[Advaita-l] Eternal Loka

[Ranga Rathnam]

Really?

A simple transaltion of Svetasvatara Upanishad.....

*Chance* is definitely excluded!!

Svetasvatara Upanishad 

Source: "The Upanishads - A New Translation" by Swami Nikhilananda

Invocation

That is full; this is full. This fullness has been projected
from that fullness. When this fullness merges in that fullness,
all that remains is fullness. 

Om. Peace! Peace! Peace! 


Chapter I 


1     Rishis, discoursing on Brahman, ask: Is Brahman the cause?
Whence are we born? By what do we live? Where do we dwell
at the end? Please tell us, O ye who know Brahman, under
whose guidance we abide, whether in pleasure or in pain. 


2     Should time, or nature, or necessity, or chance, or the elements
be regarded as the cause? Or he who is called the purusha, the
living self? 


3     The sages, absorbed in meditation through one�pointedness of
mind, discovered the creative power, belonging to the Lord
Himself and hidden in its own gunas. That non�dual Lord
rules over all those causes�time, the self and the rest. 


4     The sages saw the wheel of Brahman................

> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:02:21 +0530
> From: vmurthy36 at gmail.com
> To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Eternal Loka
> 
> Namaste
> 
> The Kakataliya Nyaya is the best answer for this. Swami Sivananda has given
> very nice explanation in Vedanta for Beginners.
> http://www.dlshq.org/download/vedbegin.htm
> 
> 'A crow came and sat on a palmyra tree, and just at that time, a fruit of
> that tree fell on its head and killed it. The falling of the fruit had
> really no connection with the crow’s sitting on the tree. The coincidence
> of the two events was merely accidental. This illustration is used to
> describe anything which is purely accidental and has no reason behind. It
> is said in the Yogavasishtha that the appearance of a common world to many
> Jivas, each of whom has really an independent world of itself, is only
> accidental (Kakataliya) and has no reason or any other meaning for it
> whatsoever.'
> 
> Brahman having Gunas and Causing the World is according to this Kakataliya
> Nyaya. It is accidental. There is No meaning for saying Brahman is Cause
> for World and Cause for Gunas.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:45 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > Well said Sri Sada ji.  No guNa can legitimately be in Brahman because
> > every guNa, without any exception, is attributed to brahman ONLY ensuing
> > from the world or jiva.  Without jagat/jIva there cannot be a single guNa
> > that brahman can have.  jagatkartRtvam, sarvAntaryAmitvam, saulabhyam,
> > saushIlyam etc... to have any or all of these Brahman has to depend on the
> > jagat/jIva.  For ONLY for their sake brahman bears the burden of these
> > guNas.  If not for them these need not be borne by brahman.  Advaita sees
> > this truth, on the basis of the shruti and declares brahman to be nirguNa
> > at the paramarthic level.  Brahman has to depend on those (jiva/jagat)
> > which depend on It for their very existence (paratantra satyam) to have any
> > guNas. That is the sorry state of Brahman if guNas have to be admitted in
> > it.
> >
> > vs
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:58 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
> > kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Rajaram Venkataramani <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > >Please answer a basic question. "If there is no sarvajna Ishwara after
> > > >pralaya, who will create as before and award rewards of karma in
> > previous
> > > >kalpa?"
> > > --------
> > > Shree Rajaram - There is fundamental problem in the whole analysis. All
> > > that you mentioned, Iswara with sarvajna, laya, pralaya, karma, jiiva,
> > > jnaanam, ajnanaam -lokas, even puurva miimamsa, utta miimaamsa that
> > include
> > > Sreedhara swami  bhaashya, Bhattas, praabhaakaras, miimaasa positions,
> > and
> > > anything else you name it, all and any divisions and distinctions which
> > > differentiates in terms of sajaati, vijaati swagata bhedas - all  are
> > only
> > > transactionally real. Noone disputes that. From paaramaarthika point -
> > > existence-consciousness alone was there which has no distinctions of any
> > > kind - ekam eva advitiiyam. Hence nirguna brahman we talk about refers to
> > > that prajnanam brahma - that which is one without a second. Ontologically
> > > paramaarthika satyam differs from vyaavahaarika satyam which again
> > differs
> > > form praatibhaasika satyam. The adviata teaching is from paaramaarthika
> > > satyam. Confusion arises if try to mix these things - from what reference
> > > these
> > >  distinctions you mentioned are valid. You may not agree with this, but
> > > advaita categorically dismisses any distinctions of any kind from the
> > > absolute point.
> > > Just my 2c
> > > Hari Om!
> > > Sadananda
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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