• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Advaita revisited

sravna

sravna

Well-known member
Yesterday some sudden intuition struck me regarding the concept of maya and I am sharing it with you. There has been diffciulty to reconcile the concept of maya with nirguna brahman. ?My view is that maya inheres in nirguna brahman but nirguna brahman's reality is itself a unified whole and a single reality. However saguna brahman and maya automatically get projected as a lower level reality. Saguna brahman has the same experience with maya as nirguna brahman has but maya does not inhere in saguna brahman but weilded by saguna brahman upon itself to turn into many. Then saguna brahman as Atman becomes the silent witness and experiencer of everything. The only difference between nirguna brahman and saguna brahman's experience is that whereas maya inheres in the former , it is not the case in the latter but saguna brahman uses maya to get the same experience, The nature of reality lends itself to projection of lower realities and hence we have both nirguna brahman and saguna brahman.

I believe qualitatively the experience of brahman would be the same in both, but for nirguna brahman the experience is a unified whole whereas in the case of saguna brahman it unfolds through space and time.
 
Last edited:
hi sir,

my humble feelings now...i was a straunch ADVAITA devotee for nearly 30 years...in recent years....after

hearing some kalashepa of SRI DUSHYANT SRIDHAR about visitadvaita sri vaishnava sampradya through

youtube....now i feel saguna is easier and more palatable than nirguna....i understand NIRGUNA BRAHMAN

very well...even i did my ph.d based on ADVAITA VEDANTA....but some what ....vaishnava visitadvaita

philosophy marketing was better than advaita...i have problem with dvaita siddhanta....now i like

more saguna brahman upasana is better than nirguna brahman upasana..,,,maya can be can't be...

i feel MAYA VADHA is not able to enjoy the real SAGUNA BRAHMAN...
 
I understand. In the final analysis it is all the same. It depends on which level you want to focus and as you said the acceptance is on how well you market the philosophy. But i feel that the concept of maya is brilliant and necessary to logically explain reality. Maya may keep troubling but it is only with good intention.
 
God is playing such a brilliant sport that we can be only at awe of it. With science and technology we are only trying to duplicate maya . Scientists will understand reality through what reality is not. That is the reason each theory is being superseded. Direct understanding needs a highly evolved mind.
 
Brahman is one which is said to be beyond the reach of our senses and mind. There are no two Brahmans, one Nirguna and the other Saguna Bramhan. According to the spiritual status and intellectual understanding of a Jivatma in this birth he adopts the route that convinces him. But the ultimate truth of the nirguna nature of Brahman stands. Every soul is free to follow the path that suits him in this birth. Moksha is only the realisation of the unity of the Jiva and Brahman and nothing else. Saguna Brahma Upasana with the concept of duality also would ultimately lead one to this realisation.
 
sravna said:
Yesterday some sudden intuition struck me regarding the concept of maya and I am sharing it with you. There has been diffciulty to reconcile the concept of maya with nirguna brahman. ?My view is that maya inheres in nirguna brahman but nirguna brahman's reality is itself a unified whole and a single reality. However saguna brahman and maya automatically get projected as a lower level reality. Saguna brahman has the same experience with maya as nirguna brahman has but maya does not inhere in saguna brahman but weilded by saguna brahman upon itself to turn into many. Then saguna brahman as Atman becomes the silent witness and experiencer of everything. The only difference between nirguna brahman and saguna brahman's experience is that whereas maya inheres in the former , it is not the case in the latter but saguna brahman uses maya to get the same experience, The nature of reality lends itself to projection of lower realities and hence we have both nirguna brahman and saguna brahman.

I believe qualitatively the experience of brahman would be the same in both, but for nirguna brahman the experience is a unified whole whereas in the case of saguna brahman it unfolds through space and time.
Click to expand...


Dear Sravna,

I was hanging around in some Advaita/Non Dualist page in Facebook and it was very irritating cos everyone was just finally saying "Nothing exists" without understanding what they were saying.

I felt mostly they were just sort of in a denial and not really understood Advaita at all.

Advaita is nice for the mind when it comes to intellectual debate but beyond that for practical life it is a bit lacking flavor.

Everyone in that FB page was in Aham Brahmasmi mode and I asked them "if you fall of a cliff what would you be calling out? Aham Brahmasmi or God save me?"

