message to my friends

[f. maiello]

namaskaar.

Perhaps it will help if I expound my interpretation
(which amounts to what I consider to be my strategic
philosophy) of advaita vedanta.

To begin with we have to determine what non-duality
is really referring to.  Sankara's triune advaitic
formula holds the key to the answer.  It posits,
finally, that there is no duality between jiva and
brahman.  However, an understanding of what the idea
of jiva itself actually encompasses is vital to our
comprehension of the entirety of the issue (which
includes what it is that we're witnessing in the
world also...we have to make some sense out of the
phenomena surrounding us).  And, in order to make this
intelligible, we have to adopt the drishti-srishti
vada: that the [universal phenomenal archetype] of
God, world, and soul (Isvara, jagat, jiva--
collectively referred to as sohamidam), are an
outgrowth emanating the mind of jiva (viz. that
sohamidam is a product of the jiva's perception;
which is the only way we can justify Sankara's use
of the term 'jiva' in the formula.  Note also that
Bhagavan Ramana makes a similar reference [to the
one I'm making here] in his own recounting of this
formula, which would complicate things if I related
it here; however, suffice to say, it has the same
import of usage/implication).  And this is why in
Sankara's formula, 'jiva' was posited as that which
is non-different from brahman--because 'jiva' is
the central creator of God and world, via the act
of drishti-srishti.  And the crucial and pivotal
stipulation Sankara made was that sohamidam, *as a
separative entity*, is an illusion.  (It's also
interesting to note that Quantum Physics also
makes use of the drishti-srishti vada.)

Therefore, the jiva, along with its world- and God-
conception are considered real manifestations of
brahman *unless* regarded as separate and distinct
from brahman.  This is, to me, the definitive
message of advaita vedanta.  Others may see it
differently.  The point is, whatever works insofar
as the practical release of the ego's delusionary
bandha, is what really matters.  In this regard, the
paths of bhakti and karma yoga can accomplish the
same thing.  Where, in this light (as I indicated to
Vidyasankar), I consider all of this a temporal
strategy, simply because if/when one is finally and
consciously abiding in the Self, the "experience"
therein is likened to a buddhic "white-out," where
all conceptions, theories, and even ideals are meager
and fractional modalities and involvements, with no
more value than pesky insects in the Garden of Bliss.

As Buddha said, "Upon reaching the other shore,
why then would you carry the raft on your back?"


OM shaanthi shaanthi shaanthiH