The Doctrine of Mystics - The Secret of Vedas - Aurobindo

[vgovindan]

I am giving hereunder a link for the said article by Shri Aurobindo. I would not like to elaborate more than to say that it demolishes the popular notion that these (Vedas) are mostly ritualistic- karma kANDa.

https://www.saccs.org.in/texts/sriaurob ... the%20mind.

[vgovindan]

Further to previous post. A review of 'The Secret Of Vedas' appeared in The Hindu In Aug 1914. Shri Aurobindo's response thereof was also published on 27 Aug 1914. (The review is not readily traceable).
That response of Shri Aurobindo titled 'Interpretation of the Veda', is given in the link below -

https://theveda.org.in/rigveda/sa/15/in ... f-the-veda

[vgovindan]

Shri Aurobindo refutes Illusionism aka mAyAvAda.

"The individual soul can only cut the knot of ego by a supreme act of egoism, an exclusive attachment to its own individual salvation which amounts to an absolute assertion of its separate existence in Maya. We are led to regard other souls as if they were figments of our mind and their salvation unimportant, our soul alone as if it were entirely real and its salvation the one thing that matters. I come to regard my personal escape from bondage as real while other souls who are equally myself remain behind in the bondage!"

The Life Divine - The Destiny of the Individual - Shri Aurobindo -
https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/the-de ... vidual#p19

[vgovindan]

Aurobindo explains origins of ethics and dvandva - pain - pleasure, good - evil.

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/deligh ... he-problem

[vgovindan]

"Maya in its original sense meant a comprehending and containing consciousness capable of embracing, measuring and limiting and therefore formative; it is that which outlines, measures out, moulds forms in the formless, psychologises and seems to make knowable the Unknowable, geometrises and seems to make measurable the limitless. Later the word came from its original sense of knowledge, skill, intelligence to acquire a pejorative sense of cunning, fraud or illusion, and it is in the figure of an enchantment or illusion that it is used by the philosophical systems."

"These three generalisations of the play of existence in its relation to the eternal and stable, the immutable Sachchidananda, starting from the three conceptions of Maya, Prakriti and Lila and representing themselves in our philosophical systems as mutually contradictory philosophies, are in reality perfectly consistent with each other, complementary and necessary in their totality to an integral view of life and the world."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/deligh ... e-solution

[vgovindan]

"Thus by the very nature of the world-play as it has been realised by Sachchidananda in the vastness of His existence extended as Space and Time, we have to conceive first of an involution and a self-absorption of conscious being into the density and infinite divisibility of substance, for otherwise there can be no finite variation; next, an emergence of the self-imprisoned force into formal being, living being, thinking being; and finally a release of the formed thinking being into the free realisation of itself as the One and the Infinite at play in the world and by the release its recovery of the boundless existence-consciousness-bliss that even now it is secretly, really and eternally. This triple movement is the whole key of the world-enigma."

"Infinite consciousness in its infinite action can produce only infinite results; to settle upon a fixed Truth or order of truths and build a world in conformity with that which is fixed, demands a selective faculty of knowledge commissioned to shape finite appearance out of the infinite Reality.

This power was known to the Vedic seers by the name of Maya. Maya meant for them the power of infinite consciousness to comprehend, contain in itself and measure out, that is to say, to form—for form is delimitation—Name and Shape out of the vast illimitable Truth of infinite existence. It is by Maya that static truth of essential being becomes ordered truth of active being—or, to put it in more metaphysical language, out of the supreme being in which all is all without barrier of separative consciousness emerges the phenomenal being in which all is in each and each is in all for the play of existence with existence, consciousness with consciousness, force with force, delight with delight. This play of all in each and each in all is concealed at first from us by the mental play or the illusion of Maya which persuades each that he is in all but not all in him and that he is in all as a separated being not as a being always inseparably one with the rest of existence. Afterwards we have to emerge from this error into the supramental play or the truth of Maya where the “each” and the “all” coexist in the inseparable unity of the one truth and the multiple symbol. The lower, present and deluding mental Maya has first to be embraced, then to be overcome; for it is God’s play with division and darkness and limitation, desire and strife and suffering in which He subjects Himself to the Force that has come out of Himself and by her obscure suffers Himself to be obscured. That other Maya concealed by this mental has to be overpassed, then embraced; for it is God’s play of the infinities of existence, the splendours of knowledge, the glories of force mastered and the ecstasies of love illimitable where He emerges out of the hold of Force, holds her instead and fulfils in her illumined that for which she went out from Him at the first.

This distinction between the lower and the higher Maya is the link in thought and in cosmic Fact which the pessimistic and illusionist philosophies miss or neglect."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/the-divine-maya

[vgovindan]

"We regard thought as a thing separate from existence, abstract, unsubstantial, different from reality, something which appears one knows not whence and detaches itself from objective reality in order to observe, understand and judge it; for so it seems and therefore is to our all-dividing, all-analysing mentality. The first business of Mind is to render “discrete”, to make fissures much more than to discern, and so it has made this paralysing fissure between thought and reality. But in Supermind all being is consciousness, all consciousness is of being, and the idea, a pregnant vibration of consciousness, is equally a vibration of being pregnant of itself; it is an initial coming out, in creative self-knowledge, of that which lay concentrated in uncreative self-awareness. It comes out as Idea that is a reality, and it is that reality of the Idea which evolves itself, always by its own power and consciousness of itself, always self-conscious, always self-developing by the will inherent in the Idea, always self-realising by the knowledge ingrained in its every impulsion. This is the truth of all creation, of all evolution."

"In Supermind being, consciousness of knowledge and consciousness of will are not divided as they seem to be in our mental operations; they are a trinity, one movement with three effective aspects. Each has its own effect. Being gives the effect of substance, consciousness the effect of knowledge, of the self-guiding and shaping idea, of comprehension and apprehension; will gives the effect of self-fulfilling force. But the idea is only the light of the reality illumining itself; it is not mental thought nor imagination, but effective self-awareness. It is Real-Idea."

"This is the justification of the current religious notions of the omnipresence, omniscience and omnipotence of the Divine Being."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/the-su ... as-creator

[vgovindan]

"A tree evolves out of the seed in which it is already contained, the seed out of the tree; a fixed law, an invariable process reigns in the permanence of the form of manifestation which we call a tree. The mind regards this phenomenon, this birth, life and reproduction of a tree, as a thing in itself and on that basis studies, classes and explains it. It explains the tree by the seed, the seed by the tree; it declares a law of Nature. But it has explained nothing; it has only analysed and recorded the process of a mystery."

"The tree does not explain the seed, nor the seed the tree; cosmos explains both and God explains cosmos. The Supermind, pervading and inhabiting at once the seed and the tree and all objects, lives in this greater knowledge which is indivisible and one though with a modified and not an absolute indivisibility and unity. In this comprehensive knowledge there is no independent centre of existence, no individual separated ego such as we see in ourselves; the whole of existence is to its self-awareness an equable extension, one in oneness, one in multiplicity, one in all conditions and everywhere. Here the All and the One are the same existence; the individual being does not and cannot lose the consciousness of its identity with all beings and with the One Being; for that identity is inherent in supramental cognition, a part of the supramental self-evidence."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/the-su ... sciousness

[vgovindan]

"We, human beings, are phenomenally a particular form of consciousness, subject to Time and Space, and can only be, in our surface consciousness which is all we know of ourselves, one thing at a time, one formation, one poise of being, one aggregate of experience; and that one thing is for us the truth of ourselves which we acknowledge; all the rest is either not true or no longer true, because it has disappeared into the past out of our ken, or not yet true, because it is waiting in the future and not yet in our ken. But the Divine Consciousness is not so particularised, nor so limited; it can be many things at a time and take more than one enduring poise even for all time. We find that in the principle of Supermind itself it has three such general poises or sessions of its world-founding consciousness. The first founds the inalienable unity of things, the second modifies that unity so as to support the manifestation of the Many in One and One in Many; the third further modifies it so as to support the evolution of a diversified individuality which, by the action of Ignorance, becomes in us at a lower level the illusion of the separate ego."

"....the eternal recurrence of the manifestation in Time is a proof that the divine multiplicity is an eternal fact of the Supreme beyond Time no less than the divine unity; otherwise it could not have this characteristic of inevitable eternal recurrence in Time.

