[Advaita-l] diction of mantras

[mwadhwa at uwm.edu]

Pranaam all,

       I think this discussion is being enjoyed by all. It's good.

"""If one follows advaita, one walks the path in the traditional way to whatever
extent possible; even so, Chaarwaaks having a degraded version of advaita or
"anything goes" is meaningless till one attains a so-called advaitic position.
After that, what one does is best known to a jnaani.

            I have only one thing, and that's about acceptence. I would ask
about traditional aspect of advaita. First of all I would like to say something
about what you said here:

In some way, even when you mention the extreme of Chaarwaaks, you don't suggest
that following that path realizes oneself."""


       I would like to ask you, how did you come to advaita. There is no way you
can come to this path untill you have seen the sheer non sense and despiar in
other things. I have to use words and that is the reason something can be taken
up from there and made debatable. Well if you ask me, then the path of
Chaarwaaks is to lead to the same point of realization. Once one goes into the
depths of death, one realizes what life is. When one sees the pangs of
suffering one comes to the realization as to what is the meaning of suffering.
I would ask all on this list, if there is anyone who couldn't have come to this
path after seeing utter despair or pain or sufferings caused by all things and
Chaarwaaks is no different. There is a reason why america is facing the
greatest spiritual crisis and why greatest masters are coming with their
message to US most often than not. They had seen the other end of hedonism or
so called bhoga that they turn towards yoga. Polarities are part of these
contradictions.

       My point was to bring an acceptance. It is true that one cannot expect
germination of seeds where there is rock, but it is also true that where there
was a rock, it may not be a rock other time, it may happen that the rock breaks
and some flowers germinate from that seed. Jesus Christ was nailed on Cross, and
it is also true that those who were involved in that crucification were the ones
who accepted him first as some messiah. If there is gutter somewhere it is also
true that it has the highest possibility of removal and be replaced by a
beautiful garden. I know tomorrow anyone can say that we are advaitins and we
are superior but what is the end result, we have made the same split in the
whole that every organized and structural religious body has done. You might
have seen how much discord and disturbance that has been created by these
religiuos bodies instead of acceptance and somewhere it was not their fault, it
was because people had made an inflexible and rigid system. How could it be
acceptable to some who wanted to break free from its rigid boundaries?

       I can understand your outbursts regarding advaita, and they are perfectly
fine, but what I mean is that that is not the end. We are just making it another
mental conditioning and nothing more. Let it come! this is how flexibility can
be introduced and because advaita as it is has ultimate word, it brings you
there.

      I may seem too rebellious but so were all those who loved to speak truth
as it is without binding it, without distorting it, without giving it any
definition for it is no truth that could be defined.

   """When you say that there is a purpose to *following* advaita and then say
that all that there is is a degraded (or upgraded) form of advaita, and only
after attaining a higher stand point, one knows why, didn't you see some
contradiction?"""

       I will ask this if anyone sees any contradiction in one's internal mental
structure when one came to some awakening and before that, between these two.
You will find that you have undergone 180 degree shift. Something has utterly
changed, some revolution has come inside, and now when you look at the world it
is not the same. There is some contradiction now. Advaita will bring the
greatest contradictions. If one has just become erudite in listening to all
philosophies and didn't see such contradictions then I feel that still more
preparation is needed.

       I will give one practical thing to contemplate upon. Just go and sit in
an aeroplane and the cars and roads will look puny. Go still higher and the
earth looks so puny. What about the one who is the all transcendent yet is
immanent. The greatest contradiction in itself - Thou art the immanent yet
transcendental - Who art thou? The sudden cry of the one who realizes him so
and sees him so. This is what I say, if you can make a way through these
contradictions and paradoxes there will be some understanding. If you reach the
immanent aspect of that supreme truth then so is that contradicting yet the
highest transcendental aspect too. If you reach form so will you have to reach
formless.

          """"So, the goal being (advaitic) realization, there is no scope for
mixing up any other psychology or philosophy into advaita because all is some
form of advaita. All those rest only as argumentative logic for correction,
nothing more. They can't be brought on to the traditional advaita as a
following.""""

