Shaiva
Shaiva
BINGO! Basically one is Shiva Tattva (pure "I") and Shakti-Tattva is the mirror. But, both are two sides of Parama Shiva, the Absolute Being, or "I", beyond all description.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Impersonalists
- Thread starter Madhuri
- Start date
BINGO! Basically one is Shiva Tattva (pure "I") and Shakti-Tattva is the mirror. But, both are two sides of Parama Shiva, the Absolute Being, or "I", beyond all description.
This makes so much sense to me.
It helps explain the OP and the idea of the Supreme Personality versus the imperialists. Really all of it is the Divine Lord, so if we are brought to the divine through His Supreme Personality, then that is fine. Likewise if we feel the divine is impersonal that too is a part of the divine. The two sides of the same coin incorporate both and all views.
bhaktajan
Active Member
Dear Advaitians!
It’s a beautiful day for moksha, I pray you escape maya asap.
Here are some questions that I serve to you for your pleasure:
- Which came first: ‘Consciousness’ or ‘Un-Consciousness’?
- Do both “Consciousness and Un-Consciousness” simply exist side-by-side, always?
- Do we ‘souls’ vacillate between ‘Consciousness’ and/or ‘Un-Consciousness’ always, in samsara?
- Are such endless vacillations in samsara a ‘Sad*’ thing?
- Does the repeated expense of time & effort, in samsara, reward us? En-mass? In any real tangible everlasting way, ever?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Don’t do the “Elephant’s bath”!
---to immerse into a lake’s waters;
and, as the final touch,
emerge to roll on the muddy banks afresh
---that’s the “Elephant’s bath”.
…………………………………………………………..
Bhaktajan
“I told you to feed the boy porridge, not meat”
Namasté Bhaktajan
I don’t consider myself specifically an Advaitin of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, but I would be delighted to answer your well thought out questions!
• Which came first: ‘Consciousness’ or ‘Un-Consciousness’?
Consciousness precedes all manifestation. Note here that by Consciousness I mean the divine Consciousness of the Lord.
• Do both “Consciousness and Un-Consciousness” simply exist side-by-side, always?
There is only Consciousness, everything 'arises' in Consciousness i.e. all arises in the Lord. All is maintained and dissolves into the One True Lord. What a jIva may refer to as "un-consciousness" is perhaps the sense experience of un-awarness, such as in deep sleep, swoon or the imagined state of death, when mundane sense and thought based consciousness is not aware of itself.
• Do we ‘souls’ vacillate between ‘Consciousness’ and/or ‘Un-Consciousness’ always, in samsara?
There is only Consciousness, the Atman is divine Consciousness, and consequently there is no real “Un-Consciousness”, only the change of the Lord’s prakriti i.e. matter changes, sleep comes and goes, bodies are born and die.
• Are such endless vacillations in samsara a ‘Sad*’ thing?
Whilst the jIva considers themselves to be alone, independent and distinct from the Lord, they can be subject to their desires, fears and limited states of joy (the 3 Gunas). Thus they may suffer thinking “I am sad today, I am feeling happier now I am shopping, or I feel angry with her!” They are thus propelled to continue in samsAra until the moment comes where they turn to the One True Lord and through His grace they begin to see that all that is, is the Lord. They may explain this as Shiva-Shakti, or Visnu or the beautiful Krishna, as their mind, karma and svabhAva permits them. They may recognise that their existence is service to the Lord, for (their) being is His joy.
• Does the repeated expense of time & effort, in samsara, reward us? En-mass? In any real tangible everlasting way, ever?
I am not certain what “repeated expense” refers to, unless it is the sensation that the jIva still believes that their life belongs to them, is for them alone, and that all actions serves them personally, in contrast to all serving the Lord. For it is this limited perspective of “my time and my effort” which comes with avidya (ignorance) and the want of the Lord’s grace. Likewise any sense of “en-mass” arises in the mind of jIva where they take their body to be independent to the bodies around them. All this is very true for some jIva, and whilst that perspective is held then it is a tangible and real. The Lord removes that doubt.
Thanks!
I don’t consider myself specifically an Advaitin of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, but I would be delighted to answer your well thought out questions!
• Which came first: ‘Consciousness’ or ‘Un-Consciousness’?
Consciousness precedes all manifestation. Note here that by Consciousness I mean the divine Consciousness of the Lord.
• Do both “Consciousness and Un-Consciousness” simply exist side-by-side, always?
There is only Consciousness, everything 'arises' in Consciousness i.e. all arises in the Lord. All is maintained and dissolves into the One True Lord. What a jIva may refer to as "un-consciousness" is perhaps the sense experience of un-awarness, such as in deep sleep, swoon or the imagined state of death, when mundane sense and thought based consciousness is not aware of itself.
• Do we ‘souls’ vacillate between ‘Consciousness’ and/or ‘Un-Consciousness’ always, in samsara?
There is only Consciousness, the Atman is divine Consciousness, and consequently there is no real “Un-Consciousness”, only the change of the Lord’s prakriti i.e. matter changes, sleep comes and goes, bodies are born and die.
• Are such endless vacillations in samsara a ‘Sad*’ thing?
Whilst the jIva considers themselves to be alone, independent and distinct from the Lord, they can be subject to their desires, fears and limited states of joy (the 3 Gunas). Thus they may suffer thinking “I am sad today, I am feeling happier now I am shopping, or I feel angry with her!” They are thus propelled to continue in samsAra until the moment comes where they turn to the One True Lord and through His grace they begin to see that all that is, is the Lord. They may explain this as Shiva-Shakti, or Visnu or the beautiful Krishna, as their mind, karma and svabhAva permits them. They may recognise that their existence is service to the Lord, for (their) being is His joy.
• Does the repeated expense of time & effort, in samsara, reward us? En-mass? In any real tangible everlasting way, ever?
I am not certain what “repeated expense” refers to, unless it is the sensation that the jIva still believes that their life belongs to them, is for them alone, and that all actions serves them personally, in contrast to all serving the Lord. For it is this limited perspective of “my time and my effort” which comes with avidya (ignorance) and the want of the Lord’s grace. Likewise any sense of “en-mass” arises in the mind of jIva where they take their body to be independent to the bodies around them. All this is very true for some jIva, and whilst that perspective is held then it is a tangible and real. The Lord removes that doubt.
Thanks!
Last edited:
bhaktajan
Active Member
Namasté Bhaktajan
I dont consider myself specifically an Advaitin of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, but I would be delighted to answer your well thought out questions!
I was not pointing you out as an advaitin.
Which came first: Consciousness or Un-Consciousness?
Consciousness precedes all manifestation.
Note here that by Consciousness I mean the divine Consciousness of the Lord.
I agree. But the Advaitin is hard pressed to point out the difference. Hence no responses from advaitins.
Do both Consciousness and Un-Consciousness simply exist side-by-side, always?
There is only Consciousness, everything 'arises' in Consciousness i.e. all arises in the Lord.
I agree, in the ultimate sense. But Sambhutam & vinesam exists side by side. Animate (conscious) & inanimate (un-conscious) exist side by side.
Enlightenment and gross-ignorance exist side by side.
Good karma & bad karma exist side by side.
The advaitin must admit that one is different from the other and are inseperable ---yet one seeks the other ---and the reverse case is the scenerio of the Consciousness soul becoming further entangled in un-consciousness (un-conscientious) illusion (aka Maya).
Hence, it can be alternatively asked, Do both Enlightenment and Illusion simply exist side-by-side, always? ---IMO, to opine that both Enlightenment and Illusion are absolutely in-distinguishable seems to me as intellectual laziness.
All is maintained and dissolves into the One True Lord. What a jIva may refer to as "un-consciousness" is perhaps the sense experience of un-awarness, such as in deep sleep, swoon or the imagined state of death, when mundane sense and thought based consciousness is not aware of itself.
I agree. But true absolute nescience/ignorance/un-conscious field of being exists as the backdrop behind Consciousness.
Even in the absolute realm of Vaikuntha there are opposites yet the source of unity is personally present and thus, to have the audience of that unity-personified is be back to source.
Do we souls vacillate between Consciousness and/or Un-Consciousness always, in samsara?
There is only Consciousness, the Atman is divine Consciousness, and consequently there is no real Un-Consciousness, only the change of the Lords prakriti i.e. matter changes, sleep comes and goes, bodies are born and die.
I agree. By vacillate between Consciousness & Un-Consciousness I am referring to the soul transmigrating through 8.400.000 species of living beings since time immemorial . . .
whilst repeatedly exercising their mechanical-bodily skills of sense-perception, in each form of life, sometimes as a Demigod, sometimes as a worm ---until enlightenment.
After absolute-enlightenment, the darkness of ignorance is dispelled.
This translates into a whole new absolute change of status of existence.
I dont consider myself specifically an Advaitin of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, but I would be delighted to answer your well thought out questions!
I was not pointing you out as an advaitin.
Which came first: Consciousness or Un-Consciousness?
Consciousness precedes all manifestation.
Note here that by Consciousness I mean the divine Consciousness of the Lord.
