[Advaita-l] 'world' is not the mental creation of tiny soul !!

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste Sri Sadananda

It is true we have to do Brahma Jijnaasaa not Avidyaa Jijnaasaa. But to do
Brahma Jijnaasaa we have to know what is preventing us from knowing Brahma.
Why? Because Brahma is not a new thing to be known. It is already there but
we do not know it. Why? Because there is Avidyaa stopping us from knowing.

You can see why we have to remove Avidyaa. To know Brahman. If you say I
don't care who has Avidyaa there will be a problem. If I have to know
Brahman I have to remove Avidyaa. But if Avidyaa is not my Avidyaa why and
how I have to try to remove it? I have to say Avidyaa is my Avidyaa but not
some other person. Now I can make sincere attempts to remove Avidyaa.

Vaishnavas do not understand this logic. They simply say Advaitis are
Maayaa Vaadis. To know Brahma the only thing required is to remove Avidyaa.
Then already existing Brahma will be known automatically. No extra effort
required.

To know Aeronautical Engineering we have to study books on it. Because
Aeronautical Engineering is new to us. We have to find out. But Brahma is
not like that. Every body knows Brahma to some extent by "I" idea. But he
does not know Brahma fully as He is. Brahma is like cloud covering the Sun.
If you remove the Cloud Automatically Sun will be seen by us. No extra
effort required.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:00 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 3/25/14, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>  You have mentioned " with knowledge " . Agreed. But during
>  this period when
>  knowledge is not yet aquired, in order to aquire the same
>  ,  is it not
>  necessary to   deliberate on avidya, its
>  nature, origin, locus. its
>  undesirable effects ,  etc. Absolutely agreed, since we
>  are mired in avidya
>  itself, it is not possible to understand it fully. I am not
>  saying it is
>  possible. But unless there is a desire to get out of it, it
>  is clearly not
>  possible to undertake any sadhnas for transcending it. It is
>  only for this
>  that vichara on avidya is essential. I do feel this is not
>  overemphasizing
>  the issue. In fact I think in our anxiety to move forward
>  quickly to the
>  final Goal, we are perhaps underemphasizing the preliminary
>  steps so
>  essential for undertaking the further steps.
>
>  Chandramouliji - PraNAms
>
> In principle, one can keep inquiring about ignornace. I think Shree
> Vidyasankar had analyzed beautifully the problem in the inquiry of
> ignorance. The locus of ignorance has been one of the major topics of
> Bhagavan Ramanuja's 7-fold criticism of avidyaa of advaita doctrine, in his
> Shree Bhashya. The criticism includes  anyonya aasraya dosha and the
> anirvachaniiyatvam aspects, to state two of the seven.
>
> Personally, a simple teaching should do to  show the fundamental human
> problem. Everybody is looking for unlimited happiness in the limited sense
> objects without realizing that happiness that one is longing for comes from
> one's own self ,and there is no happiness outside. Hence, the teaching in
> Maitreyi brahmana - aatmanatsu kaamaaya sarvam priyam bhavati. Frankly to
> know this fact I do not need any bhaashyaas too. If I am already happy,
> then why am I looking for happiness? Obviously I do not know that I am full
> all by myself. The whole teaching is now centered on knowing how can I be
> full and still feel limited.
>
> Please tell me, do I need to know muula avidya , creation, etc to know
> that happiness that I am seeking comes from own myself and I do not need to
> know anything else other than remove my misconceptions that I am taking
> what I am not and suffering as a consequence of that misconceptions. Even
> after knowing that I am full by myself and happiness comes from my own
> self, I am still looking for happiness outside, knowing very well it is not
> really there.
> Essentially that misconception that happiness is out there is deep rooted.
> Krishna defines the sthitaprajna - not in terms of muula avidya etc- He
> provides a direct statement - prajahaati yadaa kaaman sarvan paarth mano
> gataan, aatmanyevaatmanaa tuShTaH. Once I recognize that I am full by
> myself all other teachings becomes meaning full and that the whole creation
> is my own (aatma's) projection and I am the very substantive of the whole
> universe - or aham brahmaasmi. End of the story. The story ends with the
> conviction gets deep rooted by aatma-anaatma vichaara.
>
> Is creation by the tiny jiiva or that of Iswara? This question becomes
> irrelevant after realization since we have moved to aatma-anaatma. Before
> realization, when I am ignorant, the misconceptions include the reality of
> whole nine yards- anekajiiva-Iswara-and jagat. Eka jiivatvam and aneka
> jiivatvam are two sides of the same coin as long as there is a notion of
> jiivatvam. Who has this notion, obviously by the one who is looking for
> happiness out there - like the 10th man story.
>
> From my point the rest of the discussion can go on, but I would think it
> will never be decisive other than saying this aacharya said this or that,
> while the fact remains I am still looking for happiness out there which is
> not there, irrespective of any acharyas statements.
>
>
> Just 2 more c.
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh