Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 71

Thread: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

  1. #41
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Jai shri RAma,

    I would also like to give alternate explanation.

    All smArta-s were advaitins or all advaitins earlier were smArta-s. smArta-s worship 5 deities and the daily rituals is called panchyatna puja. All 5 forms of God - Ganesha, Shiva, shakti, Vishnu and Surya are considered as equal manifestations of same divinity. sometimes Surya is worshipped as Surya Narayana.

    smArta-s are the once who follow smtiri-s. there are 18 smriti-s, some of them are Manu Smriti, Apastamba Dharma Smriti, Gautam, Yagnavalkya, Atri, Daksha, Shankha, etc.

    Smriti-s are typing called as notes from memory. Great Rishi-s what had mastered Veda-s wrote smriti-s in accordance with Veda-s (shturi-s). Hence even shruti-s are also important to smArta-s.

    Smriti-s are also called as dharma Shastra-s (laws code, code of conduct) and are created for universal well being nad harmony.

    Adi Shankaracharya has quoted many smriti-s in his bhashya-s. Which means that he himself gave importance to them.

    Dharma Shastra-s, which provide moral and ethical laws, permit us to take sword for self protection and also allow Brahmins who are starving to take up occupations like trading and even take up the dharma of sword as a last resort.

    I hope you have got your answer

    If we stick to Brahma Satya Jagat Mithya, then dharma shastra-s are also useless and everything is illusion.

    So until, you attain inner purity, you will have to do nitya karma and carry out your duties. Adi Shankara also repaired, reconstructed many temples and also re-installed the deity of famous Jagannath Puri and built one of his math, Puri Math right there.

    Adi Shankaracharya only established advaita as highest philosophical truths. He himself did not gave Jnana to any Grihastha and gave utmost importance to Sanyasa for attaining Brahma-vidya, as one can fully devote all 24 hours to God.

    But for masses, he also composed hyms for various deities and as I have said repaired temples, reconsecrated Sri Yantra-s. This means he encouraged deity worship, shakta-s Tantra (in pure form), karma kand (mimAmsA), but he did not consider them as the supreme goal. So he asks us to rise above them after you attain inner purity.

    Unfortunately his life i.e. biography, as some say, is corrupted and hence rejected by rivals, and only his prasthantrayi Bhashya is considered as authentic and are undoubtedly attributed to Adi Shankaracharya. If we blend even some of his hymms, his biography and his bhashya-s, we can understand why he is called as Jagat Guru.

    Adi Shankara also commented on Vishnu Sahasranama and has commented on Patanjali Yoga Sutra, a short 28 verse hym, which is considered as an essence of Yoga Sutra of Patanjali, perhaps, according to Adhaviya shankara Digvijay (written by VidyaraNya Svami), his Guru Govindapada is considered as incarnation of Shesha Naaga and the same shesha Naaga was born earlier as Maharshi Patanjali.

    Saundarya Lahiri is also considered as very powerful composition on Devi bhavAnI, specially the first 40 verses (out of total 100) are said to be very potent. Then there is Dakshinamurti stotra, Shiva Panchakshara stotra and Veda Sara Shiva Stotra is also attributed to him, all considered authentic atleast by Kanchi Paramacharya.

    EDIT: Citing 12 purANa-s which includes 3 up-purANa-s in his Vishnu Sahasranam Bhashya shows that he was in full support of purANa-s and he did not devised symbolic meaning. Hence he even propagated bhakti. He also cited tamasic and rajasic puranas which means that unlike Vaishnava-s he did n't considered them as leading to hell, or in other words, those verses are an interpolation

    In short he blended Yoga, Tantra (shakta), Karma Kand, Bhakti into Advaita, and established advaita as the final destination.

    Aum
    Last edited by Amrut; 02 December 2013 at 01:11 AM.
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  2. #42
    Join Date
    October 2012
    Location
    Bhaarath
    Age
    51
    Posts
    1,113
    Rep Power
    1502

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Namaste IS Amrutji,

    Thank you very much for taking time to explain me.

    Advaita belongs to 4th ashram, which is sanyAsa ashram.
    Although don't even know 1% of Advaitam, this statement makes sense to me. My spiritual level is too low to take up sanyAsa and also the purpose of my life (my perceived) do not allow me.

    Honestly must admit that will take some time to understand your reply completely.

    How ever, you reply clarified that Advaitam is not for ordinary people as it can't be practised in the concrete jungle lifestyle.
    Anirudh...

  3. #43
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Quote Originally Posted by Anirudh View Post
    Namaste IS Amrutji,

    Thank you very much for taking time to explain me.


    Although don't even know 1% of Advaitam, this statement makes sense to me. My spiritual level is too low to take up sanyAsa and also the purpose of my life (my perceived) do not allow me.

    Honestly must admit that will take some time to understand your reply completely.

    How ever, you reply clarified that Advaitam is not for ordinary people as it can't be practised in the concrete jungle lifestyle.
    Namaste,

    As per my understanding Advaita is not for those who wish to fulfill desires. Also no of desires has to be less. That is why even in prakaraNa granth-s, which are very basic texts like Atma Bodh, Vivekchudamani (basic though profound in knowledge), qualifications are given.

    If advaita could have been practiced by all, there wont be any of these qualities like four main qualities like
    vivek, vairAgya, ShaTa sampattis (Sat sampatti - Sama, dama, uprati, titikshA, sraddhA and samAdhAna) and mumukshu.

    This explains it all

    Until then we will have to prepare ourselves to be qualified. Total mastery is not expected, but they have to be present up to a certain extent. Only Guru can know if you qualify for Advaita.

    The problem is in this e-age , everything is floating on net, including Brahma Sutra-s, which are definitely not for laymen. People write commentaries even if they are not authorized by a Guru or by God. God should order them to write down commentaries.

    Alas, all are pouncing to write commentaries, may be some of them do not even meditate, who knows.

    Certain things should not be thrown to masses.

    Aum
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  4. #44
    Join Date
    June 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    572
    Rep Power
    820

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Namaste Amrut.,

    Very interesting reply and i am sure, useful for already convinced.

    Sorry to say this, but you haven't answered my questions.

    First, you are not explain or at least saying what it means when you say "Brahman is getting deluded" and no i do not understand what you are saying. My question is very much focused on, Advaitic Brahman having the possibility of "Getting deluded"! and not about the time when it got deluded, or status before and after delusion or deluded Brahman and Nirguna Brahman both existing in all four states forever! Its only pointed question on "Whether the Advaitic Brahman can be deluded or not!"

    You are again, not explaining the super impositions or the source of Maya! You are explaining the effect!

    No explanation for "Saguna Brahman" coming in to existence and the cyclic inter-dependency of existence of Maya beforehand of existence of Saguna Brahman!

    You confused more now.... Ishvara u said is Saguna Brahman + Maya but now you are saying that IShavaara is Nirguna Brahman with 6 upadhis. I am lost. But, same you immediately saying, removing that 6 upadhis will leave the Brahman as pure conscious, and i hope that is what you mean "Nirguna" Brahman!

    The example i stated is misunderstood...

    For one, name and form is real and can be compared with another real where there is a commonality of name and form! When you compare a real with unreal where there is no commonality, the fundamental identity of objects and their reality of name and form is lost. In other words, calling an object and its existence when ultimately one is real and the other is unreal has no commonality and that is what is called "Paradoxical" meaning such cannot exist!

    You cannot build anymore on top of what cannot exist and so why that crux require a meaningful explanation!

    "
    Real is that which is present at all places at all times – all pervading, omnipresent, as consciousness, without which nothing can be experienced.

    Remove these common factor of name and form and what is left is Jnana.
    "

    The above statements are coming from one particular thought but not rational. Even if we take your definition of real as something that exist always and at all place, all pervading etc. what should be unreal? The opposite of it? or another positive entity? ( Not sure if you are understanding what is positive entity means - Not having knowledge can be identified as Ignorance when they are mutually exclusive. Or Ignorance when being positive has nothing to do with the knowledge - here ignorance is positive and dawn of knowledge does not have to have any effect of the positive entity ignorance - but using that knowledge you can destroy the positive entity called ignorance)

    So, driving the theories to fit in to the conclusion is not rational but building the framework which comfortably explains the conclusion with out compromise is what i am looking for.

    So, the questions remain open and you haven't unlocked them yet!

    Hare Krshna!

  5. #45
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Namaste Grames,

    So the saga continues. Didn't I say, the questions will continue.

    I will attempt to answer rationally, though I am poor at reasoning.

    'Brahman getting deluded' has not to be taken literally

    Ok. My Bad. Brahman appears to be different due to the influence of mAyA. Consider that you are standing in essel world, where there is a room of different types of mirrors (new e.g )

    So there are concave, convex, different types of mirror. you see yourself fat, slim, elongated, etc. The imperfections in mirror does not mean there is imperfection in 'You'.

    Now please have mercy and do not raise further questions on this e.g. itself.

    "Whether the Advaitic Brahman can be deluded or not!"
    No, if taken from standpoint of supreme reality.

    See, answers can be given from practical POV and Turiya POV. We should not mix both of them. Explanations will differ and we will never be able to get answers.


    You are again, not explaining the super impositions or the source of Maya!
    Source means the starting point. This is what I understand. But both are said to be beginningless. So I cannot say that the source of mAyA is Brahman. I can only say that Brahman can exist without mAyA, as experienced in turiya state, but not vica versa.

    No explanation for "Saguna Brahman" coming in to existence and the cyclic inter-dependency of existence of Maya beforehand of existence of Saguna Brahman!


    You confused more now.... Ishvara u said is Saguna Brahman + Maya but now you are saying that IShavaara is Nirguna Brahman with 6 upadhis. I am lost. But, same you immediately saying, removing that 6 upadhis will leave the Brahman as pure conscious, and i hope that is what you mean "Nirguna" Brahman!
    The Brahman when endowed with mAyA (guNa-s) is called as saguNa Brahman. Ishvara = SaguNa Brahman.

    upAdhi-s are also within mAyA.

    So it is NirguNa Brahman + mAyA = Ishvara = SaguNa Brahman.

    Remove six upAdhi-s, then what is left is NirguNa Brahman.

    the very word sa-guNa means with guNa-s. guNa-s are within mAyA. Outside mAyA there are no guNa-s.

    All Clear?

    The example i stated is misunderstood...

    For one, name and form is real and can be compared with another real where there is a commonality of name and form! When you compare a real with unreal where there is no commonality, the fundamental identity of objects and their reality of name and form is lost. In other words, calling an object and its existence when ultimately one is real and the other is unreal has no commonality and that is what is called "Paradoxical" meaning such cannot exist!

    You cannot build anymore on top of what cannot exist and so why that crux require a meaningful explanation!


    Real is that which is present at all places at all times – all pervading, omnipresent, as consciousness, without which nothing can be experienced.

    Remove these common factor of name and form and what is left is Jnana.


    The above statements are coming from one particular thought but not rational. Even if we take your definition of real as something that exist always and at all place, all pervading etc. what should be unreal? The opposite of it? or another positive entity? ( Not sure if you are understanding what is positive entity means - Not having knowledge can be identified as Ignorance when they are mutually exclusive. Or Ignorance when being positive has nothing to do with the knowledge - here ignorance is positive and dawn of knowledge does not have to have any effect of the positive entity ignorance - but using that knowledge you can destroy the positive entity called ignorance)

    So, driving the theories to fit in to the conclusion is not rational but building the framework which comfortably explains the conclusion with out compromise is what i am looking for.
    If you do not allow me to take definition of real as per advaita, then I would not be able to give any answers.

    Real is that which is present at all places at all times – all pervading, omnipresent, as consciousness, without which nothing can be experienced.

    Unreal is that which do not exist at any time.

    There is a priori of names and forms are real. I went to the root cause - names and forms.

    I = Jiva is also an a priori

    I didn't get about 'positive identity'

    Quote Originally Posted by grames View Post

    Sorry to say this, but you haven't answered my questions.

    So, the questions remain open and you haven't unlocked them yet!
    Did I answer them now??

    Did I found master key.

    Aum

    Amrut
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  6. #46
    Join Date
    June 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    572
    Rep Power
    820

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Dear Amrut.,

    Many thanks and i am closing this discussion as i know it is very difficult to provide any reasoning or rational explanations and i appreciate the attempts you have made.

    As you requested, no more questions and the conclusion i take is, i do not see anything rational yet to get convinced that this 'faith' has rational background but just as a "faith". Again, there is no right or wrong attached to this and it is just my personal opinion.

    Hare Krshna!

  7. #47
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Quote Originally Posted by grames View Post
    Dear Amrut.,

    Many thanks and i am closing this discussion as i know it is very difficult to provide any reasoning or rational explanations and i appreciate the attempts you have made.

    As you requested, no more questions and the conclusion i take is, i do not see anything rational yet to get convinced that this 'faith' has rational background but just as a "faith". Again, there is no right or wrong attached to this and it is just my personal opinion.

