Neither Buddhism nor Advaita is necessary to realize the ult
| By : Santthoshkumaar Kumaar on Feb 02, 2011 | Views (162) | Responses (15) | |
Neither Buddhism nor Advaita is necessary to realize the ultimate truth.
As one peeps into the annals of religious history he finds the following facts:-
The practices of the path and the destination or goals of both religions can be different. Theravada Buddhism is relatively conservative, and generally closest to early Buddhism. Later on Mahayana and Vajrayana also developed. It appears that later schools of Buddhism have developed a variety of other ritual and devotional practices that were inspired or influenced by the existing religious cultures of India, China, Japan, Southeast Asia, and Tibet. Little differences can be found between later schools of Buddhism and Hinduism. There is a huge difference when comparing Hinduism to the teachings of the Buddha as recorded in the Pali Canon of the Theraveda school of Buddhism.
Buddha is a Sanskrit word. Buddha means "awakened one." A Buddha is someone who has realized the enlightenment that ends the cycle of birth and death and which brings liberation from suffering.
Among all the Buddha's teachings, those on the nature of the self are the hardest to understand, yet they are central to the religion. In fact, "fully perceiving the nature of the self" is one way to define enlightenment.
The Five Skandhas
The Buddha taught that an individual is a combination of five aggregates of existence, also called the Five Skandhas. These are:
- Form
- Sensation
- Perception
- Mental formations
- Consciousness
Various schools of Buddhism interpret the skandhas in somewhat different ways. Generally, the first skandha is our physical form. The second is made up of our feelings, emotional and physical, and our senses -- seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling.
The third skandha, perception, takes in most of what we call thinking -- conceptualization, cognition, reasoning. This also includes the recognition that occurs when an organ comes into contact with an object. Perception can be thought of as "that which identifies." The object perceived may be a physical object or a mental one, such as an idea.
The fourth skandha, mental formations, includes habits, prejudices and predispositions. Our volition, or willfulness, also is part of the fourth skandha, as are attention, faith, conscientiousness, pride, desire, vindictiveness, and many other mental states both virtuous and not virtuous. The causes and effects of karma are especially important to the fourth skandha.
The fifth skandha, consciousness, is awareness of or sensitivity to an object, but without conceptualization. Once there is awareness, the third skandha might recognize the object and assign a concept-value to it, and the fourth skandha might react with desire or revulsion or some other mental formation. The fifth skandha is explained in some schools as base that ties the experience of life together.
The Self Is No-Self
What's most important to understand about the skandhas is that they are empty. They are not qualities that an individual possesses, because there is no-self possessing them. This doctrine of no-self is called anatman or anatta.
Very basically, the Buddha taught that "you" are not an integral, autonomous entity. The individual self, or what we might call the ego, is more correctly thought of as a by-product of the skandhas.
On the surface, this appears to be a nihilistic teaching. But the Buddha taught that if we can see through the delusion of the small, individual self, we experience that which is not subject to birth and death.
Two Views
Beyond this point, Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism differ on how anatman is understood. In fact, more than anything else it is the different understanding of self that defines and separates the two schools.
Very basically, Theravada considers anatman to mean that an individual's ego or personality is a fetter and delusion. Once freed of this delusion, the individual may enjoy the bliss of Nirvana.
Mahayana, on the other hand, considers all physical forms to be void of intrinsic self (a teaching called shunyata, which means "emptiness"). The ideal in Mahayana is to enable all beings to be enlightened together, not only out of a sense of compassion, but because we are not really separate, autonomous beings.
There's an apparent discrepancy between the Buddha's words in The Dhammapada --
"By oneself, indeed, is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself, indeed, is one purified. Purity and impurity depend on oneself. No one purifies another." (Dhammapada, chapter 12, verse 165)
John Daido Loori, Roshi --
"The responsibility that emerges with realization is not limited to what is happening to us. It embraces the whole catastrophe. It includes everything everywhere, throughout time and space -- past, present, and future. There is no separation." (Loori, The Heart of Being, page 172)
"By oneself, indeed, is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself, indeed, is one purified. Purity and impurity depend on oneself. No one purifies another." (Dhammapada, chapter 12, verse 165)
John Daido Loori, Roshi --
"The responsibility that emerges with realization is not limited to what is happening to us. It embraces the whole catastrophe. It includes everything everywhere, throughout time and space -- past, present, and future. There is no separation." (Loori, The Heart of Being, page 172)
So, when there is harm, where does responsibility lie? Is it individual or universal?
The Mahayana answer is, of course, "both." When dualities dissolve and the barriers fall, there are no limits to our being. Therefore, there are no limits to our responsibility. However, as individuals we are entirely responsible for ourselves. Daido used to tell us to not blame anyone else even for our bad moods -- "No one can make you angry. You make yourself angry."
As per Daidos --
That responsibility, that sense of responsibility, encompasses the whole universe, because it's based on the realization that we're not separate from the universe. What happens to the ten thousand things happens to me. What's going on in Somalia is going on right here. In the jungles of South America. In the Ozone layer. Whatever affects this great universe affects this body and this mind. That's the realization of the Buddha, and that's the realization that these Precepts are based on.
The world is apprehended by way of the mind The world is acted upon by way of the mind And all good things and bad Exist in the world by way of the mind.
- Samyutta Nikaya
Buddha was a Gnani, but his interpreters are not. Buddha did not enter into scriptural interpretation. So the Hindus threw him out of their religion. Sankara however although he agreed in nearly all points with Buddha, was a tactician and wanted to teach these truths within the Hindu fold. Hence he did in Rome as Rome does! He made himself outwardly appear as an orthodox Hindu, and thus secured his aim.
Buddhism has failed through misunderstanding Gotama and believing that nothing is left to exist after Nirvana. What is it that sees the illusory nature of the finite ego? This is what the Buddhists need to answer and cannot on their theories.
Buddha's teachings that all life is misery belongs to the relative standpoint only. For you cannot form any idea of misery without contrasting it with its opposite, happiness. The two will always go together. Buddha taught the goal of cessation of misery, i.e. peace, but took care not to discuss the ultimate standpoint for then he would have had to go above the heads of the people and tell them that misery itself was only an idea, that peace even was an idea (for it contrasted with peacelessness).
That the doctrine he gave out was a limited one, is evident because he inculcated compassion. Why should a Buddhist sage practice pity? There is no reason for it. Advaita is the next step higher than Buddhism because it gives the missing reason, viz. unity, non-difference from others, and because it explains that it used the concept of removing the sufferings of others, of lifting them up to happiness, only as we use one thorn to pick out another, afterwards throw both away. Similarly Advaita discards both concepts of misery and happiness in the ultimate standpoint of non-duality, which is indescribable.
Buddhists say that a thing exists only for a moment, and if that thing has still got some of the substance from which it was produced how then can they deny that its cause is continuing in the effect; hence its existence is more than a moment. Vedanta is concerned with whether it is one and the same thing which has come into being, or has it come out of nothing.
Even the Sunyavada ultimate of the "void" is really a breath, and therefore an imagination and not truth.
Buddha as a constructive worker committed an error in failing to give the masses a religion, something tangible they could grasp, something materialistic, if symbolic that their limited intellect could take hold of, in addition to his ethics and philosophy. Here Sri Ramakrishna was wiser and gave religion; such as Kirtan, puja etc.--to the ignorant masses, as well as Advaita to those like Vivekananda.
Buddha gave as the central feature of his doctrine the great law of Karma in order to reiterate its ethical meaning. He did more good in this to uplift the people than the ritualists.
Tibetan and Chinese Buddhists who say that there are many Buddhas living in spirit bodies and helping our earth from the spiritual world are still in the sphere of religious illusion, not ultimate truth. Their statements are wrong. Every sage realizes that the only way to help mankind is to come down amongst them, for which he must necessarily take on flesh-body. When people are suffering how can he relieve their suffering unless he appears amongst them? When people are suffering how can he feed them from an unseen world whether their struggle be for material bread or for spiritual truth? No! He must be here actually in the flesh. It is impossible to help them in any other way and all talk of Shiva living on Mount Kailas in spiritual body or Buddha in Nirmanakaya, invisible body belongs to the realm of delusion or self-deception.
The Buddhist scriptures were completely distorted by the time of Sankaracharya. Sankaracharya had to criticise the Buddhist literature prevailing then as the Buddhists themselves were confused as to what Shunyata is. Vasubandhu and his disciple Dignaga (the latter lived about a couple of centuries before Sankaracharya) could not retain the original teachings of Lord Buddha. At first Vasubandhu did not agree with his half-brother Asanga and wrote one book on Abhidharma and later on he went to the side of Asanga and wrote a second book, where he opposed his own earlier views on Abhidharma. Sankaracharya had to criticise the Buddhist knowledge and literature of his time as he wanted to bring to us back the Pure Vedantic knowledge through his work on the Prasthanatraya. That is why there is reference to the writing of Dharmakirti in Sutrabashya.
There is another aspect also the puranic literature the Vishnu Purana also says that Lord Buddha created confusion. And in Sarnath he first taught about the Moral code which is basic. He talked about Anatma. And two decades later he taught the concept of Shunyata and the tenets of the Mahayana Buddhism.? In spite of Nagrjuna's telling that Shunyata is not Nihilism and that Parajanaparamita also mentioning about the Shunyata after one leaves the five? skandhas, there are and there will always be people who will go on calling Buddha's philosophy as Nihilism. About the origin of the Tantric Buddhism also there are controversies.
The Hindus consider Lord Buddha being an Avatara of Lord Vishnu. It seems that in many Buddha viharas, probably more in Sri Lanka, there are statues of Lord Vishnu, which are looked at reverentially. By the Buddhists. Sri Ramakrishna paramhansa also says that there is no doubt about Lord Buddha being an Avatara of Lord Vishnu. Swami Vivakananda tells us about him very superlatively. Dr. Radhakrishnan says that he was a reformer of Hinduism.
The theory of no soul also follows from the doctrines of dependent origination. There is no in visible permanent substance besides the flow of consciousness. As the body is destroyed the five skandhas disappear into five elements (Pancha bhutas) and nothing remains besides the Upadana or Karma. This principle is known as the theory of no-soul in Buddha's philosophy.
Like the view of William James, Buddha also admits the selas the flow of consciousness. In the consciousness the present movement is the result of the past moment and the future the result of present. Thus one moment succeeds another moment and the actions and the memory of the past moments are transferred to next moment. The cause of the present mental state is that past mental state. Buddha has explained the community of the life with the example of the flame of a lamp. There is cause and effect relation between antecedent and subsequent states of life. The life is a systematic and continuous process of different stages. In this process every stage depends on the stage preceding it, and the subsequent stage is the result of the present stage. Hence the life is homogeneous. Like the flame of a lamp it is changing every moment. The flame of a lamp in every moment depends on the conditions prevailing at that time, but in spite of the difference in flames, they appear to be the same due to continuity. Buddha believes in rebirth and the principle of Karma. He however, does not believes in rebirth in the sense that a soul enters in a different body after leaving one body, but rebirth means that another birth follows every birth or another birth is caused due to one birth. Just as a lamp can be lighted by another lamp and yet the lights of both cannot be identified, similarly in spite of cause and effect relations between the two the two births are different and not identical.
As a matter of fact, Buddha has always asked the disciples not to indulge in useless discussions regarding the soul. If the soul is taken as eternal, one gets attached to it and suffers in the efforts to make it happy. According to Buddha, the love with the invisible and unproved soul is as much ludicrous as the love of some invisible and imaginary beautiful women. The attachment towards this soul is like preparing a ladder to mount on a place which has not been seen by anyone.
According to Buddha man is a name for a conglomeration. Just as wheel and other parts of a chariot are together called a chariot. Similarly the body with the external form, mental states and colorless consciousness is together called human being. This conglomeration is the man. Besides this there is no soul. So long as this conglomeration remains, the life of man also remains; death is the name of its destruction.
At another place, Buddha has called the man as the sum total of five Skandhas. Those five skandhas are changing elements and man is more or less a collection of them. As the man dies, this collection is scattered. In the five skandhas the first is the "Roop" which includes the form, complex and size etc. of the human body. Another skandhas is Vedan which includes the feelings like pleasure, pain and aversion etc. The third Skandha is consciousness or Sanjana. It includes different types of conglomerations and knowledge. The fourth skandha is the Samskaras which include the tendencies due to the actions of the post birth. The fifth Skandha is the Vijnan or consciousness.
Advaitic view:-
Shankara's system of Advaita does not need the support of any Scripture or Revelation like the Veda. The Srutis may all disappear, yet will his school stand. For it is based, not upon the varying theological fancies, which are as numerous as the sands of the sea, but upon reason, the common heritage of all mankind, irrespective of colour or creed or clime.
The tenet of Nirguna Brahman is true for Shankara, not because it is taught by the Sruti, but because it is based on anubhava (intuitive experience) though it is also supported by the Sruti ... The Advaitin knows that a legitimate doubt may have here to arise. The Rishis may have truly spoken; but they may have been deluded themselves. How are we certain that what the Rishis cognized is the Reality or Truth? This can be proved according to the Advaita, only by anubhava.[1]
And also:
Again, in the absence of this anubhava, Nirguna Brahman as an object of thought is mere sound without sense. To one who has not seen a penguin, for instance, the word has no meaning ... Of what use, then, is such Sruti to him? Similarly, common sense tells the Advaitin that the meaning of the Sruti and especially where there are conflicting interpretations is made out by means of reasoning based upon the authority of anubhava, which is final.
Thus reason comes into play between Sruti and anubhava, corroborating the data of intuition with those of the revealed texts.
But reason also permits discrimination between the different possible experiences, for, in an a priori astonishing fashion:
Anubhava ... can reveal not two, but twenty thousand conflicting experiences. And the business of the wise is to sift the ultimate truth from out of all these ... The Advaitin rejects nothing. All human experiences are his data. He tests all by reason.
Only Advaita can reply: it is the witness, the Seer. The Buddhists are in error in regarding the finite ego as illusory, and as having nothing more behind it: but they would have been perfectly correct in such outlook had they added the notion of the witness. How is it that Skandas come together and compose the ego? Who sees them come and go? It is the witness, the Atman, and this lack Vedanta supplies in the seer and seen and reason Analysis. When they say that mind comes and goes they are forgetting that there must be another part of the mind as consciousness which notices it and which tells them of this disappearance and appearance. All their misunderstandings arise from the fact that Buddha refused to discuss ultimate questions. When Buddhism degenerates into Nihilism Advitin refutes it (See Mandukya P.281). The truth of a single reality within or underlying the illusory ego is all-important and without it Buddhism becomes fallacious.
Vedanta admits the transitoriness and evanescence of thoughts just like Buddhism, but not of the Mind which observes this transitoriness and knows it.
Buddhists borrowed from Upanishads because they were Indians. The Vedantins did not need to borrow from Buddhism therefore (see P.396 v.99 of Mandukya Up)
Buddha taught the illusoriness of ego, but did not go farther probably because he thought the world could not understand the higher truth. Hence followers go with him to that point of his, and then deny the Vedantic doctrine of one supreme reality when Buddha himself neither denied nor advocated it. Anyway the refutation of his followers is to ask them “What is it that is aware of the ego's illusoriness?" There must be something that tells you that. That something is the Drik, and if you say this Drik itself may be illusory, coming and going, still there must be something non-transient i.e. permanent, to tell you this.
Buddha's teachings that all life is misery belongs to the relative standpoint only. For you cannot form any idea of misery without contrasting it with its opposite, happiness. The two will always go together. Buddha taught the goal of cessation of misery, i.e. peace, but took care not to discuss the ultimate standpoint for then he would have had to go above the heads of the people and tell them that misery itself was only an idea, that peace even was an idea (for it contrasted with peacelessness). That the doctrine he gave out was a limited one, is evident because he inculcated compassion. Why should a Buddhist sage practice pity? There is no reason for it. Advaita is the next step higher than Buddhism because it gives the missing reason, viz. unity, non-difference from others, and because it explains that it used the concept of removing the sufferings of others, of lifting them up to happiness, only as we use one thorn to pick out another, afterwards throw both away. Similarly Advaita discards both concepts of misery and happiness in the ultimate standpoint of non-duality, which is indescribable.
Buddhists say that a thing exists only for a moment, and if that thing has still got some of the substance from which it was produced how then can they deny that its cause is continuing in the effect; hence its existence is more than a moment. Vedanta is concerned with whether it is one and the same thing which has come into being, or has it come out of nothing.
Even the Sunyavada ultimate of the "void" is really a breath, and therefore an imagination and not truth.
Buddha as a constructive worker committed an error in failing to give the masses a religion, something tangible they could grasp, something materialistic, if symbolic that their limited intellect could take hold of, in addition to his ethics and philosophy. Here Sri Ramakrishna was wiser and gave religion; such as Kirtan, puja etc.--to the ignorant masses, as well as Advaita to those like Vivekananda.
Buddha gave as the central feature of his doctrine the great law of Karma in order to reiterate its ethical meaning. He did more good in this to uplift the people than the ritualists.
Tibetan and Chinese Buddhists who say that there are many Buddhas living in spirit bodies and helping our earth from the spiritual world are still in the sphere of religious illusion, not ultimate truth. Their statements are wrong. Every sage realizes that the only way to help mankind is to come down amongst them, for which he must necessarily take on flesh-body. When people are suffering how can he relieve their suffering unless he appears amongst them? When people are suffering how can he feed them from an unseen world whether their struggle be for material bread or for spiritual truth? No! He must be here actually in the flesh. It is impossible to help them in any other way and all talk of Shiva living on Mount Kailas in spiritual body or Buddha in Nirmanakaya, invisible body belongs to the realm of delusion or self-deception.
Conclusion
Looking at all the above religious views one can concludes that :-
One life time is not enough to acquire self-knowledge by studying the scriptures. The scriptures itself declare: - Studying of scriptures is not necessary
The Upanishads clearly indicate:-
This Ataman cannot be attained by the study of the Vedas, or by intelligence, or by much hearing of sacred books. It is attained by him alone whom It chooses. To such a one Ataman reveals Its own form. [Katha Upanishad Ch-II -23-P-20]
This Ataman cannot be attained through study of the Vedas, nor through intelligence, nor through much learning. He who chooses Ataman—by him alone is Ataman attained. It is Ataman that reveals to the seeker Its true nature. [3 –page-70 Mundaka Upanishad (Upanishads by Nikilanada)
Gaudapada says that:- The merciful Veda teaches karma and Upaasana to people of lower and middling intellect, while Jnana is taught to those of higher intellect.
This clearly indicates that religion, which is based on individual conduct, prescribes karma and Upaasana to people of lower and middling intellect, therefore religion is for the lower intellect. And wisdom is for those are capable of inquiring into their own existence.
Brahman is considered the all-pervading consciousness which is the basis of all the animate and inanimate entities and material. (brahmano hi pratisthaham, Bhagavad Gita 14.27)
If Brahman is considered the all-pervading consciousness then, it is necessary to realize, the consciousness as self, which pervades all the three states to realize the fact that there is no second thing exists other the consciousness. Thus, consciousness [Ataman] is ultimate truth [Brahman].
Even in the Buddhism: - Buddhist teaching has itself become a kind of interactive and self-evolving process, much like its idea of pratityasamutpada. However, the end goal is still Nirvana, which is an experience ultimately beyond all concepts and language, even beyond the Buddhist teachings. In the end even the attachment to the Dharma, the Buddhist teaching, must be dropped like all other attachments. The tradition compares the teaching to a raft upon which one crosses a swift river to get to the other side; once one is on the far shore; there is no longer any need to carry the raft. The far shore is Nirvana, and it is also said that when one arrives, one can see quite clearly that there was never any river at all.
They alone in this world are endowed with the highest wisdom who are firm in their conviction of the sameness and birthlessness of Ataman. The ordinary man does not understand their way. [Chapter IV — Alatasanti Prakarana 95-P-188 in Upanishads by Nikilanada]
Therefore, if one is seeking truth he has to know his true self is not physical but is the consciousness, which is in the form of consciousness.
Self-knowledge cannot be attained by study of the Vedas and intellectual understanding or by bookish knowledge. Therefore there is no use of studying the Vedas and other scriptures in order to acquire the non-dual wisdom. That is why Buddha rejected the scriptures, and even Sri, Sankara indicated that, the ultimate truth lies beyond religion, concept of god and scriptures.
Thus it is necessary to follow the formless path dropping all the accumulated baggage and move forward to reach the destination in lesser time and effort.
Scientific inventions say:
Why You Are Not Your Brain, and Other Lessons from the Biology of Consciousness
by :Alva No�. Hill and Wang, 2009
Alva No, a University of California, Berkeley, philosopher and cognitive scientist, argues that after decades of concerted effort on the part of neuroscientists, psychologists and philosophers "only one proposition about how the brain makes us conscious ... has emerged unchallenged: we don't have a clue." The reason we have been unable to explain the neural basis of consciousness, he says, is that it does not take place in the brain. Consciousness is not something that happens inside us but something we achieve it is more like dancing than it is like the digestive process. To understand consciousness the fact that we think and feel and that a world shows up for us we need to look at a larger system of which the brain is only one element. Consciousness requires the joint operation of brain, body and world. "You are not your brain. The brain, rather, is part of what you are."
If the brain [body] is not the self then what is self? Therefore, there is a need to understand and assimilate the knowledge of the self through deeper inquiry, analysis and reasoning in order to unfold the mystery of the ‘I’.
There is no scope for debate and argument in pursuit of truth. Seeker has to verify the facts of any claim, if find them to be true then only accept them. It is not correct to impose idea on others when they are not ready to accept anything other than their accepted truth. There is no need to prove whether Buddha is right or Sri, Sankara is wrong. But seekers only mission is to know, how to realize the nondual truth, which is propounded by the Buddha and Sri,Sankara and Sri, Goudpada? Since present practices are based on conduct and action, and they are based on the false physical self [ego]. What are the fatter and obstacle in realize the nondual truth? How to overcome the obstacle on the path of nondual truth?
Sri Ramana Maharishi is right in saying :-
The intricate maze of philosophy of different schools claims to clarify matters and reveal the Truth, but in fact they create confusion where no confusion need exist. To understand anything there must need be the understanding being. Why worry about his bodies, his ahankar, his buddhi, creation, God, Mahatmas, world – the not-Self – at all? Why not remain yourself and be in peace?
Take Vedanta, for instance: it speaks of the fifteen pranas, the names and functions of which the student is asked to commit to memory. Will it not be sufficient if he is taught that only one prana does the whole work of maintaining life in the body? Again, the antahkarana is said to think, to desire, to will, to reason, etc. Why all these details? Has anyone seen the antahkarana, or all these pranas? Do they really exist? They are all conceptual divisions invented by teachers of philosophy by their excessive analysis. Where do all these concepts end? Why should confusion be created and then explained away? Fortunate is the man who does not lose himself in the labyrinths of philosophy, but goes straight to the Source from which they all rise.
Ramana Maharshi says: this self –inquiry is not the critical study of the scriptures. When the source is reached the ego gets merged into it. The result of self-inquiry is the cure for all the sorrows. It is the highest of all the results. There is nothing greater then it. It only indicates there is no necessity to study the scriptures to acquire self-knowledge. [Page-66-practicle guide to know yourself c/e by A.R.N].
Ramana Maharshi says:
Q by D:- Is not necessary to study the Vedas or at least the Prasthanatraya [the Bhagavad Gita,Dasopanishad and Brahma Sutras, all with commentaries]to ensure firm realization?
Ramana Maharshi:-No. Do you need all that to see yourself? All that is intellectual wealth, useful in explain doubts and difficulties if others rise them or if you yourself encounter them in the course of thinking. But to attain realization, all that is not necessary. You want fresh water to drink, but you do not require all the water of the river Ganges to quench your thirst. [Page 111/112 of Practical guide to know yourself c/e by A.R.N].
Why go round and round, by various tortuous paths
When the Vedas and Upanishad declare that Consciousness or Atman is actually nothing but Brahman, then why go round and round, by various tortuous paths, like the blind led by the blind. One has to realize the fact that, the mind is in form of universe. Trace the source of mind and realize that source is consciousness. The mind rises from consciousness as waking or dream and subsides as deep sleep.
Looking at all these facts it makes one clear that, the Self-knowledge is main goal of the every human being. Indulging in god and guru glorification is meant for the mass that is incapable of grasping the truth. Thus, people who are capable and have urge to know the ultimate truth/Brahman has to realize the truth is beyond religion, god and scriptures. By glorifying the fake gurus and indulging in rituals one will not be able to overcome the duality, which is mere mirage.
Thus, the goal is to realize Atman [consciousness]. If Atman [consciousness] is nothing but Brahman and by realizing Atman [consciousness] as Brahman [ultimate truth] is truth realization or Self-Realization , then there is no need to follow religion, study scriptures or glorifying gods or gurus and follow the path of doubts and confusion by losing oneself in the labyrinths of philosophy, when there is an easier path. By mentally tracing the source of the mind from where it rises and subsides one becomes aware of the fallacy of the mind, which rises as waking or dream and subsides as deep sleep. The mind raises form consciousness and subsides as consciousness.
Sort by : Oldest | Latest
|
Dear and divine.... a fine and long wisdom post....
.Atom = science = microscopic vision = neutron, proton, electron.
At OM = religion = macroscopic vision = omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent.
vibrations of energy converted into sound ,the first sound of creation ,
OM ALLAH GOD and the name one like .
Buddhism is a microscopic vision in time to understand timelessness .... Advaita is a macroscopic vision to understand time and timelessness together...
a quote from own zero.......People are searching me in telephone directories not knowing to lift the receiver to hear dial tone which is I am.
love all... |
|
To explain further on mimamsa. The origin of individualized ego from the universal ego has to be understood. The various sheaths through which that universal ego had projected itself as individualized ego and the world as we see it.
To again destroy it, we have to exactly follow same track and discriminate what had been projected and destroy it. It is like eating grapes, which is a pleasurable experience...a bliss... but mere eating grapes will not make it readily available to us. For that we have to know how to grow them, reap them and finally relish them. The whole process is what called sruti or scriptures that elaborate various aspects of creation and dissolution. The mind having lost this knowledge is projected into world as ignorant will follow many cycles of rebirth and gain it back to merge with brahman. Ofcourse in that last instantaneous second of merger, one doesn't need any scriptural injuctions or aids for he who reached that stage of rebirth has everything within himself and has to merely look inwards and realise ...or have anubhuti pramana ...or realisational proof. |
|
Very good post.
As Ramana Maharishi puts it - All knowledge is meant only to lead the person to the realisation of the Self. The scriptures or religions are well-known to be for that purpose. What do they all mean? Leave alone what they say of the past or of the future; for it is only speculative. But the present existence is within the experience of all. Realise the pure Being. There is an end to all discourses and disputes. But the intellect of man does not easily take to this course. It is only rarely that a man becomes introverted. The intellect delights in investigating the past and the future but does not look to the present. The purpose of intellect is The purpose is that it should show the way to realise the Self. It must be put to that use. |
|
Realization of the self is not a fruit hanging from tree. that you go and pluck it. the creation itself had been formed by projection of mind through maya. in this cosmic play one has to go through entire process. ofcourse you cannot but live in the present itself, but that doesn't entitle one to ridicule the process of learning. one should go through many births of transformation ....even ramana maharshi went through all that and the tumor which took his life was also a fruit of his prarabdha karma or past actions. one cannot sit still and idle and believe he is liberated. even a deeply introverted mind comes only after much trials and tribulations.
|
|
Very good post comparing Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. Gautama Buddha was a great Vedantist and learnt from the learned Brahmins of that time including meditation. Non duality experience after long time practice is possible in meditation only. In that samadhi stage the whole world / universe vanishes and what remains is consiousness / god / etc etc what ever name you want to give
|
|
Dear Partha Gangulyji,
Pranam I respect your views but as per my conviction:- Bhakti is not the means to Self-Realization. The devotee and the deity both are part of the illusion. Without knowing what is self, realization of self is impossible. The self is not limited to individual but it pervades the whole universe as its formless substance and witness. The individual is false self within the false experience. Thus conduct and actions performed as an individual within the falsehood will not yield fruits. Thus it is necessary to realize the fact that, the self is not the form but the self is formless and reject all theories based on the form in order to realize the ultimate truth. Ish Upanishad declares: - Those people who have neglected the attainment of Self-knowledge and have thus committed suicide 10/11/12 Those people who have neglected the attainment of Self-knowledge and have thus committed suicide, as it were, are doomed to enter those worlds after death. This is a condemnation of people who do not try to attain Self-knowledge. They are, in a real sense, committing suicide, for what can be worse than being a slave to sense enjoyment, completely oblivious of the real purpose of life, which is to be your own master? In order to be your own master you have to realize that you are identical with Ataman, the true Self, that you are Pure Consciousness, ever free, without name and form, and unconditioned. You are not subject to any modification, without beginning and end, beyond thought and speech. You are Existence Absolute, Knowledge Absolute, Bliss Absolute. When you know this you are free. You no longer swing between birth and death. If you do not try to know who you really are, you are indeed committing suicide. You are inviting the ignominy of a slave's life in this world and a similarly unfortunate fate after death. The Self, is one without a second, complete in itself. It never moves. It is always still, always the same, yet it moves faster than the mind. It is the power that moves everything, and it makes the whole world go the way it does. It gives those who mechanically perform sacrifices [avidya] go into darkness that is like being blind. But those who merely worship gods and goddesses [vidya] go into a deeper darkness. [IX] "Blinding darkness' here implies ignorance. And those who worship gods and goddesses go into a deeper darkness because they seek rewards for their worship. As long as there is the sense of "I' and "mine' within us, there can be no Self-knowledge. When you say "me' and "mine' you automatically identify yourself with your body-mind complex. This shows that you are ignorant of your real Self, which is Pure Consciousness and which is also the Self of all. The sign of an ignorant person is in the way he uses the words "I' and "mine'. He says: "I am so and so. I own this much property,' and so on. An ignorant person has many desires in his mind, and because of these desires he is born again and again. He has to have a body; otherwise he cannot satisfy his desires. But the more he tries to satisfy them, the more they grip his mind. This goes on endlessly. But it is given to a human being to think, reason, and discriminate. Thus he soon comes to realize that the path he has been following cannot give him peace of mind. He understands that he has to choose another path the path of renunciation. As long as he does not practice renunciation, he gropes in the dark like a blind man and he suffers. There are two types of such people who grope in the dark. One type worships avidya (ignorance) that is, they mechanically perform the prescribed sacrifices without any thought as to why they are doing them. No wonder they grope in the dark. They are doomed unless someday the truth dawns on them that to save themselves they must seek Self-knowledge. Worse, however, is the situation of the other type those who worship vidya. The word vidya ¸ usually means "knowledge', but here it is used to mean "gods and goddesses'. Some people worship gods and goddesses so that they may someday attain the same status. They may get their desire fulfilled, but this will only delay their liberation. That is why the Upanisad says that they will be in deeper darkness. Scholars say that the path of avidya [performing aganihotra and other sacrifices] and the path of vidya [worshipping gods and goddesses] produce different results. Wise men confirm this. [X] Vidya and avidya both are hindrances to Self-knowledge, but vidya is even worse than avidya. The word vidya is used here in a special sense; here it means worshipping gods and goddesses. By worshipping gods and goddesses you will go after death to the world of gods and goddesses. But will that help you? The time you spend there is wasted, because if you were not there you could have spent that time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is your goal. In the world of gods and goddesses you cannot do that, and thus you go deeper and deeper into darkness. Avidya is karma and therefore a hindrance. You perform avidya - i.e., you perform Agnihotra and other sacrifices. This is a roundabout way of purifying the mind, and it is also groping in the dark. But it may not have as heavy a toll on your time and energy as the other. Even in Mundaka Upanishad:- The rituals and the sacrifices described in the Vedas deal with lower knowledge. The sages ignored these rituals and went in search of higher knowledge. ... Such rituals are unsafe rafts for crossing The sea of samsara, of birth and death. Doomed to shipwreck are those who try to cross The sea of samsara on these poor rafts. Ignorant of their own ignorance, yet wise In their own esteem, these deluded men Proud of their vain learning go round and round Like the blind led by the blind. Even Vedas:- The illusion can be understood only when the mind learns to view and judge the worldview, on the true base. The orthodox nonduality has no truth. Vedic religion was modified and reintroduced with new add-ons by Sri, Sankara a great Advith Master to uplift the Vedic culture and Santana Dharma [Hinduism], which were in ruins in the clutches of Buddhism. 18 puranas are introduced in the name of Veda Vyasa. It indicates the fact that somewhere someone has added the puranas in the name of Veda Vyasa the grand master of Vedas. It is impossible to accept and believe that Veda Vyasa authored and introduced puranas which has all conceptual gods because:- In Vedas the God has been described as:- Sakshi (Witness) Chetan (conscious) Nirguna (Without form and properties). Nitya (eternal) Shuddha (pure) Buddha (omniscient) Mukta (unattached). It indicates clearly all the gods with form and attributes are mere imagination based on the false self. And also in Yajurved says: Translation 1. They enter darkness, those who worship natural things (for example air, water, sun, moon, animals, fire, stone, etc). They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol etc.) [Yajurved 40:9] Translation 2. "Deep into shade of blinding gloom fall asambhuti's worshippers. They sink to darkness deeper yet who on sambhuti are intent." [Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Giffith pg 538] Translation 3. "They are enveloped in darkness, in other words, are steeped in ignorance and sunk in the greatest depths of misery who worship the uncreated, eternal prakrti -- the material cause of the world -- in place of the All-pervading God, But those who worship visible things born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like) in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow, and suffer terribly for a long time." [Yajur Veda 40:9.] So, Yajur Veda indicates that:- They sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol etc [Yajurved 40:9] Those who worship visible things born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like) in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow, and suffer terribly for a long time." [Yajur Veda 40:9.] When the religion of the Veda knows no idols then why so many gods and goddesses with different form and name are being propagated as Vedic gods. Why these conceptual gods are introduced when Vedic concept of god is free from form and attributes. Who introduced concept of god with attributes and attributeless gods, when Yajur Veda says: - those who worship visible things, born of the prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like), in place of God are enveloped in still greater darkness. Therefore, all these add-ons proves that the form and attribute based concepts are introduced by some sages of the past with new belief system and code of conducts in the name of Vedas. Sruti is made the final or exclusive authority in apara Vidya and that for supporting the tenet of the CAUSAL relation or creatorship of Brahman, Nirguna Brahman = the "Absolute beyond qualities," which can be defined only in a negative way. For the Shankarian school = the Ultimate Reality, higher than the Lord. i.e. of Saguna or apara Brahman ... The support of Scriptural Revelation is, therefore, absolutely necessary for this hypothesis of cosmology, this Saguna or apara (= inferior) Brahman, but not for the absolute truth of Nirguna Brahman. The Sruti itself says: "This Atma is NOT to be attained by a study of the Vedas. [Katha Upanishad I, 2, 23.] Therefore, all the add-ons and attribute based knowledge, which are inferior, have to be bifurcated and excluded to know the ultimate truth. The seeker of truth has to drop all the inferior knowledge based on the attributes and go beyond Vedas to understand assimilate and realize the ultimate truth or Brahman. The ultimate truth or Brahman itself is god. One has to go beyond Vedas means go beyond religion. Go beyond religion means, go beyond concept of god. Thus, going beyond Veda, religion and conceptual god means going beyond illusion. That is end of Vedas [ Veda –antha] When one goes into the annals of the history it looks like the true Advith expounded by Sri Sankara and his param guru, Goudpada was lost or mutilated by the orthodox, because the preaching and practice does not match. It is necessary for the seeker to do his homework, and verify the validity of all the claims, rather than blindly believe, what others expound as knowledge, till; the un-contradicted truth is obtained. The seeker must have the courage of Buddha to accept the truth and reject the untruth. Since Buddha rejected religion, idea of god and scriptures, therefore, it is evident that, he has gone through every aspect and verified and found them to be inadequate and useless for the pursuit of truth. Even Buddhism is mixed up with regional culture and traditions of the local religion, wherever it existed. Thus to get the full essence from Buddhism is very difficult. The scriptures are for ignorant masses, who wholly accept the material world as it presents itself. Wisdom is for those who have begun to realize that things are not what they seem. Each sect concocts a God to suit its own purposes. Such concocted Gods have no value in pursuit of truth. Man himself suggests that there must be a God. It is an auto-suggestion. Prayers and sacrifices belong to a premature stage of development. However when no answers come to prayers, struggle for existence presses man, and doubt arises again. Faith in religion weakens as man pays more attention to facts of life and this world. Reason is the common ground for whole humanity in modern age, whereas the appeal to scriptural relations reaches only the sects. Those who argue that truth is only in their religion are vain logicians, depending on mere ideas, speculations and imaginations. Truth is bitter pill. It becomes very difficult for the seeker to accept it at first; because of his inherited conditioning. Gradually he will be able to grasp it as he moves on. The illusion is present only in ignorance where, 'I' and you are separate entity. In truth, there is neither 'I' nor you, nor, the illusion. Therefore there is no teaching, no teacher, and no student in reality. Truth pursuit is a very personal journey. Seeker has to verify minutely on his own, “what is truth”, and “what is not truth”, before accepting anything as truth. The illusion exists as reality, only on base of the ego, which is he false self within the false experience. For Gnani, who is aware of the fact that the self is not physical but self is consciousness, there is no illusion, even though; he is in the midst of illusion, because he is fully aware of the fact that, all the three states are consciousness. Therefore he is conscious of consciousness in the midst of illusion. The language of the duality, invented by the within the duality, for use in the dualistic world, when used to describe non-duality, produces these apparent contradictions, because there no apparatus in non-duality, because noting exist other than the soul, which is in the form of consciousness. Non duality is the state of oneness of existence and there is no scope in its philosophy for anything like non-existence. Gaudapada’s rational exposition of Advaita: - that whatever is seen, whether external or internal, whether by the ordinary persons or yogis, is unreal. The essence of Mandukya's is: Do not be satisfied with rituals, yoga etc. which are good in their own way, but inquire. Inquire in to the nature of the mind. ? Brahman and Atman are things one can never see. So seeker should not inquire into them. He has to inquire into the world around him, which he can see. Analysis tells him it is passing away every second. Everything is dying repeatedly. Where is it going? Thus he follows up his investigation into what he can lay hands on. How can he inquire into Atman which he cannot see? So first he must deal with the known and seen, this inquiry leads up to the unknown in the end. Mediocre minds waste their time on arguing about unimportant matters. Accumulation of scriptural knowledge is dangerous in pursuit of truth. Seeker has to establish in the truth of Non-duality by sheer reasoning alone. Seeker has to begin by defining "What is real?" "What is unreal?" etc, because that is the right way to discuss, understand and assimilate self-knowledge. Thus seeker has to remove all the hindrance in order to acquire Self-knowledge. With respect and regards Santthosh |
|
Dear Santtoshkumarji,
I have read your detailed post and am able to comprehend your knowledge on the teachings of the Upanishad and Vedanta. If you would kindly read my post, it starts with I GUESS and do not exactly reflect my conviction as to the attainment of self-realisation thro' worship or routine yoga, though I also believe that true Bhakti does not imply worship of any deity. I feel it is actually total surrender of I, which is an illusion, to the supreme Brahma or Atma which resides everywhere. This is also what Advaitism is all about. I agree that true and sustained meditation is the way to attain self-realisation and enjoy pure consciousness. Is there, therefore, any conflict between Bhakti and true knowledge or Gyan ? I would await your considered views on the subject. Respecfully yours, Partha |
|
Dear Sankara Bagvatpada
Thank you for your response. I respect your view but as per my conviction :- If one is fully aware of the self is not form but self is formless then, all the three states will naturally become unreal. If one makes no discriminations, the thousands things are as they are, of single stuff. To understand the mystery of this single stuff is to be released from all entanglements. When all things are seen equally the timeless Self-stuff is reached. No comparisons or analogies are possible in this causeless, relation less state, which is mirageless existence. The observer [FW] and the observed [three states] are one in essence. Until we are able to view and judge the on standpoint of the observer we will not become aware the observer [FW] and observed [three states] are one in essence. The essence is consciousness. Thus the consciousness is ultimate truth or Brahman. If the Advita is bifurcated from all the religious add-on than it becomes scientific and it becomes very easy to understand and assimilate. The scientific –inventions about consciousness are nearer to truth but they are not truth in themselves. Buddha, Sri,Sankara and Sri, Goudpada have declared non-dual truth centuries back but one has to reach the destination with scientific[rational] investigation not through punditry. Until one mentally reaches the conclusion, the conviction will not arise. Without the firm conviction the wisdom will not dawn. Therefore, there is a need to know consciousness is real all else is myth, which Sri, Sankara declared as the world is myth Brahman alone is real. Sri, Shankara says Atman is Brahman and everything is Brahman is scientific declaration not religious or yogic. Sri,Sankara and Goudpada are more scientific than anyone else in the world. Since, the real Advitic essence is hidden it cannot be got without the inner [mental] journey. Gaudapada says that:- The merciful Veda teaches karma and Upaasana to people of lower and middling intellect, while Jnana is taught to those of higher intellect. Gnana here is knowledge un-contradictable truth or scientific truth. Thus their scientific truth of the whole not part is declared by by Sri,Sankara 1400 years back and thought only to those of higher intellect. Thus karma and upasana[religion and yoga] ,which is meant for the mass has to be bifurcated from Advita to reach the ultimate end. Wisdom is for those are capable of inquiring into their own existence to know and realize the ultimate truth, which is Brahman. When one goes into the annals of the history it looks like the true Advith expounded by Sri Sankara and his param guru, Goudpada was lost or mutilated by the orthodox cult, because their preaching is based on nonduality and practices are based on duality. Sri, Sankara says in Brahma Sutras: that Brahman is the cause of the world, whereas in Mandukya he denies it. This is because he says that at the lower stage of understanding, the former teaching must be given, for people will get frightened as they cannot understand how the world can be without a cause, but to those in a higher stage, the truth of non-causality can be revealed. Sri, Sankara himself has warned us not to use ambiguous words, and to practice semantic analysis in his book "Definition of one's own Self. [" Page 199, v.24 of "Sankara's Selected Works] Brahman is considered the all-pervading consciousness, which is the basis of all the animate and inanimate entities and material. (brahmano hi pratisthaham, Bhagavad Gita 14.27) Sri, Sankara’s notion of Maya, the cosmic illusion [mind or matter], which must be transcended in order to realize the truth of Brahman, which means ultimate truth. If Brahman is considered the all-pervading consciousness then, it is necessary to realize, the consciousness as self, which pervades all the three states, to realize the fact that, there is no second thing exists other the consciousness. Thus, consciousness [Ataman] is ultimate truth [Brahman]. The Sruti itself says: "This Atma is NOT to be attained by a study of the Vedas. [Katha Upanishad I, 2, 23.] It means the seeker has to investigate on his own and realize the ultimate truth Ultimate Truth can be known if the seeker keeps up the pursuit to the very end, whereas some asserts that Ultimate Truth cannot be known. When the Vedas and Upanishad declare that Consciousness or Atman is actually nothing but Brahman, then why go round and round, by various tortuous paths, like the blind led by the blind. One has to realize the fact that, the mind is in form of universe. Trace the source of mind and realize that source is consciousness. The mind rises from consciousness as waking or dream and subsides as deep sleep. All are searching truth within the illusion not being aware of the fact that, the illusion is created out of single stuff which is consciousness because everyone thinks their body and their experience of the universe are not consciousness and consciousness is limited to their body. Thus searching the truth in illusion with the illusory self, within the illusory experience, has to be illusion. The illusion is created, and sustained, and finally dissolves as consciousness. Consciousness is material of the illusion. Since, there is no second thing other than the consciousness; the consciousness itself is God/ Brahman/Christ. This conviction derives only through from deeper inquiry, analysis and reasoning. Many People want to take as less trouble as possible and gain as much as possible. They disdain the hard labour of thinking needed in pursuit of truth and hope to get truth by doing nothing i.e. merely believing or refraining from thought in yoga. Conversion can occur only in the sphere of religion, never in pursuit of truth. When one knows non dual truth, he becomes free from sphere of imagination. If one’s reason is not sharp enough, then only religion and yoga can satisfy him. The seeker of truth examines both scientific and religious doctrines and discoveries and to evaluate them. with respect and regards Santthosh |
Like
Agree
Disagree
Offensive
|
|
Dear Sivakumar,
Thank you for your response and comment comment. First one must inquire into the nature of the body i.e. matter. Second he must inquire into the nature of the mind, which is in the form of the universe. One has to realize by looking at everything in nature because in everything there is consciousness. One should not avoid them, he should not shut his eyes to Nature; he should not shut himself away from the world which is as much consciousness, as anything else. But those who are ignorant tell one to be non-observant and to withdraw: keen powers of observation are desirable and will help, not hinder one’s pursuit of truth. One has to take experiences as they come to him and he should not run away from the world in ascetic fear or shyness of them. To say they are illusion without first examining them and inquiring into them thoroughly is to delude oneself. This world is common to everyone; therefore one must begin his inquiry with it and not avoid. It is only after he has inquired into the nature of the objective universe, that he should inquire into who is the knower. If, however he inquiries into the knower before the inquiry into the universe, then it is mere mysticism. “What is this universe?” must precede “What is’ I”?” in pursuit of truth. In the witness state the consciousness is aware of both conscious and unconscious. But in waking or dream it is unconscious of its true nature and conscious of the individuality which perceives the world. In deep sleep it is without the individuality and the world. There is no burden and bondage in deep sleep. There is gravity no in deep sleep. It is unconsciously complete un- connectedness to the world. Becoming consciously un-connectedness to the world in the midst of waking experience is the witness state. To achieve this one has to drop all accumulate dross based on the ego as self. This witness states is the state of Brahman/Buddha/Christ which is free from all the burden and bondage of the world or illusion. It is free from the illusory birth, life, death and the world. It is free from the illusory pain and pleasure. It is free from illusory duality and it is eternal reality. |
|
Dear Masireddy
Thank you for your response and comment. I respect your views. As per my conviction:- Self- Knowledge cannot be attained by one who is without strength or earnestness or without the receptiveness and courage to accept the truth and reject the untruth. But if a serious seeker strives by means of inquiry, analysis and reasoning on the true base, he will be able to realize it. By realizing Atman, the one become satisfied with that Knowledge. He establishes in the true self, and he is free from experiencing the duality as reality and he is in non dual tranquility. Such seeker ever devoted to the Self, behold everywhere the Ataman. Having well ascertained the Self, the goal of the Self- knowledge and having perfect understudying, the seekers, never relaxing their efforts, enjoy here supreme Immortality and at the time of the great end attain complete freedom in Ataman. When one realizes the fact that the causes of all the causes is uncaused; and views and judges the worldview on the base of the uncaused, then everything of the experience of duality, becomes one with the highest imperishable Ataman, which is the Self of all. As flowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their names and forms, so one is freed from name and form, attains the Ataman, which is greater than the Great. He who knows the Ataman as self verily becomes Ataman. He overcomes the experience of duality; becomes one with the immortal self/Ataman. with respect and regards Santthosh |
|
Dear Partha Gangulyji,
Thank you for your response. Religion was introduced for the mass mind set, which was unable to grasp higher truth and bereft of the old creed. So for them new religion may be concocted to suit their temperament and capacity. Investigating into the nature of the mind and seeing the whole world in it mentally and grasping and realizing the fact that, all the diversity is created and sustained by the consciousness and finally dissolves as the consciousness. Therefore, there is no second thing other than the consciousness in the experience of diversity. Thus the unity in diversity is possible only through perfect understanding. The physical journey such as yoga and religion, paths and theories are for those who are incapable of performing the mental journey. Individual happiness is sought by religion, whereas Truth seekers seek universal peace, which is the true nature of the true self. Religion is a means whereby one keeps society within a certain order. Those however who refuse to wait for the next world but want comfort here and now, are likely to follow the atheistism. In the past religion was encouraged by the rich and the rulers because of the fear atheism because it may lead the masses to attack them and to rebel against established order of property and cause unrest in society. The poor are promised better life in the next world. Yet religion is needed for the masses, without it they might arise and rebel and become cause of concern: there would be no settled order, no stable peaceful society. The Rulers of the past with the help of the sages had invented the religion and idea of god and injected and imposed it on people because they can give the people an opiate and keep them better under control. Science has been opening the eyes of the people and exposed many myths of religious claim; that is why religion, with its fables instead of fact, its myth of a next-world heaven instead of making a heaven of this practical world, the some religionists are making the world hell in order to reach the paradise by causing the terror attacks in the name of god and religion. West will gradually follow the path of the east, and imitate the east, and vice versa, which will result in the decay of all religion. The eastern religion like all religions cannot produce enduring good results; only the universal truth can do that. Therefore, universal truth is necessary to eradicate the unrest of the world caused in the name of religion and god. The word "I” used in the eastern scriptures is not the individual me as one imagines, but the soul, which is the true self. Since everyone thinks the ‘I’ is self only the body is not self and base their theory and understanding on base of ‘I’ as self. It is very difficult for them to accept the fact that the ‘I’ itself is not the self. If this is understood the truth pursuit becomes easier. The religion is based on the false self. Therefore there is need to understand realize the true self is not physical bit the true self is consciousness [soul]. The ritual worship of individualized gods and goddesses are only for mental children not for the seekers of truth. Religion renders ethical services to mankind. There is no need to criticize religion, yoga etc. They are helpful in some way for those who are not on the pursuit of truth, but one has to understand the fact that, they are not the means to self-realization. "Know the Truth through deeper inquiry, analysis and reasoning, is the only means to acquire non dual wisdom.” The very fact that religions differ proves that each religion is a man made. Many in the West are giving up religion. That is inevitable owing to the decay of religious organizations. But their mistake is to rest satisfied with such negative inner life and not to aspire to something higher than religion after giving it up because their lean towards materialistic life. Religion is a matter which must be left to individual feelings, not to intelligence. Religions keep mass mind set within moral bounds; without their help there would have been no hope for mankind. That is, religions prevent the masses from becoming even more beastly than they already are. The people cannot give up religious ideas in one day. It will have to be a gradual process by making them aware of the universal truth. The credulous and unintelligent masses must have a religion but those who bestow serious seekers of truth need none. As per the religion of Hindus the three "Ashrams" or stages in life were originally intended for three grades of intelligence thus: Religion: low intellects had to do 'karmas' works, ritual actions, chanting of mantras and indulging in bajans and prayers etc. Middle intellects: Yoga: taking yellow robes, going to caves, ashrams etc. High intellects: Philosophy: who wanted truth are concerned with no external rites or sanyas but depend solely on intelligent inquiry for their path. In India, in the past the male birth is regarded as superior because a father of the male child can more easily renounce home and become a Sanyasin than a woman who is tied down by the care of her children. Non dual wisdom can be attained by any house holder without disturbing his family life and that this path is easier; there is no need to renounce and take Sanyasa, which however is harder. Only it needs no distractions and more concentration. it is better to have been married status and lead the normal pleasures of life, and thus to have learn to evaluate sex at its proper worth instead of hankering always after sex so that the mind may pass on undisturbed and become more receptive to grasp and realize the non-dual truth. Ashtavakra Gita which says: "For the wise man there is nothing to be renounced." He knows that everything is unreal, hence cannot be given up. Yoga and meditation recommended as a temporary discipline to those who lack self-control. It will act as an antidote, counteract their inherent tendency, but the man who is already sufficiently level-headed and calm needs no such external discipline. In any case yoga/meditation is to be recommended only until the practitioner achieves some degree of self-control after which he may relinquish his old habits. Yoga and meditation are a temporary discipline and for the training of the mind, for the mind to become achieve external peace, remaining unaffected amid troubles. It has no other purpose. The mystic/yogi who objects to adopt inquiry and reasoning into the quest has an attitude of not allowing anything other than his accepted truth. |
|
The title of this blog is very true. Nothing comes in between us and God. An honest prayer for Knowing works
|
You have yourself agreed that enlightenment is not possible in one birth, so it is also possible that individuals, who are at a lower and middle level of intellect have to take refuge of sruti. But how can one know if he is an all intelligent and known person ? ... how can he be sure that his discrimination is thoroughly weaned ? ... here comes an injunction that one need to conform in entirety with sruti and added to that apply his own intuition and anubhava to see the consonance of sruti and anubhava jnana.
In that context, putting forth advaita philosophy or buddhism or any conscious path of self realization as mere nothing is defeating the very purpose itself. Realization requires integrating many things. only then one becomes equal with universe. by reactionary thinking, we are again falling into the same abyss of maya.
Here jagadguru adi shankaracharya might have consciously showed that he is orthodox hindu in establishing vedic traditions which pre-date buddhism, but it should not be seen as his motive to establish or refute any order. It was only his constant reminder that when he adorns the image of a verdant hindu, he is showcasing bhakti marga. when he is demonstrating monastic life, he is showcasing karma marga and when he is establishing advaita thought then he is encompassing jnana marga to complete spiritual cycle.
meriting and demeriting different ideas based on motives is dangerous. Ofcourse refuting and presenting arguments is encouraged as it progresses knowledge aquisition. IT is very symbolically followed in buddhism too