[Advaita-l] 'world' is not the mental creation of tiny soul !!

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/25/14, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:


 
 You have mentioned " with knowledge " . Agreed. But during
 this period when
 knowledge is not yet aquired, in order to aquire the same
 ,  is it not
 necessary to   deliberate on avidya, its
 nature, origin, locus. its
 undesirable effects ,  etc. Absolutely agreed, since we
 are mired in avidya
 itself, it is not possible to understand it fully. I am not
 saying it is
 possible. But unless there is a desire to get out of it, it
 is clearly not
 possible to undertake any sadhnas for transcending it. It is
 only for this
 that vichara on avidya is essential. I do feel this is not
 overemphasizing
 the issue. In fact I think in our anxiety to move forward
 quickly to the
 final Goal, we are perhaps underemphasizing the preliminary
 steps so
 essential for undertaking the further steps.
 
 Chandramouliji - PraNAms

In principle, one can keep inquiring about ignornace. I think Shree Vidyasankar had analyzed beautifully the problem in the inquiry of ignorance. The locus of ignorance has been one of the major topics of Bhagavan Ramanuja's 7-fold criticism of avidyaa of advaita doctrine, in his Shree Bhashya. The criticism includes  anyonya aasraya dosha and the anirvachaniiyatvam aspects, to state two of the seven.

Personally, a simple teaching should do to  show the fundamental human problem. Everybody is looking for unlimited happiness in the limited sense objects without realizing that happiness that one is longing for comes from one’s own self ,and there is no happiness outside. Hence, the teaching in Maitreyi brahmana - aatmanatsu kaamaaya sarvam priyam bhavati. Frankly to know this fact I do not need any bhaashyaas too. If I am already happy, then why am I looking for happiness? Obviously I do not know that I am full all by myself. The whole teaching is now centered on knowing how can I be full and still feel limited. 

Please tell me, do I need to know muula avidya , creation, etc to know that happiness that I am seeking comes from own myself and I do not need to know anything else other than remove my misconceptions that I am taking what I am not and suffering as a consequence of that misconceptions. Even after knowing that I am full by myself and happiness comes from my own self, I am still looking for happiness outside, knowing very well it is not really there. 
Essentially that misconception that happiness is out there is deep rooted. Krishna defines the sthitaprajna - not in terms of muula avidya etc- He provides a direct statement - prajahaati yadaa kaaman sarvan paarth mano gataan, aatmanyevaatmanaa tuShTaH. Once I recognize that I am full by myself all other teachings becomes meaning full and that the whole creation is my own (aatma's) projection and I am the very substantive of the whole universe - or aham brahmaasmi. End of the story. The story ends with the conviction gets deep rooted by aatma-anaatma vichaara. 

Is creation by the tiny jiiva or that of Iswara? This question becomes irrelevant after realization since we have moved to aatma-anaatma. Before realization, when I am ignorant, the misconceptions include the reality of whole nine yards- anekajiiva-Iswara-and jagat. Eka jiivatvam and aneka jiivatvam are two sides of the same coin as long as there is a notion of jiivatvam. Who has this notion, obviously by the one who is looking for happiness out there – like the 10th man story.

>From my point the rest of the discussion can go on, but I would think it will never be decisive other than saying this aacharya said this or that, while the fact remains I am still looking for happiness out there which is not there, irrespective of any acharyas statements. 


Just 2 more c.
Hari Om!
Sadananda