    Hare Krshna!
    Dear Grames,

    It is nice to communicate with you. May be someone else more learned and intelligent then me can give you satisfactory answers.

    Hare Krishna
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  8. #48

    Smile Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    I have seen many replies. But let me clarify my statement. I will still say Advaita Vedanta is scientific. It is called Brahma Vidya.

    Brahma means absolute. Vidya means Science. Hence it is the science of the Absolute which distinguishes itself from the other sciences.

    I called it rational, since logic is only limited to one state which is the waking state. But the rationality of Advaita analysis the 3 states of Jagrat, Swapna and Sushupti.

    Finally Advaita is something that can be verified. So it is not something which you just take on faith. That is the reason I say it goes beyond Shastra.

    The Shastra itself declares "Tatra Veda aveda tatra tapa atapa". There the Veda is no longer Veda. So we use the Shastra to verify Advaita, but once verified the Shastra can be kept aside.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    June 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    572
    Rep Power
    820

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Hi.,

    Re-opening this thread??

    A is the only thing in the universe and to experience that universe, you should be that A because you are that A!

    The above is a declaration of a newbie scientist. Now, he has cleverly connected all logical fallacy in to a simple paradoxical statement like the one above so that, you cannot question his verdict. Here is why it is paradoxical

    1. You must become that A to know you are actually that A
    2. Anything else that is not A does not exist including you - really.
    3. Anything else that is not real, can not give you idea of real - So, A alone can give you the experience
    4. You are that A anyways - But you do not have experience of A because you are in between point 2 and 3 - The paradox knot that will never leave you
    5. Since A is the only one, there is no experience and only experienced alone remain - the Sat! What is Experienced is also temporary however divine that is.
    6. Since A is always in that experience, now we are in a cyclic confusion - Where did anything else came from and going through and on what substratum
    7. Oh no, A is the only Being....so there is no Becoming - of anything else to A
    8. No you should not ask any question on the pt 7 - if A is the only Being, why am i not A - Immediate answer is, No you Are that. But , no i am not that - because i have different experience NOW! No you are that, but now you are neither that nor something else! Another Paradox.

    U know what, this bullets can be extended to infinity - all will be answered with paradoxes in between and not sure if that is called scientific and rational! Rationality requires support of a Fact - that fact cannot come from unreal sources - they must be real and here the only fact that is real is A itself! So, A is A - no further proof required! Thats the only rationality left and this situation and position is called, WASTE OF TIME!

    Hare Krshna!

  10. #50
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

    Namaste Grames,

    Quote Originally Posted by grames View Post
    Re-opening this thread??

    A is the only thing in the universe and to experience that universe, you should be that A because you are that A!

    The above is a declaration of a newbie scientist. Now, he has cleverly connected all logical fallacy in to a simple paradoxical statement like the one above so that, you cannot question his verdict. Here is why it is paradoxical

    1. You must become that A to know you are actually that A
    2. Anything else that is not A does not exist including you - really.
    3. Anything else that is not real, can not give you idea of real - So, A alone can give you the experience
    4. You are that A anyways - But you do not have experience of A because you are in between point 2 and 3 - The paradox knot that will never leave you
    5. Since A is the only one, there is no experience and only experienced alone remain - the Sat! What is Experienced is also temporary however divine that is.
    6. Since A is always in that experience, now we are in a cyclic confusion - Where did anything else came from and going through and on what substratum
    7. Oh no, A is the only Being....so there is no Becoming - of anything else to A
    8. No you should not ask any question on the pt 7 - if A is the only Being, why am i not A - Immediate answer is, No you Are that. But , no i am not that - because i have different experience NOW! No you are that, but now you are neither that nor something else! Another Paradox.

    U know what, this bullets can be extended to infinity - all will be answered with paradoxes in between and not sure if that is called scientific and rational! Rationality requires support of a Fact - that fact cannot come from unreal sources - they must be real and here the only fact that is real is A itself! So, A is A - no further proof required! Thats the only rationality left and this situation and position is called, WASTE OF TIME!
    Great questions ! It only shows that you have not understood Advaita well.

    It appears you have moved from Bangalore and you are now in USA.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Creation and Advaita !
    By nirotu in forum Advaita
    Replies: 174
    Last Post: 28 April 2015, 10:34 PM
  2. A Personal Hindu Library
    By saidevo in forum Dharma-related Websites
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 17 March 2009, 12:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •