everything is decided on peer-review. Ideas, theories and evidence has to rigorously tested before it is accepted.

This is not Christianity we are talking about, In the Abrahamic sects Ishvaras (GOD) Knowledge is not complete, and needs to be revised by mere mortals.

This is an argument from faith. Not valid. The evidence shows us clearly that no religion in the world circa 2000BCE had a monotheistic religion, everybody was polytheistic in the world, and then circa 1000BCE monotheistic thought developed in many urban cultures in the world. We see this is equally true for the Vedic people.

 

[Surya Deva]

Plus you still don't seem to understand, the Upanishads did not introduce anything new, the Philosophy of Upanishad is What is in the Vedas.

False. The Vedas do not mention anything about yoga, samsara, karma, moksha, brahman. We can only see in very later stages of the Vedic hymns like the Purusha suktam and Nasadiya Suktam precursors to Upanishadic thought. The Upanishads are known as Vedanta because they mark an end to the previous Vedic thought, in very much the same way the NT marks an end to the previous OT thought.

Nothing I am telling you is against anything you would be taught in an official degree course in religious studies. I am telling you exactly what the scholarship says.

No, no proof from the Vedas, I have read them, cant see nothing of that sort.

No you have not, you have read translations from the Arya Samaaj, an unreliable and fundamentalist organization that translates the Vedas as books on how to build steam engines, Aeroplanes and electric cars You do not know Sanskrit yourself(you admitted yourself) hence you simply choose to believe their translations are correct, ignoring the modern secular scholarship.

Ahh another package deal,

So Maya comes from Consciousness?

I don't get it, How can Consciousness (real) emanate Maya (Illusion).

Or are you saying that Consciousness is an illusion?

The Sun is real and so is the Radiation, but Maya is Illusion, not real??

The radiation analogy does have its limitations. The purpose of the analogy is to show that the Maya is a creative energy that belongs to Brahman(As Krishna says in the Gita: my creative energy) which is inseparable from Brahman in the much the same way the radiation is inseparable from the sun. However, Maya has the power to project illusion and cover or veil Brahman, this is why Maya is said to be power of illusion, but not an illusion itself.

The best modern example for the theory of Maya comes from physics: the holographic principle: Technology News: Science: The Holographic Universe: Is Our 3D World Just an Illusion?

The basic idea is that the universe is a holographic projection of a more fundamental reality. Meaning the actual universe is illusory, it is projected from this source. This is what the theory of Maya says too - our entire universe is projected from Maya like a hologram of what is fundamentally guna activity(in modern physics we say string activity) (Once again it is non-Indians who are doing all the ground work)

The application of the theory of Maya is to reveal our empirical reality as it really is which is achieved in Advaita through Yoga. Consciousness(Brahman) is pervading the entire reality of Maya and is present in every dimension of the world of Maya. It is present in the causal level(guna activity) it is present in the subtle level(mental) and it is present in the gross level(physical) However, the Jiva which is effectively a material machine(like AI) reflects that consciousness and falsely thinks that it is a localized unit of consciousness(like the analogy of the pot and space in the Upanishads) without realizing that actually consciousness is everywhere in the universe and is the ground of reality itself. This is why in Advaita the upadhis(limiting adjuncts) are systematically removed from the Jiva so that it can expand its field of consciousness and experience its essential nature as consciosiousness.

So Brahman is the cause of Illusion, hence Brahman is not perfect.
How does a perfect all knowing being get illusioned?

No Maya is the cause of the illusion. Brahman is not the cause of anything. Brahman just is a pure homogeneous substance of consciousness. Brahman does not do anything or will anything. It is just there.

That is just talking about individual perception, does not mean that there is no spoon, or the dot in the Sky is Illusion, what we observe differently is in fact a great example of Individuality of the observer, not the illusion of what is being observed.

What you say is fair, though you are missing the actual point. What we observe is based on differentiating a form we see into an objective reality with boundaries. For example, the body is one whole organism. However, we then divide it into objects like the various parts of the body and then defines the boundaries by saying the toes are the little appendages on the feet, the feet are attached to the legs, the legs are attached to the hips etc. Infant studies in psychology it is shown that infants have no conception of the distinction of parts of the body and the boundaries of different parts, they learn these conceptions through language.

Now extend the body example further: Is it true the body is just one organism completely separate from the rest of the world around it? No, because the body is not separate from the world, but a part of the world and lives by breathing its air via the lungs, sees by receiving light from the sun, smells by receiving particles from the air, tastes by receiving chemicals with the tongue, and grows and evolves by consuming chemicals. In fact the body's natural chemical/biological processes are finely coordinated with not just the Earth, but with the solar and lunar cycles and solar and lunar cycles are in turned coordinated by the complex interplay of forces in the universe . In other words the entire universe is a single functional organism. It is not the just the body, for even a complex process like lifting your fingers, requires a complex interplay of forces in the universe. This is what is meant when we say the gunas determine everything in the universe.

So our entire conception of an objection reality relies purely on language and isn't actually reality, because our divisions of reality and definitions of objects and their boundaries are purely arbitrary. Logic will fully bear this truth out and this is how Advaita through the critique of naam-rupa establishes this conclusion. But modern science has now empirically demonstrated that no such thing as objective(separable) reality exists with the Bell Experiment:

. The Bell Reasoning and the Aspect Experiment.

The reasoning of Bell and the experimental investigation of his theoretical results by Aspect were a most interesting attempt to find experimental proof of the existence of a particlelike objective reality underlying quantum mechanics. Bell’s theorem essentially says that (1) if particles exist and (2) if one presumes that a measurement on one particle cannot affect the results of a measurement on a second, distant particle, then under certain circumstances quantum mechanics predicts an incorrect result. The Aspect experiment showed that quantum mechanics gives the correct result.


2. What Conclusions are to Be Drawn?

Because the first “if” is usually implicitly assumed to hold (rather than being explicitly stated), it is normally assumed that the second “if” does not hold. If that is assumed, the implied long-range, instantaneous “interaction” between the two particles, needed to explain the influence of one particle on the second, distant particle, seems mysterious indeed. But if one assumes there are no particles, or more generally, no objective reality, then it is the first “if” that does not hold. In that case, since there are just wave functions (rather than wave functions plus mysteriously coupled particles), the mystery in the Bell-Aspect results completely disappears; the experiment simply confirms the veracity of quantum mechanics (which may not always agree with our local classical expectations because, under certain circumstances, it predicts correlations between widely separated events).

Thus the most economical interpretation—because there is no need to have an underlying particle theory that must incorporate instantaneous action-at-a-distance—of the Bell-Aspect results is that there are no particles. Only the wave function exists.

The Bell experiments and the the conclusions derived thereof are now considered proven. There is no objective reality and there is likely no reality at all. We now routinely exploit the fact there is no objective reality with the principle of quantum entanglement, where we create an entangled pair of particles and transmit information between those entangled parts for the purpose of communications. This is used quantum encryption, quantum computing and quantum teleportation.

Bells experiment, however tests more for whether locality is true or false, rather than whether reality is true or false. The violation of the Bell experiment's test of inequalities proves that either locality is false or reality and locality is false. As the Bell experiment does not control for the variable of reality the conclusion that there is no reality is inconclusive. However, later experiments devised by physicists control for the variable of reality and again the experiment violates the test of the inequalities and proves there is no reality(no physical world without an observer)

In short we have very clear modern experimental confirmation of Advaita. Advaita is no longer just a philosophy, but an actual confirmed theory of reality. Indian Hindus rather than welcoming this fact, are ignorant of it and still worshiping Krishna, Shiva or Durga. The irony is Advaita comes from their own Vedic tradition. They have disowned their own wisdom. Again, why I consider Indian Hindus the weakest link in Hinduism.

 

[Surya Deva]

If the Matrix is eternal, then there is no getting out of the Matrix, all perceptions of freedom will be just another Illusion of getting out.

The matrix is not eternal. Maya's projection ends when the jiva attains jnana of the projection. How is that possible? Brahman or consciousness is never actually entangled in Maya projection, Brahman always remains transcendent. When the jiva realizes that consciousness(Brahman) is not entangled, by meditating the Jiva is able to realize that reality by removing all the limiting adjuncts which are preventing it from knowing that transcendental reality.

Amazing, but basically according to Advaita Jiva is artificial intelligence. It is not an actual sentient organism, but a natural machine which reflects consciousness and falsely believes itself to be conscious. Hence why Krishna tells us to get rid of the ego(ahamkara) because there is no agent. The Jiva is not an agent, it is just another cog in the machine of the universe, and it is driven by the forces of nature, and it wrongly thinks that it is doing things according to its own free will.

Is it making sense now? I can be very patient with you, because I appreciate these ideas are complex and they cannot be cognized straight away - but I can explain them fairly well and have even been able to get my mother, a ordinary Indian housewife to understand.

A product of gold contains the gold, hence a product of Maya will be Maya.

Bingo. So the entire empirical reality you witness is all Maya. It is the creative energy of consciousness. It is all in end just one vast field of consciousness. There is no such thing as objective and material reality.

Hmm, it does not say the Individuality disappears, it just says we merge with Brahman.

When a river merges into the ocean it loses its individuality; when a wave falls a back into the ocean it loses its individuality. Individuality is temporal and like all temporal things it ends. You are that Brahman, you are that whole(thou art that) but you do not realize it. You think of yourself as as single unit of consciousness in an objective world of people and things, doing this and that, experiencing pain and pleasure. You condemn yourself through ignorance. You are much more than this, but you do not realize it.

Buddhism never disowned the Vedic religion.

In Sutta Nipat 192, Mahatma Buddha says that:

Vidwa Cha Vedehi Samechcha Dhammam Na Uchchavacham Gachhati Bhooripanjo.

People allow sense-organs to dominate and keep shuffling between high and low positions. But the scholar who understands Vedas understands Dharma and does not waver.

Now as for Hinduism.

Buddha may not have, but Buddhism certainly did. Remember Buddhism is a religion that was formed centuries after his death. The religion is Nastika, because it rejects the Vedas.

The very name ‘Hinduism’ testifies this.

No, Vasudeva kutumbukum says the entire world is one family. It does not say everybodies philosophy is equally valid. It is impossible for everybodies philosophy and beliefs to be equally valid, because they are contradictory. Some say we only have one life and then face judgement; some say we reincarnate until we achieve Moksha and merge into god/void/absolute reality; some say that a personal god created this world for enjoyment or sport(lila) and some say there is no god and this world was created by nature or that an absolute reality projects this world. It is logically impossible for all these ideas to be equally valid: A and not A leads to a contradiction. The law of non-contradiction is fundamental to any logical system. A contradiction falsifies the system.

 

[Maya3]

Whoa!
Stop there for a minute before you generize a whole people!

Do you truly not see how rude you are?
And against rules of conduct on this forum.

Maya

 

[Surya Deva]

I am not really saying that every Indian Hindu is like this, I am talking generally. I am also Indian Hindu too remember Perhaps I should qualify and say most Indian Hindus I meet.

The emperor is wearing no clothes .....

 

[Surya Deva]

To add: My pet peeve and annoyance with most Indian Hindus is how they try to white wash great social evils and religious fundamentalism pretending it does not exist or it is OK - and then cry foul when non-Indians highlight those issues exactly. Caste system oppression, widow burning or ostracizing widows, gurus and pandits molesting disciples and luring people into personality worshiping cults, bathing in toxic waters and encouraging drinking, bathing and swimming in the water, religious fundamentalism, vast social and gender inequality are not minor issues and it is irresponsible and I would even argue criminal to ignore them.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Surya Deva;3071704]I never said that. If we define Hinduism as the culture, way of life and history of India, it is as valid as Americanism and Spanishism is a religion.

Yes a Culture and way of life, started with the attempt to understand the Vedas.

Advaita is not a faith-based system, it is a philosophy based on formal reasoning. Hence it is also based on methodology, its arguments can be tested by any logician and be falsified. However, even the best logicians like the famous British logician whitehead called it the best metaphysics the human mind has ever conceived.

Faith is faith, if its put into a certain Philosophy does not change the fact the person has faith in the Philosophy.

The Darsana systems are rather similar to science in fact....

No argument there, I have no problems with Any darshana.

I have noticed Indian Hindus don't at all appreciate how sophisticated their rational schools of thought are, and prefer faith and mythology. It is really unfortunate and this is why I have ruled that Indian Hindus are the weakest link in Hinduism. It is better we separate Hinduism from India. This is why I have personally........

The people you speak of in India are uneducated, they are poor and illiterate, instead of educating and dispelling there ignorance you have taken the easy way out and simply are trying to remove them from a chance of betterment.

Instead of just removing them as a problem, remove the problem.

Today, 90% of courses on Hinduism, Sanskrit, Indian studies, Yoga etc are studied by non-Indians and taught by non-Indians. Practically all of the academic literature written in these areas comes from non-Indians.

That is where i think the problem is, Indian are told they don't know there own litterateur, we are ridiculed and made fun, most of which stems from Abrahamic and racial bias. Some Indian who still have the "Slave", mentality take it as being true and don't do their own research, Some completely ignore it and become into a state of self preservation, Some take it as a lesson and use their own intellect and try to change general perceptions of their people.

Pride in ones heritage and culture is nothing to be ashamed of.

Krishna had 16,000 wives; Eternal Veda Vyasa wrote the Puranas in 3000BCE; Risis had electric cars, nuclear weapons; homosexuality is punishable and forbidden; Lord Rama existed millions of years ago; Krishna is the one true God and must be worshiped Why am I the only Hindu that is embarrassed by all of this?

I don't believe many of this stuff, but im not embarrassed by it.

I have tried to dialogue with Indian Hindus, but it is futile really. I personally think India is a doomed country having witnessed the ground reality myself. A country so fragmented, divided, chaotic, polluted, dirty cannot possibly survive. It is a sinking ship, and we need to save Hinduism from sinking with it.

The state of India is in the Hands of Indians, the Indians are in the Hands of a secular government, India does not have a Hindu Government.

We cant save Hinduism, but we can save the Indians with Hinduism.

I don't. The Upanishads are relatively quite primitive in their articulation compared to the Darsanas, thus I base my knowledge on the Darsanas, because they are scientific evidence-based. The systems of Samkhya, Advaita, Vaiseshika, Nyaya and Yoga, as well upavedas like Ayurveda, Vykarana and Chandha are simply brilliant and all rational people appreciate them.....

Not all Indian Hindus, just the illiterate and poor.

That is why i think education is a proper answer, not education based on the western system, but education of Indians based of Vedic thought.

Okay, it is difficult to prove either way whether wars between kingdoms in India were political, religious or both.

Then that is settled then.

Absolutely, and that is what I am doing. There are many Indian Hindus here, who are hopelessly confused about their religion who think Hinduism is a radical univeralist religion and accepts all faiths/beliefs/philosophies as valid paths

I think your approach needs to be a bit different.

Indian Hindus are not the problem themselves, it is their ignorance, arrogance and stubbornness that is the problem.

So educate and Dispel Ignorance, don't ridicule and exclude.

So many reformers have tried to get Hinduism back on track, to save the Indian people like Swami Vivekananda, Aurobindo going back to Guru Nanak, Mahavira and Buddha, but Indians seem to be a people hellbent on their own destruction. I can't see India surviving into the 22nd century. I can see Hinduism surviving into the 22nd century. Like great Hindu visionaries like Vivekananda, I can see it become the religion of our future in the form of Advaita.

Europeans in the 18th century said all of India will be Christian in 19th.

Its still there, so don't be too quick to just push it to oblivion.

I know Advaita very well and it presents the most clearest description of metaphysics we have in the world, according to great logicians like Whitehead, it presents the most scientific account of reality according to great physicists like Schrodinger, and it is the most elevated and sublime philosophy of the world according to Schopenhauer.

Indian Philosophy done by learned Indians, don't put us all in the same boat.
Dont put all your faith in Advaita.

This is an argument from faith. Not valid. The evidence shows us clearly that no religion in the world circa 2000BCE had a monotheistic religion, everybody was polytheistic in the world, and then circa 1000BCE monotheistic thought developed in many urban cultures in the world. We see this is equally true for the Vedic people.

What proof do you have of this?

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Surya Deva;3071862]False. The Vedas do not mention anything about yoga, samsara, karma, moksha, brahman. We can only see in very later stages of the Vedic hymns like the Purusha suktam and Nasadiya Suktam precursors to Upanishadic thought. The Upanishads are known as Vedanta because they mark an end to the previous Vedic thought, in very much the same way the NT marks an end to the previous OT thought.

Yes they do, in the Pursha Sukta and Nasadiya Sukta as you said, and Upanishads are not after Vedas, Brahmanas and Aryanakas come in between.
Also the Vedangas, Upanishads are Only Philosophy in trying to Understand the Mantras in Veda Samhitas.

Nothing I am telling you is against anything you would be taught in an official degree course in religious studies. I am telling you exactly what the scholarship says.

Dont say i have to go to Oxford to Know my own Litterateur.

No you have not, you have read translations from the Arya Samaaj....

Ahh, and you know this because??

Plus I have already provided you that Arya Samaj Veda Samhita translations are accurate.

The radiation analogy does have its limitations. The purpose of the analogy is to show that the Maya is a creative energy that belongs to Brahman(As Krishna says in the Gita: my creative energy) which is inseparable from Brahman in the much the same way the radiation is inseparable from the sun. However, Maya has the power to project illusion and cover or veil Brahman, this is why Maya is said to be power of illusion, but not an illusion itself.

SO the illusion of an illusion, therefore there is no Maya.

The best modern example for the theory of Maya comes from physics: the holographic principle: Technology News: Science: The Holographic Universe: Is Our 3D World Just an Illusion?

Times like these i have more Pride in my heritage, not embarrassment.

The basic idea is that the universe is a holographic projection of a more fundamental reality. Meaning the actual universe is illusory, it is projected from this source. This is what the theory of Maya says too - our entire universe is projected from Maya like a hologram of what is fundamentally guna activity(in modern physics we say string activity) (Once again it is non-Indians who are doing all the ground work)

That is more pride in being Indian.

Man you have a inferiority complex, just oozing out of you.

The application of the theory of Maya is to reveal our empirical reality as it really is which is achieved in Advaita through Yoga. Consciousness(Brahman) is pervading the entire reality of Maya and is present in every dimension of the world of Maya. It is present in the causal level(guna activity) it is present in the subtle level(mental) and it is present in the gross level(physical) However, the Jiva which is effectively a material machine(like AI) reflects that consciousness and falsely thinks that it is a localized unit of consciousness(like the analogy of the pot and space in the Upanishads) without realizing that actually consciousness is everywhere in the universe and is the ground of reality itself. This is why in Advaita the upadhis(limiting adjuncts) are systematically removed from the Jiva so that it can expand its field of consciousness and experience its essential nature as consciosiousness.

You have not clearly defined Maya. All this is just your illusion of how things really are.

No Maya is the cause of the illusion. Brahman is not the cause of anything. Brahman just is a pure homogeneous substance of consciousness. Brahman does not do anything or will anything. It is just there.

Sorry, what was the cause of Maya?

What you say is fair, though you are missing the actual point. What we observe is based on differentiating a form we see into an objective reality with boundaries. For example, the body is one whole organism. However, we then divide it into objects like the various parts of the body and then defines the boundaries by saying the toes are the little appendages on the feet, the feet are attached to the legs, the legs are attached to the hips etc. Infant studies in psychology it is shown that infants have no conception of the distinction of parts of the body and the boundaries of different parts, they learn these conceptions through language.

That true, Physically we are all made of the same thing, but Physical material are not all conscious, but to observe we cant be a Part of the observed object, the Physical Universe is in the Observed object, we are within this Universe but still observing it.

But that does not mean we are Illusions by some unseen force, that makes us think we are an individual.

Our Individuality comes from our Eternal Atman, The Illusion you speak of is just our illusion regarding the concept of Brahaman, not regarding the Physical nature of the Universe.

In short we have very clear modern experimental confirmation of Advaita. Advaita is no longer just a philosophy, but an actual confirmed theory of reality. Indian Hindus rather than welcoming this fact, are ignorant of it and still worshiping Krishna, Shiva or Durga. The irony is Advaita comes from their own Vedic tradition. They have disowned their own wisdom. Again, why I consider Indian Hindus the weakest link in Hinduism.

As i said before, we are not all in the same boat, education is the key.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Surya Deva;3071864]The matrix is not eternal. Maya's projection ends when the jiva attains jnana of the projection. How is that possible? Brahman or consciousness is never actually entangled in Maya projection, Brahman always remains transcendent. When the jiva realizes that consciousness(Brahman) is not entangled, by meditating the Jiva is able to realize that reality by removing all the limiting adjuncts which are preventing it from knowing that transcendental reality.

If Maya is not eternal, then when did it start?

Amazing, but basically according to Advaita Jiva is artificial intelligence. It is not an actual sentient organism, but a natural machine which reflects consciousness and falsely believes itself to be conscious. Hence why Krishna tells us to get rid of the ego(ahamkara) because there is no agent. The Jiva is not an agent, it is just another cog in the machine of the universe, and it is driven by the forces of nature, and it wrongly thinks that it is doing things according to its own free will.

So there is no Jiva Atma?

Is it making sense now? I can be very patient with you, because I appreciate these ideas are complex and they cannot be cognized straight away - but I can explain them fairly well and have even been able to get my mother, a ordinary Indian housewife to understand.

The problem i Have is with Maya itself.

Bingo. So the entire empirical reality you witness is all Maya. It is the creative energy of consciousness. It is all in end just one vast field of consciousness. There is no such thing as objective and material reality.

But Maya is Illusion, so its a real thing causing Illusion or just a sense of Illusion named Maya, if it is then it has naam-rupa, and is real.

When a river merges into the ocean it loses its individuality; when a wave falls a back into the ocean it loses its individuality. Individuality is temporal and like all temporal things it ends. You are that Brahman, you are that whole(thou art that) but you do not realize it. You think of yourself as as single unit of consciousness in an objective world of people and things, doing this and that, experiencing pain and pleasure. You condemn yourself through ignorance. You are much more than this, but you do not realize it.

River has the same core character as the Ocean, Water.
Waves are Water just like the Ocean.

I now this.

If Individuality is Part of the Brahman, it must have the same Core Character as Brahman.

If i experience Pain and Pleasured then the Brahman should also experience pain and pleasure.

Then Moksha if means loosing the Individuality is incorrect as there is no Individual, and if Jeeva is brahman in nature, Brahman which is the the purpose of Moksha then Why are not the Jeevas already in Moksha?

Buddha may not have, but Buddhism certainly did. Remember Buddhism is a religion that was formed centuries after his death. The religion is Nastika, because it rejects the Vedas.

Yes, Just like Sankara did not, but his followers are doing.

No, Vasudeva kutumbukum says the entire world is one family. It does not say everybodies philosophy is equally valid. It is impossible for everybodies philosophy and beliefs to be equally valid, because they are contradictory. Some say we only have one life and then face judgement; some say we reincarnate until we achieve Moksha and merge into god/void/absolute reality; some say that a personal god created this world for enjoyment or sport(lila) and some say there is no god and this world was created by nature or that an absolute reality projects this world. It is logically impossible for all these ideas to be equally valid: A and not A leads to a contradiction. The law of non-contradiction is fundamental to any logical system. A contradiction falsifies the system.

Yes, But Acceptance based on core Human belief is what Hinduism is.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

On a lighter note,
I found this quite amusing.

A and B are walking together in their local park. It is a beautiful sunny day.



A: “Hey, look over there. Do you see it? What a beautiful tree!”

B: “STOP RIGHT THERE! There is no ‘tree’! There is no ‘beauty’! Both ‘tree’ and ‘beauty’ are merely concepts appearing in space-like, ever present awareness! Don’t settle for mere concepts, A! Don’t buy into the ignorance of the mind! End seeking once and for all, here and now! All words are merely pointers! Discard the pointers!”

A: “Er…. yeah. Of course. I get that. I was just saying…”

B:”STOP! There is no ‘I’ to ‘get’ anything! And nothing to get! And no ‘saying’!”

A: “Yes. I know. I SEE that.”

B:”WHO sees that? WHAT is there to see? WHO sees WHAT? There is nobody there seeing! Ask yourself the question ‘WHO SEES’?! There is only clear, space-like seeing with no person doing anything! There is no duality! There is only non-duality! Duality is an illusion! Only non-duality is real!”

A: “I was just saying….”

B:”WHO was saying? WHAT is there to say? And to WHOM?”

[Pause]

A: “Look, are you going to let me speak at all?”

B:”WHO would let WHO speak?…”

A: “Jesus, B, I knew you were going to say that! You know, you’ve become so predictable since you got into this Advaita stuff. Look, all I wanted to say is that the tree over there is… lovely. Beautiful. NICE. And yes, I know that ultimately those are just concepts, and the word is not the thing, and there is no separate ‘tree’, blah blah blah. But can’t I just say that it’s a beautiful tree? Am I allowed to say it? I mean, come on, it’s beautiful, don’t you think it is?”

B:”No! There is NOBODY HERE who thinks! You are lost in a world of ignorance! You have not yet woken up to your true nature!”

A: “Wow. Okay, okay, you seem pretty worked up about this….”

B:”No! There is NOBODY HERE getting ‘worked up’! ‘Worked up’ is merely a conceptual overlay appearing in awareness! It is all simply your perception, a projection of your own ignorance. There is still the belief that you are a time-bound self…”

A: “Okay! Okay! Whatever, B. I give up. I just thought it was a nice tree. I wanted to share something with you. I don’t know. Just to share something. Something.. beautiful. That’s all. No more, no less. If you don’t like that, fine. I give up…”

B:”You’re referring to the past! There is NO past! Only the eternal present! Only NOW!”

[Pause].

A: “B, can I be honest with you? Since you’ve, well, in your own words, ‘recognised your true nature’, all the joy seems to have gone out of you. I’m sure you’ve found some clarity in one way or another, but it’s almost like you’ve lost the ability to, well, relate as a human being to me. You always seem to feel the need to shoot everything and everyone down, even when they haven’t actually asked for your help or advice. It’s like you always need to play the teacher. You’re trying to teach me when I don’t need to be taught.”

B:”That’s what the seeker always says! But the seeker’s ignorance must be destroyed with the machine gun of Truth!”

A: “See? There you go again! I’m trying to talk to you in a down-to-earth, ordinary human way, just as a friend, not asking for help but sharing, and it’s like just can’t HEAR that anymore. What’s happened to you?”

B:”There is no person here! Do away with this ignorance that I am a person and that you are a person, and be free!”

A: “As I said, you’re no fun anymore. There used to be a time when I could talk about the beauty of trees. We talked, and it was fun, enjoyable, and totally innocent. Now I feel like it’s wrong. Like you see it as wrong. Like it’s not allowed in your non-duality… system. Like if I’m not using the same language as you, if I’m not saying the things in the same way as you do, you get on your high horse and start preaching. And get angry. And nobody enjoys being around an angry preacher. And even worse, an angry preacher who then denies that they are angry and that they are preaching!”

B:”Ah, your feelings are hurt! Poor little hurt ego! A sure sign you are stuck in ignorance! If, like me, you had completely recognised your true nature, there would be no hurt! Getting hurt is a sign of WEAKNESS, which is ego! Stop being a baby! Drop the hurt little ego and SEE! Be fearless like ME! Stop complaining, don’t take it all so personally! Remember, my pointers are impersonal! ”

A: “B, listen to what I’m saying. I’m not saying my ego is hurt. I’m not saying I’m seeking. I’m not saying I need a teacher. Listen to what I’m saying. I’m saying that you seem joyless and angry to me these days. It’s like you feel the need to teach me all the time, when I haven’t asked for a teacher, and I don’t need one. I was just saying that it’s a beautiful tree, it’s such a simple thing, and you can’t seem to hear that anymore. What’s happened to you? I thought seeing your true nature was supposed to bring freedom? And simplicity? But it seems that you’re angrier and more arrogant than ever. Can you hear what I’m saying, B? As a friend to a friend, can you hear it?”

B:”NOBODY hears!”

A:”Good grief. ‘It’s a beautiful tree’. So simple. Can you not hear that anymore?”

B: “NOBODY hears! NOBODY’S here! Nobody! Nothing! No-one!!”

A: “I know, B, I know! You say that about ten thousand times a day. Nobody here. Pure awareness. Everything’s a concept. The illusion of duality. I get it. I see this nonduality thing. I see the truth in those pointers. I see that I am totally free and unbound. I see the miracle of life. But I never, ever feel the need to talk about it. I never feel the need to convert anyone. I never feel the need to teach or preach. I feel free to just live an ordinary life. I feel so free, that I even feel free to say ‘it’s a beautiful tree’! Yes, for me, that’s part of the freedom. The freedom to say ordinary things in an ordinary way! The freedom to use words like ‘I’ and ‘me’ and ‘tree’, the freedom to talk about time and space, although in an ultimate sense they are only concepts. Still, there cannot be anything wrong with saying those words, can there? There cannot be anything wrong with anything, can there? Yes, I get it, I really do, there is nobody here, there’s no tree and no beauty, in an absolute sense, I GET IT, but still, IT’S A BEAUTIFUL TREE! Can’t that be as true as its opposite? In the end, can’t ‘tree’ and ‘not tree’ be… equal?”

B:”If you say ‘I get it’, there is the assumption that there is somebody there who gets it…”

A: [Sighs] “You know what? I’m leaving. I hate to say it, but you’re no fun to be around anymore, B. You used to laugh. You used to take things lightly. You used to enjoy walking in nature. WE used to enjoy walking in nature. Together. Looking at these trees. Chatting like equals. It never used to be a problem. These days, it feels like a problem when you’re around. I don’t feel that we’re equals anymore. It’s like you see everybody as beneath you. You see everybody as desperate seekers, while you are the only one who is free. Can’t you see, that’s a huge projection on YOUR part?”

B: “There is no projection, only space-like awareness. Anything you say is YOUR projection.”

A: “Okay. Goodbye B. Sorry, but I’m going. Enjoy your space-like awareness. On your own.”

[Walks off]

B: “Fine! FINE! Walk off! See if I care! WHO cares? WHO CARES? There’s nobody here who cares! See how carefree I am! NOBODY CARES! Nothing and nobody to care about! It’s all YOUR projection! Your suffering is your problem, not mine! There are no problems in this eternal presence! You are still lost in separateness! I can’t help you! But THERE IS NO SUFFERING HERE!”

[Pause]

B: “Only few will hear this message! Most people will walk away! You’re not the only one! Many others have walked away too! This will never, ever be a popular message! I am here to destroy your seeking, not to comfort you! From the beginning of time only few have truly heard this! People are simply not ready to confront their true nature! All those egos run a mile when confronted with my clarity! They are all afraid of this teaching! Afraid to hear the truth! Afraid to no longer be joyless, lonely seekers! Afraid to let go of all their concepts and come to deep, permanent rest in spacious awareness! Afraid to be free and peaceful, like me! Afraid of my brutal, uncompromising love!”

B stands alone, for a long while, looking at the tree.

B (secretly thinking to himself): My goodness, what a beautiful tree…

 

[Surya Deva]

Yes they do, in the Pursha Sukta and Nasadiya Sukta as you said, and Upanishads are not after Vedas, Brahmanas and Aryanakas come in between.
Also the Vedangas, Upanishads are Only Philosophy in trying to Understand the Mantras in Veda Samhitas.

The Purusha Sukta and the Nasadiya Sukta are only two out of thousands of suktas which have been composed over centuries to possibly thousands of years(dates vary for composition of Vedic hymns from 2000BCE according to linguistics and 7000BCE according to archaeological and astronomical evidence(hard sciences)) The early Suktas are clearly polytheistic, they worship Indra, Agni etc with the Soma ritual, which is entirely consistent with a primitive culture.

Dont say i have to go to Oxford to Know my own Litterateur.

This is an arrogant attitude. I use to think that I did not need to go university to study philosophy, as I already could come up with all the ideas/theories/perspectives any philosopher could have all by myself. I was an arrogant fool, for I discovered as soon as studied philosophy professionally how little I actually knew and how wonderful the history of ideas has been and I learned formal methods of philosophical investigations which broadened my mind, sharpened my intellect and ability for free rational thinking. It is close to impossible for a single human being to research all the different areas of a subject, and this is why we have the institution of academia, which is a body of interdisciplinary and peer-reviewed research, that a single person is not capable of researching by themselves. For example you do not know linguistics, so you cannot gather linguistic knowledge of your literature; you do not know archaeology, so you cannot gather archaeological knowledge about your literature; you do not know genetics, so you cannot gather genetic knowledge about the authors that composed your literature. You do not know the science of history, so you cannot gather historical knowledge about your literature. Thus, we leave these areas to the experts, who dedicate their life careers to research in these areas.

An ignorant uneducated person would read the Vishnu purana for instance and believe that it was composed by eternal Ved Vyassa in 3000BCE. Academics would the read the Vishnu Purana differently. The linguists would look at the text itself, the style of grammar and composition, the language and dialects used; the historians would study the historical references in the Puranas and the development of Puranic thought by comparing and contrasting to other Puranas; Archaeologists would look at the descriptions of buildings, town layout. Collectively, the experts would be able to form a more accurate and scientific assessment of the date of composition, the historical context, and the likely authors, as well as the ideological/philosophical and theological thought and be able to situate the text accordingly.

In the case of the Vishnu Purana we know from evidence-based research that it was composed after 300AD during the Gupta period and the Vishnu Purana was composed by a number of anonymous authors within the Vaishnava religion, loosely based on the alleged historicity of Krishna in ancient times and then continuously edited over centuries(interpolated) They contain legends, stories and myths of Krishna. In much the same way the Gospels and other Christian literature contain legends, stories and myths of Jesus. Even to this very day new myths about Jesus are produced.

Having a scholarly evidence based perspective is not equally valid to a faith based perspective.

Ahh, and you know this because??

Plus I have already provided you that Arya Samaj Veda Samhita translations are accurate.

You've done no such thing, your claimed translation of the Nasadiya Suktam was proven wrong by the Sanskrit experts. Then your claimed method of using the Niruka to translate the Vedas was shown to be useless, for the same Nirukta which is used to translate the Vedas as documents on building steam engines, aeroplanes and telegraphs, is used by another author to translate the Vedas as documents on Yoga, meditation and pranayama, is used by yet another author to translate the Vedas as a book on hormones and stimulation of pleasurable zones in the body like the breasts and anus Therefore the etymological method of the Nirukta because it produces contradictory translations is invalid.

SO the illusion of an illusion, therefore there is no Maya.

I am not sure where you drew that conclusion from. I told you Maya is not an illusion but an actual creative power that belongs to Brahman, this power has the ability to project and veil Brahman. The holographic projection it produces that veils Brahman is the illusion part.

Times like these i have more Pride in my heritage, not embarrassment.

I don't understand why would you have pride all of a sudden, when you seem to be strongly against the theory of Maya? Maya is no longer just a philosophy, but an actual theory within modern science.

Also, there is no reason for 'pride' stop being so myopic. Were all in this together. Were all humans. Each culture in the world has contributed to a body of knowledge we have today. Everything has not come from a single tradition, even the Vedic tradition. Modern empirical science and technology, computers, lasers, motors, factories comes from the Western tradition.

We have far more knowledge today collectively than our ancients did in every discipline. Even in terms of 'spiritual science' modern developments like biofeedback machines, electromagnetic stimulation of the brain, sensory deprivation tanks have greatly advanced our spiritual technologies over traditional methods. There is far more detailed literature today than the Upanishads or the Sutras in explaining the science of reality in very minute detail.

Humans are evolving and progressing. Lets not get stuck in a time-warp. We are heading for an interstellar civilization by the 22nd century. By the end of this century we will have space elevators(elevators that go to space), programmable matter that can assemble itself into any form we wish, computers and the internet wired to our brain, thought-control, machines that read thoughts and dreams, fusion reactors, the technology to control the weather and every geological process, even continental shift, colonies on Mars and the Moon, nanotechnology to enhance human life span by hundreds of years, and the ability to communicate with and access other dimensions and possibly even time travel(predicated by Relativity) As great as the Vedic tradition was, it is a mere shadow compared to the brilliance of the modern era.

While humanity is moving into the space age era, it is embarrassing that Hindus are still worshiping god/s, doing bizarre rituals to idols, following dead traditions, bathing in toxic waters considering it sacred
The irony is, what science is realizing today is what our Risis of the Upanishads and our philosophers realized in 1000BCE. Hindus have ignored this wisdom in favor of Puranic childishness. It's really SAD.

That is more pride in being Indian.

Man you have a inferiority complex, just oozing out of you.

No, because I am a humanist, therefore I don't favour any single nationality or civilization. I draw from every tradition because they are our common human heritage.

You have not clearly defined Maya. All this is just your illusion of how things really are.

What do you not understand about Maya that I have not clearly defined?

Sorry, what was the cause of Maya?

There is no cause, Maya is eternal. Maya projects and veils Brahman. This entire empirical reality/universe is a holographic projection of the creative energy of Brahman. In that sense we can say Brahman is the ultimate cause, but the effect is not real, but a mere appearance of the cause. As the link on the holographic principle shows: This 3D reality is a projection of a more fundamental reality. Hence the 3D reality is an illusion, but its cause which is projecting it is real.

Like I said we have experimental confirmation of the theory of Maya in modern physics now. It is no longer something that can be just treated as speculative philosophy. There is real empirical basis to it now.

The Hindu really should be the last person opposing this. I can understand why an Abrahamic person would oppose it, but a Hindu too? Hindus behave like they are an Abrahamic religion today. Were not: We are the total opposite.

 

[Surya Deva]

That true, Physically we are all made of the same thing, but Physical material are not all conscious, but to observe we cant be a Part of the observed object, the Physical Universe is in the Observed object, we are within this Universe but still observing it.

Absolutely, and hence the purusha and prakriti/maya dualism in Hindu philosophy. The observer is always independent of what it is observing. But can you observe the observer? You will say by looking into your inner world of perceptions, desires, thoughts, imaginations, states of consciousness, ego that you are observing yourself. But in actual fact, you are not observing yourself, because you are not your perceptions, desires, thoughts, imagination, or egos because they are constantly changing, they always objects of knowledge. They are inert(jada) and are not illuminated unless you are conscious of them.

So the theory of the gunas was developed in Hindu philosophy to differentiate the object from the observer(witnessing consciousness) Prakriti or matter is made of the guna activity, that cause prakriti to constantly change and transform from static/passive states, to mobile states to inertial states. Not only physical matter fits this definition, but also mental matter like thoughts, perceptions, egos, desires also fit this definition. Hence, it was concluded that what we call mind is also matter, just a more subtle grade of matter, but part of the same causal system of prakriti.

So do you see why there is no individual now? Just as there are no objects in reality, those objects are arbitrary creations by us through language by dividing the field of our perception into several divisions when it is fact it all one single causal system, likewise we create divisions of inner and outer reality by positing the existence of an individual self and this is why in Hindu philosophy we call this the ahamkara(I-construct) It is literally a construct of material activity which artificially splits the single causal system of prakriti into an objective reality.

In fact the truth is prakriti is one single causal system that exists across several dimensions of reality. What we call "mental" is the subtle dimension of prakriti. It is not just us that has a mental dimension, all matter, including a rock has a dimension. The causal dimension of prakriti is the highest dimension(sattva) of pure guna activity. We enter these different dimensions of prakriti through different states of consciousness. In the dream state we enter into the subtle dimension of prakriti. In this subtle dimension exist various subtle beings like ghandarvas, devas, yakshas and various subtle lokas.

But that does not mean we are Illusions by some unseen force, that makes us think we are an individual.

Our Individuality comes from our Eternal Atman, The Illusion you speak of is just our illusion regarding the concept of Brahaman, not regarding the Physical nature of the Universe.

Then you are going against what both Sruti and the Gita says. The Sruti tells us there is no individual self, only a universal self that is the same self in every being. The Gita tells us there is no doer/agent, there is only guna activity and everything that we think we are doing, is just the forces of gunas. You see the same truths are now confirmed in psychology: We know the mind is very much like a machine and its behavior can be predicted in how it responds to certain stimuli. We influence peoples behaviour by exploiting laws of nature.

The irony here is I am not telling you anything new. What I tell you is taught in the Upanishads, in the Darsanas and the Gita. You are going against what our Vedic wisdom teaches us.

As i said before, we are not all in the same boat, education is the key.

Yes, and I am telling you the boat of Advaita will take you to the other side of the river. This is the work of our Vedic tradition and it has not been paralleled until modern science, who are experimentally confirming what the Vedic tradition knew through pure reasoning and meditation.

 

[Surya Deva]

Yes a Culture and way of life, started with the attempt to understand the Vedas.

Yep a culture and way of life that begins with the Vedas, but then later veers of into multiple directions degenerating. The early Vedic people cannot be blamed for being primitive and sacrificing animals and humans and worshiping natural gods, they didn't know any better in those times, they were early humans and cannot be blamed for being primitive as much as the Neanderthals cannot. However, what is impressive about the evolution of the cultural and religious thought of the Vedic people is how they produced Vedanta in the end. It is really is remarkable how a people who previously worshiped natural gods, would abstract such an advanced and high concept like Brahman: The absolute infinite reality, that pervades all beings as Atman as pure consciousness and how this reality can be known through analysing reality(tattvajana) the science of reality. These ideas are remarkably modern and it would be fair to say the Vedic people were proto-scientists.

Then in the Darsana period the attempt to analyse reality was made using scientific epistemology(pramana) from different perspectives

Vedanta: Linguistic perspective
Samkhya: Phenomenological perspective
Nyaya-Vaiseshika: Empirical perspective

None of these perspectives are invalid in themselves, they valid insofar as the perspective they deal with. The Nyaya Vaiseshika were realist pluralists because they dealt with the empirical world. The Samkhya were dualists and evolutionists because they dealt with the world as the interaction between observer and object. The Vedantists are non-dualists and idealists because they deal with the world as a construction of reality through language.

The same perspectives that occur in the Darsana are perspectives of modern philosophy too.

[Faith is faith, if its put into a certain Philosophy does not change the fact the person has faith in the Philosophy.[/quote]

No argument there, I have no problems with Any darshana.

You seem to have a problem with Advaita Vedanta though. Why is Advaita Vedanta faith and the other darsanas rational/scientific then?

The people you speak of in India are uneducated, they are poor and illiterate, instead of educating and dispelling there ignorance you have taken the easy way out and simply are trying to remove them from a chance of betterment.

Nope, actually many of these people following these traditions are not all illiterate, they are literate and otherwise intelligent people, but who are perpetuating these dead traditions because these traditions are given sanction in the Puranas. Even on the Hinduism DIR forum you will find literate Hindus actually fight tooth and nail to defend Puranic Hinduism or Smriti traditions like Manusriti.

The problem has got nothing to do with literacy. It is what I said arrogance, ignorance and stubbornness. Refusing to be rational. Refusing to grow up. The majority of Indian Hindus you see, of which more than 70% are literate are apathetic about Hinduism, they have an anything goes mentality, that everybodies path and beleifs/philoshies are equally valid. They do not speak up against practices like some Hindus worshiping rats or eating left over food eaten by rats thinking of it as blessed, because they say it is their "faith" They have no problem with Hindu rituals and superstition(which become very bizarre) because they consider it their faith.

The very first thing we need to do is get of this postmodern attitude that treats Hinduism as a "faith" just another path or viewpoint and actively encourage free thinking and challenging other paths/traditions/philosophies as Hinduism as historically always been based on. Second, we must get rid of Puranic Hinduism and return Hinduism to what it really should be based on Sruti and the Upanishads. Thirdly, we need to work reconciling Hinduism with modern science so there are no contradictions. Hinduism needs to be advanced as the religion of science. Hence Hindus need to actively dialogue with scientists(like Swami Vivekananda did) and make Hinduism for scientists, then Hinduism will become the religion of the future.

Hinduism is an evidence-based religion. It is based on direct realizations of our yogis(risis) and the deep rational thinkers of our Darsanas. It is perfectly compatible with science. Puranic Hinduism is not - it needs to GO.

Instead of just removing them as a problem, remove the problem.

Yes Puranic Hinduism is the problem. We must get rid of it. Hindus must expose Puranic Hinduism by educating Hindus and reducating them about what their religion really teaches. This is the only way Hinduism can be saved.

That is where i think the problem is, Indian are told they don't know there own litterateur, we are ridiculed and made fun, most of which stems from Abrahamic and racial bias. Some Indian who still have the "Slave", mentality take it as being true and don't do their own research, Some completely ignore it and become into a state of self preservation, Some take it as a lesson and use their own intellect and try to change general perceptions of their people.

Whose fault is it that non-Indians are the primary authority for Hindu, indological, Indian philosophy, Yoga and Sanskrit today? Rajiv Malhotra also a nationalist answers: Indian themselves. Indians would prefer to study medicine or computer sciences or business than study their own history, philosophy, arts or Sanskrit. They do not get involved, and this is why they have lost Hinduism to the non-Indian.

Western intellectuals, philosophers and scientists can appreciate what Indian people themselves cannot appreciate about the Vedic wisdom. The West has become prosperous by learning from the Vedas, while Indians deny their own Vedas in favour of Puranas. Indians have themselves to blame. Here is what I predict: The torch of Santana Dharma has forever gone from India and has been passed onto the West. It is the West now that leads the world in matters spiritual, scientific and philosophy - not India. India's time has passed.

Pride in ones heritage and culture is nothing to be ashamed of.

All India has to be proud of today is its glorious past lol Indian people are stuck in a time warp. I welcome all Indians into the 21st century.

I don't believe many of this stuff, but im not embarrassed by it.

It is embarrassing because these people are suppose to be Hindus. These people go out there and tell these beliefs to others, resulting in many rational and young educated Hindus disassociating from Hinduism and non-Hindus being alienated from Hinduism. Even today in the West were tens of millions of people practice 'Yoga' these Western Yogis do not want to be associated with Hinduism because they consider it a primitive and backwards religion that worships god/s, practices caste system and burns widows.

The state of India is in the Hands of Indians, the Indians are in the Hands of a secular government, India does not have a Hindu Government.

We cant save Hinduism, but we can save the Indians with Hinduism.

Hindu government? Do you mean the BJP, RSS, VHP?

That is why i think education is a proper answer, not education based on the western system, but education of Indians based of Vedic thought.

Ironically, the Western education system is based on the old Indian education system. There is no such thing as "Western education system" today, the education system is a modern education system which has been accepted by common consensus by most countries in the world, including Japan which was never colonized. Independent India had a choice to either go the traditional route or the modern route, and it chose the modern route. If India went back to traditional ways it would become even more backwards than it is today.

Europeans in the 18th century said all of India will be Christian in 19th.

Its still there, so don't be too quick to just push it to oblivion.

If there is a war between India and China in the near future, India is a gonner. As India is where 90% of the worlds Hindus reside, India gone, means Hinduism is also gone. China has already surrounded India by turning all of its neighbors against it and building military bases and funding proxy wars and terrorism against India to destabalize it. Chinese strategists openly talk about destabalizing India realizing because India is in such a fragmented state, it could theoretically be broken up into several pieces in a single move.

And personally I think that is exactly what is going to happen, because Indians actually celebrate 'diversity' the cause of their fall and it will be the cause of their death too. Indians may argue with me till they go blue in the face, but they will never be able to deny the hard fact that I tell them: their division lead to their conquest. Their hundreds of temples which they prided themselves on were razed in a twinkling of an eye. Where was there Krishna, Vishnu and Shiva to protect them? The Muslims invaders laughed at them, "Ask your idol to protect itself from us" and the Indians looked on as the Muslims smashed their idols and temples one by one. What did the Indians learn from this? Nothing, they still stubbornly practice the same traditions and have the same mentality.

Indian Philosophy done by learned Indians, don't put us all in the same boat.
Dont put all your faith in Advaita.

I am not a person who does faith. Advaita is evidence based. I can test its conclusions by following its arguments. The best logicians have themselves declared it is the most rational and logically consistent metaphysics in the world.

 

[Pleroma]

The western people are controlled by God just as the eastern people, everyone is equal in the eyes of God, by making a global religion one does not become free, one cannot achieve moksha, only fools think that they are far more superior than others. The world needs our culture not the other way around. Your knowledge in Advaita and Modern Science sucks. Gods are important and one cannot do away with them in any philosophy of Hinduism.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Dear Surya, I would like to Apollogize for calling u racist, and wrong. I pray one day that the supreme ishvara furthers the cause of the Advaita. May ishvara bless you with success in all ventures. I would also like to apologize to all on this thread, in my arrogance I have become what I am against, my friend surya has made me realize that by going against Advaita I'm was going against my own principals. I don't want to see any divisions let alone be the cause of one. I am sincerely sorry if I have heart anyone's feelings, I'm truly sorry if I may have belittle anyone. Surya deva is a vary learned person, and I think we all can appreciate someone who is as valuable as surya on the Hinduism dir. May the supreme OM bring us all together may love and friendship prosper in all, may we all understand each other, we can live individually but can only survive collectively. Surya friend and no hard feelings, you are clearly more knowledgable then me. OM TATH SATH

 

[Surya Deva]

Dear Surya, I would like to Apollogize for calling u racist, and wrong. I pray one day that the supreme ishvara furthers the cause of the Advaita. May ishvara bless you with success in all ventures. I would also like to apologize to all on this thread, in my arrogance I have become what I am against, my friend surya has made me realize that by going against Advaita I'm was going against my own principals. I don't want to see any divisions let alone be the cause of one. I am sincerely sorry if I have heart anyone's feelings, I'm truly sorry if I may have belittle anyone. Surya deva is a vary learned person, and I think we all can appreciate someone who is as valuable as surya on the Hinduism dir. May the supreme OM bring us all together may love and friendship prosper in all, may we all understand each other, we can live individually but can only survive collectively. Surya friend and no hard feelings, you are clearly more knowledgable then me. OM TATH SATH

Thank you very much Satyamavejayatni I appreciate your peace and your compliments. I was about to respond to your other posts, but I was busy yesterday, so I couldn't get around to doing it. Advaita is a Hindu philosophy which is based on Sruti, it is thus an integral philosophy of Hinduism and we should not oppose it. We oppose Sruti, when we oppose Advaita.

Dvaita and Viseshadvaita rose in opposition of to Advaita because Advaita being an essentially atheistic or transtheistic philosophy contradicted the Vaishnava religion who worshiped Vishnu and Krishna as God. So their theologians created Dvaita and Visesadvaita and bhedabheda as a theological justification and rationalization for their religion. Despite the fact that the Sruti of the Upanishads very clearly advance the philosophy of Advaita.

 

[Pleroma]

Dvaita and Viseshadvaita rose in opposition of to Advaita because Advaita being an essentially atheistic or transtheistic philosophy contradicted the Vaishnava religion who worshiped Vishnu and Krishna as God. So their theologians created Dvaita and Visesadvaita and bhedabheda as a theological justification and rationalization for their religion. Despite the fact that the Sruti of the Upanishads very clearly advance the philosophy of Advaita.

That doesn't change the fact that your knowledge in Advaita sucks. Advaita accepts the existence of Gods, Advaita is theistic, the works of Shankara like Soundarya Lahari are evidence that Shankara explicitly accepted the existence of Gods, Shankara was a Devi upasaka, his sri chakra are well renowned in various parts of India. You just cannot do away with Hindu deities and call it a global religion, that's a clear lack of knowledge about Hinduism, Advaita and the Upanishads. We really don't care how many of the people in the world practice Hinduism what is important for us is the true representation of Hinduism to the world and not a pseudo man made religion blindly thinking that that's what Hinduism is.

One day you will realize your mistakes and come back to the traditional ways of Hinduism. I promise that you will because Hinduism is purely theistic and also Advaita is theistic. I really don't care a damn if anyone find it offensive and move away from Hinduism but for god sake don't misrepresent Hinduism.

 

[Surya Deva]

That doesn't change the fact that your knowledge in Advaita sucks.

That is not a fact, that is your opinion, and a childish and immature opinion at that. As I said earlier on in your thread "The Sun God is the one true God" after giving you a fair chance to argue with me, I have ruled you are not rational. You don't debate or even discuss, you preach, and you preach loud. You declare things as absolute truth and leave nothing open for debate or discussion. If somebody disagrees with you, you call them names like "you must be deluded" "your knowledge is outdated and sucks" I have thus concluded you are not rational and I don't really want to discuss or debate any topic with you.

In comparison to other Hindu members, who strongly disagree with some of my arguments, they at the very least discuss and debate with me. You can learn lessons in maturity and debating from Satyamavejayanti, who has attempted to engage my arguments, ask questions and allow our debate to progress to the point where we could end it amicably.

I very seldom ignore people, but when somebody is being an obvious troll, then I have no choice but to ignore. I will engage some of the points you made in your recent post for you provide some semblance of reason for your assertion, but if in your subsequent responses I still think you are being irrational and immature, then you can consider this my last post addressed you on RF.

Advaita accepts the existence of Gods, Advaita is theistic, the works of Shankara like Soundarya Lahari are evidence that Shankara explicitly accepted the existence of Gods, Shankara was a Devi upasaka, his sri chakra are well renowned in various parts of India.

Advaita Vedanta is a non-dualist and monistic idealist philosophy. What this means, is that Advaita only accepts one pure substance in reality that is pure consciousness(Brahman/Atman) and no other substance(including jiva, ishvara, world), whatever we see in reality is just a form of that one pure substance. The theory of Maya, as an inherent creative power that exists within this pure consciousness, is used to explain why this one appears as many. Therefore Advaita does not accept the real existence of anything other than the existence of pure consciousness.

I know what I have told you is correct because this basically Advaita 101, you will find it in pretty much any beginners/dummies guide to Advaita. I have of course studied Advaita way past beginner level, I have studied it formally at the best institutions of Advaita in India where I have formally studied the canon of Advaita texts and Advaita was even part of my BA dissertation. I have credentials in this area, so before you start telling me my knowledge of Advaita sucks, tell me what your credentials are.(I doubt somebody who tells another person "your knowledge sucks" can be that educated or even mature, I am guessing you are young)

Now to prove what I just told you Ill cite directly from one of the core texts of Advaita Vedanta in the Shankara tradition and considered a core text by all Advaita Vedanta ashrams in India, the Panchadasi:

The definition of Brahman as the Self or pure consciousness and the complete non-distinction between ones Self and Brahman

1.1 Salutation to the lotus feet of my Guru Sri Sankarananda whose only work is to destroy the monster of primal nescience together with its effect, the phenomenal universe.

1.2. This discussion about the discrimination of Truth (Brahman) (from untruth) is being initiated for the easy understanding of those whose hearts have been purified by service to the pair of lotus feet of the Teacher.

1.3. The objects of knowledge, viz., sound, touch, etc., which are perceived in the waking state, are different from each other because of their peculiarities; but the consciousness of these, which is different from them, does not differ because of its homogeneity.

1.4. Similar is the case in the dream state. Here the perceived objects are transient and in the waking state they seem permanent. So there is difference between them. But the (perceiving) consciousness in both the states does not differ. It is homogeneous.

1.5. A person awaking from deep sleep consciously remembers his lack of perception during that state. Remembrance consists of objects experienced earlier. It is therefore clear that even in deep sleep 'want of knowledge' is perceived.

1.6. This consciousness (in the deep sleep state) is indeed distinct from the object (here, ignorance), but not from itself, as is the consciousness in the state of dream. Thus in all the three states the consciousness (being homogeneous) is the same. It is so in other days too.

1.7. Through the many months, years, ages and world cycles, past and future, consciousness is the same; it neither rises nor sets (unlike the sun); it is self-revealing.

1.8. This consciousness, which is our Self, is of the nature of supreme bliss, for it is the object of greatest love, and love for the Self is seen in every man, who wishes, 'May I never cease to be', 'May I exist forever'.

1.9. Others are loved for the sake of the Self, but the Self is loved for none other. Therefore the love for the Self is the highest. Hence the Self is of the nature of the highest bliss.

1.10. In this way, it is established by reasoning that the individual Self is of the nature of existence, consciousness and bliss. Similar is the supreme Brahman. The identity of the two is taught in the Upanishads.​

Ishvara is a product of Maya, and ultimately unreal and illusory, disappearing on realization of Brahman

3.37. Brahman who is existence, consciousness and infinity is the Reality. Its being Ishvara (the Omniscient Lord of the world) and Jiva (the individual soul) are (mere) superimpositions by the two illusory adjuncts (Maya and Avidya, respectively).

6.133. Maya transforms the immutable Kutastha, the ever association-less Atman, phenomenally into the form of the universe. Casting the reflection of Atman on itself, Maya Creates Jiva and Ishvara.

6.155. It is said by the Shruti that Jiva and Ishvara are creations of Maya, being reflections of Atman in it. Ishvara is like the reflection of the sky in the cloud; Jiva is like the reflection of the sky in water.

6.156. Maya is comparable to a cloud and the mental impressions in the Buddhi are like the water-particles which make up the cloud. The reflected consciousness in Maya is like the sky reflected in the water-particles of the cloud.

6.157. Shruti says that this (pure universal) consciousness reflected in Maya is Ishvara which controls Maya as well. The great Ishvara is the inner ruler, omniscient and cause of the universe.

6.158. The Shruti, in the passage beginning with 'the consciousness in the deep sleep' and ending in 'He is the Lord of all' describes this 'sheath of bliss' as the Ishvara. [Mandukya Upanishad: 5-6; Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: IV-iv-22]

6.192. Superficially it looks as if Brahman were the cause of the world and that Ishvara were a real entity. This cannot be explained except by the mutual superimposition of the true nature of Brahman on Ishvara and the creativity of Ishvara on Brahman.

6.193. In a piece of cloth stiffened with starch, the starch becomes one with the cloth; so by the process of mutual superimposition the ignorant conceive Ishvara to be one with Paramatman.

6.194. As the dull-witted imagine that the Akasa reflected in a cloud is the Akasa absolute, so the undiscriminating do not see the distinction between Brahman and Ishvara.

6.195. By deep enquiry and by the application of the rules of interpretation to the Vedic text we come to know that Brahman is associationless and unconditioned by Maya, whereas Ishvara is the creator conditioned by Maya.

6.210. The Liberation, however, can be obtained through the knowledge of reality and not otherwise. The dreaming does not end until the dreamer awakes.

6.211. In the secondless principle, Brahman, the whole universe, in the form of Ishvara and Jiva and all animate and inanimate objects, appears like a dream.

6.212. Maya has created Ishvara and Jiva, represented by the sheath of bliss and the sheath of intellect respectively. The whole perceptible world is a creation of Ishvara and Jiva.

6.213. From the determination of Ishvara to create, down to His entrance into the created objects, is the creation of Ishvara. From the waking state to ultimate release, the cause of all pleasures and pains, is the creation of Jiva.

6.214. Those who do not know the nature of Brahman, who is secondless and associationless, fruitlessly quarrel over Jiva and Ishvara, which are creations of Maya.

6.230. Just as it is impossible to establish the eternal existence of pleasure derived from flowers and sandalwood, so it is impossible to establish the associationlessness of Atman as long as the world and Ishvara are believed to be realities and ever-existing.

6.236. Maya is said to be the desire-fulfilling cow. Jiva and Ishvara are its two calves. Drink of its milk of duality as much as you like, but the truth is non-duality.
​

If you are rational you will now accept that Advaita does indeed teach that the only existent reality is consciousness and everything else is an illusion, including Ishvara and jiva. I am not holding my breath.