[Advaita-l] Need explanation

[Kartik Vashishta]

Hari OM!

Sadar Pranam Sri Praveen Ji Maharaj,

I have some questions based on your explanation which is a God send to me:

Sw. Krishnanandaji was an excellent orator and writer and during his time
he stood tall even in Western Philosophy! Here, he has expressed the
Vedantic truth in what seems to be the style of the Kant's critique. This
is what the good Swamiji states:
1) A likely objection is noted that the neti neti method would end up in
shUnya but the (scientific) method is tending to reach the absolute by real
evolution. By this it is said that the continuous improvement is real and
it would tend to become absolute, but never become absolute, since
evolution is a continuous process, and the individual is ever-expanding to
infinity but never really infinity!

Does this mean that the realization of the absolute cannot be a process
because a process is changing every moment? Evolution being a process is
al;so hence unreal......

2) The response starts with a jab at dualists that considering duality as
real, one can blame each action of his on the Lord who prods as the
indweller. However, the happenings in the world and the world itself is not
a creation by the Absolute, since He doesn't act. It is the very nature of
the Absolute to appear as the world (ref Mandukya Karika in 1st chapter on
देवस्य स्वभावः)। However, being an appearance, it is never separate from
the absolute and so not an eternal second entity to be called dual, since
the presence of another entity itself contradicts absoluteness of the
absolute.

Does this mean that the world is not a second absolute, since two absolutes
would be a contradiction?

3) The absolute includes diversity of appearances and rejecting these
finite individual appearances doesn't lead to nihilism. That individuality
also is not an assertion of the absolute but something wrongly assumed to
be real. In the process of negating the duality at many levels of
association, if one doesn't immediately understand one's absolute nature,
still it is an improvement even in the progress. Swamiji uses an
interesting logic to refute these individuals now: since there is an
infinite set of various "finites" spread across space, they cannot really
be divided and thereby, have to remain undivided! Being undivided, there
cannot really be duality. Such duality can be asserted wrongly, but cannot
be proven.

Does the presence of infinite individuaualities not contradict that there
can be only one absolute? How do we arrive at the conclusion that an
infinite set of finites spread across space cannot be divided?

Thank you very very much for your help.

I have another question from the most blessed Swamiji's book:
https://www.swami-krishnananda.org/mundak1/mundak1_3.html

Putmān retas siñcati yoṣitāyām bahvīḥ prajāḥ puruṣāt samprasūtāḥ: In this
manner, the heavenly Purusha is causing, by his own vibration of will, the
creation of every little thing in this world. Even the little crawling
insects are created by the Supreme Purusha. Creation takes place in a
variety of ways, which is only one illustration of the manner of the
relation of cause and effect, highlighting how we, in our crude form of
understanding, imagine how something could have come from something else.
Why should anything come from something else? If something is not there
which is causeless, and if the ultimate cause also has a cause, there would
be a logical regression and the argument will break. A meaningful argument
should have an end. Endless arguments are no arguments. And so, the
argument in respect of the effect coming from a cause should lead to a
cause which itself has no further cause.

Could you please explain this.

Pranam!

OM
Kartik Vashishta
OM

On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Kartikji,
>
> Sw. Krishnanandaji was an excellent orator and writer and during his time
> he stood tall even in Western Philosophy! Here, he has expressed the
> Vedantic truth in what seems to be the style of the Kant's critique. This
> is what the good Swamiji states:
> 1) A likely objection is noted that the neti neti method would end up in
> shUnya but the (scientific) method is tending to reach the absolute by real
> evolution. By this it is said that the continuous improvement is real and
> it would tend to become absolute, but never become absolute, since
> evolution is a continuous process, and the individual is ever-expanding to
> infinity but never really infinity!
>
> 2) The response starts with a jab at dualists that considering duality as
> real, one can blame each action of his on the Lord who prods as the
> indweller. However, the happenings in the world and the world itself is not
> a creation by the Absolute, since He doesn't act. It is the very nature of
> the Absolute to appear as the world (ref Mandukya Karika in 1st chapter on
> देवस्य स्वभावः)। However, being an appearance, it is never separate from
> the absolute and so not an eternal second entity to be called dual, since
> the presence of another entity itself contradicts absoluteness of the
> absolute.
>
> 3) The absolute includes diversity of appearances and rejecting these
> finite individual appearances doesn't lead to nihilism. That individuality
> also is not an assertion of the absolute but something wrongly assumed to
> be real. In the process of negating the duality at many levels of
> association, if one doesn't immediately understand one's absolute nature,
> still it is an improvement even in the progress. Swamiji uses an
> interesting logic to refute these individuals now: since there is an
> infinite set of various "finites" spread across space, they cannot really
> be divided and thereby, have to remain undivided! Being undivided, there
> cannot really be duality. Such duality can be asserted wrongly, but cannot
> be proven.
>
> 4) Some say that one has to really become the absolute (bhedAbhedavAdins
> perhaps). This is refuted as being impossible since a limited thing cannot
> really become absolute. It is to be known and experienced as aparokSha/
> immediate. It is unfolding one's own nature to oneself by negating what one
> is not. The truth is one absolute existence and all other words that
> indicate gradations are figurative, since there is only one absolute
> reality even when one thinks oneself limited.
>
> 5) The truth alone is (through "satyameva jayate").
>
> 6) Taking the diversity as real leads to all the adversities of saMsAra,
> starting with limitations and wanting what the others have, etc.
> viShiShTadvaita stance of a relation between individual and total is also
> refuted, since the truth is one and it cannot be twofold to have relations.
> Since the levels of realities are different between the apparent and the
> real, the latter doesn't contradict the former. Then why even is there an
> appearance of the world? To this, he says that there is no eternal plan
> that can be said to be there but only as a tool to help those who subscribe
> to duality without choice conforming to the world (naisargika), so that
> they can outgrow through the understanding of appearance of one
> non-duality.
>
> 7) The truth spoken of as absolute /ultimate or relative are only
> concessions for slow and middling intellects (adhama and madhyama
> adhikAris). The brahman expressed as the world is not outside of brahman,
> since space itself is brahman in which the entire world appears. Since
> everything is in space and time, which are themselves expressions of
> brahman, there is no duality. If there were a real dual entity, it can
> never become brahman since one thing cannot really become another separate
> thing. What Swamiji has left unsaid is that if such change is accepted, it
> will be temporary and the attainment of absolute (mokSha) has to
> necessarily be permanent. brahman is the consciousness of one's being and
> what can be really said about that is that absolute consciousness just is!
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> ​gurupAdukAbhyAm
> ,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
>
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Kartik Vashishta via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Hari OM!
> >
> > I have been reading the classic book "The Realization of the Absolute" by
> > Sri Sri Swami Krishnananda and am trying to understand the section titled
> > "Critique of Duality":
> > http://pastebin.centos.org/478826/
> >
> > Is it possible for someone to kindly explain me what the esteemed Swami
> is
> > conveying.
> >
> > Pranam,
> >
> > OM
> > Kartik Vashishta
> > OM
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>