brahman and maya

[a-TB]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Ok so how shall we reword this?

We cant use He or She cos its sexists...neither can we use "It" cos it would be improper.

So how do you propose to say it?

"The undefinable One constantly sends guides to help entire creation"



In Arabic this problem wont arise cos the Plural WE (as how Hindi uses Hum) is used mostly to denote the act of God..and anyone sent is called a messenger and the word people is used to denote mankind usually starting off in vocative..so in Arabic it would read as

O' dear people,We constantly send messengers to guide and help you.

This way its totally not sexist and everyone of every sexual orientation is included.

It need not be he or she. God could send transgenders too if one buys into the idea of a God creating and sending messengers to fix his creations. In belief anything is possible.

If there was a God creating all this and had to periodically send messengers to fix the created, then it would represent a major flaw in creations. It is like a massive recall that God cannot implement and so sending patchwork of fixes and not succeeding. That would be absurd.

 

[sravna]

It is based on a pattern emerging from a series of messages over many years. There was no view expressed but a critique. Most here know about your brand of spirituality wanting to fix the temperature of cities. Your past views about other human beings who are not like you are known too. So it was an opinion that what was seen here is a repeat of those biases in the post here too. A spiritual person would thank for the analysis provided

Just because you are talking of seeing a pattern does not make your opinion any less biased. All your accusations of others do not automatically become a critique also. These are words you are heaping upon yourself to make you look unbiased. Word play does not get you far. The fact is I have my views about many things and you have yours. I simply asked you to understand that you should not presume your views are some unwritten laws to be followed and those of others are just prejudices that need to be corrected..

 

[renuka]

It need not be he or she. God could send transgenders too if one buys into the idea of a God creating and sending messengers to fix his creations. In belief anything is possible.

If there was a God creating all this and had to periodically send messengers to fix the created, then it would represent a major flaw in creations. It is like a massive recall that God cannot implement and so sending patchwork of fixes and not succeeding. That would be absurd.

Kindly state your opinion on these 2 stanzas from the Bhagavad Geeta.
Do you think Lord Krishna was also stating about a faulty mechanism in creation and a massive recall and patchwork?

yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata
abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmānaṁ sṛijāmyaham

paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśhāya cha duṣhkṛitām
dharma-sansthāpanārthāya sambhavāmi yuge yuge

 

[renuka]

It is based on a pattern emerging from a series of messages over many years. There was no view expressed but a critique. Most here know about your brand of spirituality wanting to fix the temperature of cities. Your past views about other human beings who are not like you are known too. So it was an opinion that what was seen here is a repeat of those biases in the post here too. A spiritual person would thank for the analysis provided

I think you your observation here could be clouded by the previous posts of Sravna about spiritual powers etc.
This thread of his isnt about spiritual powers.
Sravna is discussing Brahman and Maya concept here.
None of the post have anything to do with his spiritual powers.

I hope we can also be fair to him that not all of his threads are about powers.

 

[renuka]

A poem by Ibn Arabi

I marvel at a being that comprises every form,
Whether of essential angels, jinn, or humankind;
Whether of this world or of the world-supernal,
Of animal, vegetable, or mineral.
These are naught beside it,
Nor yet are they its essence,
But in any form it wills, it manifests itself.
It is what appears, by definition, to perception,
Yet it is what remains veiled from conception.
For minds cannot know it by the force of their thinking,
But Imagination makes it manifest to sense.
It is the Living, although no life supports its Essence
In the way that all the forms subsist in [life].
Inform me then, who it may be that I have indicated
In what we have described (and cast aside conceptions):
There it is – concealed, but without being absent;
And there, again, envisaged, but hidden from vision!
I would like to know: Of the likes of it have you
Ever heard or no? – Inform me, then, who is it?
But no one knows what we have adduced here
Except for One, and that is God.
No creature can ever comprehend it.
None there is like unto it, except one personage:
I marvel at the One Perfect that he epitomizes!

 

[prasad1]

Kindly state your opinion on these 2 stanzas from the Bhagavad Geeta.
Do you think Lord Krishna was also stating about a faulty mechanism in creation and a massive recall and patchwork?

yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata
abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmānaṁ sṛijāmyaham

paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśhāya cha duṣhkṛitām
dharma-sansthāpanārthāya sambhavāmi yuge yuge

A perfect "GOD", or "BRAHMAN" can not be creating an IMPERFECT world. So there is basic flaw in the logic.
So I can not justify these two Gita stanzas.
I suppose even Gita or any other preachings are Man-Made they are imperfect.

 

[renuka]

A perfect "GOD", or "BRAHMAN" can not be creating an IMPERFECT world. So there is basic flaw in the logic.
So I can not justify these two Gita stanzas.
I suppose even Gita or any other preachings are Man-Made they are imperfect.

So going by this logic ..so how do we explain the flaws around in the world?
You do subscribe to the concept of Brahman isnt it?
So what is Brahmans role in this flawed system?

Somehow existence seems like an Android with apps and every now and them it needs updates to fix bugs for smooth running of software.
Android Geeta:
"For protection of Android and for fixing the bugs..I manifest latest updates

Whenenever there is decline in function ..to reestablish functionality..I update from time to time"

So what say you?
What is wrong in an update to maintain a system?
After all Dharma itself is a system of law of being.
Every system has operators and operations and malfunction.

In a manifested state everything is subject to change...in an un-manifested state..verily Brahman is.

 

[prasad1]

So going by this logic ..so how do we explain the flaws around in the world?
You do subscribe to the concept of Brahman isnt it?
So what is Brahmans role in this flawed system?

Somehow existence seems like an Android with apps and every now and them it needs updates to fix bugs for smooth running of software.
Android Geeta:
"For protection of Android and for fixing the bugs..I manifest latest updates

Whenenever there is decline in function ..to reestablish functionality..I update from time to time"

So what say you?
What is wrong in an update to maintain a system?
After all Dharma itself is a system of law of being.
Every system has operators and operations and malfunction.

In a manifested state everything is subject to change...in an un-manifested state..verily Brahman is.

The concept of Brahman is abstract.
To explain in a man-made language is impossible.
Just as the entity INFINITY can be expressed, so too Brahman is beyond language.
Yes I do believe in Brahman as I have no other word for it.


In Hinduism, Brahman connotes the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality in the universe. In major schools of Hindu philosophy, it is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists. It is the pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes. Brahman as a metaphysical concept is the single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe.

Brahman - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[prasad1]

If there was a God creating all this and had to periodically send messengers to fix the created, then it would represent a major flaw in creations. It is like a massive recall that God cannot implement and so sending patchwork of fixes and not succeeding. That would be absurd.

I do not believe that God is needed.
Brahman according to Advaita is all-encompassing.
If there is a God, avatar, etc are in Brahman.
I do not believe Brahman interferes with the universe.
The concept of God, the active god of Abrahamic religion is foreign to Advaitic philosophy.
All this Active and partial God is very difficult to reconcile with.

 

[sravna]

What is the point in making everyone perfect in the physical world when God is seeking a different type of reality than the spiritual reality?

I agree with Renuka that the physical world is about change. The change is from imperfection to perfection. If God by his design is able to bring perfection eventually to all, is it not a perfect but also an interesting, purposeful and brilliant design?

 

[sravna]

My view is that scientists have enough intelligence to understand that there is a supernatural source to the origin of the universe. But they do not want to accept it out of fear. The "rational" community wants to believe that it can ultimately control everything and for that God should not exist. So they give ridiculous logic for the creation of universe like "universe came out of nothing" and "universe existed forever" and the followers equally ridiculously embrace it in total faith.

There is definitely an agenda to the purported beliefs of this "rationalists" and they do all they can to carry it out.

 

[sravna]

A successful scientist will try to explain supernatural phenomena and not buck it and so widen the scope of science. Similarly a successful spiritualist will give significance to the mundane reality and not dismiss it.

 

[a-TB]

Just because you are talking of seeing a pattern does not make your opinion any less biased. All your accusations of others do not automatically become a critique also. These are words you are heaping upon yourself to make you look unbiased. Word play does not get you far. The fact is I have my views about many things and you have yours. I simply asked you to understand that you should not presume your views are some unwritten laws to be followed and those of others are just prejudices that need to be corrected..

Sexists comments as a pattern, hatred towards people of any kind like LGBTQ, dislike of other castes and creed show that a person cannot see others as fellow human beings. When such things happen I feel compelled to point out such ideas. If you are truly unbiased towards all beings then you dont need to own the critique saying it does not apply to you. But you know the truth and hence your reaction.

 

[a-TB]

I think you your observation here could be clouded by the previous posts of Sravna about spiritual powers etc.
This thread of his isnt about spiritual powers.
Sravna is discussing Brahman and Maya concept here.
None of the post have anything to do with his spiritual powers.

I hope we can also be fair to him that not all of his threads are about powers.

There is a way of starting a benign set of discussion only to introduce and manipulate discussions about spiritual powers which is all BS. That has happened many times. Even in this section there are currently two threads - Hyderabad horrors and Pollution in Delhi that points to this obsession and delusion. This thread may appear be be about something else but my sense is that it is not.

 

[a-TB]

Kindly state your opinion on these 2 stanzas from the Bhagavad Geeta.
Do you think Lord Krishna was also stating about a faulty mechanism in creation and a massive recall and patchwork?

yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata
abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmānaṁ sṛijāmyaham

paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśhāya cha duṣhkṛitām
dharma-sansthāpanārthāya sambhavāmi yuge yuge

The issue is NOT with this verse but your interpretation given your beliefs.

The literal translation from one of the sites is "To protect the pious living beings and to put an end to malevolence, I appear in every age to establish dharma. "

Here are your assumptions from what I gather from your questions and other posts

a. You think Krisha is a person with extraordinary powers being God. After all He speaks in Gita as he is God

b. You think God does miracles. You continue to believe in miracles that defy laws of nature. After all you have witnessed miracles by Sathya Sai Baba etc. For example when you hear of a story that he produced siva lingam from his mouth devotees accept he created it defying the law that what comes out of the mouth must have been put there earlier.

c. You are influenced by Islam and believe that an intermediary messenger has to come to give word of God to the humans.

Just for a moment let us assume that God is not a person with extraordinary powers defying His own laws of nature.

"I appear in every age" does not mean Mr Krishna shows up. It means if there is an imbalance then events will unfold so that order will be restored. For example, President Bush (both) invaded Iraq and put an end to atrocities of Sadam Hussain. Similarly after 70 years of corruption by one party a person by name Modi emerged that ended 70 year old issues. In these events you can understand Krishna's hand in restoring 'Dharma'

World is fine with its up and downs. It is humans (with ego) that have issues. But nature has intelligence and it responds and puts human ego in their place.

 

[a-TB]

I do not believe that God is needed.
Brahman according to Advaita is all-encompassing.
If there is a God, avatar, etc are in Brahman.
I do not believe Brahman interferes with the universe.
The concept of God, the active god of Abrahamic religion is foreign to Advaitic philosophy.
All this Active and partial God is very difficult to reconcile with.

God as a miracle man is imagination of human beings. Such a God does not exist.

I read somewhere that God is in all living beings - learning to recognize that is true devotion.

 

[Jaykay767]

Renukaji,

Let me add a few points.

1. In this discussions, we are mixing up multiple concepts and ideologies. Advaitha does not talk about personal God and its attributes. All of them are relegated to Maya. So talking of perfect God, and why would he create a imperfect world, etc...are all relegated to Maya. This is where you see how path breaking Shankarar was in his times.

2. Advaita keeps empirical reality (universe, galaxies and planets) separate, and it is a causeless existence. Our rishis were not bothered about this or its origin.

3. Our "human existence and its problems in this world" is the result of Maya. The world of Maya has its own karmic rules and suffering., hence trapped in a endless cycle of birth and death. Personal gods cannot change the karmic rules. In the Gita, vedavysa writes that even the Bhagawan Krishnar had to suffer the consequence of Karma.

4. Nirguna Brahman, the Brahman without attribute is the ultimate spiritual reality. In this context, there is no personal God, etc...

On a side note, the many issues you have raised earlier are the dichotomy of the dualism philosophy. How do we reconcile personal God with the endless human sufferings? Why can't God intercede in our lives and fix it, etc.. And this is what Advaitam does, it negates the dualism, and brings forth the ultimate spiritual reality of Nirguna Brahman.

JK.

 

[prasad1]

When Sangomji used to participate in the discussion here, he used to say that he was an atheist. I used to think it was odd, a man of his knowledge of Hindu scripture and knowledge could never be an Atheist.
But I realize that he too did not believe in ab Activist God.
The problem is that we have been brought up, and lived the majority of life with this god concept. Now to realize that Saguna Brahman is just a means and not the end is difficult to accept. But this Saguna Brahman is imperfect and is like the Abrahamic god, which is limited can not be the ultimate reality.

So to accept that one has been following a false promise and go beyond to nirguna Brahman is a difficult concept.

It is like giving up the crutches and walking on artificial legs, for a paraplegic. It will take time and guts.

But it is better than living life on false hope and pretexts.
God is not the King that is false equivalence.
The so-called Avatars and demigods are all biased and limited.

According to the Advaita school of Vedanta, brahman is categorically different from anything phenomenal, and human perceptions of differentiation are illusively projected on this reality.

 

[renuka]

Renukaji,

Let me add a few points.

1. In this discussions, we are mixing up multiple concepts and ideologies. Advaitha does not talk about personal God and its attributes. All of them are relegated to Maya. So talking of perfect God, and why would he create a imperfect world, etc...are all relegated to Maya. This is where you see how path breaking Shankarar was in his times.

2. Advaita keeps empirical reality (universe, galaxies and planets) separate, and it is a causeless existence. Our rishis were not bothered about this or its origin.

3. Our "human existence and its problems in this world" is the result of Maya. The world of Maya has its own karmic rules and suffering., hence trapped in a endless cycle of birth and death. Personal gods cannot change the karmic rules. In the Gita, vedavysa writes that even the Bhagawan Krishnar had to suffer the consequence of Karma.

4. Nirguna Brahman, the Brahman without attribute is the ultimate spiritual reality. In this context, there is no personal God, etc...

On a side note, the many issues you have raised earlier are the dichotomy of the dualism philosophy. How do we reconcile personal God with the endless human sufferings? Why can't God intercede in our lives and fix it, etc.. And this is what Advaitam does, it negates the dualism, and brings forth the ultimate spiritual reality of Nirguna Brahman.

JK.

Whatever you wrote is best summarized by Ibn Arabi when he wrote:


The final achievement of the mystic, is not to become one with God, for he already is, but to realize the meaning of such oneness. ~ Ibn Arabi

 

[renuka]

My answers in blue:

The issue is NOT with this verse but your interpretation given your beliefs.

The literal translation from one of the sites is "To protect the pious living beings and to put an end to malevolence, I appear in every age to establish dharma. "

Here are your assumptions from what I gather from your questions and other posts

a. You think Krisha is a person with extraordinary powers being God. After all He speaks in Gita as he is God

I do not think of Krishna as a person with extraordinary powers. Krishna does NOT mention anywhere that He is God in the Geeta. He uses the word "I" to explain His attributes and His function..Sanskrit doesn't really have a word for God. Krishna is an avatar ..one who has descended for a function as explained by Him.

b. You think God does miracles. You continue to believe in miracles that defy laws of nature. After all you have witnessed miracles by Sathya Sai Baba etc. For example when you hear of a story that he produced siva lingam from his mouth devotees accept he created it defying the law that what comes out of the mouth must have been put there earlier.