No one answered me! LOL

To a great extent 100% Dualism(Dvaita) is the easiest of all.
That is we were created by God and He is always greater than us and He is almighty and we seek His mercy and compassion and case closed....no need for Sayujyam or Maya theory.
A total surrender makes life easier..after all Lord Krishna Himself advocated surrender of the Dualistic kind.
 
renuka said:
Dear Sravna,

I was hanging around in some Advaita/Non Dualist page in Facebook and it was very irritating cos everyone was just finally saying "Nothing exists" without understanding what they were saying.

I felt mostly they were just sort of in a denial and not really understood Advaita at all.

Advaita is nice for the mind when it comes to intellectual debate but beyond that for practical life it is a bit lacking flavor.

Everyone in that FB page was in Aham Brahmasmi mode and I asked them "if you fall of a cliff what would you be calling out? Aham Brahmasmi or God save me?"

No one answered me! LOL

To a great extent 100% Dualism(Dvaita) is the easiest of all.
That is we were created by God and He is always greater than us and He is almighty and we seek His mercy and compassion and case closed....no need for Sayujyam or Maya theory.
A total surrender makes life easier..after all Lord Krishna Himself advocated surrender of the Dualistic kind.
Click to expand...
Dear Renuka,

It is not about what is easy to understand. It is about truth. Advaita answers all tough questions without contradictions. Others cannot. Believe me if you truly understand advaita you can really relish the thought that nothing second exists.
 
sravna said:
Dear Renuka,

It is not about what is easy to understand. It is about truth. Advaita answers all tough questions without contradictions. Others cannot. Believe me if you truly understand advaita you can really relish the thought that nothing second exists.
Click to expand...
I agree with you ....but Advaita is too technical even though its the ultimate truth.
It does not cater for human emotional needs that Dualism can provide.

Advaita is like High Grade Wine...people discuss its grade and quality more than actually enjoying the intoxication.

Dvaita is like local brew ..you can taste the personalized flavor, get drunk and keep coming back for more.

For those who feel I left Vishistadvaita out dont feel bad...you can still get drunk..may be Vaagmi Ji can tell you more!LOL
 
renuka said:
I agree with you ....but Advaita is too technical even though its the ultimate truth.
It does not cater for human emotional needs that Dualism can provide.

Advaita is like High Grade Wine...people discuss its grade and quality more than actually enjoying the intoxication.

Dvaita is like local brew ..you can taste the personalized flavor, get drunk and keep coming back for more.

For those who feel I left Vishistadvaita out dont feel bad...you can still get drunk..may be Vaagmi Ji can tell you more!LOL
Click to expand...
Very funnily said Renuka. Sometimes or many a time it is better to be intoxicated and enjoy that bliss.
 
I quote below all the dukhrinjkarane that is indulged in by the advaiti Sravna and the down to earth taunt by Renuka. It is quite interesting to see how people get intoxicated with their ability to think in diverse ways. Now coming to the point I give my thoughts in blue color below:

1) There has been diffciulty to reconcile the concept of maya with nirguna brahman...........

Why so? Actually Nirguna Brahman cannot stand without the support of Maya. Take away Maya and advaitam will collapse due to its own dead weight.

2) My view is that maya inheres in nirguna brahman but nirguna brahman's reality is itself a unified whole and a single reality. However saguna brahman and maya automatically get projected as a lower level reality. Saguna brahman has the same experience with maya as nirguna brahman has but maya does not inhere in saguna brahman but weilded by saguna brahman upon itself to turn into many. Then saguna brahman as Atman becomes the silent witness and experiencer of everything. The only difference between nirguna brahman and saguna brahman's experience is that whereas maya inheres in the former , it is not the case in the latter but saguna brahman uses maya to get the same experience, The nature of reality lends itself to projection of lower realities and hence we have both nirguna brahman and saguna brahman.

There are no two realities and there can not be two realities. Reality is just one. There is no need to impose the extraneous Maya on the reality. The reality shines by itself. and it cannot be hidden by Maya.--particularly when Reality is all "powerful ".

3) In the final analysis it is all the same. It depends on which level you want to focus and as you said the acceptance is on how well you market the philosophy.

This is a condescending statement. We do not accept that advaitins are at any higher or superior level of understanding. Rather we consider them as groping in the darkness. They need the crutch of Maya to cover up the weaknesses in their understanding of reality. So they are totally out of focus.

4) With science and technology we are only trying to duplicate maya .

No. God reveals different things at different times. Time being a unidirectional non returning vector, we do not see the whole picture at any given point of time. It is always a "given situation" in which scientific laws work. When situations change due to passage of time the "given situation" changes and so facts appear to undergo a change. There can not be an entity of maya which plays hide and seek. It is logically wrong.

everyone was just finally saying "Nothing exists" without understanding what they were saying.

We do not say "Nothing exists". You are misquoting for your convenience.

I felt mostly they were just sort of in a denial and not really understood Advaita at all.
Advaita is nice for the mind when it comes to intellectual debate but beyond that for practical life it is a bit lacking flavor.

"Nice for the mind" is the truth. Renuka!! you said it. Human mind needs at the end of all the dukhrinjkarane such a nice/"high" feeling and yearns for it. Like a drunk on withdrawal tantrums.

Everyone in that FB page was in Aham Brahmasmi mode and I asked them "if you fall of a cliff what would you be calling out? Aham Brahmasmi or God save me?"
No one answered me! LOL

LOL

To a great extent 100% Dualism(Dvaita) is the easiest of all.
That is we were created by God and He is always greater than us and He is almighty and we seek His mercy and compassion and case closed....no need for Sayujyam or Maya theory.

Why He did all this and is continuing to do? Please answer.

It is about truth. Advaita answers all tough questions without contradictions. Others cannot.

What are these tough questions and the answers? Please list them here briefly Sravna.

Believe me if you truly understand advaita you can really relish the thought that nothing second exists.

You have not thought adequately deeply. It can be dangerous to remain elated with half truths. Try to perceive.
 
Dear shri Vaagmi,

A complete and cogent theory has to explain everything neatly. Why take maya out of the explanation? In nirguna brahman's reality there is no maya but maya comes into play at a lower reality along with saguna brahman. My idea is that the experiences of nirguna brahman and saguna brahman are equivalent , the difference being in the case of saguna brahman it is played out in space and time.

Maya is a truth that was grasped by an extraordinary mind. Without maya , no theory of reality can stand. So it is to sankara's great credit that he was to perceive reality at such depth.
 
Some clarifications. when I say maya is not in nirguna brahman's reality, I mean there is no veiling on nirguna brahman. Similarly there is no veiling on saguna brahman. In fact the case of saguna brahman illustrates how there can be no veiling on nirguna brahman. Maya as a standalone reality starts only at the level of saguna brahman's reality.
 
Just one tough question for you Vaagmi ji. How do you reconcile the eternal reality of God with the transient physical reality?
 
sravna said:
Just one tough question for you Vaagmi ji. How do you reconcile the eternal reality of God with the transient physical reality?
Click to expand...

Question needs elaboration to know what you have first understood by the terms 1. Eternal reality 2. transient physical reality. Please explain.
 
Dear Sravna,
You may call me an atheist. No problem. But I have this to say about the given situation.

Let us dio away with the often misunderstood and misused terms like nirguna, saguna etc.,

Let me state my case:

I look at the universe/world around me. I am impressed by the whole system that is so efficiently functional. I understand how it works and sometime I wonder how it works. I gain knowledge by observation and as the gaps in my knowledge narrow, new questions come and the gap widens as time does not stand still and moves inexorably and unidirectionally. I find a lifetime is pathetically inadequate to understand even the tip of the iceberg that is the reality. With the creative mind that I have, I come to the conclusion that I have to move on and hence determine the reality as I understand it giving it a certain contour. There are many like me who also are in the same boat and each one being endowed with a creative thinking mind, determine the reality in different ways and give it a contour. The reality remains whatever it is while we all keep arguing about what it is.

Now a friend and a fellow traveller comes and tells me this. I would avoid using sagunam nirgunam etc., and use just English language here. My friend tells me The reality consists of just a universal conciousness which we prefer to call losely as God. He further says There is just this conciousness and we, the thinking beings and other beings are all just part of this universal consciousness. Then he further goes on to explain the obvious sore thumb saying we see and perceive a lot of things in this universe and beyond because of a disease called Maya which afflicts us. And he further says this maya is just an aspect of the superior Universal conciousness (UC). He calls his wisdom by the name Advaitam.

Now I am an Atheist. I am not ready to accept any scheme or blue print behind the given situation. I tell him that the whole thing is just there happening without any rhyme or reason. It is just happening through the centuries and millenium without anyone guiding or commanding it. I come into this world live here and just go when the time comes depending on my health and lifestyle. There is no God or any other superior force guiding all these. It is just a function of time. There is just only the time, the unique dimension, and nothing else. If there is this God as you say and if I am part of this God, how come I am finite outside and am able to perceive me and God that way? Using the language as a tool--with all its inadequacies--I ask a simple question to you: I am the subject and God or UC or whatever you call it is the object which I perceive using your logic. But how come that this object and subject fuse into one suddenly and I become part of this UC. When such contradictions heaps on the UC you somehow want to wriggle out and discover using your language skils an entity called Maya and tell me that the dual perception is due to maya. Lo. I laugh at your pathetic attempt to cover up your inability to explain the subject object merger theory. So here we stand my dear Sravna.

You with your cock and bull story of object becoming a subject and maya standing on the way of understanding this "wonder".

And I dismiss your dukhrinjkarane as a game of Sudoku.

Finally I stand where I started--wondering where all this started and where all this will end. and I am not bothered because I am just a dot in the infinite continuum called Time and will die one day still wondering what all this is about.
 
Dear shri vaagmi,

I do not see any serious challenge from you as you are simply dismissing my argument without rhyme or reason. I gave a logical standing for the concept of maya and say it is a truth. Do you find any contradictions in the theory? If so kindly talk about them.

I also posed a question to you. Let me elaborate on it. By eternal reality, I mean something beyond time. The contradiction involved in talking about beginning and end of time requires something that is timeless., but we also know we exist in a transient time bound reality. How do you connect these two realities?
 
sravna said:
God is playing such a brilliant sport that we can be only at awe of it. With science and technology we are only trying to duplicate maya . Scientists will understand reality through what reality is not. That is the reason each theory is being superseded. Direct understanding needs a highly evolved mind.
Click to expand...
Dear Sravna,
I feel Advaitins are not in any sense Non Dualist. The Non Dualism page I was hanging out for a while had mostly whites! They were just in a state of denial if you ask me.
When they had no answer they would reply "Nothing is real..nothing exists"

So when I asked them "Do you exists?"
They reply "No"

Then when I asked them "then who is using your lap top and replying me?"

Then they got mad with me saying I am ignorant and have no knowledge..no higher evolved mind.
One white woman even said that I have the audacity to question about Non Dualism when I know nothing!LOL

It was such a crazy page.

They could talk volumes and volumes of Zen! They are not pro Adi Shankara as much(yet call themselves non dualist) but when I ask them a simple question "do you exists and who is typing the answers" all of them get angry with me.

Sravna..you seem to have a different understanding from that crazy bunch but to me the crazy bunch seemed to be individuals with a pride who cant accept a concept of God or Higher power and Non Dualism made them feel superior.

Sometimes a Non dualist could be a person who just cant submit to God.
They feel proud...they dont want to be 2nd best..they want to be the ultimate.

I am altering a Cherokee proverb to fit into this discussion.

"There is a battle of two wolves within us..One is Maya and the other is Surrender, The Wolf that wins? The one you feed"

So Sravna, quit feeding Maya.
 
sravna said:
Dear shri vaagmi,

I do not see any serious challenge from you as you are simply dismissing my argument without rhyme or reason. I gave a logical standing for the concept of maya and say it is a truth. Do you find any contradictions in the theory? If so kindly talk about them.

Reply:
It does not matter for me whether you see a challenge or not in my views. I just state my views. Rhyme and reason can be found only if you are vibrating in that frequency. I have said enough about Maya. Maya was contrived by its author only when he found that his theory of subject object merging does not have a firm foundation to stand on. Once you become a subscriber to a certain ideology you lose your independence to look at things objectively and start using hyperboles about the author of your pet idelogy. No offence meant. Just a statement of fact.

I also posed a question to you. Let me elaborate on it. By eternal reality, I mean something beyond time.

Reply:
What is this something? God?

The contradiction involved in talking about beginning and end of time requires something that is timeless., but we also know we exist in a transient time bound reality. How do you connect these two realities?

Reply:
Not yet clear. What are you talking about. Make it more clear in common language.

Thank you.
Click to expand...
 
sravna said:
Yesterday some sudden intuition struck me regarding the concept of maya and I am sharing it with you. There has been diffciulty to reconcile the concept of maya with nirguna brahman. ?My view is that maya inheres in nirguna brahman but nirguna brahman's reality is itself a unified whole and a single reality. However saguna brahman and maya automatically get projected as a lower level reality. Saguna brahman has the same experience with maya as nirguna brahman has but maya does not inhere in saguna brahman but weilded by saguna brahman upon itself to turn into many. Then saguna brahman as Atman becomes the silent witness and experiencer of everything. The only difference between nirguna brahman and saguna brahman's experience is that whereas maya inheres in the former , it is not the case in the latter but saguna brahman uses maya to get the same experience, The nature of reality lends itself to projection of lower realities and hence we have both nirguna brahman and saguna brahman.

I believe qualitatively the experience of brahman would be the same in both, but for nirguna brahman the experience is a unified whole whereas in the case of saguna brahman it unfolds through space and time.
Click to expand...
sravna said:
Yesterday some sudden intuition struck me regarding the concept of maya and I am sharing it with you. There has been diffciulty to reconcile the concept of maya with nirguna brahman. ?My view is that maya inheres in nirguna brahman but nirguna brahman's reality is itself a unified whole and a single reality. However saguna brahman and maya automatically get projected as a lower level reality. Saguna brahman has the same experience with maya as nirguna brahman has but maya does not inhere in saguna brahman but weilded by saguna brahman upon itself to turn into many. Then saguna brahman as Atman becomes the silent witness and experiencer of everything. The only difference between nirguna brahman and saguna brahman's experience is that whereas maya inheres in the former , it is not the case in the latter but saguna brahman uses maya to get the same experience, The nature of reality lends itself to projection of lower realities and hence we have both nirguna brahman and saguna brahman.

I believe qualitatively the experience of brahman would be the same in both, but for nirguna brahman the experience is a unified whole whereas in the case of saguna brahman it unfolds through space and time.
Click to expand...
sravna said:
Yesterday some sudden intuition struck me regarding the concept of maya and I am sharing it with you. There has been diffciulty to reconcile the concept of maya with nirguna brahman. ?My view is that maya inheres in nirguna brahman but nirguna brahman's reality is itself a unified whole and a single reality. However saguna brahman and maya automatically get projected as a lower level reality. Saguna brahman has the same experience with maya as nirguna brahman has but maya does not inhere in saguna brahman but weilded by saguna brahman upon itself to turn into many. Then saguna brahman as Atman becomes the silent witness and experiencer of everything. The only difference between nirguna brahman and saguna brahman's experience is that whereas maya inheres in the former , it is not the case in the latter but saguna brahman uses maya to get the same experience, The nature of reality lends itself to projection of lower realities and hence we have both nirguna brahman and saguna brahman.

I believe qualitatively the experience of brahman would be the same in both, but for nirguna brahman the experience is a unified whole whereas in the case of saguna brahman it unfolds through space and time.
Click to expand...

There are multiple perspectives with multiple people and for everyone their perspective is the truth. So this is my perspective.

Brahman means expansion. Expansion of spacetime causes all the 'evolution' or evolutionary changes in Universe. Brahman causes 'ati sRsti' or super creation, which is creation of more and more intelligent beings.

Thus expansion of spacetime is Brahman. It is called the 'Nirguna' Brahman. The 'evolution' of forms of Universe is also Brahman. It is called 'Saguna Brahman'.

Gunas of Universe are Sattva (Increase in Entropy), Rajas (Increase in Energy) and Tamas (decrease of Entropy and energy).

The Nirguna Brahman, the 'expansion of spacetime' keeps happening always. It is not associated entropy or energy or changes in them.

The Saguna Brahman, the evolution in the forms of Universe is associated with changes in entropy and energy. This evolution keeps creating more complex/intelligent beings.

The Saguna Brahman (evolution) leads to 'mAyA'.

mAya means perception of 'change of form'. The evolution leads to continuous perception of change of forms.

The change of form can occur due to mere observation or superimposition (like wavefunction collapse) called adhyaropA.

It could be due to acquisition of new attributes in existing forms that makes it alternately known (anyatha AkhyAti).

It could be due to acquisition of totally new forms (Atma AkhyAti). It could be due to just being unknown (akhyAti) or simply erroneous perception.

Since mAyA is a perception in change of form, it could be translated as deception or illusion. But that's only one dimension of mAyA (the akhyAti).

The one who lords over the change of the forms (mAya) is Isvara. It is the bonding between the forms. At chemical level, it is the Electromagnetic force. At biological level it is the 'priyam' or love between beings.

The Saguna Brahman causes the 'Sat' (Existence), 'Cit' (consciousness) and 'Ananda' (defined as offspring or next generation)

The nirguna Brahman, the expansion of spacetime is beyond all these.

-TBT
 
This kind of topic gets revisited and the usual participants say the same thing only to come back again. It is like birth-death-birth cycle.

Here is my take and like all other posts in the thread it is also wrong.

(Confused) Advita people of this forum: Nirguna Brahman is like Idli, you have to just marvel and taste this Idli. Saguna Brahman is just Idli with Sambar. But this sambar flows and is deceptive. It hides the Idli and we are fooled into drinking the Sambar

Dualists: There is Idli that goes with Sambar, Chutney, Thokku etc. We want to taste them but can only smell and we live our life in that smell and worship it

Special case of dualists (though some insist they be called special case of non-dualists, though there is nothing non-dual about their beliefs). They say Idli without sambar does not make sense. Idli is always with sambar (like Lakshmi and Narayana are always together). In addition to smell they can taste the Idli & sambar together and want to go to a place called Vaikunta where they can be tasting bits of sambar-idli all the time. They laugh at the idea of talking about Idli alone


Advita - non-dual exist to fight with dualists and special case of dualists.
If dualists are dismissed the Advita people will have nothing to do. So they keep generating words and keep asserting their points to each other every so often

What is then the reality? The reality is there is only Idli everywhere and you are that Idli. How can Idli taste itself - not possible. There is no one to taste. Idli only remains and all these ideas of sambar, chutney are just like a dream. Everyone is actually the only Idli there is
 
This kind of topic gets revisited and the usual participants say the same thing only to come back again. It is like birth-death-birth cycle.(#23)
This is different by Meena & looks true

Poem: Advaita The Ultimate Question by Meena Kandasamy

Non Dualism Atman Self Brahman God Are Equal And Same. So I Untouchable Outcast Am God. Will You Ever Agree? No Matter What You Preach Answer Me. Through Your Saints. One More Final Question Can My Untouchable Atman And Your Brahmin Atman Ever Be One ?
www.poetrynook.com www.poetrynook.com
 
a-TB said:
This kind of topic gets revisited and the usual participants say the same thing only to come back again. It is like birth-death-birth cycle.

Here is my take and like all other posts in the thread it is also wrong.

(Confused) Advita people of this forum: Nirguna Brahman is like Idli, you have to just marvel and taste this Idli. Saguna Brahman is just Idli with Sambar. But this sambar flows and is deceptive. It hides the Idli and we are fooled into drinking the Sambar

Dualists: There is Idli that goes with Sambar, Chutney, Thokku etc. We want to taste them but can only smell and we live our life in that smell and worship it

Special case of dualists (though some insist they be called special case of non-dualists, though there is nothing non-dual about their beliefs). They say Idli without sambar does not make sense. Idli is always with sambar (like Lakshmi and Narayana are always together). In addition to smell they can taste the Idli & sambar together and want to go to a place called Vaikunta where they can be tasting bits of sambar-idli all the time. They laugh at the idea of talking about Idli alone


Advita - non-dual exist to fight with dualists and special case of dualists.
If dualists are dismissed the Advita people will have nothing to do. So they keep generating words and keep asserting their points to each other every so often

What is then the reality? The reality is there is only Idli everywhere and you are that Idli. How can Idli taste itself - not possible. There is no one to taste. Idli only remains and all these ideas of sambar, chutney are just like a dream. Everyone is actually the only Idli there is
Click to expand...

Its not as easy as you think it is.
Drag in maya matrix and the Idli starts to have an identity crisis.

Idli starts to think "Who am I?" KaH Aham?
Am I urad dhal or am I rice?

Why did the dualistic thought get into the mind of idli?
Then it sinks further in the ocean of Sambar(a) {Samsara)...unable to get beyond maya matrix.

It get's soggy and looses its true fluffy identity.
Then idli totally gives up and surrenders!
He calls out to God and God tells it "I have always been next to you as a livesaver..round with a hole in the middle for you to hold on and not drown..I am the Medu Vada which you failed to see"

Idli finally goes beyond duality..it is no more urad dhal or rice.
It finally realizes that there is only Idli and Vada made for each other.
 

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top