• 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.

On Vishitadvaita Philosophy...

  • Thread starter Thread starter malgova.mango
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
s007bala said:
Shri H H

When you peel of the skin,the color,of blood is blue which when contact with oxygen,turn into red color for all human beings.But then again,science has differentiated blood groups of various types.We have A, B ,AB,O,Rh factor...positive & negative and so on...now DNA with Haplogroups are even more specific..so difference in physical attributes exist.The nomenclature used by science is different.

:)
Click to expand...

And I thought haemoglobin was responsible for the colour of blood...!?
 
science is veda

Shrimathi H H

I have corrected my self by addressing you properly,as i found reading various topics,that you,belong to fairer sex aka Thai Kulam.My apologies for addressing you incorrectly out of wrong assumption & ignorance.

We can agree to disagree.Maybe my usage of the word difference,is not well appreciated by you.Regardless,differences exist,this is facts of life.

There is a difference between you and me.Namely gender.I cannot possibly do all that you do and similiarly you cannot possibly do what i do.

But,there are common concepts we both agree upon,like science.

Its my fond hope,stem cell research carries forward with Obama Administration,and find cures for AIDS/Cancer/Alzheimers....etc.I am personally suffering from lots of imbalances in human anatomy,so i practice meditation,chanting..etc.

I am at peace and hope others too are at peace with themselves first.

Shri Amma Sharanam Mama

sb

:)
 
Last edited:
s007bala said:
I have corrected my self by addressing you properly,as i found reading various topics,that you,belong to fairer sex aka Thai Kulam.My apologies for addressing you incorrectly out of wrong assumption & ignorance.

There is a difference between you and me.Namely gender.I cannot possibly do all that you do and similiarly you cannot possibly do what i do.

Its my fond hope,stem research carries forward with Obama Administration,and find cures for AIDS/Cancer/Alzheimers....etc.I am personally suffering from lots of imbalances in human anatomy,so i practice meditation,chanting..etc.
Click to expand...

S-Bala-ji,

No worries abt how you address me - i do not see myself as someone having any gender either.

When you practice meditation, am sure you are not seeing yourself as a human form...
 
Meditation

happyhindu said:
S-Bala-ji,

No worries abt how you address me - i do not see myself as someone having any gender either.

When you practice meditation, am sure you are not seeing yourself as a human form...
Click to expand...

Shrimathi H H

When i meditate,i just flow.You may ask,who is this "I"?This 'I' and the 'I" in you are one at the same 'Brahman' which is ever connected whether we are ever aware of it or not. :):humble:

sb
:)
 
en rathhathin rathhamay

Seshadri Subramaniam said:
Interesting id...!!!

Yes, blood is also vishishtadvaitham... :thumb:

Regards
Click to expand...

Shri Subramaniam

En rakthathin rakthamay.....A-chintya Bhed-abheda - inconceivable and simultaneous one-ness and difference...is ruling roost in USA..thnx to Guru Srila Prabhupada.All nationalities participate and love Lord Vishnu's incarnation,Swayam Bhagavan As Lord Krishna...

Om Namo Narayanaya

sb

:):dance::attention:
 
Mdm HH,

happyhindu said:
A fact is an established entity only when the logic behind it can be proven or when the entity itself is proven to exist. When neither can be established, it cannot be called a fact, based on the writings of a few people alone.

Many Facts are hidden and an entire discipline called research a multi-billion dollar industry is thriving because of that.

As I said the equations are given, only connection is needed and it is not by few peoples. The equations are the only hope and refuge for a seeker.

I have not been able to rationalize logic, nor been able to refute error in various cognitive processes. And therefore all such things wud remain 'philosophies' to me until i am able to comprehend the 'truth' myself.

That's your problem, I've no comments - My request is please don't tell me I can't talk about VA or Dwaita and highlight their short-comings. You exercise your freedom, I exercise mine. In short " Live and let Live."

Debating or arguing to "prove" something wud therefore remain
unnecessary.

Then don't do that - You made your arguments and ask me not to counter-argue. What is this?

One look at Bhasyam - it is all objections and siddantha. Arguments and Reply.

Knowledge belongs to sphere of Logic my dear...Debates are the back-bone for that.


Regards.
Click to expand...
 
Sesh!

If you read under competent guide, Bhasyams of Bhagavat Padal.. You will not have any doubt about Nirguna Brahman.

If you doubt it, then you are struck, you need to pray to Lord Dakshinamoorthy and carry on with your enquiry.



Seshadri Subramaniam said:
Malgova, am not stuck anywhere... think you got the wrong end...

I have never said that advaitam is incorrect...

What am trying to say here is that there cannot be a "Nirguna Brahman"... for that line of thinking negates the very premise itself...

My theory:

Fact, logic etc are relative...

Yes - and Logics can also be used to ascertain Vedanta Vakyas. That's why Bhashyams are written - so that human intelligence can understand

For re-birth,papa and punya - only Shruti-Anukula Tarka or supporting logic is available.
For MahaVakyas - Proving Logic is used.

These are for people who are bound by the relativity of their existence.

ALL SAMSARIS HAVE EXISTENCE IN RELATIVE FIELD ONLY.

Also, the concept of timelessness has no meaning... for time has a meaning only when there is a beginning and an end...

IT IS NOT TIMELESS - IT SHOULD BE BEGININGLESS - FOR TIME HAS NO BEGINNING - ISN'T IT.

So, the Brahman which we are talking about did not evolve - it has been and will always be. For if we say that Brahman was born, and there was a period devoid of Brahman, then he is but an elevated individual... not the ultimate.

yes - you are correct

Awareness is the only thing which has no beginning or ending

yes

- it can exist in different ways in different beings - which is the very purpose of creation.

the primary awareness is the subject matter


But what is awareness?

the vishaya for "I"

It is not like a "Hiranyagarbha" state where every thing is in a sort of suspended trance, rather it is like the new-born baby which reacts to its surroundings... but is unable to express itself. so to express and explore it has to evolve... which is the reason for creation.

REASON IS DIFFERENT , REST ARE OK

Awareness is the prerequisite to creation, awareness + creation = perception, with perception comes discrimination, curiosity and other gunas...

GOOD.... THE REST, NO COMMENTS ... CAUSE YOU NEED TO ASCERTAIN THE PRIMARY AWARENESS .. THEN THE REST WILL GET SORTED OUT ITSELF OR EASY TO SORT OUT.

Different beings were created; with each age and period evloving new species... this is just the continuous pattern of awareness itself; there is no reason, no purpose, just to explore, feel and exist.


But awareness is a state, and in this, it is a quality and that is why a Saguna Brahman...

I am somewhat comfortable with Ramanujacharya's theory of Saguna Brahman, but still have doubts as regards the purpose (of attaining that state)... I think we have evolved for Brahman (us) to experience different forms of perception... for that is the only existing truth... Not to go back to that original state...
Click to expand...
 
Why only Bhasyams, even as such sometimes we bcome the vedantin and the opponent ourselves with a debate raging inside our own mind. The idea however is not to "highlight their short-comings" or to "prove" anything at all, instead it might be to see where one lacks in the subject being discussed due to khyativada or errors in perceptual cognition. Have never been able to base so-called 'analysis' on anyone's writings alone.

Just as i do not see myself as someone lacking cognitive error, i do not see you as someone lacking it either. Neither do i beleive in going by the writings of other people alone, which is what you seem to go by. Therefore i was only expressing my stand as regards the un-necessity to "prove" anything.

However, i never said that you cannot go ahead and do what you want to do. Neither have i asked you not to "counter-argue" at all. The fact that you have made an invalid conclusion of this sort can itself be seen as reason enuf, why i find it necessary to refrain from further discussion on this (am making it clear that this applies to me, not to you). No offence meant to you at all.
 
happyhindu said:
Why only Bhasyams, even as such sometimes we bcome the vedantin and the opponent ourselves with a debate raging inside our own mind. The idea however is not to "highlight their short-comings" or to "prove" anything at all, instead it might be to see where one lacks in the subject being discussed due to khyativada or errors in perceptual cognition. Have never been able to base so-called 'analysis' on anyone's writings alone.

Just as i do not see myself as someone lacking cognitive error, i do not see you as someone lacking it either. Neither do i beleive in going by the writings of other people alone, which is what you seem to go by. Therefore i was only expressing my stand as regards the un-necessity to "prove" anything.

However, i never said that you cannot go ahead and do what you want to do. Neither have i asked you not to "counter-argue" at all. The fact that you have made an invalid conclusion of this sort can itself be seen as reason enuf, why i find it necessary to refrain from further discussion on this (am making it clear that this applies to me, not to you). No offence meant to you at all.[/quote

hi all ,
please read sri bhagvad padal's bhrahmasutra bhasya with bhamati tika
...means with bhamati commentary to understand about nirguna brahman.
" tatva samanvayaad" this is the forth sutra of bhrahma sutra..
here bhagavad padal clarified all our doubts.... ADVAITAM IS CURD/
YOUGURT......CLARIFIED BUTTER IS VISITADVIATHAM.......MEANS
QULIFIED ADVAITAM....

REGARDS
tbs
Click to expand...
 
without good arguments to support - there is no clarified butter in VA. In my version, BP has not talked anything about VA as it is a later off-shoot.

clarified butter is A and only A.
 
malgova.mango said:
without good arguments to support - there is no clarified butter in VA. In my version, BP has not talked anything about VA as it is a later off-shoot.

clarified butter is A and only A.
Click to expand...

Even Ramanujacharya was learning advaitham, before he was inducted to the vishishtadhvaitha line...

What tbs says is right... qualified advaitham is vishishtadhvaitham

malgova, you are a devotee of Adi Sankara and hence you see the light in only his Bhashyam... simple. I would not want to start a debate on which is higher... as it is these sort of trivial issues which has kept us divided...
 
Sesh!

Everyone who enter school do not pass some fail too.. These are realities my dear..

What TBS said is wrong. He did agreed earlier.. So I'm puzzled about this statement.

I've read the three Bhasyams ... please ...

I respect your decision on debates

This is not trivial issue. It is the bedrock to ascertain the "TRUTH" the stake is high.

I too like an orderly study rather than debate. The risk of debate getting, Vithanda or Jalpa is very high. But please don't expect me to be mute about it,

Regards

Regards
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When it gets too vithanda or jalpa - I'll be mute then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tbs ji!

i didn't meant you...you are not even in the remote corner of my mind when I wrote.

but now, I'm genuniely wondering why you agreed first that VA is not complete, and said VA is clarified butter later. implying A is incomplete and in curd stage.

i need your answer and not from the book. I may not have the reference.

namaskarams
 
malgova.mango said:
tbs ji!

i didn't meant you...you are not even in the remote corner of my mind when I wrote.

but now, I'm genuniely wondering why you agreed first that VA is not complete, and said VA is clarified butter later. implying A is incomplete and in curd stage.

i need your answer and not from the book. I may not have the reference.

namaskarams
Click to expand...

hi MM sir,

im kind of mute now.....means GUROTHU MOUNAM VYKYA ..
SISHYASTHU CHINNA SAMSAYAHA,,,

REGARDS
tbs
 
the maunam - could be understood like this.

the "thuriya" or Brahmam or Sakkshi Bhudham is refered as Maunam.

So the topic is dealing about Maunam. Not in literal sense, for in Maunam - doubts can't be cleared. IMHO
 
Milk

shri tbs

>>ADVAITAM IS CURD/
YOUGURT......CLARIFIED BUTTER IS VISITADVIATHAM.......MEANS
QULIFIED ADVAITAM....<<

But all are from Milk ie Vedanta.

Just my $20.00 dollar worth views.

sb
:doh:
 
Last edited:
Dear S-Bala-ji,

Whenver possible, please try not to quote the whole post completely, because it takes up space. We are only players here and we shd be grateful to the ones providing us this playground. Some of us might prefer a serious game or a game with substance, and there is place for all...just that hope we do not trivialize to the extent of wasting forum space. Just a request.

Regards.
 
no offence .. but visishtadvaitam sez that there is a paramatma called sriman narayanan and we the jeevatman need to strive thru bakthi to reach him at a specific place called sri vaikundam .... so there are separate entities called paramatma , bakthi , jeevatma and a place for the jeevatma to go to finally to reach the paramatma ... which by itself acknowledges the independent existence of each one of these ... which means that as i noted before .. it cannot be qualified advaitam ... because if it is not advaitam then it can only be dwaitam ... what is advaitam can never become dwaitam and vice versa ... so u can never qualify advaitam ... the act of qualifying itself introduces a second prakriti ... rt?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top