There are NO miracles..there are only sequence of events which as a human I have not figured out how it works.
Laws of nature is Dharma, Nothing defies laws of nature and siddha powers themselves function by the laws of nature in a format that we havent really figured out yet.
If I use my hands to gather a leaves and make a pile of it, it isnt a miracle..so why if Sathya Sai Baba gathers subtle material to create a Shiva Linga it is considered a miracle?
No its not! Its just that Sathya Sai Baba has the ability to use subtle material and energy in ways I am not able to and ways which you and I do not understand.

c. You are influenced by Islam and believe that an intermediary messenger has to come to give word of God to the humans.
Finally something you say is 100 % right.

Just for a moment let us assume that God is not a person with extraordinary powers defying His own laws of nature.

"I appear in every age" does not mean Mr Krishna shows up. It means if there is an imbalance then events will unfold so that order will be restored. For example, President Bush (both) invaded Iraq and put an end to atrocities of Sadam Hussain. Similarly after 70 years of corruption by one party a person by name Modi emerged that ended 70 year old issues. In these events you can understand Krishna's hand in restoring 'Dharma'

If you can accept Modi, Bush etc why cant there be an avatar?
The fact is if a human can exists why not a human incarnation of "God"?
Going by your logic..if everything has the ability to get back to factory settings why even have a PM? Even animals have an Alpha.

World is fine with its up and downs. It is humans (with ego) that have issues. But nature has intelligence and it responds and puts human ego in their place.

 

[Jaykay767]

Some more points -

1. Karma is the balancing force in the nature. It ensures the forces of good defeats the forces of evil. And you can see in history, all evil kingdoms have collapsed albeit after their terrible reign of terror.

2. If gods overcome karma, then the world will collapse. All will indulge in bad karma and ask God for forgivenesses. So even as we believe in a personal God, they cannot overcome karma, at best mitigate it to some extent or support us during the trying circumstances.

3. Advaita does not worrying about karma, suffering, etc..it is a highly intellectual pursuit to understand and realise the ultimate reality of Nirguna Brahman.

4. The world of maya is a infinite existence. Ie. if we do not realise Brahman, and become jeevanmuktha, then we will continue endlessly in this world. The bondage will carry us back again here. And when I say this world, it is just not the human world here. There are multiple planes of existence as per our Hindu scriptures, so we could come back to any of these different worlds.

 

[sravna]

When I say that I am as intelligent as Einstein , very few people will take it seriously, Similarly when I say that I can control weather or something similar, very few again will take me seriously. The problem is being an Einstein or being able to control weather are extreme rarities. So anyone who has not met me and seen the thing at work will not believe me.

But what prevents in theory from me being an Einstein or being able to control weather. Does science say it? Even if it does, is science the last word on truths? Far from it. Or do you know everything to pronounce whether something is true or not? So the best thing to do when you do not agree with something is to keep quiet or present a convincing logic on why it has to false. You may not be able to do even that when I have the evidence to prove your logic to be flawed.

 

[KRN]

The power of failure, the power of pain and sufferings actually help us and also meant to propel us forward. Failure etc., are sought to be avoided because quality of existence deteriorates. The high quality of existence after removing the effects of failure happens by our own design for success. So it adds to our evolving. Success without failure preceding it happens by accident or good luck . It really does not add to our learning or evolution. It may even cause temporary regression because of complacency.

Dear Sir
Worldly success occurs through practising action as ordained by Vedas, and by avoiding action prohibited by Vedas. This is the traditional view, and success doesnt happen simply by luck. So it is said SATYAMEVA JAYATE (here, by Satyam, is meant the path of Vedic Rishis, as the rest of the passage shows)

 

[KRN]

In my view, people have been needlessly fighting over concepts like maya, and analogies like the rope and the snake, for centuries, without trying to focus on the essence of the idea.

The Srutis give clear analogies of its own, on the relationship between Brahman and the world.

Mundaka Upanishad 1.1.7 states,

As the spider creates and absorbs, as medicinal plants grow from the earth, as hairs grow from the living person, so this universe proceeds from the immortal (Brahman)

These are analogies to which the Advaitin, the Vishishtadvaitin, the Dvaitin - everyone agrees with, obviously since they come from Sruti. (I am not bothered about the atheists, agnostics etc...)

These analogies clearly show the relative insignificance, and dependence, of the world, on Brahman. This is spirituality, which is uncompromising with the materialistic attitude, that sees the world alone.

And hence Sruti exhorts us to focus on Brahman all the while we live on this, relatively insignificant world.

 

[a-TB]

My answers in blue:

a. You think Krisha is a person with extraordinary powers being God. After all He speaks in Gita as he is God

I do not think of Krishna as a person with extraordinary powers. Krishna does NOT mention anywhere that He is God in the Geeta. He uses the word "I" to explain His attributes and His function..Sanskrit doesn't really have a word for God. Krishna is an avatar ..one who has descended for a function as explained by Him.

b. You think God does miracles. You continue to believe in miracles that defy laws of nature. After all you have witnessed miracles by Sathya Sai Baba etc. For example when you hear of a story that he produced siva lingam from his mouth devotees accept he created it defying the law that what comes out of the mouth must have been put there earlier.

There are NO miracles..there are only sequence of events which as a human I have not figured out how it works.
Laws of nature is Dharma, Nothing defies laws of nature and siddha powers themselves function by the laws of nature in a format that we havent really figured out yet.
If I use my hands to gather a leaves and make a pile of it, it isnt a miracle..so why if Sathya Sai Baba gathers subtle material to create a Shiva Linga it is considered a miracle?
No its not! Its just that Sathya Sai Baba has the ability to use subtle material and energy in ways I am not able to and ways which you and I do not understand.

c. You are influenced by Islam and believe that an intermediary messenger has to come to give word of God to the humans.
Finally something you say is 100 % right.

Just for a moment let us assume that God is not a person with extraordinary powers defying His own laws of nature.

"I appear in every age" does not mean Mr Krishna shows up. It means if there is an imbalance then events will unfold so that order will be restored. For example, President Bush (both) invaded Iraq and put an end to atrocities of Sadam Hussain. Similarly after 70 years of corruption by one party a person by name Modi emerged that ended 70 year old issues. In these events you can understand Krishna's hand in restoring 'Dharma'

If you can accept Modi, Bush etc why cant there be an avatar?
The fact is if a human can exists why not a human incarnation of "God"?
Going by your logic..if everything has the ability to get back to factory settings why even have a PM? Even animals have an Alpha.

World is fine with its up and downs. It is humans (with ego) that have issues. But nature has intelligence and it responds and puts human ego in their place.

a. Krishna is talked about as a miracle maker in Bhagavatham and other such scriptures. If you think Krishna is not a miracle producer that is sign of wisdom..
But ..you say he has descended

He has 'descended' from where? Heaven? why? Because He does not like what is going on only with human beings? That is not wisdom. Why should He come down? We are told God is everywhere and here and now. So there is confusion in your understanding. The meaning Avatars means that every being you see is also an avatar. You and I are avatars. Cure to get past the confusion is to get the ideas right. It comes because of mistaken premise in interpreting that verse you quoted. Please do not ask me to educate you.. LOL

b. No one has created anything out of subtle materials except in the imagination of believers. It is called belief. No one can reason with a belief except to just leave the believers alone unless they try to talk 'reason' with their beliefs

c. Good that you agree. But I thought Islam has but one (main) messenger and he is the last one. So again it does not square away with God sending men again and again. So it is your own brand of belief

d. I say all of us are avatars. I did not say Modi is an avatar only. But Dharma gets restored by someone acting like an instrument. Power & corruption can bring money, which can give more power and it is an endless cycle. But such cycles end. That is like Krishna appearing.

You dont need to think of human incarnation of God because every human has potential divinity. For that matter every being is divine. But Islamic faith does not accept animals having souls which may be the reason for confusion. Best is to drop those beliefs because they are not logical


My logic was NOT that that everything gets back or not to factory setting. Please re-read what I wrote. I was only showing the absurdity of a God sending messengers by showing logically why it is absurd.