          I didn't say I mix up any other psychology or philosphy, I just said
all is advaita. I didn't make any parts, I am seeing it as a whole. As I talked
earlier. Even if you see from higher standpoint you will realize, "The whole
life is yoga." How come this bold utterence. All life is yoga!!! Isn't it
strange, but that's how I see it. I don't say that I am impinging anything on
anyone. I just would say one thing, let the rivers flow and let it carry with
it all the mud and dust, it itself knows how to get purified. We throw garbage
in it and thus it becomes impure. It is us who are throwing garbage that it is
polluted, otherwise river is intelligent enough to keep going to its source and
be purified too. It is true with everyone, we pollute ourselves too and thus
carry the load of so much garbage.

      """All those rest only as argumentative logic for correction, nothing
more. They can't be brought on to the traditional advaita as a following."""

            You talk about following, then I don't see what is that that you
follow. If you follow something then you can never be natural as you are, the
river is going to get polluted, if you don't leave it on its own and be
purified on its own. The purport is only to make us come out of our crookedness
and flow seemlessly. Isn't it logic that is bringing you to this philosophy.
Isn't it mind which makes the greatest contradiction through its own death and
that too itself. The nail of mind is used to take out the nail of mind itself
and then both are thrown away.


I just got your email Amunathanji, I would like to add something regarding atma
jnana:

     """""there seems to be some difference of opinion regarding
the nature of self knowledge (Atma j~nAna). i'm of the
opinion that Atma j~nAna is non-intellectual. it's our
svarUpa lakShaNa. apparently, some revered svAmi-s are
of the opinion that self knowledge is intellectual.
let's get things straight. i request the learned
members to share their understanding of this issue -
is self knowledge intellectual?""""

        We have read so many scriptures and as I talked just now, we haven't
accepted the contradictions yet. Self knowledge is both.
If you want to see anything then just see it in this way- Just try to see the
true nature of that immanent and transcendental truth. Just see how that
supreme person as HE is called in many scriptures HE can be both in deep sleep
and fully conscious at the same time. Just see how such contradictions can
place themselves so beautifully and it is not that they are not truths, they
are true and hence are realizable.

Atma jnana is both, intellectual as well as non-intellectual. Contemplative as
well as direct realization. It is both. Janaka reached there through
contemplative method where Budhdha reached through direct realization.  Why
there should be any confusion regarding the same? Those who say that HE is
intellectual is true and those who say HE is non-intellectual is also true.
Those who say HE is Self, they are true, and those who say HE is non-self, they
are also true. The only difference is to see as to from which standpoint they
are saying. People have made mess of Budhdhistic ideas also as to nobody tries
to understand what non-Self means in Budhdhism and both Hindus and Budhdhists
are fighting uselessly on this word of self and non-self. When the non-self of
budhdhits is ever changing maya or world then the self of hindus is the
non-changing, sempiternal SElF. And both are fighting- you said this and you
should't be an advaitin but Buddha would have been the greatest advaitin. So
were all those who said truth boldly be it Christ or Guru Nanak or Krishna or
anyone..all were advaitins and those who fight over these useless things then
they can never be called advaitins. There can not be seen a single trace of
they following anything...just see..they were oceans..open like
anything...krishna's life is a life of contradictions..yet the most revered and
most beautiful.... When you throw all mental conditionings then it becomes an
ocean. Where is confusion? When there is no-mind, there are no contradictions.
There is no contradiction in this contradiction, I suppose.

       Well enough from my side. I again welcome any comments or any
suggestions. Amunathanji I will be happy to know more about you as I am new
addition to this list, so it will be great to know more about you.


Pranaams,
Manish














Quoting praveen.r.bhat at exgate.tek.com:

** praNAm,
**
** Manish-ji wrote:
** I won't say that there is any other philosophy, everything is degraded or
** upgraded aspect of advaita... for the purport of advaita is "to make a path
** through all these" to a state of transcendence, where its true meaning
** percolates...
**
** ... The philosophy of eat, drink, marry and sleep as propounded by charwaks,
** even that can be considered as much a part of advaita "though degraded to
** greatest extent", for in advaita "if you attain a higher stand point only
** then you can see why it is so"...
**
** ... I hope all of you on this advaita list will try to present your thoughts
** as boldly as you feel like. There is a discussion, and an understanding, and
** no argumentation.
**
**
** praveen:
** With the invitation in the last para above, I've taken the liberty to mark
** some of your own words in quotes since my comments are in the context of
** those.
**
** When you say that there is a purpose to *following* advaita and then say
** that all that there is is a degraded (or upgraded) form of advaita, and only
** after attaining a higher stand point, one knows why, didn't you see some
** contradiction? IMHO, what Amuthan-ji and others tried to point out is quite
** that. If one follows advaita, one walks the path in the traditional way to
** whatever extent possible; even so, Chaarwaaks having a degraded version of
** advaita or "anything goes" is meaningless till one attains a so-called
** advaitic position. After that, what one does is best known to a jnaani. In
** some way, even when you mention the extreme of Chaarwaaks, you don't suggest
** that following that path realizes oneself. So, the goal being (advaitic)
** realization, there is no scope for mixing up any other psychology or
** philosophy into advaita because all is some form of advaita. All those rest
** only as argumentative logic for correction, nothing more. They can't be
** brought on to the traditional advaita as a following.
**
** My apologies if this sounds harsh, but I'm reminded of a friend's Guru
** telling him about why sandhyaavandana is done in a pooja room and not in
** front of a gutter, even though the Lord is everywhere! (I hope this is not
** seen as my naming other philosophies as gutters; I respect them all)
**
** shivam shaantam advaitam,
** --praveen
** _______________________________________________
** Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
**
** To unsubscribe or change your options:
** http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
**
** For assistance, contact:
** listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
**



















Quoting praveen.r.bhat at exgate.tek.com:

** praNAm,
**
** Manish-ji wrote:
** I won't say that there is any other philosophy, everything is degraded or
** upgraded aspect of advaita... for the purport of advaita is "to make a path
** through all these" to a state of transcendence, where its true meaning
** percolates...
**
** ... The philosophy of eat, drink, marry and sleep as propounded by charwaks,
** even that can be considered as much a part of advaita "though degraded to
** greatest extent", for in advaita "if you attain a higher stand point only
** then you can see why it is so"...
**
** ... I hope all of you on this advaita list will try to present your thoughts
** as boldly as you feel like. There is a discussion, and an understanding, and
** no argumentation.
**
**
** praveen:
** With the invitation in the last para above, I've taken the liberty to mark
** some of your own words in quotes since my comments are in the context of
** those.
**
** When you say that there is a purpose to *following* advaita and then say
** that all that there is is a degraded (or upgraded) form of advaita, and only
** after attaining a higher stand point, one knows why, didn't you see some
** contradiction? IMHO, what Amuthan-ji and others tried to point out is quite
** that. If one follows advaita, one walks the path in the traditional way to
** whatever extent possible; even so, Chaarwaaks having a degraded version of
** advaita or "anything goes" is meaningless till one attains a so-called
** advaitic position. After that, what one does is best known to a jnaani. In
** some way, even when you mention the extreme of Chaarwaaks, you don't suggest
** that following that path realizes oneself. So, the goal being (advaitic)
** realization, there is no scope for mixing up any other psychology or
** philosophy into advaita because all is some form of advaita. All those rest
** only as argumentative logic for correction, nothing more. They can't be
** brought on to the traditional advaita as a following.
**
** My apologies if this sounds harsh, but I'm reminded of a friend's Guru
** telling him about why sandhyaavandana is done in a pooja room and not in
** front of a gutter, even though the Lord is everywhere! (I hope this is not
** seen as my naming other philosophies as gutters; I respect them all)
**
** shivam shaantam advaitam,
** --praveen
** _______________________________________________
** Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
**
** To unsubscribe or change your options:
** http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
**
** For assistance, contact:
** listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
**