I agree. But the Advaitin is hard pressed to point out the difference. Hence no responses from advaitins.
Do both Consciousness and Un-Consciousness simply exist side-by-side, always?
There is only Consciousness, everything 'arises' in Consciousness i.e. all arises in the Lord.
I agree, in the ultimate sense. But Sambhutam & vinesam exists side by side. Animate (conscious) & inanimate (un-conscious) exist side by side.
Enlightenment and gross-ignorance exist side by side.
Good karma & bad karma exist side by side.
The advaitin must admit that one is different from the other and are inseperable ---yet one seeks the other ---and the reverse case is the scenerio of the Consciousness soul becoming further entangled in un-consciousness (un-conscientious) illusion (aka Maya).
Hence, it can be alternatively asked, Do both Enlightenment and Illusion simply exist side-by-side, always? ---IMO, to opine that both Enlightenment and Illusion are absolutely in-distinguishable seems to me as intellectual laziness.
All is maintained and dissolves into the One True Lord. What a jIva may refer to as "un-consciousness" is perhaps the sense experience of un-awarness, such as in deep sleep, swoon or the imagined state of death, when mundane sense and thought based consciousness is not aware of itself.
I agree. But true absolute nescience/ignorance/un-conscious field of being exists as the backdrop behind Consciousness.
Even in the absolute realm of Vaikuntha there are opposites yet the source of unity is personally present and thus, to have the audience of that unity-personified is be back to source.
Do we souls vacillate between Consciousness and/or Un-Consciousness always, in samsara?
There is only Consciousness, the Atman is divine Consciousness, and consequently there is no real Un-Consciousness, only the change of the Lords prakriti i.e. matter changes, sleep comes and goes, bodies are born and die.
I agree. By vacillate between Consciousness & Un-Consciousness I am referring to the soul transmigrating through 8.400.000 species of living beings since time immemorial . . .
whilst repeatedly exercising their mechanical-bodily skills of sense-perception, in each form of life, sometimes as a Demigod, sometimes as a worm ---until enlightenment.
After absolute-enlightenment, the darkness of ignorance is dispelled.
This translates into a whole new absolute change of status of existence.
bhaktajan
Active Member
• Are such endless vacillations in samsara a ‘Sad*’ thing?
Whilst the jIva considers themselves to be alone, independent and distinct from the Lord, they can be subject to their desires, fears and limited states of joy (the 3 Gunas). Thus they may suffer thinking “I am sad today, I am feeling happier now I am shopping, or I feel angry with her!” They are thus propelled to continue in samsAra until the moment comes where they turn to the One True Lord and through His grace they begin to see that all that is, is the Lord. They may explain this as Shiva-Shakti, or Visnu or the beautiful Krishna, as their mind, karma and svabhAva permits them. They may recognise that their existence is service to the Lord, for (their) being is His joy.
I agree. But the Advaitin is likely to opine that sad & joyousness are one and the same ---and that to differentiate them as different is another illusion.
Yet, if illusion is absolutely sad and deplorable and endlessly occurring birth after birth in samsara ---then, the opposite is achievable too. Yet, the Advaitin is likely to opinethat Enlightenment & Ignorant sufferring are both illusions with no absolute refuge.
• Does the repeated expense of time & effort, in samsara, reward us? En-mass? In any real tangible everlasting way, ever?
I am not certain what “repeated expense” refers to, unless it is the sensation that the jIva still believes that their life belongs to them, is for them alone, and that all actions serves them personally, in contrast to all serving the Lord. For it is this limited perspective of “my time and my effort” which comes with avidya (ignorance) and the want of the Lord’s grace. Likewise any sense of “en-mass” arises in the mind of jIva where they take their body to be independent to the bodies around them. All this is very true for some jIva, and whilst that perspective is held then it is a tangible and real. The Lord removes that doubt.
I agree. But the Advaitin says that after endless “samsara in maya” ---there are no progressive benefits from the experience of each smasaric birth [since all-is-one].
In the 20th century many newly adult males expended tremendous energy to obtain victory in various battle-fronts ---what en-mass societal benefit was gained by all those losers?
IMO, the only common-denouminator of all the loss of lives in battle in any epoch, is the pastime of living in strife ---due to past bad-karma that reaped present suffering.
Therein, I am referring to ‘blood/sweat/tears’ expended during each birth . . . without accruement of an redeeming value; ie:
There once was a lady that had her face and yes, hand torn off by her neighbor’s pet chimpanzee. After her face transplant was completed, she delclared, “Now I can have a hamburger again”.
{Remember, Please judge my citation of this event from the POV of a Hindu}
“She will eventually be able to eat a hamburger, something she said was very important to her, having only had pureed food since her injury, and I think we can all relate to that." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13735929
After this event, the notion that somethings & pastimes should be avoided, during the long path of lifetimes, that span one’s career in “samsara in maya”:
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_3BoujBzTHZQ/S_koGnwcfjI/AAAAAAAAAiM/IC5V-wdbyEM/JULIO-APARICIO-GORED%5B2%5D.jpg
After this event, it must be such a thrill, or sense of accomplishment, to then get revenge by roasting the beast and eating him with relish amongst friends and welwishers (?):
http://media.commercialappeal.com/mca/content/img/photos/2008/05/26/a-Spain-Bullfight_t600.jpg
Why does not an advaitin muster all their intellectual honesty and respond to my original list of questions?
Are they not intelligent enough?
Is their silence due to the notion that somethings & pastimes should be avoided, during their span of lives in “samsara in maya”?
Whilst the jIva considers themselves to be alone, independent and distinct from the Lord, they can be subject to their desires, fears and limited states of joy (the 3 Gunas). Thus they may suffer thinking “I am sad today, I am feeling happier now I am shopping, or I feel angry with her!” They are thus propelled to continue in samsAra until the moment comes where they turn to the One True Lord and through His grace they begin to see that all that is, is the Lord. They may explain this as Shiva-Shakti, or Visnu or the beautiful Krishna, as their mind, karma and svabhAva permits them. They may recognise that their existence is service to the Lord, for (their) being is His joy.
I agree. But the Advaitin is likely to opine that sad & joyousness are one and the same ---and that to differentiate them as different is another illusion.
Yet, if illusion is absolutely sad and deplorable and endlessly occurring birth after birth in samsara ---then, the opposite is achievable too. Yet, the Advaitin is likely to opinethat Enlightenment & Ignorant sufferring are both illusions with no absolute refuge.
• Does the repeated expense of time & effort, in samsara, reward us? En-mass? In any real tangible everlasting way, ever?
I am not certain what “repeated expense” refers to, unless it is the sensation that the jIva still believes that their life belongs to them, is for them alone, and that all actions serves them personally, in contrast to all serving the Lord. For it is this limited perspective of “my time and my effort” which comes with avidya (ignorance) and the want of the Lord’s grace. Likewise any sense of “en-mass” arises in the mind of jIva where they take their body to be independent to the bodies around them. All this is very true for some jIva, and whilst that perspective is held then it is a tangible and real. The Lord removes that doubt.
I agree. But the Advaitin says that after endless “samsara in maya” ---there are no progressive benefits from the experience of each smasaric birth [since all-is-one].
In the 20th century many newly adult males expended tremendous energy to obtain victory in various battle-fronts ---what en-mass societal benefit was gained by all those losers?
IMO, the only common-denouminator of all the loss of lives in battle in any epoch, is the pastime of living in strife ---due to past bad-karma that reaped present suffering.
Therein, I am referring to ‘blood/sweat/tears’ expended during each birth . . . without accruement of an redeeming value; ie:
There once was a lady that had her face and yes, hand torn off by her neighbor’s pet chimpanzee. After her face transplant was completed, she delclared, “Now I can have a hamburger again”.
{Remember, Please judge my citation of this event from the POV of a Hindu}
“She will eventually be able to eat a hamburger, something she said was very important to her, having only had pureed food since her injury, and I think we can all relate to that." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13735929
After this event, the notion that somethings & pastimes should be avoided, during the long path of lifetimes, that span one’s career in “samsara in maya”:
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_3BoujBzTHZQ/S_koGnwcfjI/AAAAAAAAAiM/IC5V-wdbyEM/JULIO-APARICIO-GORED%5B2%5D.jpg
After this event, it must be such a thrill, or sense of accomplishment, to then get revenge by roasting the beast and eating him with relish amongst friends and welwishers (?):
http://media.commercialappeal.com/mca/content/img/photos/2008/05/26/a-Spain-Bullfight_t600.jpg
Why does not an advaitin muster all their intellectual honesty and respond to my original list of questions?
Are they not intelligent enough?
Is their silence due to the notion that somethings & pastimes should be avoided, during their span of lives in “samsara in maya”?
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friends,
Interesting discussion!
Out of that eternal nothingness [stillness] came a BIG BANG [sound/vibration] and rest is that those vibrations are still ringing eternally and in between every vibration is that stillness.
Every form including human are nothing but VIBRATIONS and perception too happens through the vibration that is both the body and mind [thoughts] which also has its own past [in a way] and so the underlying stillness [consciousness] of which the vibration is always a part of misses IT and so remains away from TRUTH.
Anyone near understanding???
Love & rgds
Interesting discussion!
Out of that eternal nothingness [stillness] came a BIG BANG [sound/vibration] and rest is that those vibrations are still ringing eternally and in between every vibration is that stillness.
Every form including human are nothing but VIBRATIONS and perception too happens through the vibration that is both the body and mind [thoughts] which also has its own past [in a way] and so the underlying stillness [consciousness] of which the vibration is always a part of misses IT and so remains away from TRUTH.
Anyone near understanding???
Love & rgds
Hello Zenzero
I don't think you are alone. Do you feel alone in your perception of truth?
(I am not being sarcastic or about to start ranting about "no one" to feel alone from, just asking.)
Kriya Yogi
Dharma and Love for God
I take it as the unknowers not realizing that God is the most personal, understanding, intimate, loving, and blissful. Yogananda describes him as such: "Once you know him he is the dearest of the dear and the nearest of the near." He is evernew, everintelligent, and is more seductive and personal then anything ever experienced throughout eternity." God will absorb all desires and fulfill them with his presence to where you will no longer wonder of his presence or love. Your sight will only see God when before God was the only thing you couldn't see.
Last edited:
Hi Bhaktajan and Kasiersose
I don't feel the question is flawed exactly, my initial answer was assuming that "un-consciousness" meant something different to consciousness. Which I tried to explain cannot be possible.
But since posting Bhaktajan has added that by "un-consciousness" he/she meant material innate. Correct me if I am wrong. This is a hard quesiton, but ultimately the material arises in Consciousness, which is why it should not be taken separately, from the non-dual perspective.
i.e.
bhaktajan
Active Member
Okay . . . but, Consciousness is a part and parcel characteristic of a Conscious Entity, ie Person, Beast etc ---Consciousness is not yet known to be a characteristic of inanimated states of Gas and atomic elements.
I would say that the characteristic of "Consciousness" possesses pre-atomic properties; "Consciousness" is more subtle than "eternal nothingness [stillness]".
Yet, I would conceed that "Consciousness" exists surrounded by "eternal nothingness [stillness]".
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Bhaktajan,
Personal understanding is that in STILLNESS it is nothing but CONSCIOUSNESS as consciousness has no qualities that can be perceived through human mind.
Rgds what is known ................ they are MIND states which will always fall short of the WHOLE.
LOve & rgds
Personal understanding is that in STILLNESS it is nothing but CONSCIOUSNESS as consciousness has no qualities that can be perceived through human mind.
Rgds what is known ................ they are MIND states which will always fall short of the WHOLE.
LOve & rgds
Kriya Yogi
Dharma and Love for God
Hello Zenzero,
You don't really believe that Oneness is Aloneness do you?
Once oneness occurs the feeling of lonliness is gone for you are ever one with everyone in the universe and God is ever present in your consciousness. Never again will lonliness come to those that find Oneness.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I agree, my mindless friend. Aloneness is ALL-ONE-NESS. There is no other...
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friends,
With friends Ymir's confirmation on the issue of ALONENESS like to explain further that MIND is always is THINKING and THINKING is always like being ABSENT as one [consciousness] is not present in totality it is fractured by the thoughts which takes one one the journey to either of the past or of the future. One [consciousness] when present can never THINK and so the PRESENCE is always in the PRESENT with no thoughts taking place.
So MIND by its very nature diverts consciousness and always trying to hold on to something even *GOD* and when the mind is unable to hold something it feels LONELY which is far off than ALONENESS which is completeness/wholeness/ consciouness.
Love & rgds
With friends Ymir's confirmation on the issue of ALONENESS like to explain further that MIND is always is THINKING and THINKING is always like being ABSENT as one [consciousness] is not present in totality it is fractured by the thoughts which takes one one the journey to either of the past or of the future. One [consciousness] when present can never THINK and so the PRESENCE is always in the PRESENT with no thoughts taking place.
So MIND by its very nature diverts consciousness and always trying to hold on to something even *GOD* and when the mind is unable to hold something it feels LONELY which is far off than ALONENESS which is completeness/wholeness/ consciouness.
Love & rgds
Kriya Yogi
Dharma and Love for God
Ahh sorry about that. The choice of word confused me.
bhaktajan
Active Member
But who is conscious of being alone . . . with 'what'? The self?
This is an example of
"reverse-anthromorphism"
Anthropomorphism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Self-inflicted "reverse-anthromorphism"
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The individual's degree of 'Self-Preservation' propells on to find self-realisation.
Otherwise, we dive into the pool of Maya-the-witch's lap ---and/or whatever we think is worth the effort to pursue.