[Advaita-l] About the term in 'Ishwara' in Advaita - a brief note

[Venkatesh Murthy वेङ्कटेशः]

Namaste

There is  confusion below in your writing. Surya is the Originator and
Storehouse of Energy. How can you say Energy is more basic? Surya is
producing the Energy. Without Surya there is no Energy. Modern
Scientists are confusing us. They are saying Surya is a Mass of
chemical gases. It is wrong. It is like saying you are a Mass of
Chemicals and nothing more. But you are more than chemicals. You are
Atma. Like this Surya is pure Brahman. He is not just gases. He is
more. He is Brahman. Scientists are lying saying he is only gases.

You cannot say there are billions of Stars like Sun. They are not
useful for us. Surya is like our Atma in our body. A star is like Atma
in another body. But you have to know Atma in your own body but not
another person's body. Like this we have to know our own Atma. The
Atma for us is Surya. If we know Him we know our Atma.

Surya is basis of Energy. But Energy is not basis of Surya.

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>
> In a last ditch attempt, I am going to take your desert-mirage analogy
> and extend it. When you are talking of material entities, yes, the mirage
> is not real and the desert is real. More specifically, the water that you
> thought you saw in the mirage is unreal, only the mirage appeared on
> the surface of the desert. But if you investigate it to the next level, you
> realize that the mirage is an effect of the sunlight. If not for light, no
> mirage would appear. And you don't need a desert for the mirage, any
> hot surface would do, e.g tar road. The temperature of the surface is
> also an effect of nothing but the same sunlight heating it up. So you
> could say that it is all a play of light, or of the sun. The sun, by its mere
> presence, quite unlike a puppet master as posited by dualists, causes
> all this. You will then, no doubt, want to focus on the sun as the ISvara
> who rules over all things on earth. Even the veda can be quoted here
> in addition to physics - sUrya Atma jagataH.
>
> I would go one step beyond this and point out to you that the light of the
> sun is a result of nuclear reactions on the sun and that all the material
> nuclei in the sun are in themselves nothing more than manifestations of
> energy. So also, the material entities in the desert or the tar road are
> nothing more than other manifestations of energy. Ultimately, the mirage
> is thereby known as nothing more than a result of interactions between
> different forms of energy. The sunlight, one form of energy, came from
> solar material, which is in turn a manifestation of nothing but energy.
> The earth, which is material, is also only another material manifestation
> of energy, the hotness of its surface is another form of energy. Ultimately,
> only the energy remains, as the reality behind all the forms in which it
> appears, and which interact with one another.
>
> So, the same logic that allowed you say the mirage is "unreal" will also
> now lead to a conclusion that the desert is "unreal", the sun is "unreal",
> the earth is  "unreal" and that only the energy is "real". Note that I put
> quotation marks signs there, because the statement of reality or unreality
> of a thing is only made on a relative basis, never as an absolute statement
> in and of itself. If you want to object that I have thereby denigrated sUrya
> and that I have therefore not given due weight to the text sUrya AtmA
> jagataH, you are welcome to your misunderstanding. I would point to the
> other Sruti text that says, na tatra sUryo bhAti na candratArakam.
>
> And I can continue acknowledging the indebtedness of my body and its
> life, as of all things on earth, to the light of the sun.  At the same time,
> I will also acknowledge that the sun is one of more than billions of stars
> in the universe and that all of it is ultimately pure energy. This does not
> conflict with sUrya AtmA jagataH in any way.
>
> If you think this is nevertheless equivalent to my wanting to kill sUrya, you
> could  not be more mistaken! I fully realize that no amount of prayatna
> will literally "kill" sUrya and you don't need to point that out to me at all.
> However, the realization that there is pure energy as the underlying
> reality of sUrya is true. The same realization also tells me that this
> pure energy is the reality of myself too and such knowledge liberates
> me. This realization happens in my intellect, my dhI, and I, the sAkshI
> of its operation, fully acknowledge that my dhI too gains sustenance
> only from that very same sun that provides energy for everything on
> earth. Where is the problem? I am more than happy to take sUrya as
> the ruler over earth, by its mere presence, and at the same time to
> talk of a reality that goes beyond sUrya.
>
> What advaitins do in talking about ISvara and nirguNa brahman is very
> similar to the above. If you can see the logic of one, you should be able
> to see the logic of the other.
>
> Anyway, as I said, this is a last ditch attempt. If you are not prepared
> to understand the above right, then perhaps advaita is not the mArga
> for you personally and you should seriously explore something that is
> more suited to your needs.
>
> In a side comment to Sri Bhaskar, who seems to wonder why I spend
> time on this :-), I can only say that I have taken what I've described as
> confusion on one person's part as an opporunity to clarify a widespread
> misunderstanding of advaita. If there is chidish enthusiasm in it, I hope
> it is along the lines of pANDityan nirvidya bAlyena tishThAset. :-)
>
> Vidyasankar
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh