[Advaita-l] Time not Death

[H S Chandramouli]

Pranams.

Yes.  That is my understanding.

Regards

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com> wrote:

> Pranams,
>
> I agree :) positively. So instead of 'concept' it is better to use
> 'vyavahArika satya' to describe time and mAyA.
>
> Hari OM
> Sujal
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:08 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pranams.
>>
>>
>>
>> Reg  << Am I getting it wrong? >>,
>>
>>
>>
>> Since you are asking, I am answering. I think so.
>>
>>
>>
>> When you ask  << Can it be considered as real or truth?>>,  the answer
>> is Time is vyAvahArika satya. It is anirvachaniya, just as mAya is. I
>> hope I have stated my understanding clearly.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> prANAms,
>>>
>>> There is no one 'else' to experience it separately. If you say, there is
>>> absolutely no one who can experience, then we are negating Brahman. Is it
>>> not SunyavAda? If we do not agree that such a state exists, which is beyond
>>> mAyA, then is this the final position of advaita?
>>>
>>> If one has to explain this non-dual state, how can one explain this
>>> inexplainable state?
>>>
>>> Secondly, 'concept' means 'it is construct of mind' because in
>>> nirvikalpa samAdhi and in deep sleep, one is beyond time. 'Change' is the
>>> nature of time' Anything that changes is not constant. Can it be considered
>>> as real or truth? Am I getting it wrong? Does the state of nirvikalpa
>>> samAdhi accept time as eternal truth? Does advaita accept time as eternal
>>> and hence truth? Please clarify.
>>>
>>> OM
>>>
>>> Sujal
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:48 AM, H S Chandramouli <
>>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Reg  << when mind is extremely purified, we will have to rise above
>>>> mAyA. Hence for such a divine soul, time is a concept of mind as when one
>>>> is in suShupti or in samAdhi, one does not experience any time i.e. one is
>>>> not aware of how much time one has spent in deep sleep (suShupti) or how
>>>> much time one was in nirvikalpa samAdhi.>>,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When one has transcended mAya, or in Sushpti or samAdhi, one does not
>>>> experience Time. So how can it be a “concept”. He just does not experience
>>>> it at all. Period.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> praNAms,
>>>>>
>>>>> Without Space and time i.e. deSa and kAla, there can be no activity
>>>>> and hence no creation, preservation and destruction. Hence when talking
>>>>> about any activity, these two have to be taken into account, but from
>>>>> pArmArthika satya, one is only aware of Self- Atman or Brahman and nothing
>>>>> else. Brahman devoid of space and time is nirvikalpa, achala, etc It cannot
>>>>> do any activity.
>>>>>
>>>>> In order to understand creation and for sake of explanation for
>>>>> various doubts, mAyA and so space and time has to be taken into account.
>>>>> But if one wishes to move ahead i.e. go further deep to finally cross the
>>>>> border of mAyA, then mAyA, space, time and any such phenomenon has to be
>>>>> downgraded i.e. it's importance has to be decreased, so that mind will stop
>>>>> getting attached to them or getting attracted or immersed into them and
>>>>> finally rise above them to enter into nirvikalpa samAdhi.
>>>>>
>>>>> From collective view point, we cannot ignore mAyA, space and time, but
>>>>> from individual standpoint, one day, when mind is extremely purified, we
>>>>> will have to rise above mAyA. Hence for such a divine soul, time is a
>>>>> concept of mind as when one is in suShupti or in samAdhi, one does not
>>>>> experience any time i.e. one is not aware of how much time one has spent in
>>>>> deep sleep (suShupti) or how much time one was in nirvikalpa samAdhi.
>>>>>
>>>>> When there is no time, there cannot be any space or any distance that
>>>>> can be traveled. If there is no distance or space between observer and
>>>>> object (of / under observation), then there cannot be any object. Only pure
>>>>> consciousness remains. There is in-explainable (deep) peace. eko Brahman -
>>>>> SAntam Sivam advaitam.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, we will have to take both statements (and both arguments) in right
>>>>> context.
>>>>>
>>>>> When bhagavAn says, he is both time and *beyond time*, what I
>>>>> understand is, bhagavAn or KRShNa is both sAkAra and nirAkAra or saguNa and
>>>>> nirguNa.
>>>>>
>>>>> OM
>>>>>
>>>>> Sujal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:18 AM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Maya is anirvachaniya. It is not correct to state that it does not
>>>>>> exist
>>>>>> nor is it correct to say that it is only a concept. It is vyAvahArika
>>>>>> satya. Same applies to kAla or Time. Upanishads clearly mention
>>>>>> "creation"
>>>>>> of Time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Vēdānta Study Group via Advaita-l <
>>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > hariH Om.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > */// Time is just a concept. It is like Maya. There is nothing
>>>>>> called Maya
>>>>>> > ///*
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Is there any pramana to suggest the above? As far as I know,
>>>>>> shankarAchArya
>>>>>> > mentions avidyA (for the sake of our discussion let us akin it to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> > samaSTi mAyA) as having bhAva. It is a vastu enjoying existence,
>>>>>> albeit a
>>>>>> > dependent one. Therefore I am not too sure how we're saying there is
>>>>>> > nothing called mAyA. As far as 'time' being just a concept, even
>>>>>> this I
>>>>>> > would approach with some skepticism. Space is just as real (or
>>>>>> unreal) as
>>>>>> > time is, in that they're both mithyA, but have a dependent vyAvahAra
>>>>>> > reality.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > If time were just a concept, it would not be influenced by
>>>>>> anything, which
>>>>>> > we know to be untrue. But that aside, I'm we have shAstra to
>>>>>> indicate that
>>>>>> > mAyA is an existing principle, as are dEsha-kAlA
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Namaste,
>>>>>> > Prashant
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 19 June 2017 at 02:20, Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l <
>>>>>> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, R Krishnamoorthy via Advaita-l wrote:
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Time is just a concept. It is like Maya. There is nothing called
>>>>>> Maya. We
>>>>>> > >> give the name Maya to things which we are not able to fully
>>>>>> understand
>>>>>> > or
>>>>>> > >> is beyond our logic. Time also does not exist. It is the name
>>>>>> given to
>>>>>> > the
>>>>>> > >> duration that elapses between any two events which is measurable
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> > fully
>>>>>> > >> recognisable. In the the Lord says I am Time to indicate He is
>>>>>> eternal
>>>>>> > >> that
>>>>>> > >> is the duration of His presence is lmmeasurable. And All beings
>>>>>> or non
>>>>>> > >> beings
>>>>>> > >> have limited duration between their birth to their death or end.
>>>>>> > >>
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > This is true.  But it isn't it strange that people are afraid of
>>>>>> death
>>>>>> > but
>>>>>> > > not afraid of time?  Shankaracharya brings this out in the
>>>>>> mohamudgara
>>>>>> > > stotra in which he admonishes an old man who is studying to
>>>>>> vyakarana to
>>>>>> > > "bhaje govindam".
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > This is another example of bad interpretations and translations.
>>>>>> Some
>>>>>> > > make it out to be some sort of tirade against grammar which is
>>>>>> ridiculous
>>>>>> > > to anyone who knows the position vyakarana plays in Sanskrit
>>>>>> scholarship.
>>>>>> > > (In fact according to thinkers like Bhartrahari, it is itself a
>>>>>> form of
>>>>>> > > Vedantic sadhana.)  No; what the acharya is saying is that why
>>>>>> would you
>>>>>> > > wait until your time has almost run out to begin sadhana?  The
>>>>>> right time
>>>>>> > > is now.
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > --
>>>>>> > > Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
>>>>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > > 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
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>