Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Advaita posits no beginning and no end to the oneness - always was and is and will be.
And includes non-physical and physical.
By identifying with that, yes, We were there. Full knowing is that identification.
And Creation is part of the illusion manifested by(for?) humans, so it seems to be "lesser".
I agree it can be pretty wonderful, although, sadly, I am no artist (yet).
As I understand it.
Lifetimes(plural) rebirth, etc I haven't seen yet. Unless it might be in the nature of Existence. Rebirth implies change, doesn't it? I'll look to see if Shankara addressed it.
He denies Jiva birth in his Mandukya commentary and elsewhere. Nothing is born.
Tattva Bodha addresses it toward the end. I would put it the "subtle" category.
Last edited by highplainsrus; 08-31-2020 at 04:51 AM..
I came across a word that might bridge things together. It seems to fit Shankara's definitions or at least comes close. The word is "existence". The hard part is "no-existence". "beyond existence" is tough, too.
Sorry, I have lost the thread. what are we trying to define? Not that i will have the answer but i can try.
it seems like they are fine with the universe and all it contains. They can get that far in their thinking.
but not that which gives rise to the universe.
that which is back of the universe, that which "created" the universe.
it sounds like that is where they get stuck, they can't think into that.
the way it was explained to me was that back of everything physical, is the non physical.
there is nothing physical that exists (including the universe and everything in it)
that was not thought into existence by that which is non physical.
the non physical gives rise to the physical.
that is the process of creation. and Creation.
as an artist it makes sense to me.
You have the sequence only partly right, Tzaph. The non-physical (God;s consciousness) creates the physical Reality and the physical Reality reproduces the non-physical (consciousness). It is an endless cycle of creation.
Sorry, I have lost the thread. what are we trying to define? Not that i will have the answer but i can try.
I was searching for something to help bridge understanding to Brahman. Existence might fill the bill for some.
It is eternal and unchanging (although objects of existence change).
It is impersonal but conceivable to self, as individual and multiple beings, and as inanimate material, space, and time.
It is formless. although it can be named.
Self can Know it. and be it.
It could be equivalent to Truth. It is mentioned in one of the texts as "pure existence" in the deep sleep state. I haven't figured out the precise Sanskrit for it. It is non-dual if no-existence is not possible. I'm checking on that. Existence may be an illusion, too. I suspect Brahman is "beyond existence". "beyond Truth"?
Existence is a cognition, though. So is Truth. Non-existence is the absence of being.
Last edited by highplainsrus; 08-31-2020 at 09:32 AM..
Advaita posits no beginning and no end to the oneness - always was and is and will be.
And includes non-physical and physical.
By identifying with that, yes, We were there. Full knowing is that identification.
And Creation is part of the illusion manifested by(for?) humans, so it seems to be "lesser".
I agree it can be pretty wonderful, although, sadly, I am no artist (yet).
As I understand it.
Lifetimes(plural) rebirth, etc I haven't seen yet. Unless it might be in the nature of Existence. Rebirth implies change, doesn't it? I'll look to see if Shankara addressed it.
He denies Jiva birth in his Mandukya commentary and elsewhere. Nothing is born.
Tattva Bodha addresses it toward the end. I would put it the "subtle" category.
There is a slight difference between the text we have here and Shankara's view of Advaita. (One view is that this may not be Shankara's text because he does not not recognize his guru Govindapada here, which is the tradition. it's wisdom is undeniable either way.)
Mandukya Karika by Gaudapada asks us to look at the world and understand its impermanence (A-nitya). It defines Brhman as the the only Truth, and it is the same Truth that exists in Jiva as Atma. Ignorance of the Truth is what separates Atma (within our experience of Jiva) from Brhman. When that Ignorance is destroyed, through Self Knowledge, there is no more two, only One. What we see as the world of Names and Forms is projected by Ignorance, the veil of Maya. When that is destroyed we realize the truth.
Shankara, whose guru Govindapada was a student of Gaudapada, after 200 or so years, allows for a Relative Reality. That the World of Names and Forms, projected by Ignorance, has a relative existence. It is not the Absolute existence of Brhaman, but relative, not Absolute Reality. Essentially he is giving us a step up, an intermediary step to reach the Absolute truth.
Ultimately no amount of intellectual understanding will get us there. It will only get us to the state where we are receptive to experience the truth within ourselves. This is Ramana Maharishi's instruction.
We are human, we are conditioned by our karma in our spiritual paths.
I was searching for something to help bridge understanding to Brahman. Existence might fill the bill for some. It is eternal and unchanging (although objects of existence change). It is impersonal but conceivable to self, as individual and multiple beings, and as inanimate material, space, and time. It is formless. although it can be named. Self can Know it. and be it. It could be equivalent to Truth. It is mentioned in one of the texts as "pure existence" in the deep dream state. I haven't figured out the precise Sanskrit for it. It is non-dual if no-existence is not possible. I'm checking on that. Existence may be an illusion, too. I suspect Brahman is "beyond existence". "beyond Truth"?
Brhaman has no attributes that can be described. We can only describe something by comparing it to something else with known attributes. There is no known attributes to describe Brhman, it is unique, the only things that can be compared to it, is itself. It can only be described by what it is not.
In deep sleep state the Atma within us is called Pragnya (awareness), it is the only witness that exists in all three states of being, awake, dream, and in deep sleep when we lose awareness of of our body and mind entirely.
Brhaman is as good as it gets for a name. Understanding will take effort because it is a new concept.
I can see how it would take years of studying multiple texts intensely and the aid of teaching to Know this, unless the Knowing can happen along the way. No wonder Shankara wants the Perfections as a pre-requisite. It takes steady conviction that the Truth is there/here and a suitable lifestyle.
Last edited by highplainsrus; 08-31-2020 at 09:58 AM..
I can see how it would take years of studying multiple texts intensely and the aid of teaching to Know this, unless the Knowing can happen along the way. No wonder Shankara wants the Perfections as a pre-requisite. It takes steady conviction that the Truth is there/here.
Indeed. It takes the same perseverance and attention as studying for a college level course. It requires requires studying, remembering, practicing (testing)what was learnt. It requires an open mind to allow for That I Am to be a possibility.
I also do not believe it takes years of studying. If it takes that many years perhaps we may never get it! Not qualified!
Ultimately no amount of intellectual understanding will get us there. It will only get us to the state where we are receptive to experience the truth within ourselves. This is Ramana Maharishi's instruction.
We are human, we are conditioned by our karma in our spiritual paths.
Wrong. Intellectual understanding is the best tool to reach the truth. It took my intellect years to filter through all the created jargon spawned by ignorance of actual science but it is doable. It is true that my experiences were the catalyst initially driving me to even entertain the hocus pocus speculations but the actual science is what cleared through the fog of jargon to the Truth.
Indeed. It takes the same perseverance and attention as studying for a college level course. It requires requires studying, remembering, practicing (testing)what was learnt. It requires an open mind to allow for That I Am to be a possibility.
I also do not believe it takes years of studying. If it takes that many years perhaps we may never get it! Not qualified!
The good thing about this is the rewards gained along the way. I'm learning patience and concentration and even picked up a little peaceful trance I can get into any time, for a few minutes. My intellect has jumped a couple of points so I can actually understand Kant now. Maybe I'll try Calculus or Physics again. Painting could be fun. No telling what else I might learn along the way. I'm in no hurry.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