It is indeed only when our human mentality lays an exclusive emphasis on one side of spiritual experience, affirms that to be the sole eternal truth and states it in the terms of our all-dividing mental logic that the necessity for mutually destructive schools of philosophy arises. Thus, emphasising the sole truth of the unitarian consciousness, we observe the play of the divine unity, erroneously rendered by our mentality into the terms of real difference, but, not satisfied with correcting this error of the mind by the truth of a higher principle, we assert that the play itself is an illusion. Or, emphasising the play of the One in the Many, we declare a qualified unity and regard the individual soul as a soul-form of the Supreme, but would assert the eternity of this qualified existence and deny altogether the experience of a pure consciousness in an unqualified oneness. Or, again, emphasising the play of difference, we assert that the Supreme and the human soul are eternally different and reject the validity of an experience which exceeds and seems to abolish that difference. But the position that we have now firmly taken absolves us from the necessity of these negations and exclusions: we see that there is a truth behind all these affirmations, but at the same time an excess which leads to an ill-founded negation."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/the-tr ... -supermind

[vgovindan]

"We begin to grasp intellectually what is the Divine, the eternal Reality, and to understand how out of it the world has come. We begin also to perceive how inevitably that which has come out of the Divine must return to the Divine. We may now ask with profit and a chance of clearer reply how we must change and what we must become in order to arrive there in our nature and our life and our relations with others and not only through a solitary and ecstatic realisation in the profundities of our being."

"Suffice it at present to observe that the absence or abolition of separatist egoism and of effective division in consciousness is the one essential condition of the divine Life, and therefore their presence in us is that which constitutes our mortality and our fall from the Divine. This is our “original sin”, or rather let us say in a more philosophical language, the deviation from the Truth and Right of the Spirit, from its oneness, integrality and harmony that was the necessary condition for the great plunge into the Ignorance which is the soul’s adventure in the world and from which was born our suffering and aspiring humanity."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/the-divine-soul

NOTE - Shri Aurobindo has not amplified further about Divine Soul, its characteristics and the method of attainment. IMHO it might somewhat correspond to Jeevan Mukta.

[kvchellappa]

Should this thread be in the lounge as it has no connection with music?

[vgovindan]

It all started as a quest to find the true meaning of the word 'mAya' - being routinely translated as 'illusion', in some of the recent 'spiritual' texts, which I had occasion to go through. As part of that quest, I came across the writings of Shri Aurobindo. At the outset, I must confess that his writings are extremely difficult to comprehend. His sentence formation is very complicated - almost each sentence running to many lines. But, I was highly impressed by his analytical approach to spirituality. The explanation offered by him in regard to the word 'mAya' were very convincing. Therefore, I ventured to go through some of his writings, and also convey to the viewers at Rasika forum, my understanding of his writings.
As I proceeded with the task, a point came - refer to topic 'Divine Soul' - where I was afraid that the topic was entering into speculative philosophy. Therefore, I wanted to read Aurobindo's entire take on the subject 'Life Divine', before I continue my posts. In this regard, I read a summary of his second part of the book. That summary confirmed my apprehension. Therefore, I dropped the idea of further postings.

I am giving hereunder two links - one about 'Mind and Super Mind' and the other which gives the Summary of his second part.
I hereby conclude this topic, as I do not want to enter into any discussion which is speculative in nature.
--------------------------------
"What Mind, Life and Body are in their supreme sources and what therefore they must be in the integral completeness of the divine manifestation when informed by the Truth and not cut off from it by the separation and the ignorance in which presently we live,—this then is the problem that we have next to consider."

"The fundamental error of the Mind is, then, this fall from self-knowledge by which the individual soul conceives of its individuality as a separate fact instead of as a form of Oneness and makes itself the centre of its own universe instead of knowing itself as one concentration of the universal. From that original error all its particular ignorances and limitations are contingent results."

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/21/mind-and-supermind
------------------------
Summary of Part 2 - Life Divine

- Sisirkumar Ghose

An integral knowledge presupposes an integral Reality. But our idea and sense of Reality vary with our status and movement of consciousness. It is quite possible — and it is in its own field a valid movement for our thoughts and for a very high line of spiritual achievement — to affirm the existence and the sole Reality of the ineffable Absolute, and to negate the individual being and the cosmic creation. The absolute view of reality, consciousness and knowledge is founded on one side of the earliest Vedantic thought, but it is not the whole of that thinking. The Isha Upanishad insists on the unity and reality of all the manifestations of the Absolute. It is this whole consciousness with its complete knowledge that builds the foundation of the Life Divine and makes its attainment possible.

But there are other conceptions of reality which demand consideration. There is the view that all that exists is a subjective creation of Mind, a structure of Consciousness, and that the idea of an objective reality self-existent, independent of Consciousness, is an illusion. This way of seeing may lead to the affirmation of the creative Consciousness or to the denial of all existence and the affirmation of Non-Existence, a nescient Zero as the sole Reality. For, in one view, the objects constructed by consciousness, have no intrinsic reality, they are merely structures; even the consciousness that constructs them is itself only a flux of perceptions that assume an appearance of connection and continuity and create a sense of continuous time, but in reality these things have no stable basis as they are only an appearance of reality. On the other hand, if the constructing Mind or Consciousness is real and the sole reality, then the universe of material beings and objects may have an existence, but it is purely subjective-structural, made by a Consciousness out of itself, maintained by it, dissolving into it in their disappearance. It is clear that a Mind of the nature of our surface intelligence can be only a secondary power of existence. This initial incapacity could not be there if these objects were the Mind’s own structures, creations of its self-Power. It may be that this is so because individual mind has only a frontal and derivative power and knowledge and there is a universal Mind that is whole, endowed with omniscience, capable of omnipotence. But the nature of Mind as we know it is an Ignorance seeking for Knowledge. A consciousness possessing the essential and integral Knowledge, proceeding from the essence to the whole, and from the whole to the parts, would be no longer Mind but a perfect Truth-Consciousness automatically possessed of self-knowledge and world-knowledge. It is from this basis that we have to look at the subjective view of reality. These structures constitute the mind’s subjective image or figure of the universe, but the universe and its figures are not a mere image or figure.

There is a precisely opposite view of reality and knowledge which affirms an objective Reality as the only truth and an objective knowledge as the sole reliable knowledge. This view starts from the idea of physical existence as the one fundamental existence and the relegation of consciousness, mind, soul or spirit to the position of a temporary outcome of the physical Energy in its cosmic action — if indeed soul or spirit has any existence. But it is evident that this solution cannot be accepted in its rigour. The subjective and objective are two necessary sides of the manifold Reality and of equal value, depending upon each other. Indeed, we have no means of knowing the objective universe except by our subjective consciousness of which the physical senses themselves are instruments; as the world appears not only to that but in that, so it is to us. If the inner or the supraphysical objects of consciousness are unreal, the objective physical universe has also every chance of being unreal. Subjective experience cannot be referred to the evidence of the external senses; it has its own standards of seeing and its inner method of verification.

There are different orders of reality; the objective and physical is only one order. Our subjective movements and inner experiences are a domain of happenings as real as any outward happenings; but if the individual mind can know something of its own phenomena by direct experience, it is ignorant of what happens in the consciousness of others except by analogy with its own or except in so far as it impinges on my own mind, life and senses.

This ego-centric attitude has in recent times been elevated into a valid standard of knowledge; it has been implicitly or explicitly held as an axiom that all truth must be referred to the judgment of the personal mind, reason and experience of every man or else must be verified by a common or universal experience in order to be valid. But the greatest inner discoveries, the experience of self-being, the cosmic consciousness, the inner calm of the liberated spirit, the direct effect of mind upon mind, the knowledge of things by consciousness in direct contact with other consciousness or with its objects, most spiritual experiences of any value, cannot be brought before the tribunal of the common mentality which has no experience of these things and takes its own absence or incapacity of experience as a proof of their invalidity or their non-existence. It is necessary to dwell for a moment on these elementary truths because the opposite ideas have been sovereign in a recent past and stood in the way of the development of a vast domain of possible knowledge.

An integral knowledge demands an exploration of all the possible domains of consciousness and experience. The supraphysical is as real as the physical; to know it is part of a complete knowledge. The knowledge of the supra-physical has been associated with mysticism and occultism, and occultism has been banned as a superstition and a fantastic error. But the occult is a part of existence; a true occultism means no more than an unveiling of the hidden laws of being and Nature, of all that is not obvious on the surface. To know these things and to bring their truths and forces into the life of humanity is a necessary part of evolution.

All insistence on the sole validity of the objectively real takes its stand on the sense of the basic reality of Matter. But it is now evident that Matter is by no means fundamentally real; it is a structure of Energy: it is becoming even a little doubtful whether the acts and creations of this Energy itself are explicable except as the motions of power of a secret Consciousness of which its processes and steps of structure are the formulas. It is no longer possible to take Matter as the sole reality. For the same reason those views of existence which arise from an exclusive or predominant preoccupation with Mind or with Life and regard Mind or Life as the sole fundamental reality, have not a sufficiently wide basis for acceptance. In our view the Spirit, the Self is the fundamental reality of existence. But an exclusive concentration on this fundamental reality to the exclusion of all reality of Mind, Life or Matter will not help to an integral and valid solution of cosmic and individual existence. An integral knowledge then must be a knowledge of the truth of all sides of existence both separately and in the relation of each to all and the relation of all to the truth of Spirit. But this is not an intellectual knowledge which can be learned and completed in our present mould of consciousness; it must be an experience, a becoming, a change of consciousness, a change of being. This brings in the evolutionary character of the Becoming and the fact that our mental ignorance is only a stage in our evolution. The integral knowledge, then, can only come by a slow process in Time such as has accompanied the other evolutionary transformations.

by -Sisirkumar Ghose

https://incarnateword.in/cwsa/22/realit ... -knowledge

[shankarank]

that these (Vedas) are mostly ritualistic- karma kANDa.

