ADVAITA-L Digest - 22 May 2002 to 23 May 2002 (#2002-129)

[hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian]

        How is a person identified with his Caste?  In todays
world everything goes by the origin/father's descent not even the
mother's descent. Why is this so?
        the Gita states nothing about descent and differentiates
based on the kind of work we do.. Don't the modern day Software
engineers fit into the Workers category..as we server somebody for
our living and hence become shudras. The modern day entreuprenuer
the "Vaishya" as he makes money by doing business and the modern
day "soldier" the Kshatriya..It is only the professor/teachers who
can be called the Brahmin's as they are the givers of the
knowledge.

      Could someone throw light on this topic of our modern day
duties in relation with the Caste system..as against our
descent/family traditions of casteism..which is taken at face
value...

  Is there any other work that says otherwise...or proves this
modern day following of CASTE identification by birth..

=hemang

On Thu, 23 May 2002 Automatic digest processor wrote :
>There are 16 messages totalling 916 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics of the day:
>
>   1. Concept of personal God and Advaita (12)
>   2. ADVAITA-L Digest - 21 May 2002 to 22 May 2002 (#2002-128)
>(2)
>   3. New member introduction: Armin Schahidi
>   4. New member introduction: Samir Shukla
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 22:23:26 +0530
> From:    reachhemant <reachhemant at SIFY.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stephanie Stean" <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>To: <ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 5:13 PM
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>
> > How is advaita divorced from all experience?  Advaita,
>non-duality, is a
> > form of experience.  Scriptural testimony is not necessary
>although it
> > serves as a guide for many.
> > > Hemant: I agree with this. Ramana got his experience first
>and learned
>his scriptures later.
>    However in India there has been an unbroken continuity of
>realised souls
>who have realised through the scripture.
>    To stray from the scripture is to be labelled 'unorthodox'.
>Buddha did so
>and managed to achieve something.
>     Buddhism however could not accept the method of extreme
>asceticism and
>brought in surrender SaraNa to Buddha etc. Before long there were
>more than
>a dozen school of Buddhist philosophy.
>
>
> > I was reading Sankaracharya lat night (a work of his called
>Direct
> > Realization).  And his description of advaita is described in
>terms of
> > experience.
>
>    > I agree with you, dvaita and visishtadvaita can be
>apprehended by every
>day
> > experience.
> > Advaita also is apprehdended by experience, but a different
>kind of
> > experience that is based upon knowledge and realization of the
>Reality of
> > the Phenomenal World and of Ultimate Reality.
> >
> > Thanks and I look forward to your comments.
> > Steph
> >  It was the armchair philosopher that prompted the comment
>'Metaphysics is
>about giving bad reasons for what you believe on instinct.' Just
>as dualism
>and qualified non-dualism can be trivially observed in everyday
>life so can
>Advaita. Consider a man who becomes so angry that he forgets
>himself totally
>in his rage. It is a statement of complete absorbtion of
>nonduality with the
>emotion. Nanda's arguments are puerile. dvaita and viSishtadvaita
>are based
>as much on scriptural testimoney as advaita.
>                       Hemant
>
> >
> > On 5/22/02 3:10 AM, "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at HOTMAIL.COM>
>wrote:
> >
> > >> I saw advaita in the Gita as much as dvaita or
>visistadvaita.
> > >
> > > Think about this : we see dualism (dvaita) everywhere. Even
>qualified
> > > non-dualism (visishtadvaita) can be apprehended by
>experience - as it is
> > > qualities that we perceive in objects. It is only advaita
>(non-dualism)
> > > which is not experienced in the phenomenal world. For the
>first two you
>do
> > > not really need the scriptures as they are open to normal
>experience. It
>is
> > > only the third which is totally divorced from all experience
>which
>really
> > > needs a scriptural testimony.
> > >
> > >
>_________________________________________________________________
> > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your
>photos:
> > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 12:00:18 -0500
> From:    Stephanie Stean <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>Ashish:
>
>Yes, I do experience it first hand, every day.  I don't
>completely
>understand what it all means, so I read to see how others have
>made sense of
>it.
>
>So my insight into this is personal.  I have no one in my
>immediate circle
>who understands or who can teach me about it.  That is why I read
>and listen
>to others, like yourselves.
>
>Thanks,
>Stephanie
>
>
> > But do you experience it first hand or is this just a point of
>view that
> > seems to be the most logical one, based on what you have
>read?
> >
> > ashish
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 12:17:37 -0500
> From:    Stephanie Stean <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>Hemant:
>
>Thanks very much for your responses.
>
>First, why is a scriptural testimony necessary for Realization?
>I know it
>is helpful, but why necessary?
>
>Lastly, through the phenomenal world, we can know Ultimate
>Reality (what
>ever that is to each individual).  But advaita does not seem to
>be divorced
> from experience. Unless I'm not understanding your use of the
>word
>experience.  How do you define or look at experience?
>
>Have a good day,
>Stephanie
>
>Maybe you're right in most cases
> >>>
> >>> Think about this : we see dualism (dvaita) everywhere. Even
>qualified
> >>> non-dualism (visishtadvaita) can be apprehended by
>experience - as it is
> >>> qualities that we perceive in objects. It is only advaita
>(non-dualism)
> >>> which is not experienced in the phenomenal world. For the
>first two you
> > do
> >>> not really need the scriptures as they are open to normal
>experience. It
> > is
> >>> only the third which is totally divorced from all experience
>which
> > really
> >>> needs a scriptural testimony.
> >>>
> >>>
>_________________________________________________________________
> >>> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your
>photos:
> >>> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 17:57:03 -0000
> From:    hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian
><hemangcs at REDIFFMAIL.COM>
>Subject: Re: ADVAITA-L Digest - 21 May 2002 to 22 May 2002
>(#2002-128)
>
>Respected Ashish,
>
>   Thank you very much for your answer to my query. Could
>you/anyone kindly clarify the following questions(marked Q.
>below)
>which I have regarding your answer.
>
> >Before you ask these questions, you could probably have asked
> >what is Advaita. It is Vedanta. Vedanta, that is the wisdom
>of
> >the Upanishads,deals only with liberation.
>
> >In so far as astrology and astronomy (Jyotish) is
>concerned, these are a part of the Vaidik day-to-day life,
>governing such things as Sankalpa, when a specific yajna is to
>be
>performed etc.
>
>      I totally Agree with this point of view of yours..but as
>is
>known from our actions.. your actions of today determine your
>course of life. Then if someone predicts what you are doing
>tommorow and you believe that and live like that,
>Q. where is the purpose solved.
>
>   Correct me if I am wrong, please..
>
> >Advaita considers all these to be a part of a Brahmachari's
>or
> >Grihastha's duties,and it accepts them as such.
>
>
>I do understand your logical reasoning that Jyotish is a part
>of
>Vedanga and as a follower this forms a part of karma..but
>    Q. Could you kindly illustrate where does it
>advocate/preach
>this. which work of Bhagavatpada or any of the seers is
>prognostication specifically mentioned as acceptable OR Is
>there
>any discussion of this topic itself in the philosophy? (may be
>I
>am being too explorative).
>
>       As has been known from Sri Sankara's BIG DEBATE with
>Mandana
>Mishra who was in the Grihastha ashrama following certain
>rituals...*I personally, again with my limited knowledge *
>accept
>that all such worldly things such as Jyotish, palm reading,
>etc.
>to predict our future and such ritual remedies on par with the
>Rituals..by Mandana Mishra..
>
>      .though surprisingly..many of the predictions bind to be
>true.. This is my personal opinion that "If one does his duty
>without trying to look too far into his/her future and
>concenterating on his present wouldn't it amount to him Doing
>his
>KARMA as he is entitled to..would it mean that he extrapolates
>this to some future date and then rectifies it in his present.
>Wouldn't it be apt to go forth and face your doshas..if there
>are
>any..rather than trying to extrapolate and remedy it through
>rituals...."
>
>Q. what is the solution to this in the Advaitha philosophy?"
>
> >The system of Purva Mimansa seeks answers to
> >questions like what is Dharma and why we do what we do when we
>do
> >various Vaidik karmas. Advaita deals with >Sannyasis and no
> >karmas are enjoined on
> >Sannyasis.
>
>    Thanks for your enlightening view. I strongly feel that
>Advaita
>deals not only with Sanyasis but also with Grihasthas and other
>forms of living, not just human life..but also all other forms.
>
>Q.Could you elucidate where Shankara/other leaders have
>advocated
>that The Tatva of Advaitha is meant only for "Sanyasis only"..
>
>
>   Please pardon my ignorance and foolish questions..but as a
>seeker I am attempting to understand this philosophy in its
>true
>sense.. with practical implications.
>   = Hemang
>_________________________________________________________
>Click below to visit monsterindia.com and review jobs in India
>or
>Abroad
>http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 13:16:46 -0500
> From:    "vaidya_sundaram at i2.com" <Vaidya_Sundaram at I2.COM>
>Subject: New member introduction: Armin Schahidi
>
>This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>--=_alternative 0064699086256BC1_=
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 05/22/02 01:15 PM -----
>
>"ed gein" <severedstateofainsophaur at msn.com>
>05/15/02 04:08 PM
>Re: Welcome and Request for more info.
>i would like to join your email thing because i like the non
>dualism
>concepts that it  has to teach and this is my attempt to better
>understanding it sort of like my 1st step therefor i dont know
>much about
>it as of right now but im hoping to learn more as i move
>on.....
>-armin
>
>
>--=_alternative 0064699086256BC1_=
>Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
><br><font size=1 color=#800080 face="sans-serif">----- Forwarded
>by Vaidya Sundaram on 05/22/02 01:15 PM -----</font>
><table width=100%>
><tr valign=top>
><td>
><td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"ed gein"
><severedstateofainsophaur at msn.com></b></font>
><p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">05/15/02 04:08 PM</font>
><td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: Welcome and Request for
>more info.</font></table>
><br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">i would like to join your
>email thing because i like the non dualism concepts that it  has
>to teach and this is my attempt to better understanding it sort
>of like my 1st step therefor i dont know much about it as of
>right now but im hoping to learn more as i move on.....</font>
><br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">-armin</font>
><br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"> </font>
><br>
>--=_alternative 0064699086256BC1_=--
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 15:58:04 -0400
> From:    Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: Re: ADVAITA-L Digest - 21 May 2002 to 22 May 2002
>(#2002-128)
>
>On Wed, 22 May 2002 17:57:03 -0000, hemang Chamakuzhi
>Subramanian
><hemangcs at REDIFFMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> >
> >     I totally Agree with this point of view of yours..but as
>is
> >known from our actions.. your actions of today determine your
> >course of life. Then if someone predicts what you are doing
> >tommorow and you believe that and live like that,
> >Q. where is the purpose solved.
>
>I think you first have to think what is being predicted. I spoke
>to a very
>good Jyotishi once and he emphasized that ultimately, it is the
>resolve of
>the person that will matter. He gave the example that if it is
>cold
>outside, what one does is put on a sweater. Similarly, Jyotish,
>which is to
>be used to calculate muhurtas for various karmas, primarily,
>tells you what
>that sweater will be. If you are under the adverse influence of,
>say, Shani
>Dev, then you are asked to chant the 10 names of Shani Dev.
>Chanting the 10
>names does not remove the evil influence - all it does is make it
>less
>painful, just as putting on the sweater does not remove the cold
>but
>protects the person wearing it, from the cold.
>
>In my opinion, if one follows Dharma, then that is enough. That
>is in our
>hands. We can pray to the Supreme to give us the strength to do
>that, and
>not worry too much about finding out what is in our future. What
>we have
>done in our past lives, we cannot change that. However, we can do
>good
>karmas today. In fact, by having the opportunity of discussing
>Advaita, as
>opposed to mugging someone, we are making the future better. The
>book Hindu
>Dharma gives a very good explanation about it. It says that even
>when we
>are affected by ailments, we should pray to the Supreme and bear
>it smiling
>as we are being rid of some bad karma that is working its way out
>by making
>us suffer. God does not do our Karmas for us, he is only the
>phaladata,
>dispenser of the fruits of our action. Karma is in our hands, and
>more
>importantly, in our minds. We can pray to the Almighty so that
>our
>intellect becomes strong and that we never stray from the path of
>Dharma.
>That is our only insurance policy.
>
> >
> >  Correct me if I am wrong, please..
> >
> >>Advaita considers all these to be a part of a Brahmachari's
>or
> >>Grihastha's duties,and it accepts them as such.
> >
> >
> >I do understand your logical reasoning that Jyotish is a part
>of
> >Vedanga and as a follower this forms a part of karma..but
> >   Q. Could you kindly illustrate where does it
>advocate/preach
> >this. which work of Bhagavatpada or any of the seers is
> >prognostication specifically mentioned as acceptable OR Is
>there
> >any discussion of this topic itself in the philosophy? (may be
>I
> >am being too explorative).
> >
>
>The very first work that I read of Adi Shankara was Atmabodh. The
>very
>first verse goes "...Mumukhshunaam apekshyo ayam atmabodho
>vidhIyate" i.e.
>it is for the benefit of the true seeker (mumukshu) that I have
>compiled
>this work called Atmabodh. Similar verses can be found in
>VivekachudaamaNI
>and Upadesh Sahasri. These are the works of Adi Shankara that I
>have
>studied. Apart from these I don't know. But I am fairly certain
>that he
>would have made similar statements, i.e. who has the adhikaar to
>study the
>pertinent work, in other texts as well.
>
>Also, in the arhives you can look for Brahma Sutras and you will
>find an
>exhaustive discussion by Shri Sadananda about the very first
>Brahma Sutra -
>  "Athato Brahmajijnasaa" ("Now, therefore, an inquiry into
>Brahman").
>
>
> >     .though surprisingly..many of the predictions bind to be
> >true.. This is my personal opinion that "If one does his duty
> >without trying to look too far into his/her future and
> >concenterating on his present wouldn't it amount to him Doing
>his
> >KARMA as he is entitled to..would it mean that he
>extrapolates
> >this to some future date and then rectifies it in his
>present.
> >Wouldn't it be apt to go forth and face your doshas..if there
>are
> >any..rather than trying to extrapolate and remedy it through
> >rituals...."
>
>Various doshas have various Upaayas (solutions). A good pandit
>can tell you
>the Upaaya. Rituals are not empty gestures. Our lack of
>understanding them
>should not imply that they have no meaning. We are asked to put a
>little
>food out for the birds and animals and a little flour for the
>ants as part
>of the bhoot-yajna. It is said that we accidentally kill various
>things,
>like small creatures. However, we do that karma so it has a
>phala
>associated with it. For expiation of those ignorant crimes, we
>feed the
>animals and ants.
>
> >
> >Q.Could you elucidate where Shankara/other leaders have
>advocated
> >that The Tatva of Advaitha is meant only for "Sanyasis
>only"..
> >
>
>It is for Sannyasis and Sannyasi is further defined as one
>endowed with
>Sadhana Chatushtya or working towards it exclusively. You should
>really
>read the discussion on Brahma Sutra, Sutra 1.
>
>ashish
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 16:27:33 -0400
> From:    Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>On Wed, 22 May 2002 12:00:18 -0500, Stephanie Stean
><cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>wrote:
>
> >Ashish:
> >
> >Yes, I do experience it first hand, every day.  I don't
>completely
> >understand what it all means, so I read to see how others have
>made sense
>of
> >it.
> >
>
>Stephanie
>
>I apologize. I did not mean to belittle your experiences or your
>sadhana.
>However, I was only interested in knowing what is the description
>of a
>daily experience of Advaita, as you state. If you are already
>liberated,
>then I can never understand. But if you are not, then is it
>possible to put
>your experiences into words?
>
>ashish
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 13:28:33 -0700
> From:    Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <balasr at YAHOO.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>--- Stephanie Stean <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM> wrote:
> > How is advaita divorced from all experience?
> > Advaita, non-duality, is a
> > form of experience.  Scriptural testimony is not
> > necessary although it
> > serves as a guide for many.
>
>Scriptural testimony is absolutely essential, as per
>sha.nkara or any other reputable advaitin. On the
>other hand, it is reasoning _based on scripture_ which
>is not necessary, although it may serve as a guide for
>many. Reasoning divorced from scripture is practically
>harmful, to say the least. Scriptural evidence
>presented to one with _proper qualifications_
>culminates in what can be roughly called "direct
>experience", as you have mentioned below.
>
> > I was reading Sankaracharya lat night (a work of his
> > called Direct
> > Realization).  And his description of advaita is
> > described in terms of
> > experience.
> >
> > I agree with you, dvaita and visishtadvaita can be
> > apprehended by every day
> > experience.
>
>Interestingly both maNDana and sureshvara would oppose
>this statement. Both of them show (roughly similar
>arguments) that perception does _not_ reveal
>difference.
>
>Even not accepting their arguments, how can
>vishishhTAdvaita be apprehended by daily experience? A
>very philosophically naive examination of every day
>experience would of course seem to reveal dvaita.
