[Advaita-l] Advaita-1)Body is the disease

[Sujal Upadhyay]

Namaste,

To add to above forgetting of Self is also found in Upanisads, with wrong
belief being repeatedly substituted by right belief, 'though art that
(Brahman), Svetketu'. It repeats not once, not twice, but multiple times.

Hari OM


OM

Sujal Upadhyay

"To disconnect from the self and to become Aware of anything else is
nothing but unhappiness" - Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi

He who has faith has all
He who lacks faith, lacks all
It is the faith int he name of lord that works wonders
FAITH IS LIFE, DOUBT IS DEATH - Sri Ramakrishna


On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Dears
> > It is said that Brahman out of ignorance created body .Does it mean that
> Brahman is also subject to avidhya? I think this may not be a correct
>
> Talking about avidyA like this is often like trying to light a lamp and
> taking it around, to search for where darkness exists. One way to get past
> this is to look at it the following way.
>
> Many people find a lot of issues with saying that brahman is the locus of
> avidyA, but I don't think anybody has any problem with accepting that the
> jIva is subject to avidyA. This comfort zone in one's thinking is itself a
> symptom of avidyA. The upanishad teaches you and me, the individual jIva-s,
> "tat tvam asi". advaita AcArya-s say that the jIva always was, is, and
> always will be, brahman alone, nothing else. It is not as if the jIva is
> one thing when subject to avidyA, transforming into something else upon
> realizing itself as brahman. So whose is this avidyA, jIva or brahman? But
> then, jIva IS brahman, even when subject to avidyA. Trying to distinguish,
> between brahman on the one hand and the jIva as the subject of avidyA on
> the other hand, is itself avidyA, because there is no such distinction in
> reality. It is the success in making this transition that distinguishes the
> jnAnI from one who remains in avidyA.
>
> On the narrower note of upanishadic interpretation, we should think about
> the sequence in bRhadAraNyaka 1.4.1-9 and ponder what it really says.
>
> The AtmA alone was, originally (eva idam agra AsIt), first saw nothing
> other than itself (na anyad AtmanaH apaSyat), felt fear (abibhet) and felt
> alone (ekAkI), then reasoned "why should I fear?" (kasmAn nu bibhemi?),
> thus got rid of that fear (bhayaM vIyAya), but was not happy (naiva reme)
> because of being alone and so desired a second (dvitIyam aicchat), then
> went through the cycle of creation, finally returning to realizing that the
> AtmA alone is the dearest of all (preyo 'nyasmAt sarvasmAd antaratamaM yad
> ayam AtmA).
>
> That initial experience by the AtmA, that feeling of fear, when there is
> nothing else, combined with loneliness, from there being nothing else, is
> indeed the avidyA that sets all the saMsAra into motion. The return to the
> AtmA alone as the most dear is the moksha that stops this saMsAra. All this
> happens to the AtmA, who is brahman. The upanishad is very clear about
> this, because after 1.4.10 and 1.4.11 begin again by saying that brahman
> alone was.
>
> Best regards,
> 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
>