Advaita Vision

Time 2021-09-20 13:11:43

Web Name: Advaita Vision

WebSite: http://www.advaita-vision.org

ID:196755

Keywords:

Advaita,Vision,

Description:

Gaudapada makes it clear throughout his Mandukya-Karika that the world is Brahman’ (he never uses this phrase as far as I recollect) only in the sense that the dream is the dreamer. It has no other reality however nuanced by the word “relative”. For the jnani, both Gaudapada and Sankara write, this dream world is to be discarded, such that there is no further compulsion to action. It is not just a stray chance or strange coincidence that the three articles Gaudapada on the Appearance of a world-Gaudapada on the Non-disappearance of the world-Gaudapada on the logical incoherence of the cessation of a non-existent world appeared in quick succession in these columns. I suppose the real thrust of what is being pointed to by them becomes apparent only if all the three are considered synergistically and not divorcing one from the other. After all, It is One Consciousness that produced them operating through three voice boxes! And what all the three point to is the Heart of Gaudapada. I used the word Gaudapada in the title of this Post as a synecdoche. It stands for The Teaching of Highly Revered Gaudapada Acharya, who marks the beginning of the human-form lineage of Advaita Vedanta, as the following stotra honors the parampara (lineage).नारायणं पद्मभुवं वसिष्ठं शक्तिं च तत्पुत्रपराशरं च ।व्यासं शुकं गौडपदं महान्तं गोविन्दयोगीन्द्रमथास्य शिष्यम् ॥श्री शंकराचार्यमथास्य पद्मपादं च हस्तामलकं च शिष्यम् ।तं तोटकं वार्तिककारमन्यानस्मद्गुरून् संततमानतोऽस्मि ॥ Continue reading MK17.It is beyond question that the phenomenalworld wouldcease to beifithad anyexistence. All thisduality thatisnothing but Maya,isbutnondualityin reality.Sankara extract: Ifoneisto beawakened bynegating thephenomenal world,howcanthere be non-duality solongas thephenomenalworldpersists?Theansweris:Such indeedwillbethe case iftheworldhadexistence.Butbeing superimposedlikea snakeonarope,itdoes notexist.Thereisnodoubt thatif ithadexisted,itwouldcease tobe.Notthat the snake, fanciedontherope through anerrorofobservation,existstherein realityandisthenremovedbycorrect observation. Therefore thepurportisthat thereisnosuchthing as theworld which appears ordisappears. An illusory snake superimposed on a rope cannot be said to cease to exist, when it never did have existence. The illusion of the snake is dispelled and the rope remains. And remembering that the jiva that ‘perceives the illusory snake is also part of the illusion and is dispelled.Gaudapada: If the perceived manifold were real then certainly it would disappear. This duality (that is cognized) is mere illusion (māyā). Non-duality is (alone) the Supreme Reality.Shankara: If the knowledge of non-duality (turīya) be possible after the disappearance of the perceived manifold, how could non-duality be said to exist (always) while the perceptual manifold remains? This is explained thus: This would have been true if the manifold really existed. This manifold being only a false imagination, like the snake in the rope, does not really exist. There is no doubt that it would (certainly) disappear if it really existed. The snake imagined in the rope, through false conception, does not really exist and therefore does not disappear through correct understanding. Nor, similarly, does the illusion of the vision conjured up by the magician exist and then disappear as though a veil thrown over the eyes of the spectators (by the magician) were removed. Similar is this duality of the cognized universe called the Phenomenal or manifold (māyāmātraṃ dvaitaṃ) a mere illusion. Non-duality turīya like the rope and the magician (in the illustrations) is alone the Supreme Reality. Therefore the fact is that there is no such thing as the manifold about which appearance or disappearance can be predicated.Nikhilananda: The manifold does not exist in the sense of a separate Reality. If it had any such existence then alone could it obstruct the eternally non-dual nature of the turīya by the appearance (of the manifold). If anyone says that the manifold disappears, that is only because he believes in its reality. But this is not the Truth, because the appearance of the manifold is only an illusion and not a reality.People say that duality disappears only because they believe in its reality. But really duality does not exist, therefore it does not disappear. If anyone believes in the reality of such illusory appearance then can one believe in the reality of the disappearance.The Mandukya Upanishad with Gaudapada s Karika and Shankara s Commentary, Translated by Swami Nikhilananda, Advaita Ashrama, 1932. No ISBN.The most radical version of Non-dual teaching goes back to Revered Gaudapada (of 5th or 6th CE) who forms a watershed mark in the Advaita tradition. With him started the human form lineage of teacher-disciple. (Before him it was a lineage of Sages preceded by the lineage of Gods see here).Gaudapada says that we are prisoners of an unwavering belief in cause-effect relationships. He avers that cause-effect relationships do not exist. For example, he writes:नास्त्यसद्धेतुकमसत्सदसद्धेतुकं तथा ।सच्च सद्धेतुकं नास्ति सद्धेतुकमसत्कुतः ॥  4.40, Gaudapada kArikA on mANDUkya Upanishad.Meaning: The unreal cannot have the unreal as its cause. Nor can the real be produced from the unreal. The real cannot be the cause of the real. And it is much more impossible for the real to be the cause of the unreal. (Translation: Swami Nikhilananda). Continue reading A highly respected Vedantin late Shri S. N. Sastri (see here) observed in his introduction to vivekacUDAmaNi that There is a wrong impression among some persons, particularly Western scholars, that Sri Sankara did not attach importance to devotion to a personal God. At the other end, we have some people who say that Shankara was a great devotee and cite the innumerable hymns in praise of various Gods and Goddesses he is supposed to have authored. Naturally, this situation raises the question on the role of devotion (bhakti) in Advaita Vedanta, particularly, in the Knowledge Path (jnAna mArga).As a matter of fact, we cannot really think of exclusive compartmentalized approaches separated by rigid walls in Vedanta. The various methods (upAya-s) suggested in Advaita Vedanta are all only broad generalized schema. One cannot, therefore, take a position that bhakti is required or not required in Advaita. Many things work together in leading a seeker to arrive at the Ultimate im-mediated understanding (aparokSha anubhUti) of Non-dual Oneness. Continue reading Q: How can I be sure that the true nature of Brahman is happiness? Also, can Brahman s nature be happiness if happiness hasobjective qualities, and Brahman doesn t?A: Brahman cannot be described. If it had a property, it would have to ‘not have’ the opposite property. And Brahman is non-dual – there is nothing other than Brahman. All ‘adjectives’ apparently used to describe Brahman are not in fact adjectives in the usual sense. They are ‘pointers’ to help you to understand Brahman intuitively.Q: Oftentimes in my inquiry, phrases will pop up that say, I am not thought, I am not thatwhich I am aware of, I am the awareful witness, however, aren t these phrases simply just contained, and being said by thoughts themself, thus invalidating their truthfulness? thought is not awareness, thought is thought.There has been an interesting discussion going on at one of the Online Advaita fora on Self-inquiry. One of the discussants posted the view of the well-known 16th Century Advaitin, Swami Madhusudana Saraswati in understanding the oft-quoted statement, All this is the Self. Madhusudana Saraswati says in his magnum opus, Advaita siddhi as follows:एतच्च सर्वमुक्तं विवरणे निषप्रपञ्चास्थूलादिवाक्यानुसारेण इदं सर्वं यदयमात्मे त्यादीनि निषेध्यसमर्पकत्वेनैकवाक्यतां प्रतिपद्यन्ते ; सुषुप्तौ निष्प्रपञ्चतायां पुरुषार्थत्वदर्शनादिति |Meaning: All this has been said in the panchapAdikA vivaraNa Sentences such as All this is the Self must be interpreted in such a way as to indicate the negation of the world s reality, so that there is consistency of meaning with sentences that reveal the nature of brahman as one completely devoid of the world, such as not gross , etc; for the achievement of the fundamental aims of human existence lies in the attainment of brahman in which the world is completely absent, which is experienced in deep sleep. [English Translation by:  Sri S. Venkatraghavan. Accension by me.] Continue reading Q: On your website ‘Advaita vision’” in the article ‘Consciousness, Ego and Self-knowledge’ is the axiom mentioned that the subject (observer) is different from the object (observed): the Seer-Seen discrimination (dŗg dŗśya viveka). Are there other such fundamental axioms within Advaita Vedanta and if so, can you give an overview of the main ones?A: I would say there are not really ‘axioms’ in Advaita. What there are is ‘prakriyā-s’. These are teaching ‘techniques’ to help you to an understanding. The end-point of the teaching – that there is only Brahman, the world is mithyā and you are Brahman – is not provable. It is ‘realized’ to be true when you have listened to the teaching and cleared any doubts. Hence ‘Self-realization’. Seer-seen discrimination is a practical exercise to bring you to the understanding that anything that you are aware of cannot be ‘you’; that you are the ‘ultimate subject’. Read any good book on the essentials of Advaita and other prakriyā-s will be given.First I would like to complement you with your website, which carries a valuable treasure of information. I am exploring every part. Secondly I would like to ask your reflections on a question I have.BackgroundIn our daily western life I see many people unhappily following the path they are on, not having the strength to make achange. In my view this is mainly the result from the way they are (more fundamentally) conditioned: materialistic, externally and scientifically oriented, as well as having a strict dualistic paradigm. At the same time I see how difficult it is for most of the Westerners to switch to a (more spiritual oriented) approach of introspection, in finding a more profound meaning in life and happiness. As I am convinced the ‘internal way’ is ‘the only way out’ in finding real happiness, I have adopted a personal mission: the endorsing of the spiritual regenerationof people around me. The challenge I faced was finding an approach to make this successful, instead of annoying people with my convictions.Q: How can we be sure that Brahman is transcendent of the level of appearance? How can we rule out the possibility that it is imperceptible due to the limitations of our mind? Could Brahman be similar to that of a higher dimensional being that is non accessible to human minds, but able to be perceived on higher levels of reality? And wouldn t this then invalidate claims of it being infinite and eternal, given that these are constructs built on the idea that Brahman is non-phenomenal?Also, how can we make the connection between ishvara (creator), and sakshi (awareful witness)? Are they both referring to the same being? I am confused. Make a donation via PayPal Disclaimer: The aim of the site is to disseminate information on all aspects of advaita.Inclusion of essays by other writers and/or links to their sites does not, in itself, indicate agreement with their ideas. Proudly powered by WordPress

TAGS:Advaita Vision 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

This the Blog section of Advaita Vision. Writing from a number of authors on a variety of topics. Plus - Questions answered and Book Extracts.

Hot Websites