Not sure why we need to take rituals negatively. One of the interpretation I have heard is that, they are the first step towards moving away from sakAma kaRma. Even though some fruits (phala) are promised, nobody can establish a priori that the fruits are guaranteed, directly. It was said , you suspend disbelief and perform them.

Ritual tradition may have been politicized later on, as part of promising some fruits to high profile Kings.

[shankarank]

There seem to exist western thinkers who have veered around to eastern ideas (vEdic, Buddhist, Jaina - ideas from dharmic systems) . Not sure if this is inadvertant transport of eastern ideas through digestion.

https://x.com/GeniusGTX/status/1867555516924538910

Schopenhauer's philosophy to modern life:

- Find peace in suffering. Accept it as inevitable.

- Immerse yourself in art and philosophy to escape life's struggles.

- Asceticism. Periodically fast, meditate, or live with less to break desire's hold.

- Question society's values. Live on compassion and renunciation.

[vgovindan]

Shankarank,
I said - "demolishes the popular notion that these (Vedas) are mostly ritualistic- karma kANDa."
I think that is what you mean.

Regarding your next post - Shri Aurobindo's works - particularly on involution and evolution - seems to have evoked a lot of attention in Western scientific community.

[kvchellappa]

Mithya

Sri Aurobindo was more of a poet with creative tinking.

To understand what mithya is one should study keenly the seminal thesis of Sankara which prefaces Brahma Sutra Bhashya, known as Adhyasa Bhashya. Voluminous commentaries have been written about it.

Swami Pramarthananda said, “If you think that you have understood mithya, you have not understood it,” reminding me of Neils Bohr who said, “Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum mechanics cannot possibly have understood it.”

Body-mind-intellect (BMI) is mithya and is one of a piece with the world that comes in its survey. Thus it appears as real. In other words, the perceiving BMI and the perceived objects are not different from each other and appear and disappear jointly.
Mathematically, BMI is negative and the world is negative and one negative into another negative is positive.
In a lighter vein, The Economist wrote in an article decades back, “Two dishonest people are perfectly honest between themselves.”
In the group I am part of, it is explained that Sankara talks mostly of mithya-drishti.
It is undeniable that the world that we sense and transact with is changing and perishable as against Atman which is above space and time and grasp by raw senses. Though Atman is not any different from the ‘experiencing’ one, it needs Sruti as a prompt. In the end Sruti is also mithya.

One may look at what some of the scientists have to say:
Yuval Noah Harai:
“We almost never experience the world as it is, we almost always have this something in front of our eyes a cover a curtain which is produced by own mind, it’s the stories that our own mind produces and believes and we go through life without really seeing the world just seeing this curtain and the projections of our own mind. It’s very important to give the mind a break every now and then and be able to detoxify.”

Einstein: “For us believing physicists, the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.”

From the Tao of Physics:
“One of the most bizarre premises of quantum theory, which has long fascinated philosophers and physicists alike, states that by the very act of watching, the observer affects the observed reality.” “Modern physics has confirmed most dramatically one of the basic ideas of Eastern mysticism; that all the concepts we use to describe nature are limited; thst they are not features of reality, as we tend to believe it, but crearions of mind; parts of the map, not of the territory.” “When we are healthy, we do not feel any separate parts of our body but are aware of it as an integrated whole, and this awareness generates a feeling of well-being and happiness. In a similar way, the mystic is aware of the wholeness of the entire cosmos which is experienced as an extension of the body.”

Erwin Schrödinger, Quantum Physicist:
“The same elements compose my mind and the world. This situation is the same for every mind and its world, in spite of the unfathomable abundance of “cross-references” between them. The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist.’
“You are a part, a piece, of an eternal, infinite being, an aspect or modification of it… This life of yours which you are living is not merely a piece of this entire existence, but in a certain sense the whole… This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in that sacred, mystic formula which is yet really so simple and so clear; tat tvam asi, You are That…
The plurality that we perceive is only an appearance; it is not real. Vedantic philosophy…has sought to clarify it by a number of analogies, one of the most attractive being the many-faceted crystal which, while showing hundreds of little pictures of what is in reality a single existent object, does not really multiply that object…
I insist upon the view that ‘all is waves’. The multiplicity is only apparent. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads. And not of the Upanishads only. The mystical experience of the union with God regularly leads to this view, unless strong prejudices stand in the way. Multiplicity is only apparent, in truth, there is only one mind…
The self is not so much linked to its ancestors, it is not so much the product, and merely the product, of all that, but rather, in the strictest sense of the word, the same thing as all that: the strict, direct continuation of it, just as the self aged fifty is the continuation of the self aged forty. No self is of itself alone. It has a long chain of intellectual ancestors. The “I” is chained to ancestry by many factors … This is not mere allegory, but an eternal memory. Nirvana is a state of pure blissful knowledge… It has nothing to do with the individual. The ego or its separation is an illusion.”

“The absolute world is of so different a nature, that the relative world, with which we are acquainted, seems almost like a dream.” “..we are not fully equipped by our senses for forming an impersonal picture of the world.” “There are two parties to every observation - the observed and the observer. What we see depends not only on the object looked at, but on our own circumstances - position, motion, or more personal idiosyncrasies. Sometimes by instinctive habit, sometimes by design, we attempt to eliminate our own share in the observation and so form a general picture of the world outside us, which shall be common to all observers.” A.F.Eddington in a book on relativity.

Max Planck: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibrate and holds this minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. The mind is the matrix of all matter.

From Helgoland by Carlo Rovelli:
Caslov, expert in QM; “Can this be believed? It’s as if reality didn’t exist.”
Concept of reality of materialism of particles in space has given way to concept of reality made up of relations rather than objects.
To take QM seriously reflecting on its implications, is an almost psychedelic experience; it asks us to renounce in one way or another, something that we cherished as solid and untouchable in the understanding of the world. We are asked to accept the reality may be profoundly other than we had imagined.
Facts are relative. Facts that are real wrt an object are not necessarily wrt another. .. The joint properties of 2 objects exist only in relation to a third.
The world fractures into a play of points of view that do not admit of a univocal global vision. It is a world of perspectives, of manifestations, not of entities with definite properties or unique facts. .. objects are such only with respect to other objects, they are nodes where bridges meet. The world is a perspectival game, a play of mirrors that exist only as reflections of and in each other. This phantasmal world of quanta is our world.
Anthony Aguirre: we break things into smaller and smaller pieces, and then the pieces, when examined, are not there.
Hippolyte Taine: External perception is an internal dream which proves to be in harmony with external things, and instead of calling “hallucination” a false perception, we must call external perception “a confirmed hallucination”.

[vgovindan]

kvc,
A nice and comprehensive collection of opinions. Thanks.

[kvchellappa]

From Sankara Advaita Group in FB:

Suraj S Hegde
On justifiability of aDhyAsa
(A summary based on upanyAsa of Vidvan Sri K S Maheswaran Namboothiri)
aDhyAsa BhAshya is not a stand alone Bhashya that is disjoint from the Brahma Sutras. It is meant to be a commentary on the beginning sutra ‘aThAto Brahma jijnAsa’. There might be doubts and objections whether it has the characteristics of BhAShya or not, and therefore might be considered irrelevant to the context. So, the first point of clarification is its relevance for the Brahma sUtras. As the name suggests, “adhyAsa” BhAshya is meant to elucidate on aDhyAsa, a conflation of Atma and anAtma. Its relation to the sUtras is to be understood. Secondly, even though it might be of relevance, the reason for discussing that in the beginning as a `foreword’(upOdGhAta) to the Bhashya should also be explained. What is an upOdGhAta? चिन्ताम् प्रकृत सिद्ध्यर्थाम् उपोद्घात प्रचक्षते - That through which the relevant matter at hand is made clear is upOdGhata . The matter at hand here is what is mentioned in the first sUtra- अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा ||
“Thus thereafter commences the contemplation on Brahman”. अथ - On the attainment of sAdhana sampatti, the four-fold qualifications, अतः - and since only after knowing Brahman the highest is attained; on realising the impossibility of liberation through action-result causality; ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा contemplation or inquiry on Brahman is undertaken. Not only does it tell us that a vichAra on Brahman is to be undertaken, it also indicates the anubanDha chatuShtaya of the text - the subject, the learning outcome or utility, relation between the two and the eligibility to undertake the study. Since the Brahma sUtras have started out to precisely determine and clarify the exact meaning(tAtparya niRNaya) of upaniShadic sentences, the sUtras share the same anubanDha chatuShtaya- The subject matter is Brahman, the utility is liberation/mOkSha, the relation is that the cognition of Brahma tattwa leads to mOkSha and the eligibility is sAdhana sampatti.
There are many other things subtly gleaned from that sutra namely, the non-difference between Atman and Brahman and the illusoriness of bandha/bondage. What is explicit in the sUtra is that Brahma jijnAsa is to be undertaken and therefore vichaara is explicitly indicated. And to reiterate, it is undertaken by one who has sAdhana sampatti and the goal is mOkSha. So, it might seem that there is a relation of attainment of mOkSha from vichAra. But typically, the immediate result of vichAra i.e inquiry or contemplation is the nischaya jnAna, doubtless knowledge or cognition corresponding to the subject of inquiry. In this case, it is the jnAna about Brahman. Therefore, if it is stated that a release from bondage is obtained from vichAra, what does it imply? It means that this bondage is of the type that is removed from jnAna/knowledge. Otherwise, the stated relation between the vichAra and mokSha cannot be accounted for. So now one needs to understand how jnAna releases one from bondage.
This leads us to posit that the bondage is caused by ajnAna and thus, the role of jnAna in release becomes clear, for jnAna removes ajnAna and therefore removes the cause of bondage. One can also see how the sUtra indicates Brahma-Atma aikya/non-difference. Let us ask for whom is this bondage? It is for the jIva, it is for ‘Me’, the adhikAri who is seeking liberation. ‘I’ have to do the vichAra for ‘my’ liberation, not for someone else. From the above line of reasoning, it is understood that from the inquiry into Brahman and its resulting cognition, the ignorance about Brahman is removed and from that my bondage is released. But how is it that knowledge of Brahman can release ‘my’ bondage? How is it that knowledge of some ‘other thing’ leads to ‘my’ release? Therefore, it has to be that what is pointed as Brahma-swaroopa has to be ‘Atma-swaroopa’ as well. The prescribed inquiry and its resulting understanding is about Brahma-Atman and it removes a mis-apprehension about Brahma-Atman, an aDhyAsa. This bondage is not due to not knowing anything at all, but rather due to a mis-comprehension or a conflation of Atman as ‘something else’ that is not Atman i.e anAtman. There is a mutual conflation of Atman and anAtman, which is aDhyAsa. Bondage is an association with a super-strate of wrong understanding over the substrate of Atman and the super-strate is negated by right understanding. Thus, the prescription of vichAra and the liberation or mOkSha through knowledge as indicated in the sUtra (vishaya-prayOjana) is accounted for by positing the concept of aDhyAsa.
Further,one could also infer that bondage is not something real. It is miThyA, just a wrong understanding that has no objective existence. So it is the same with anAtman. Thus, the advitIyatva (Unitarity) of Atman is also indicated for what was perceived as ‘other’ is not real. Note that these are just indicators, which are later fully established in the Brahma sUtras. All that aside, in conclusion, through aDhyAsa Bhashya, the shAstrAramBha, the endeavour of inquiry into Brahman, as indicated by the beginning sutra, is justified with the following line of reasoning: Brahma vichAra is meaningful only if it accomplishes the sought after objective i.e liberation from bondage. If the bondage is something that is ontic, that really exists, then it could never be removed by vichAra, for vichAra induces jnAna, that only falsifies an epistemic misapprehension. But if such a misapprehension or aDhyAsa is itself not a possibility at all, then the prescription of vichAra and the entire shAstra is meaningless. Therefore, begins aDhyAsa BhAShya to show the plausibility of such an aDhyAsa and thus justify the goal of vedAnta shAstra.

[vgovindan]

The matter at hand here is what is mentioned in the first sUtra- अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा ||
“Thus thereafter commences the contemplation on Brahman”. अथ - On the attainment of sAdhana sampatti, the four-fold qualifications, अतः - and since only after knowing Brahman the highest is attained; on realising the impossibility of liberation through action-result causality; ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा contemplation or inquiry on Brahman is undertaken.

Firstly - jijnAsA is not contemplation, but enquiry - inquisitivity.
Secondly - athaH - means 'therefore'. Enquiry does not commence after attainment of sAdhana sampatti. The very first act is 'vicAra' - enquiry - which arises to a person who realizes his suffering. SAdhana is secondary after enquiry.
Thirdly, what difference does it make whether adhyAsa bhAshya is in the beginning or at the end? It is just an elaboration of what is contained in the main body - brahma sutra. AdhyAsa bhAshya does not serve any purpose devoid of the Knowledge imparted in the main body - brahma sutra.
Fourthly, the kind of effort people make to split hair, if duly applied in the jijnAsa aspect, we would be having a Sadasiva brahmEndra, a Ramana Maharshi, a Ramakrshna in every street.
What a waste of human knowledge!

[kvchellappa]

There are two words atha (second tha, then, after something) and atah (first tha, therefore). (atha) - Sadhana chatushtaya has to precede Brahma vichara. Brahma vichara does not occur to one and all. Sankara has not proposed this out of the blue. It is an abstract from Upanishads esp. B.U. Jijnasa is desire to know and it does not come in the ordinary course. Jijnasa leads to sravana, manana, nididhyasana. Atah is stressing the path of knowledge for Brahma-jijnasa and dismissing path of karma (or even bhakti).
Sri Maheswara Nambudiri is a reputed authority though young and we must be careful with use of words.
It makes eminent sense to give an outline of the subject before entering the maze of recondite aphorisms where all acharyas have split their hair.
The fourth reason is not for my puny brain. It must be for Sadsiva Brahmendra, Ramana and Ramakrishna.
When i read a subject like QM, it looks to me to be a waste of words.
We say in common parlance 'enna brahma sutramaa' or' enna brahma viddaiyaa'. That is a very sensible usage.
The idea of referring to this piece is because it is here mithya (another term for avidya or adhyasa) is introduced which has been fiercely attacked by other acharyas. Ramanuja's critique of it is a well-known one, but belief is after-life, vaikuntam, etc. lack conviction.
In my take, Sankara's world view shares commonality with theoretical physics and the so-called reality about which we are cocksure goes up in fumes.

[vgovindan]

I am not in agreement that adhyAsa bhAshya precedes the achievement of the aim of Brahma Sutra. It amounts to putting the cart before the horse. brahma jijnAsa refers to entire gamut of spiritual knowledge - like Ramana Maharshi's 'who are you' query. How can those who have not transcended even their 'body' notion - leave aside antaH karana - can be inquisitive of Brahman (brahma jijnAsa)?

Your point about 'mithyA' is well taken. But, mithyA is not about intellectual comprehension, but, practical application. It may be worth mention that it is doubtful whether even Ramanuja and Madhvacharya have enunciated the kind of bhakti poetry as enunciated by Sankara - Sivananda Lahari and Madhurashtakam refers. Further, if he (Sankara) had applied - brahma Satyam, Jagan-mithyA, jIvaH brahmaiva na paraH - in his vyavaharika conduct, then where is the need for Manisha Panchaka? Jagan-mithya is a wonderful concept, but the million dollar question is - 'how to apply it empirically?'. It is possible only for those avadhuta sanyasis like Sadasiva Brahmendra. In case of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, his encounter with his Advaita guru, Totapuri - 'cutting' Kali with a sword - is worth mention. We can count on our fingers those who led a normal life even after Advaita siddhi. Mere dialectics about mithyA will lead us nowhere.
How to understand mithyA - falsity - of bondage excepting through attainment of Advaita siddhi?
'Brahman, mAyA' are anirvacanIya - unspeakable. But, people - including myself - utter them as if it is some vastu. Such intellectual gymnastics are aplenty; realisation is hard to come by.

PS - It is like the difference between MD enunciating 'tyAgarAjE kRtyAkRtyaM arpayAmi, vidEha kaivalyaM yAmi' and a concert singer rendering the kRti. No one can question whether the singer has attained kaivalyaM or not.

[sam]

Thyagaraja swami's descrition of vaikuntam.
aruNaa sairam renders jayathu jayathu.

..share a rendering of the Churnikai composed by Swami Thyagaraja as an introduction to his series of Utsava Sampradaya Krithis.



Jayathu Jayathu (Choornika)
by
Smt. Aruna Sairam

https://youtu.be/JnbJEqJr2pI?si=4B6OWQhP58A1mF3a

Jayathu jayathu sakala nigamagama kusala , kinnara , kimpurusha , sidha, Vidhyadhara, geeyamama..
...

Jitha sadhu hrudaya thape , sakala sura muni nikara bhaktha jana nichaya , hrudaya kamitha santhana soubhagya , dhana , kanaka vahanad ashta aiswarya dhayaka , chinthamani maya , maha vaikunta nagare

in the great city of Vaikunta which is filled The eight wealths among which are Children , luck , wealth , gold , and vehicles , which are desired by , the great devotees who are equal to devas and sages.
...

[kvchellappa]

The authorship of Sankara for many works ascribed to him is debatable. Mathurashtakam is by Vallabhacharya.
There is confusion between mythology, hearsay and metaphysics.
That I am not the body is result of enquiry in a disciplined way. It comes from sravanam of neti, neti by one who is desirous of the enquiry. Horse is yoked in front of the cart, not the other way.
You can peruse any research paper and you will see an introdcution to what it is about. At the end you will get a summary. Adhyasa bhashya is aptly in the beginning. I implicitly accept the genius and sense of balance of Sankara.
It beats me how we can judge the attainment of kaivalyam of another, that too the one whom we do not know at all. Advaita is all about me as a jijnasu. There is no way I can vet the experience of another even in sensations.

[kvchellappa]

"an emotionally immature person would not be considered a qualified student for this knowledge. A person whose individuation process has been thwarted has much of his or her personality repressed. Such a person will constantly be a victim to those repressed aspects until they have been assimilated into consciousness. The Vedantic teaching methodology does not release a person from alienated unconscious material. Rather, it assumes that the student has a well-balanced and integrated psyche as one of its qualifications."
From Jungian Myth and Advaita Vedanta Carol Whitfield
Sadhana chatushtaya is the methodology to qualify for the emotional maturity required for Vedantic wisdom.

[kvchellappa]

For those who are unconvinced about mithya, this may be handy:
https://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archive ... T6c_fzQZSg
Ramanuja’s critique of Avidya

[kvchellappa]

Spinoza and Vedanta
(The excerpts are from Will Durant’s “The Story of Civilisation”. The parenthetical comments are my adhika-prasangam).
1. “Of all the things that are beyond my power, I value nothing more highly than to be allowed the honour of entering into bonds of friendship with people who sincerely love truth. For, of things beyond our power, I believe there is nothing in the world which we can love with tranquility except such men.”
2. “After experience had taught me that all things that frequently take place in ordinary life are vain and futile; when I saw that all the things I feared, and which feared me had nothing good or bad in them save in so far as the mind was affected by them, I determined at last to inquire whether there may be anything which might be truly good and able to communicate its goodness, and by which the mind might be affected to the exclusion of all other things.”
He felt that riches could not do this, nor fame, nor the pleasures of the flesh; turmoil and grief are too often mingled with these delights. “Only the love towards a thing eternal and infinite feeds the mind with pleasure … free from pain.” (Ananda. This may as well be an introduction to Adhyasa Bhashya).
3. “The greatest good is the knowledge of the union which the mind has with the whole of nature … The more the mind understands the order of nature, the more easily it will be able to liberate itself from useless things.” Spinoza
“Here is Spinoza’s first phrasing of the intellectual love of god – the reconciliation of the individual with the nature of things and the laws of the universe.” Durant.
(Here is the idea of the unity of the individual self and the universal self.)
4. “His definition of substance is fundamental. “Substance is that which is in itself and is conceived through itself, i.e. the conception of which does not depend upon the connection of another thing from which it must be formed. It is close to the literal meaning of the Latin root – ‘that which stands under, underlies, supports’. In other words, he identifies substance with existence or reality. It is the essential reality underlying all things."
(Substance corresponds to what we call adhishtanam or Sat and give it a name for discourse as Brahman. Brahman is independent and is the source of the world, rather indistinguishable from it. Brahman is the reality and the world view that we adopt by a desiring and corrupting mind is illusion.)

5. This reality is perceived by us in two forms: as extensions or matter, and as thought or mind. These two are ‘attributes’ of substance; not as qualities residing in it, but as the same reality perceived externally by our senses as matter, and internally by our consciousness as thought. These two aspects of reality – matter and thought – are not distinct and separate entities; they are two sides, the outside and the inside, of one reality; so are body and mind; so is physiological action and the corresponding mental state. Spinoza defines an attribute as ‘that which the intellect apprehends of substance as constituting its essence,’ we know reality, whether as matter or as thought, only through perception or idea. .. Substance and its attributes are one; reality is a union of matter and mind; and these are distinct only in our manner of perceiving substance. (In a way, it corresponds to Brahman being the only reality and our perception projecting multiplicity. Spinoza did not feel the necessity to find a reason for such a split.)
6. All things are in some manner animate. .. There is some form or degree of mind or life in everything. The world is in every part of it alive. (Sat-chit is universal)
7. God is not identical with matter – Spinoza is not a materialist.
God is not identical with mind – Spinoza is not a spiritualist.
God and substance are identical with nature and the reality of all being –
Spinoza is a pantheist.
(Sarvam kalvidam brahma.)
8. God is self-caused. .. We can know the existence of god but not his real nature in all its attributes. .. Most of the qualities we ascribe to god are conceived by analogy with human qualities. .. God is not a person. .. God is ‘the indwelling, not the transient, cause of all things.’ ‘There is no creation, except in the sense that the infinite reality – matter-mind – is ever taking new individual forms or modes. .. He does not act from freedom of will; all his actions are determined by his essence i.e. all events are determined by the inherent nature and properties of things (svabhava). There is no design in nature in the sense that god desires some end. He has no desires or designs. , except as the totality contains all the desires and designs of all modes and therefore of all organisms. (योsकामो निष्काम आप्तकाम आत्मकामो B.U.) .. There are no miracles, for the will of god and the fixed and unchanged order of nature are one; any break in the chain of natural events would be a self-contradiction.
9. Man is only a small part of the universe. Nature is neutral as between man and other forms. We must not apply to nature or to god such words as good or evil, beautiful or ugly; these are subjective terms, as much so as hot or cold; they are determined by the construction of the essential world to our advantage or displeasure.
10. Order is objective only in the sense that all things cohere in one system of law; but in that order a destructive storm is as natural as the splendour of a sunset ot the sublimity of the sea.
11. Knowledge originates in impressions made upon us by external objects, but human mind perceives no external body as actually existing save through ideas of modifications in its body. Perceptions and reason, two forms of knowledge, are derived from sensation; but a third and higher form, intuitive knowledge, is derived not from sensation but from a clear, distinct, immediate, and comprehensive awareness of an idea or event as part of a universal system of law. (Sarvatrika anubhava or anubhava, third component of Sankara’s method besides Sruti and yukti?)
12. Since reason postulates nothing against nature, it postulates, therefore, that each man should love himself, and seek what is truly useful to him, and desire whatever leads him to a greater state of perfection (purnatvam), and each one should endeavor to preserve his being as far as in him lies. (B.U. 4.5.5 ‘Verily the husband is dear to the wife not for the sake of the husband, but for her own sake,’ etc.)
13. Can we free ourselves from the bondage and become in some measure the masters of our lives? Never completely, for we remain part of nature, subject to the nature of things. (Jivanmukta who is subject to the needs of the body but unmindful of it).
14. In so far as the mind is a series of temporal ideas, memories, and imaginations connected with a particular body, it ceases to exist when the body dies; this is the mortal duration of the mind. But in so far as it conceives things in their eternal relationships as part of the universal and unchanging system of natural law, it sees things as in god; it becomes to that extent part of the divine eternal mind, and is eternal. (This happily reconciles how Brahman is beyond mind, part of mithya, but through mind only we realise Brahman, when mind and Atman/Brahman become indistinguishable).
15. The endeavour to understand is the first and only basis of virtue. .. Knowledge is power; but the best and most useful form of that power is power over ourselves. Merely sensory knowledge leaves us too open to domination by external influences; rational knowledge gradually frees us from bondage to the passions by letting us see the impersonal and determined causes of events; and intuitive knowledge – direct awareness of the cosmic order – makes us feel ourselves part of that order and one with god. (Sadhana chatushtayam leading to jiva-brahma aikyam, as it were!)
16. The life of reason must be inspired by the intellectual love of god. Since god is the basic reality and invariable law of the cosmos itself, this intellectual love of god is not abject propitiation of some nebular sultan, but the wise and willing adjustment of our lives and conduct to the nature of things and the order of the world (satyam and rtam). .. Love toward a being eternal and infinite fills the mind completely with joy. .. The highest good of the mind is the knowledge of god, and the highest virtue of the mind is to know god (Jnana is Ananda).
17. Reason can indeed do much to restrain and moderate the passions, but the road which reason herself points out is very steep (kshurasya dhara, razor’s edge vide Katopanishad and B.U.); so that such as persuade themselves that the multitude can ever be induced to live according to the bare dictates of reason must be dreaming of the golden age or of some stage play. ( BG 7.3: Amongst thousands of persons, hardly one strives for perfection; and amongst those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth.)

[kvchellappa]

Excerpts from
ADVAITA, MODERN SCIENCE & GANDHI
by Ambassador(Retd) Alan Nazareth

Advaita is the theology enunciated by the 8th century South Indian sage named Shankara and is rooted in the ancient Vedic “Tat Twam Asi” (Thou Art That) maxim.
The eminent American historian Will Durant, in Volume I of his ‘Story of Civilization’ describes Shankara as the “greatest of Indian philosophers and at once the Aquinas and Kant of India” and states “Like Aquinas, Shankara accepts the full authority of his country’s scriptures as divine revelation, and then sallies forth to find proofs in experience and reason for them. Unlike Aquinas however he does not believe that reason alone can suffice for this task. It is not logic that we need says Shankara, it is Insight, the faculty of grasping at once the essential out of the irrelevant, the eternal out of the temporary. Shankara establishes the source of his philosophy at a remote and subtle point, never quite clearly visioned again until a thousand years later when Kant wrote his “Critique of Pure Reason. For Shankara, Brahman is the cause and effect, the timeless and secret essence of the world”
In his Brahmasutra Bhasya, Shankara sources and affirms his thesis thus: “It is from the realization that the self is the Brahman, that all miseries are ended and the aspiration of man is achieved”.
In his Dakshinamurti Stotram, Shankara declares “Just as the rays of the light hidden in a pot with many holes, emanates from those holes, so the self manifests itself though the eyes and other sense organs giving rise to the notion I know. Every object shines (i.e. is own after the self manifests itself.)
What all the above philosophical aphorisms mean in simple terms is that ‘God’, the ‘Creator’ is not all the many images and idols made of him and worshipped. He is the ‘Vital Principle’/Elan Vital” (Atman), the ‘Supreme/Cosmic Energy’(“Maha Shakti”) that pervades and sustains the whole universe, in which every aspect is a manifestation of Energy. Esoteric and incredible as this may seem, its validity can be simply illustrated by analyzing through spectroscopy a ray of sunlight and the light from a small little candle. Both of these will break into the same rainbow spectrum even though the sources of their respective lights differ in intensity by trillions of times, thereby establishing they are of the same nature. What to most is only sunlight and shadow, white or black, has in fact much else of great beauty/worth ensconced within it. Until and unless we comprehend this, detach ourselves from ephemeral things and focus on the Divine Spark within us, we will be chasing shadows, missing the substance, and be mired in an endless cycle of birth and rebirth, with all its attendant travails.
This Truth is clearly revealed to Arjuna by Lord Krishna in the Bhagwat Gita, which embodies the essence of Hinduism, in these words: “O Arjuna, I am the self residing in the heart of every being. I am their beginning, their life span and their end. Of all beings I am the seed. Whatever exists in this world, living or non-living, none of them can be, if I were not. Of the eight Vasus I am Agni”
That the “essence” within us is energy rather than matter has been well established by the energy mapping of the human body by India’s “Chakra” sages, These Chakras (wheel in Sanskrit), which are psychic-energy centres, are the focal points where psychic forces and bodily functions interact with each other. Among the estimated 88,000 chakras in the human body, six major ones located roughly along the spinal cord and another one located just above the crown of the skull are of prime importance. The most important of these are the lowest chakra (muladhara), located at the base of the spine, and the highest (sahasrara), at the top of the head. The muladhara encircles a mysterious divine potency (kundalini) that the individual attempts, by Yogic techniques, to raise from chakra to chakra until it reaches the sahasrara and self-illumination i.e. enlightenment results.
In his ‘Mysticism and the New Physics’, Michael Talbot writes “Since the time of the ancient Greeks, Western Science has tried to understand matter by dividing and re-dividing it in efforts to discover its fundamental building blocks. Einstein brought us closer to figuring out the fundamental building blocks of matter when he discovered that the primordial substance of the universe is not ‘matter’ but waves, particles and quanta, in other words energy in various minute forms. …The Hindu concepts of ‘Nada’ and ‘Bindu’ are identical to the concept of matter being both a wave and a particle. Translated roughly ‘Nada’ means movement or vibration; ‘Bindu’ literally means a point, and according to Hindu belief when the universe finally collapses, it collapses into what is known as the ‘Shiva Bindu’. This bears a striking similarity to modern physics. The macrophysical blackhole and the ‘Shiva Bindu’ are identical.
In a concurrent parallel development to the revolution in physics brought about by Einstein, Max Planck and others, Neils Bohr and Erwin Schroedinger opened up new avenues in bio-chemistry. The former had speculated about the complementarity of physics to biology. The latter wrote a book in the late 1930s titled ‘What is life’, in which he postulated that the gene was not a mere physical or chemical substance but also an information carrier. This book stirred much new interest in the biological sciences and several scientists moved from physics to genetics as the new scientific frontier and described themselves as molecular biologists. The first breakthrough in this new field came in the early 1950s, when Linus Pauling discovered the structure of the protein molecule. Subsequently James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the precise architecture of DNA, and a decade later discovered, with the aid of the new scientific device of X'ray crystallography, the internal structure of molecules and how exactly genetic information is encoded in chromosomes, which are DNA molecules. Further advances in this ever more minute field have led to the discovery that the basic characteristics of all living creatures from bacteria to humans are encoded in their chromosomes, using the same code script. Molecular Biologists have thus discovered the basic alphabet of a truly universal language of life.
The eminent astronomer Sir James Jeans had broadly indicated in the early forties that “Today there is a wide measure of agreement that the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality and the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine"
Paul Davies, well known physicist and author of ‘The Cosmic Blueprint’ and ‘The Mind of God’ puts the same idea this way “The very fact that the universe is creative, and that its laws have permitted complex structures to emerge and develop to the point of consciousness – in other words, that the universe has organized its own self-awareness – is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all.
The impression of design is overwhelming.” Nobel prize winning physicist Leon Lederman, in his book ‘The God Particle’ writes in the same strain.
All the abovementioned scientific discoveries are very much the “other side of the coin” of Shankara’s Advaita, which is based on the ancient Vedic “That thou art” affirmation. All of creation, whether animate or inanimate, solid or liquid, water or vapour, air or cloud, sunshine or shadow, are all manifestations of the creator, of his infinite wisdom and energy, his protean variety, his supreme all pervading consciousness and cosmic master plan, in which every created being and substance is intimately interconnected, and that all perception to the contrary is ‘Maya’, which is both illusion and ignorance.

[sam]

As Chellappa Sir rightly pointed out, the authorship of many devotional poems by Adi Sankara is doubted by many.

From Carnatic music point of view, which is solidly based on bhakthi yogam and karma yogam, neither advaitham nor visishtaadwaitam is consistent.; If we are God ourselves, where is the need for devotion?

Recently, I happened to read Swethaswara upanishad ( ofcourse in translation). Luckikly, it is short. Says nothing atall about any God.

Sankara was a reaction to early Islam which had arrived in Kerala coast through arab traders, It won many adherents from oppressed section of poor working people.

Sankara's main contributions are two.
1.
He accepted and adopted the popular deities of entire India, like VISHNU, DURGA, SIVA, GANAPATHY and SHANMUGA. Till then, the brahmins were AGNI worshippers only as Subramanya Bharathyt says,, ' theeyaik kumbidum paarppar'.

2
He established mutts to sustain ascetics .in the model of Buddhist sangams so that they can take the spiritual message to people and organize them.
====
A typical vedic brahmin , is not much of a believer in personal God.
I wonder if there is any concept of divine Grace even in adwaitham.
No pooja,
Only agnihotram.
(I dont think Thyagaraja swami did any such agni ritual).

No renunciation except after living a life as student, teacher, retreat into isolation with life partner and renunciation only after very old age
Very convenient indeed when there are kshatriyas to protect you, vaisyas to feed you and so called fourth varnam to give labour and slaves to do your bidding.
Even Vivekananda could not tolerate that social injustice.
Manuism survived purely due to royal patronage and protection..
The same story throughout Christendom and Caliphate.
Were it not for sage Vidyaranya and vijayanagar empire, India would have been a 100 percent Islamic country. Not of Abdul kalaam and Ustad Bismilla khan type but of jihadist gangs.

When we read Thyagaraja, we get a correct picture.

He was a teacher-an intellectual and culture worker throughout his life.
He lived a life of minimum needs.
He saw God.
That is the message oi Dwaitham.
Seeing God in the form in which you worship him is self-realization.
No thanthra, manthra, yoga ,yagnya can give us that bliss except through the Grace of God.
-
Where does it leave us, when mercenary troops were ravaging the country? Even Tanjore had a famine.

Religious heads are apparently, dis-interested in politics.
Not so.
They inspire kshatriyas, vaisyas and workers to unite and fight and preserve the motherland and its ancient values.

Is blackmagic , liberation of soul? is it for miracles and magical powers?Jesus rebukes the followers for asking for miracles.
Paramahamsa does likewise.
-
Religion for common people is trust in some super natural and benign force to help in our fragile life and its plans.
I suppose, even Rigvedic chants were of that purpose.
.
Einstein was rightly a supporter of jewish homeland.
So was Laski.
.
However much we may try to defend chathur varnam and four stages of life, , it is clearly misused .
Unlike Karnataka, aandhra and tamilnadu, Kerala is not known to have had any trace of either Buddhism or Jainism.
it was a stronghold of ritualistic brahminism.
A good section of brahmins themselves had embraced early christian message. Syrian catholics , almost immediately after resurrection.

Only Dwaitam of Madwacharya clearly, differentiates between the unknowable first cause, matter and jeevans.
'kaliyugadali hari naama'.
.
All world religions, have extolled renunciation
Christianity goes one step further. Renounce your personal pleasures, but serve society and people in material and spiritual needs to the best of your ability..
We get to know how people should live by the poems and songs of purandara dasa and kanakadasa.......followed by Thyagaraja.


Bertrand Russell has giuven us a nice magnum opus History of Western philosophy.
Will Durant has given us a very readable Story of Philosophy.

Will philosophy solve our material problems? Science does.
Religion gives spiritual solace and strength.
Philosophy does neither.

[vgovindan]

'brahma Satyam, jagn-mithyA, jIva brahmaiva na paraH' - this statement can be made - as an assertion - only by a brahma nishTha. If uttered otherwise, it must be with utter humility; any intellectual assertion is self-defeating/self-deception. In this regard, please read SataSlOki translated by Shri SN Shastry, wherein, while explaining verse 38, he brings out that even Upanishads - Sruti - come within the scope of mAyA. Accordingly every aspect of human knowledge comes within the scope of mAyA. Self realisation is beyond avidyA and vidyA - intellectual knowledge.

Please also listen to discourse of Mani Dravid Sastrigal in respect of Harsha Kavi. Please watch around 44 mins of video about 'brahmAstra'
Links given below -
saptaSlOki - SN Sastry
https://sanskritdocuments.org/sites/sns ... tents.html

Harsha Kavi -
https://youtu.be/cWJSGkaMYLA?si=uHTnaGmepMzYJLE7

[vgovindan]

Further to my previous post -
"Self realisation is beyond avidyA and vidyA - intellectual knowledge."

Please also refer to the following link on 'vidyA mAyA and avidyA mAyA' -
https://www.dlshq.org/messages/that%C2%92s-enough/

[kvchellappa]

(Michael Chandra Cohen : Sounds like good Advaita Vedanta - The Einstein Upanishad)
Ken Anirudha Van Skaik
Here are some inspiring words from Albert Einstein:
“I didn't arrive at my understanding of the fundamental laws of the universe through my rational mind.”
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. Matter is spirit reduced to point of visibility. There is no matter.”
"Time and space are not conditions in which we live, but modes by which we think.
Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, determined by the external world."
“Time does not exist – we invented it. Time is what the clock says. The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.”
“I think 99 times and find nothing. I stop thinking, swim in silence, and the truth comes to me."
"The intellect has little to do on the road to discovery. There comes a leap in consciousness, call it intuition or what you will, the solution comes to you and you don’t know how or why.”
"A human being experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
"Our separation from each other is an optical illusion."
“When something vibrates, the electrons of the entire universe resonate with it. Everything is connected. The greatest tragedy of human existence is the illusion of separateness.”
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”
“We are souls dressed up in sacred biochemical garments and our bodies are the instruments through which our souls play their music.”
“When you examine the lives of the most influential people who have ever walked among us, you discover one thread that winds through them all. They have been aligned first with their spiritual nature and only then with their physical selves.”
“The true value of a human being can be found in the degree to which he has attained liberation from the self.”
“The ancients knew something, which we seem to have forgotten.”
“The more I learn of physics, the more I am drawn to metaphysics.”
“One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike. We still do not know one thousandth of one percent of what nature has revealed to us. It is entirely possible that behind the perception of our senses, worlds are hidden of which we are unaware.”
“I’m not an atheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books.”
"The common idea that I am an atheist is based on a big mistake. Anyone who interprets my scientific theories this way, did not understand them."
"Everything is determined, every beginning and ending, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect, as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."
“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It will transcend a personal God and avoid dogma and theology.”
“Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another.”
“Everything is energy and that is all there is to it. Match the frequency of the reality you want and you can not help but get that reality. It can be no other way. This is not philosophy. This is physics.”
"I am happy because I want nothing from anyone. I do not care about money. Decorations, titles or distinctions mean nothing to me. I do not crave praise. I claim credit for nothing. A happy man is too satisfied with the present to dwell too much on the future."

[vgovindan]

"..A happy man is too satisfied with the present to dwell too much on the future."

Indeed! Is 'time' of 'space-time' real?
It is said - 'only clocks exist; not time'.

Our mind - rather memory (citta)- is like a clock. A clock does not know why it is ticking. Its ticking will stop when the spring loses its tension or battery is exhausted. Similar is the case with memory-clock also. It is the mind which keeps checking the memory-clock for justifying its existence.

[kvchellappa]

Unfortunate that Einstein is not there to answer!
Acc. to Advaita space-time is mithya (nama rupa).
Time in the sense we use is not time of spacetime as I understand on the fringes.
Space and time are indistiguishable in spacetime unlike in
our ordinary parlance where we imagine that movement takes place in space
with passage of time (Newton's laws of motion).
To be sure, most of the things we are face to face with, like buildings, flights,
even space travel, work with Newtonian physics.

[vgovindan]

"To be sure, most of the things we are face to face with, like buildings, flights,
even space travel, work with Newtonian physics."

True, provided there are so many observers. When there is only one observer, where is, what is movement? But, then, you and I would not be conversing, either. No wonder, the wise call life a paradox.

[sam]

Expanding universe. It is futile and idle speculation to probe the origin.
Material world is very much real. Pleasure may be satiable but pain, hunger, grief and dejection are real. Science and technology do help to save us from so mmany material needs. Learning to transcend the self means, conquering our ego and libido and tapping super ego. That leads us to life of simplicity, sacrifice and service. Easwar cannot be fathomed.it is a state oof mind.

https://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info ... eation.htm
A translation of the Nâsadiya-Sukta, Rig-Veda, X. 129.)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasadiya_Sukta
Existence was not then, nor non-existence,
Very intersting. The primordial force which began creation, .who knows where we are heading? The IT itself knows not perhaps.
.
For all his agnosticism, Einstein was a socialist and and jewish homeland patriot. Zionist.
Polical views of Einstein. He was a political and social activist.
Wiki article and article in marxist review

[vgovindan]

Sam,
Nice to see you here. Nasadiya Sukta should make us humble to the utmost; it should make us realise our true insignificance in this Grand. Yet, we continue to make assertions about everything, based on 'so called' published 'literature', which, in most of the cases, are just undigested vomit. Therefore, let's stop quoting 'authorities' on each and every topic. Let's begin to live by our concepts, without waiting for others.
Life is indeed simplicity, as you say. May we adhere to it!

[sam]

Life's philosophy should be a guide to action. Sister Margaret spoke ludidly about this in her lecture at music academy. Everone of us has obligations to our parents, siblings, relatives, friends, and as our circle of work widens, gradually to our native place and native country. Culture and religion always enjoin us to give less importance to our personal needs but never to ignore our duty to family, clan and country. No person is an island. We are all social beings.
The reality is that even if we manage to renounce material goods , ego and desire, ( hundreds of Thyagaraja swami krutis speak about it),we are always faced with the question of choice . Let me illustrate. Even a selfless social worker has to choose the correct path from so many movements. We cannot study everything and then decide. We have to honestly assess and plunge into action.
Our ideas are shaped by what we are given as information.
The question of indigestion comes to a gourmand only.
The right path is simple , narrow and straight.
Too much philosophysing, weakens a nation. The crores and crores of simple people who took the holy bath in kumbamela did so out of faith.
Faith is the guiding spirit. Faith can move montains.
There is a great line in the gospel.
Jesus asks the sick woman if she really believes that touching his garment can really cure her. The woman says 'yes'.
Jesus then says ' stand up, woman! Your fath has cured you'.

The nation is in peril. Shall we spend our time in vacuous philosophysing or in doing something materially to our suffering brethern?

[vgovindan]

Sam,
I have been in this forum for more than 20 years. Here, we never discussed politics, nation or religion. I do not remember any discussion about Hinduism per se. We never took the name of other religions. We never discussed our religious leaders. We might have discussed philosophical issues.
Being forum mainly dedicated to music - particularly carnatic music - we used to discuss about it. But such discussions would have revolved around bhakti and bhAva and other related issues. But, I do not remember any discussion about other religions.
It is only after advent of Sam, these topics came forth. Even then, shunning any discussions on controversial issues, I used to withdraw myself from any discussion. For once, the topic of other religions came forth only when a famous musician made it an issue.
Therefore, I beg you not to corrupt this forum by your thoughts about issues not relevant to music. Please do not, even by imputation, bring names of other religions. Nationalism and social service etc. are personal matters of individuals. Please do not bring them here.
Already, topics discussed in this forum are very diminished. Let us not be responsible for further erosion.

[sam]

Respected Govindan Sir,
Just this.
Carnatic music was created by Sage Vidhyaranya with the explicit purpose of Hindu devotional theme to counter sultanate intrusion and desecration .
. Saahithyam therefore is essential core and should be devotional and solidly based on the Hindu religious and cultural tradition and values.
By its very nature and essence, it is indian nationalistic
. Its sacred icons, gods,kshetrams and theerthams and values are territorial. Rightly so. In that sense, national history and events are essential to the system . It serves a very deep purpose in nation building. It is spiritual and deeply religious. Any attempt to take away the hindu religious theme and treat it as just art or entrrtainment or a profession is inadmissible. How is Aurbindo Ghosh relevant to carnatic music? If so, Savarkar is much more relevant.
I wish to add that our guide in our college days was Dr.Abdul Kalaam,
of DRDO and ISRO, to whom we owe national security. He could play the VeeNa and follow carnatic music.

Anyway, I have explained my conviction . Without this framework, we cannot really appreciate and share carnatic music.
..
The Tamil section has nearly 50 posts by veterans .
History and conflict.
.
With deep reverence to your dedicated work on Thyaagaraja and Shyaama saastry krutis, i shall keep away from this thread.

[kvchellappa]

Sankara Bhashya on BS 3.2.21:
“This argumentation we meet by asking our opponent of what nature that so-called annihilation of the apparent world is. Is it analogous to the annihilation of hardness in butter which is effected by bringing it into contact with fire? or is the apparent world of names and forms which is superimposed upon Brahman by Nescience to be dissolved by knowledge, just as the phenomenon of a double moon which is due to a disease of the eyes is removed by the application of medicine[[2]](https://www.wisdomlib.org/.../brahma.../d/doc64020.html...)? If the former, the Vedic injunctions bid us to do something impossible; for no man can actually annihilate this whole existing world with all its animated bodies and all its elementary substances such as earth and so on. And if it actually could be done, the first released person would have done it once for all, so that at present the whole world would be empty, earth and all other substances having been finally annihilated.--If the latter, i.e. if our opponent maintains that the phenomenal world is superimposed upon Brahman by Nescience and annihilated by knowledge, we point out that the only thing needed is that the knowledge of Brahman should be conveyed by Vedic passages sublating the apparent plurality superimposed upon Brahman by Nescience, such as 'Brahman is one, without a second;' 'That is the true, it is the Self and thou art it.' (Ch. Up. VI, 2, 1; 8, 7.) As soon as Brahman is indicated in this way, knowledge arising of itself discards Nescience, and this whole world of names and forms, which had been hiding Brahman from us, melts away like the imagery of a dream. As long, on the other hand, as Brahman is not so indicated, you may say a hundred times, 'Cognize Brahman! Dissolve this world!' and yet we shall be unable to do either the one or the other.”

Carlo Rocchi
"The last two sentences are the crux of the shuddha Samkara prakriya imho. Instead of this, talking about the imaginary production of “false things” (mithya padartha) (?!! *) is wild imagination, dogmatic thinking, hypotetical-deductive argumentation… painting without canvas. The world is not something about which we have a misunderstanding, but the form of the very misunderstanding (mithya pratyaya) about Brahman. So, when there is no misunderstanding - and, by definition, the jnani is the one who has resolved it -, where is its forms? Nowhere at all. In my opinion, the difference with mulavidya can be summarised in this way: It is not that there is some “thing” that is false; instead, it is false that there is some “thing” (other than Brahman). Falsehood is about knowledge, not about things. Falsehood concerns the judgment, not the things themselves; it is an epistemic value, not an ontic one. As simple as this.
* as “things”, to the extent that they are posited, however much we discuss their more or less false status, they are real, positive precisely because they are posited, even if “posited as false”, which strictly speaking is an aporetic expression. Instead, avidya, again, does not serve to say that there is something false that is posited, but only that it is false that something is posited, therefore it is only pre-supposed, that is, “never truly posited”. False, therefore, does not stand for something that, as posited, is opposed to Brahman - and which therefore must be effectively removed insofar as it is posited as something else -, instead it does not op-pose something else, because it is never truly posited as something else, but it op-poses itself, that is, it op-poses its own positing. That is to say, they twist the definition of adhyasa and interpret it as though it described something super-im-posed, rather than the mental process of super-imp-osing; that is, when it is no more the inherent error that assails the human mind, but only something objective falsely appearing in place of another. Instead of this, mayajanma points to ajanma alone, and not to the production or transformation of a jada/acetana mithya upadana karanam - that it is not evident in Samkara."

[vgovindan]

There is a simple, yet profound, Zen picture story of ox - the mind - herding. At the end, when the ox has been tamed, the realised seeker comes back to the market place; everything is where they are - were.

Barefooted and naked of breast.
I mingle with the people
of the world.
My clothes are ragged and dust-laden,
and I am ever blissful.
I use no magic to extend my life;
Now, before me, the dead trees
become alive.

https://seattleinsight.org/the-oxherding-pictures-2022/

Jagan-mithya? It is misapprehension - not falsity or illusion; it is about taming the mind. The mind is very much part of same Reality. Whoever is the witness of witness! Nasadiya Sukta refers.

[kvchellappa]

Perceptual reality (sense-driven) is a creation of the evolving mind. The question Vedanta poses, and science does in a different sense, is whether there is a Reality that is basic and not what the changing world scenario presents in a dream-like fashion, there now gone soon. Sruti says 'yes' and then asks the seeker to find out. The conclusion is that when that Reality is realised the vyavaharic reality ceases. Great souls reassure us that it is possible to get to it. I have no persoal knowledge or verification. Whether I know it or not with the wavering mind, I am That. I believe so.
All stories whether in Vedanta, Zen or whatever relate to the world that we believe to be real. Even mumukshutvam amd moksha are part of the story (vide Mandukya Upanishad and Karikas).

[rajeshnat]

kvc and vgovindan sir
your exchange is extremely good . i expecially like vgovinda sir posts where he says "I have been in the forum for over20 years"

About roughly 24 years back , i found it extremely difficult to understand any of the aurobindo especially savithri which i wanted to try , that appeared like a missile of words . THen 2 persons one relative and a known person gave me 2 books by M P Pandit . MP Pandit for all those who did not know was seceratary to Mother . I personally like his lucid nature of explaining , once when you are done with this topic. I am assuming both of you have read M P Pandit books, if you could take (especially VGV sir )on Pandit's writing on a seperate topic thread that would be fantastic

[vgovindan]

Rajesh,
Noted.

[vgovindan]

Objectivity of science questioned.
"Objects are part of our perception, they don't exist at a quantum level."

https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/qu ... 7342#47342

[sam]

Science and technology are objective and real
The process and results are objective in the sense that they are common to all humans.
It may be objected .that we see only when light rays reach our retina but this is the limit for all humans. Hence objective
.
That is where science and technology score over mystic subjective experience.
Subjective mystic bliss is experienced by some individuals only.
Perhaps, genetic.
Some day in nead future, science will invent tablets to solve problems of hunger, pain and even sorrow.

சோலையிலே மரங்க ளெல்லாம்
தோன்றுவதோர் விதையிலென்றால்,
சோலை பொய்யாமோ?-
இதைச் சொல்லொடு சேர்ப்பாரோ?
காண்பவெல்லாம் மறையுமென்றால்
மறைந்ததெல்லாம் காண்ப மன்றோ?

வீண்படு பொய்யிலே-
நித்தம் விதிதொடர்ந் திடுமோ?
காண்பதுவே உறுதிகண்டோம்
காண்பதல்லால் உறுதில்லை
காண்பது சக்தியாம்-
இந்தக் காட்சி நித்தியமாம்.

[vgovindan]

Sam,
Just consider - who declares anything as 'objective'? Keeping the subject outside, will not solve the problem; it will crop up again and again. We have postponed the problem as 'hard problem'. Only one who knows that there is a destination - 'I have to go somewhere - I do not belong here' - will seek a path. Every atom is in motion, because it is so ordained, with 'some' purpose, the sight of which has been lost or 'curtailed' with some deliberation. To declare something as 'absurd' - absurdism- entails a purpose; otherwise, why seek a purpose? Who seeks the purpose? Who has lost the sight of it? Let us not leave the problem to be solved by someone else, some time. We will not rest till we solve the problem. We are destined to solve it.

[vgovindan]

Please refer to my earlier post dated 21 Oct 24 regarding 'Involution and Evolution'.
I had the opportunity of viewing the video - link given below - wherein Swami Sarvapriyananda of Ramakrishna-Vivekananda order speaks about the views of Swami Vivkananda on 'Microcosm and Macrocosm'. This concept of Involution an Evolution is stated to have been derived from Parinama Vada of Sankhya Philosophy of Sage Kapila.
Shri Aurobindo seems to have delved deeper into that concept.

https://youtu.be/6KhJlItAi9U?si=gEhoGsgz2AT_9fDj

[vgovindan]

The truth propounded in Ashtavakra Gita and Nirvana Shatkam, given in a nutshell by Alan Watts. Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/IrhaM8l267U?si=-cMZAig92M4ts0at

[vgovindan]

Harmony of Spheres - Pythagoras -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musica_universalis

Is it the equivalent of anAhata nAda?