DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Re-incarnation and its beliefs

**radikal** · 06-20-2007, 05:56 AM

Rohitji, Advaita is not so simple as we might think it is. I don't think it is a joke. If it was, people (the few that do) would not spend a vast period of their lifetime trying to discuss, understand and comprehend it, even theoretically (A practical approach is even more difficult and strenous). And this they have been doing for a few thousand years, but with greater vigour from the time of Sri Adi Sankaracharya.

Advaita theoretically is a transcendent concept, hence it is difficult to put in words, even in Sanskrit, much less in English.
Even some of the greatest exponents in Advaita (The pontiffs of the Sankara mutts) do not talk about it to normal people, because it requires a vast amount of learning, especially in Sanskrit. And clearly a Dvaitic perspective was/is much easier for people to comprehend.

Anyway, from what miniscule theoretical knowledge I have, I am trying to answer your questions for my own sake.

From an Advaitic standpoint, a Creator God doesn't exist separate from Creation. Creation is the Dream of God (The Only Thing There Is - TOTTI ). And hence Creation is not separate from TOTTI, just as our own dreams are not separate from us.

I am using TOTTI instead of GOD here, because TOTTI has a meaning that is exactly how I think of God, and moreover the word GOD has much more different interpretations.

Next, Chitta Shuddi of the mind and NOT the Soul/Self ( which btw is a loose translation of the word Atman) . The Soul/Self is always Eternal and Pure, it undergoes NO contamination of any kind whatsoever. Neither does Advaita nor Jainism talk of a tainted, less than perfect, or a fallen Atman.

The Mind is like a dirty mirror to the Soul, with its fickle nature of associating itself with the sense objects, making the Soul (a part of TOTTI) forget its own true nature, thus causing Creation ( in an imaginary dream ).

The Mind ( including the body) makes the Soul experience itself as a particular and divided part of Creation, which is separate from the rest of Creation.

When the Mind (with all the senses ) turns back on itself, (cleaning the mirror - this is Chitta Shuddi), the association of the self-idea with the external objects, including that of the body fall off, thus revealing the true nature of the Self to ItSelf.

And hence, come the tenets of Advaita Tat-twam-Asi ( That Thou Art ) and Aham Brahmasmi ( I am Brahman ).

I felt that one more of your questions, in my perspective means, how are the different life forms created from TOTTI ?

Different life forms are created from TOTTI because of their states of self-awareness. A being that is completely Self-aware is TOTTI Itself, even when being a part of Creation, it is 'awakened' ( from the Dream ) and 'liberated' ( from the bondages/limitations of a Dream ).

Even so, inherently it doesn't make any real sense, because its just a damn dream. TOTTI always IS. Period. As new forms are created in our dream from our own mind, similarly new forms are created in TOTTI's dream from TOTTI's own mind.

How the free will of the dream-beings of TOTTI, and TOTTI's own will are linked is a different question altogether.

Here is a more Sanskritised intro to Advaita.

http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad_faq.html

Love and Light.

Yes, dear anbu_kathir, when something is dearly fancied, even though it is known to have been plagiarised, twisted and then wishfully disguised, but miserably fails; there is only one psychology that works; and that is, adoption of the process of "dissonance reduction". Not only me but also every sensible reader who has some idea of what Advaita stands for would never find it difficult to notice that undeniable fact.

Anyway, thank you for your try, AK.

Only for those who are genuinely interested in facts

Advaita Vedanta is nothing but Buddhism in disguise

- GauDapAda is the first historically known author in the Advaita VedAnta tradition.

- GauDapAda is traditionally said to have been the guru of Govinda BhagavatpAda, who was the guru of SankarAcArya.

- GauDapAda composed the GgauDapAdIya kArikAs (GK), which constitute an expository text on the mANDUkya upanishad.

1. The philosophy of Sankaracarya (born about 600 AD), is really just Buddhism in disguise, as explained by Padma Purana (mayavada-asac-chastram pracchanam bauddham ucyate).

2. This can be demonstrated by the chronology of key Mayavadi philosophical explanations, which appear first in Buddhist scriptures and later show up in the philosophy of Sankara and his followers.

3. That Mayavada had stolen the salient features of Sunyavada was not unnoticed by the Buddhists themselves.

4. Buddhism had exercised a profound influence on Sankara's mind to the extent that the tradition opposed to Sankara holds that he is a Buddhist in disguise and his mayavada but crypto-Buddhism.

5. It is well known that Sankara is criticised by his opponents as a "Buddhist in disguise" (pracchanna-bauddha) and his philosophy as mayavada [1] which is but crypto-Buddhism.

6. Among the Vedantins, Bhaskara (750-800) is probably one of the earliest critics against Sankara. He called the Mayavadin "one who depends on the doctrine of the Buddhist" (Buddhamatavalambin), and says that this position has been negated by the author of Brahmasutra.[2] Afterwards, Yamuna (918-1038), Ramanuja (1017-1037), Madhva (1197-1276), Vallabha (1473-1531) and other Vedantins severely criticize the Advaita Vedanta, pointing out that it is in essence nothing but a Buddhist doctrine.

7. Then, in the latter part of the sixteenth century, Vijnanabhiksu of the Samkhya school shows in his Samkhyapravacanabhasya that the mayavada of the Vedantins is of the same standpoint as that of the Vijnanavadin's [4] and criticizes the Vedanta school as a whole. In justifying his criticism, he quotes a verse from the Padmapurana which states that the mayavada is an incorrect theory and is Buddhist doctrine.[5]

Sources:

http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/mayavada.htm

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2004/05/02/...0200170400.htm

http://www.nagarjunainstitute.com/bu...v11sankara.htm
.
.
.

06-20-2007, 05:56 AM	#36
radikal Join Date Oct 2005 Age 55 Posts 4,523 Senior Member	Rohitji, Advaita is not so simple as we might think it is. I don't think it is a joke. If it was, people (the few that do) would not spend a vast period of their lifetime trying to discuss, understand and comprehend it, even theoretically (A practical approach is even more difficult and strenous). And this they have been doing for a few thousand years, but with greater vigour from the time of Sri Adi Sankaracharya. Advaita theoretically is a transcendent concept, hence it is difficult to put in words, even in Sanskrit, much less in English. Even some of the greatest exponents in Advaita (The pontiffs of the Sankara mutts) do not talk about it to normal people, because it requires a vast amount of learning, especially in Sanskrit. And clearly a Dvaitic perspective was/is much easier for people to comprehend. Anyway, from what miniscule theoretical knowledge I have, I am trying to answer your questions for my own sake. From an Advaitic standpoint, a Creator God doesn't exist separate from Creation. Creation is the Dream of God (The Only Thing There Is - TOTTI ). And hence Creation is not separate from TOTTI, just as our own dreams are not separate from us. I am using TOTTI instead of GOD here, because TOTTI has a meaning that is exactly how I think of God, and moreover the word GOD has much more different interpretations. Next, Chitta Shuddi of the mind and NOT the Soul/Self ( which btw is a loose translation of the word Atman) . The Soul/Self is always Eternal and Pure, it undergoes NO contamination of any kind whatsoever. Neither does Advaita nor Jainism talk of a tainted, less than perfect, or a fallen Atman. The Mind is like a dirty mirror to the Soul, with its fickle nature of associating itself with the sense objects, making the Soul (a part of TOTTI) forget its own true nature, thus causing Creation ( in an imaginary dream ). The Mind ( including the body) makes the Soul experience itself as a particular and divided part of Creation, which is separate from the rest of Creation. When the Mind (with all the senses ) turns back on itself, (cleaning the mirror - this is Chitta Shuddi), the association of the self-idea with the external objects, including that of the body fall off, thus revealing the true nature of the Self to ItSelf. And hence, come the tenets of Advaita Tat-twam-Asi ( That Thou Art ) and Aham Brahmasmi ( I am Brahman ). I felt that one more of your questions, in my perspective means, how are the different life forms created from TOTTI ? Different life forms are created from TOTTI because of their states of self-awareness. A being that is completely Self-aware is TOTTI Itself, even when being a part of Creation, it is 'awakened' ( from the Dream ) and 'liberated' ( from the bondages/limitations of a Dream ). Even so, inherently it doesn't make any real sense, because its just a damn dream. TOTTI always IS. Period. As new forms are created in our dream from our own mind, similarly new forms are created in TOTTI's dream from TOTTI's own mind. How the free will of the dream-beings of TOTTI, and TOTTI's own will are linked is a different question altogether. Here is a more Sanskritised intro to Advaita. http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad_faq.html Love and Light. Yes, dear anbu_kathir, when something is dearly fancied, even though it is known to have been plagiarised, twisted and then wishfully disguised, but miserably fails; there is only one psychology that works; and that is, adoption of the process of "dissonance reduction". Not only me but also every sensible reader who has some idea of what Advaita stands for would never find it difficult to notice that undeniable fact. Anyway, thank you for your try, AK. Only for those who are genuinely interested in facts Advaita Vedanta is nothing but Buddhism in disguise - GauDapAda is the first historically known author in the Advaita VedAnta tradition. - GauDapAda is traditionally said to have been the guru of Govinda BhagavatpAda, who was the guru of SankarAcArya. - GauDapAda composed the GgauDapAdIya kArikAs (GK), which constitute an expository text on the mANDUkya upanishad. 1. The philosophy of Sankaracarya (born about 600 AD), is really just Buddhism in disguise, as explained by Padma Purana (mayavada-asac-chastram pracchanam bauddham ucyate). 2. This can be demonstrated by the chronology of key Mayavadi philosophical explanations, which appear first in Buddhist scriptures and later show up in the philosophy of Sankara and his followers. 3. That Mayavada had stolen the salient features of Sunyavada was not unnoticed by the Buddhists themselves. 4. Buddhism had exercised a profound influence on Sankara's mind to the extent that the tradition opposed to Sankara holds that he is a Buddhist in disguise and his mayavada but crypto-Buddhism. 5. It is well known that Sankara is criticised by his opponents as a "Buddhist in disguise" (pracchanna-bauddha) and his philosophy as mayavada [1] which is but crypto-Buddhism. 6. Among the Vedantins, Bhaskara (750-800) is probably one of the earliest critics against Sankara. He called the Mayavadin "one who depends on the doctrine of the Buddhist" (Buddhamatavalambin), and says that this position has been negated by the author of Brahmasutra.[2] Afterwards, Yamuna (918-1038), Ramanuja (1017-1037), Madhva (1197-1276), Vallabha (1473-1531) and other Vedantins severely criticize the Advaita Vedanta, pointing out that it is in essence nothing but a Buddhist doctrine. 7. Then, in the latter part of the sixteenth century, Vijnanabhiksu of the Samkhya school shows in his Samkhyapravacanabhasya that the mayavada of the Vedantins is of the same standpoint as that of the Vijnanavadin's [4] and criticizes the Vedanta school as a whole. In justifying his criticism, he quotes a verse from the Padmapurana which states that the mayavada is an incorrect theory and is Buddhist doctrine.[5] Sources: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/mayavada.htm http://www.hindu.com/mag/2004/05/02/...0200170400.htm http://www.nagarjunainstitute.com/bu...v11sankara.htm . . .
	Quote