>vishishhTAdvaita (the rAmanuja type) rests as much on
>scriptural authority as advaita, only in a different
>way.
>
>Rama
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
>http://launch.yahoo.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 16:56:56 -0400
> From:    "Subrahmanian, Sundararaman V [IT]"
>          <sundararaman.v.subrahmanian at CITIGROUP.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>"Special" Experiences are not a means of knowledge of Self
>according to
>traditional view point.
>True realization is to know that there is only Self in every
>experience
>(mundane and special - ie., eating, walking, reading, writing and
>including
>samAdhi).
>
>-----Original Message-----
> From: Ashish Chandra [mailto:ramkisno at HOTMAIL.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:28 PM
>To: ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>
>On Wed, 22 May 2002 12:00:18 -0500, Stephanie Stean
><cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>wrote:
>
> >Ashish:
> >
> >Yes, I do experience it first hand, every day.  I don't
>completely
> >understand what it all means, so I read to see how others have
>made sense
>of
> >it.
> >
>
>Stephanie
>
>I apologize. I did not mean to belittle your experiences or your
>sadhana.
>However, I was only interested in knowing what is the description
>of a
>daily experience of Advaita, as you state. If you are already
>liberated,
>then I can never understand. But if you are not, then is it
>possible to put
>your experiences into words?
>
>ashish
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Wed, 22 May 2002 19:24:32 -0500
> From:    Stephanie Stean <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>Hello:
>
>I'm unsure of your intent with this comment.
>
> >"Special" Experiences are not a means of knowledge of Self
>according to
> > traditional view point.
> > True realization is to know that there is only Self in every
>experience
> > (mundane and special - ie., eating, walking, reading, writing
>and including
> > samAdhi).
> >
>
>Before I reply, if you could clarify your posting and what you
>wanted to
>communicate.  Thank you.
>
>And Ashish, to answer your question:
>
>Let me begin by saying that I don't practice or belong to any
>faith or
>religion.  I do not want to give you the wrong idea about myself.
>As I said
>before, I read to see the knowledge and understanding of others.
>I joined
>this list to learn more about advaita.  I've only recently become
>familiar
>with this term.
>
>As for describing the experiences: I have no words.  I hoped
>others did, but
>of course, that is not the case.  I do not consider myself to
>have "special
>experiences."  I don't think having just special experience would
>give me
>the knowledge I have and allow me to connect with the scriptures
>at the
>depth that I do.
>And as for liberation, I know I have not reached that point yet.
>I have
>just begun to stop doubting myself and truly explore what it
>happening.
>
>I wish I could describe to you what I see.  It's even hard for me
>to write
>this much.  I guess I continue reading in hopes that all will
>make sense to
>me eventually.  I have no teacher, so most of my studies and
>exploration are
>done on my own.  And this can be scary.
>
>I'm sorry to not be able to explain more than that.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Stephanie
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Thu, 23 May 2002 11:06:30 +0000
> From:    nanda chandran <vpcnk at HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
> >Advaita also is apprehdended by experience, but a different
>kind of
> >experience that is based upon knowledge and realization of the
>Reality of
> >the Phenomenal World and of Ultimate Reality.
>
>See I'm talking about the experience of a normal person and not
>that of a
>realized sage - for a realized sage you neither need scriptures
>or Advaita
>philosophy.
>
>Non-dualism - a state where no difference is entertained between
>oneself and
>other objects in the world - is not open to normal experience.
>
> >From direct experience, IMO, the only thing you can infer is
>that "I don't
> >know who I truly am". This is after an analysis of the three
>states of
> >sleep, deep sleep and waking state. It can also be inferred
>that "I am
> >conscious". You can also stretch this to say that consciousness
>is
> >everywhere. However, you cannot conclude from these that "I
>am
> >consciousness" and "Everything is Consciousness" and "Nothing
>but
> >Consciousness is there" is not a part of our everyday
>experience.
>
>You do not call that which you can infer as direct experience. Do
>you have
>the wholesome feeling of being a human being which can see, hear,
>talk etc?
>That's direct experience. Even as normal people can directly
>experience
>themselves as humans so can jnaanis directly experience
>themselves as pure
>consciousness.
>
> >Sorry for cutting in here but how are these two systems
>experienced or
> >observed everyday. We experience duality or plurality, that is
>granted.
> >However, both these systems talk of a jiva that is eternal.
>
>Eternality is only a philosophical description of the absolute -
>we call it
>eternal in contrast to phenomenal things that are temporary. As
>transient
>things represent suffering, we call that which is changeless and
>represents
>bliss as eternal. But strictly speaking eternality is only a
>concept
>attributed to the absolute.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Thu, 23 May 2002 06:26:27 -0500
> From:    Stephanie Stean <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>The use of the words experience and advaita are also concepts
>that are used
>to describe something beyond our understanding.  For you to say
>advaita is
>not normal experience makes sense to me.
>
>Advaita is experience though (not normal experience), on a
>different level.
>You could say it is more of an intuitive experience rather than a
>sensual
>one.  Also, it is not a fleeting experience (temporal) but a
>permanent
>"state" as you said.  But a person still "experiences" during
>Realization.
>
>If the experience of advaita was not an experience of some sort
>at some
>level, I don't believe there would be scriptures or literature
>telling us
>about it.  How can you communicate what you have not experienced
>or known?
>
>Does this make sense?  Or maybe you don't agree.  Thanks.
>
>
>On 5/23/02 6:06 AM, "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> >> Advaita also is apprehdended by experience, but a different
>kind of
> >> experience that is based upon knowledge and realization of
>the Reality of
> >> the Phenomenal World and of Ultimate Reality.
> >
> > See I'm talking about the experience of a normal person and
>not that of a
> > realized sage - for a realized sage you neither need
>scriptures or Advaita
> > philosophy.
> >
> > Non-dualism - a state where no difference is entertained
>between oneself and
> > other objects in the world - is not open to normal
>experience.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Thu, 23 May 2002 07:41:52 -0500
> From:    Stephanie Stean <cerebral_rose at MAC.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>On 5/22/02 3:28 PM, "Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian"
><balasr at YAHOO.COM> wrote=
>:
>
>Dear Rama:
>
>I don't disagree with anything you've said below.  I also realize
>that
>scripture is considered essential according to many of the
>mystics and sage=
>s
>living before us and living now.  But one of my personal
>questions (for
>myself during my life) is "are the scriptures NECESSARY (any
>scriptures for
>that matter) for Realization and why?"
>
>I read a quote the other day from an Indian mystic, Bayezid
>Bistami which
>said,
>"...Even if you should be offered the degree that all the
>prophets attained=
>,
>do not consent to accept it.  Demand to go further; keep raising
>your
>demands.  For if you accept a degree, it will become a curtain
>for you, and
>will hold you back."
>
>This philosophy, I follow.
>
> > Scriptural testimony is absolutely essential, as per
> > sha.nkara or any other reputable advaitin. On the
> > other hand, it is reasoning _based on scripture_ which
> > is not necessary, although it may serve as a guide for
> > many. Reasoning divorced from scripture is practically
> > harmful, to say the least. Scriptural evidence
> > presented to one with _proper qualifications_
> > culminates in what can be roughly called "direct
> > experience", as you have mentioned below.
> >
>
>I apologize for my lack of clarity.  I'm referring to the
>intellectual
>understanding of the philosophies.  Intellectually it seems
>easier to
>understand visishtadvaita and dvaita than advaita.
>Experientially, that is
>a different matter.  (I'm still learning so please pardon my
>errors).
>
>Also, to say that any of the three are not a part of normal
>experience, I
>would agree, if we define normal as the norm among ourselves and
>our fellow
>people. =20
>
>But they can be normal and everyday states of mind for the
>Knowledgeable.
>
> >>=20
> >> I agree with you, dvaita and visishtadvaita can be
> >> apprehended by every day
> >> experience.
> >=20
> > Interestingly both maNDana and sureshvara would oppose
> > this statement. Both of them show (roughly similar
> > arguments) that perception does _not_ reveal
> > difference.
>
>You are right: the claim of understanding dvaita in everyday
>experience
>could be na=EFve.  I don't claim to know it because I don't
>experience or kno=
>w
>duality as described by the proponents of it.  However, I can
>understand it
>to a certain degree (intellectually).  But when I read texts,
>that are
>considered dvaitan, my interpretations are more advaitan.
>
>I have a question for you.  What are the texts of MaNDana and
>sureshvara
>that explain their views?  Could you tell me the titles so that I
>may look
>them up?
>
> >=20
> > Even not accepting their arguments, how can
> > vishishhTAdvaita be apprehended by daily experience? A
> > very philosophically naive examination of every day
> > experience would of course seem to reveal dvaita.
> > vishishhTAdvaita (the rAmanuja type) rests as much on
> > scriptural authority as advaita, only in a different
>
>Thank you.
>
>Stephanie
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Thu, 23 May 2002 09:29:35 -0400
> From:    Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>On Thu, 23 May 2002 11:06:30 +0000, nanda chandran
><vpcnk at HOTMAIL.COM>
>wrote:
> >
> >You do not call that which you can infer as direct experience.
>Do you have
> >the wholesome feeling of being a human being which can see,
>hear, talk etc?
> >That's direct experience. Even as normal people can directly
>experience
> >themselves as humans so can jnaanis directly experience
>themselves as pure
> >consciousness.
> >
>
>But I also have the very direct experience of deep sleep and
>dreaming. From
>what I know (through experience and subsequent inference), I did
>not know
>what it was that was present during my deep sleep. That is also a
>direct
>experience, is it not? I am not saying that jivanmuktas infer
>their
>liberation through their direct experience - but we can at least
>experience
>that we don't know what we truly are. I may be a man with hands
>and feet
>and face and intellect right now but what happens when these are
>not
>apprehended, when I experience non-dual avidyA? That is also
>everyone's
>experience. In the waking state, one does not know what one was
>when one
>was in deep sleep. So we either hazard discontinuity to our
>"Self" saying
>that different people or different "things" had those experiences
>all of
>which "I" somehow experienced, or we say that it was "Me" all
>along.
>
>When I said that one does not know what one truly is, I meant
>that there
>exists doubt in the mind of everyone (who wants to know) as to
>whether the
>composite of body, mind and intellect is the person itself, or
>whether it
>is something else.
>
> >>Sorry for cutting in here but how are these two systems
>experienced or
> >>observed everyday. We experience duality or plurality, that is
>granted.
> >>However, both these systems talk of a jiva that is eternal.
> >
> >Eternality is only a philosophical description of the absolute
>- we call it
> >eternal in contrast to phenomenal things that are temporary. As
>transient
> >things represent suffering, we call that which is changeless
>and represents
> >bliss as eternal. But strictly speaking eternality is only a
>concept
> >attributed to the absolute.
> >
>
>True, but so is the word absolute.
>
>ashish
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Thu, 23 May 2002 11:08:47 -0400
> From:    "Subrahmanian, Sundararaman V [IT]"
>          <sundararaman.v.subrahmanian at CITIGROUP.COM>
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>Dear Ms. Stephanie Stean,
>
>Kindly accept my apologies for very terse statements that are
>not
>self-explanatory.  I was in a hurry and just wanted to contribute
>my
>thoughts.  I guess, I should write such posts only when I have
>the time to
>sit through and write a decent explanation.  Also, even though my
>statements
>are in the affirmative, it only represents my current level of
>understanding.  Having said that, the following is the
>explanation of the
>statement I made:
>
>Realization is not an "experience" in the normal usage of the
>word - unless
>it has been used with an implied meaning.  Every experience has a
>beginning
>and hence will have an end.  What advaita is pointing out to the
>seeker is
>not an experience of brahman, but the true identity of the
>experiencer.  The
>Self(Atman) illuminates all experiences in all three states of
>existence.
>
>"aham asmi sadA bhAmi..." - "I" always exist and shine forever
>(as the
>illuminator of everything)
>
>"mayyEvodEti chidvyomni jagat gandharva pattanam" - It is in "ME"
>(do all
>experiences) arise like clouds (approx) in the sky.
>
>All experiences "I am tall", "I am a hero", "I am hungry", "I
>worship", "I
>love God" - all are possible only because of the awareness that
>makes these
>experiences known.  Advaita is a quest for that awareness.  And
>this quest
>is not an achievement, but a realization of that which has always
>been
>existing.  Every experience is an "awareness" of something.
>Every cognition
>is an "awareness" of something.  But there is nothing like
>awareness of
>awareness (will lead to infinite regression).  That is why
>awareness is not
>experience.
>
>Regarding your comments about the need for scriptures, I have the
>following
>to say:
>
>One thing for sure is that, one cannot stumble upon one's self,
>since the
>stumbler is what we are interested.  That is why somebody (Guru)
>has to tell
>you that "you are brahman".  Of course he does not have to say it
>in
>Sanskrit, he can say it in English as well.  Vedantic texts
>incorporate in
>them various methodologies to correct erroneous notions about
>oneself and
>lead one in a step by step manner towards what one really is.
>Each text has
>a methodology: Chandogya uses sR^shTi prakriya, Taitiriya uses
>panchakoSa
>prakriya etc.  Vedanta leads one from wrong notions to correct
>knowledge.
>
>I hope I have clarified my statement.  Your corrections/comments
>are
>welcome.
>
>Regards,
>SVS
>
>-----Original Message-----
> From: Stephanie Stean [mailto:cerebral_rose at MAC.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:25 PM
>To: ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG
>Subject: Re: Concept of personal God and Advaita
>
>
>Hello:
>
>I'm unsure of your intent with this comment.
>
> >"Special" Experiences are not a means of knowledge of Self
>according to
> > traditional view point.
> > True realization is to know that there is only Self in every
>experience
> > (mundane and special - ie., eating, walking, reading, writing
>and
>including
> > samAdhi).
> >
>
>Before I reply, if you could clarify your posting and what you
>wanted to
>communicate.  Thank you.
>
>And Ashish, to answer your question:
>
>Let me begin by saying that I don't practice or belong to any
>faith or
>religion.  I do not want to give you the wrong idea about myself.
>As I said
>before, I read to see the knowledge and understanding of others.
>I joined
>this list to learn more about advaita.  I've only recently become
>familiar
>with this term.
>
>As for describing the experiences: I have no words.  I hoped
>others did, but
>of course, that is not the case.  I do not consider myself to
>have "special
>experiences."  I don't think having just special experience would
>give me
>the knowledge I have and allow me to connect with the scriptures
>at the
>depth that I do.
>And as for liberation, I know I have not reached that point yet.
>I have
>just begun to stop doubting myself and truly explore what it
>happening.
>
>I wish I could describe to you what I see.  It's even hard for me
>to write
>this much.  I guess I continue reading in hopes that all will
>make sense to
>me eventually.  I have no teacher, so most of my studies and
>exploration are
>done on my own.  And this can be scary.
>
>I'm sorry to not be able to explain more than that.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Stephanie
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date:    Thu, 23 May 2002 10:36:13 -0500
> From:    "vaidya_sundaram at i2.com" <Vaidya_Sundaram at I2.COM>
>Subject: New member introduction: Samir Shukla
>
>This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>--=_alternative 0055B6DE86256BC2_=
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 05/23/02 10:35 AM -----
>
>"samir shukla" <samir.shukla at excite.com>
>05/23/02 02:39 AM
>Please respond to samir.shukla
>         RE: Welcome and Request for more info.
>/> My name is Samir A. Shukla, I want to join this to gain more
>knowledge
>about the Adya Shankaracharya & the philosophy to grow
>spiritually. It
>might interest you that I've taken the descipleship of Shri
>Narayan Kaka
>Dhekane, Nashik.
>I'll be very thankfull to you if you permit me to join the
>list,
>Yours Truly
>Samir A, Shukla
>
>--=_alternative 0055B6DE86256BC2_=
>Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
><br><font size=1 color=#800080 face="sans-serif">----- Forwarded
>by Vaidya Sundaram on 05/23/02 10:35 AM -----</font>
><table width=100%>
><tr valign=top>
><td>
><td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"samir shukla"
><samir.shukla at excite.com></b></font>
><p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">05/23/02 02:39 AM</font>
><br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to
>samir.shukla</font>
><td><font size=1 face="Arial">        </font><font size=1
>face="sans-serif">RE: Welcome and Request for more
>info.</font></table>
><br><font size=3 face="Times New Roman">/> My name is Samir A.
>Shukla, I want to join this to gain more knowledge about the Adya
>Shankaracharya & the philosophy to grow spiritually. It might
>interest you that I've taken the descipleship of Shri Narayan
>Kaka Dhekane, Nashik. <br>
>I'll be very thankfull to you if you permit me to join the list,
><br>
>Yours Truly <br>
>Samir A, Shukla<br>
></font>
>--=_alternative 0055B6DE86256BC2_=--
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of ADVAITA-L Digest - 22 May 2002 to 23 May 2002
>(#2002-129)
>****************************************************************


_________________________________________________________
Click below to visit monsterindia.com and review jobs in India or
Abroad
http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs