[HedgeYourBets]

Badri,

Do you mean to say, BOTH re-incarnation and re-birth being the same, prior happens when, THE SOUL IS REALISED and happen to take another form in this world, WITH THE KNOWLEDGE or realisation?

[PhillipHer]

Wow! nice twist!

No, that is not what I meant at all...

[9mm_fan]

ma'am,
AS far as i know, atmas within animal bodies are re-born as animals, this is like an infinte loop?

The major probelm with this soul theroy is that,

*1 What was the human population 2000 years ago? => Meaning that many # human souls were there!

Anyway, write down a #

*2 Now, what is the human population today?

I mean, how many human souls are there today ?

Write down a #

* 3 Do a subtraction!!! Note down the difference in #.

Here comes the question!

Where are these new souls coming from

Are the human souls multiplying

And HOW would you account for the millions of new souls

* The only way you can do is, some souls are new and they are in their first life. Right ?

[radikal]

contd....

Well to answer your first few questions according to what I have read and felt, ( about population, multiplication of souls), thamiz, several arguments can be made depending upon the basic views about the soul.

Assuming the soul according to Dvaita principles..

First, you think earth is the only planet where life exists? And humans are the only beings with a soul ?

Yes individual souls do multiply. Ever heard of soul-mates? or God taking incarnations, what do you think those are..? I would certainly think the incarnations are like dividing the soul of a God, which merge back with the God on the end of the incarnation.
---------------------------------------------------------
If we consider the basis of a soul according to Advaita (Not-two, Non-duality) there is only one Soul. The Soul is All That Is, and there is nothing else.

As an analogy, we may think of air. Theres air everywhere over and near the earth's surface, Air is all that is. However, once you have a building, you can define Air inside the building.

But it still is the same Air, only that a part of it occupies the building, another part of it surrounds it. The difference is merely a matter of perception.

You can go on creating smaller rooms in that building, and air will 'divide' itself to occupy those rooms.

So, Air is all that is, yet I can somehow uniquely feel that the air inside my kitchen is somewhat hotter than the air in my living room, thus differentiating it by its assumed characteristics.

So this is what happens with the Soul too. The Soul is All That Is, and there is nothing else. But it can collect itself in clumps of varying frequencies forming dead matter, plants, animals, humans and other beings in the spiritual hierarchy.

The higher the frequency of vibration, the higher is the energy, the higher is the spiritual self awareness of the form that the One Soul assumes.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Answering your final question about the souls living a first lifetime, -- yes souls sometimes are in their first lifetimes, but no they aren't in their first lifetime exactly.

The Hindu concept of time is cyclic, so time is not a straight line. Creation and the Creator both are eternal (transcending time), while Creation seems everlasting ( for a loooooong period of time).

And hence no one is exactly leading the first lifetime or last lifetime. It is an eternal cycle that appears everlasting.

Love and Light.

[9mm_fan]

contd....

Well to answer your first few questions according to what I have read and felt, ( about population, multiplication of souls), thamiz, several arguments can be made depending upon the basic views about the soul.

Answering your final question about the souls living a first lifetime, -- yes souls sometimes are in their first lifetimes, but no they aren't in their first lifetime exactly.

And hence no one is exactly leading the first lifetime or last lifetime.

Love and Light.

So, there is no FIRST lifetime for soul at all?

What about first of all FIRSTS?

And there is no LAST!!!

Nice writeup which defends every darn thing but ANSWERS NOTHING!!!

[Peptobismol]

So, there is no FIRST lifetime for soul at all? What about first of all FIRSTS? And there is no LAST!!! Yeah, that is the way these things are. It is difficult to bring concepts of transcendence to words.

Btw, this question I have already answered. I pasted it again for your convenience.

The Hindu concept of time is cyclic, so time is not a straight line. Creation and the Creator both are eternal (transcending time), while Creation seems everlasting ( for a loooooong period of time).

If all of us are taking an infinite number of trips (with small breaks in between ) along a circle, who is first? who is last?

So there is no first of the first.. neither there is a last of the last.

Of course, there seems to be first births, when we join the path of a circle after a break. Similarly before taking a break there is a 'last' birth, but this is not the final one either.

Nice writeup which defends every darn thing but ANSWERS NOTHING!!! Oh, if you would see, I have answered your questions in some manner. May be you mean the answers don't make sense to you. Well, at least I gave you some laughs.

Love and Light.

[MannoFr]

I hate to repeat this question again and again, but kathir... are you talking about science or hypothesis or beleif here? Depending upon the category you choose to be in, you need to provide sufficient corroboration

[tgs]

I hate to repeat this question again and again, but kathir... are you talking about science or hypothesis or beleif here? Depending upon the category you choose to be in, you need to provide sufficient corroboration

Its certainly not today's science.

There is no proof of the claims I make that can be said in words. Anyone can scoff at them and say they are bullshit.

Spirituality is not a thing of the intellect or the mind. It is meant to be a harmonious relationship between the body the mind and the soul. All of them have to come together in unison.

To even get a glimpse of the soul, most of us need to undertake certain regular practices atleast for an year. That is a basic starter. You don't have to give much, around 4 - 5 hrs a week is enough.

It does not matter if you don't believe in anything I have said. Try the practices sincerely if you are curious, to the normal regular person of today there is no other way to prove what I have said.

Love and Light.

[LottiFurmann]

Mounting evidences of logically explosive contradictions among the believers.

Assuming the soul according to Dvaita principles..

First, you think earth is the only planet where life exists? And humans are the only beings with a soul ?

Yes individual souls do multiply. Ever heard of soul-mates? or God taking incarnations, what do you think those are..? I would certainly think the incarnations are like dividing the soul of a God, which merge back with the God on the end of the incarnation.
---------------------------------------------------------
If we consider the basis of a soul according to Advaita (Not-two, Non-duality) there is only one Soul. The Soul is All That Is, and there is nothing else.

As an analogy, we may think of air. Theres air everywhere over and near the earth's surface, Air is all that is. However, once you have a building, you can define Air inside the building.

But it still is the same Air, only that a part of it occupies the building, another part of it surrounds it. The difference is merely a matter of perception.

You can go on creating smaller rooms in that building, and air will 'divide' itself to occupy those rooms.

So, Air is all that is, yet I can somehow uniquely feel that the air inside my kitchen is somewhat hotter than the air in my living room, thus differentiating it by its assumed characteristics.

So this is what happens with the Soul too. The Soul is All That Is, and there is nothing else. But it can collect itself in clumps of varying frequencies forming dead matter, plants, animals, humans and other beings in the spiritual hierarchy.

The higher the frequency of vibration, the higher is the energy, the higher is the spiritual self awareness of the form that the One Soul assumes.

In the thread In search of 'TRUTH'

All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago.

- Stephen Hawking

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/bot.html

The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever.

- Stephen Hawking

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/bot.html

[LottiFurmann]

Mounting evidences of logically explosive contradictions among the believers.

In the thread In search of 'TRUTH'

Originally Posted by SRS All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago.

- Stephen Hawking

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/bot.html

The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever.

- Stephen Hawking

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/bot.html

And what does this have to do with what you have quoted of me, Rohit?

Anyway, the Hindu concept of Creation also comes with an Universe with a beginning and end.

And it is a creation theory that comes with numbers as big as those that modern science suggests.

Love and Light.

[Big A]

Once again, user "Rohit" is showing is deplorable lack of scientific knowledge. Of course the Universe did not always exist. What has always existed is energy. The beginning of the universe simply corresponds to a transformation of this energy from one form to another. Nevertheless, the present or future state of the Universe is not sufficient to describe the origin of this energy, in purely scientific terms. , leaving open the possibility of a Creator God. By the way this energy, is called the "singular energy" in the Big Bang theory, and "shakti" in Hinduism.

[Ifroham4]

And what does this have to do with what you have quoted of me, Rohit?

Anyway, the Hindu concept of Creation also comes with an Universe with a beginning and end.

Thank you for your expected reply, dear anbu_kathir.

As you have responded, if both the premises of an Advaitic Soul and also of a Creator God are held to together as true, then the implications are extremely serious as derived below.

Hopefully, this will also provide the answer(s) to your question(s).

The implications of holding the combined belief in an Advaitic Soul as well as in a Creator God are:

1. Neither an Advaitic Soul nor a Creator God exists; which directly implies that the Adviata doctrine is a false doctrine.

2. A Creator God has created an Advaitic Soul. This would be absurd from the Advaita standpoint, but unfortunately that is what the belief implies.

3. A Creator God created the universe and then created individual souls, the union of which could be believed as constituting an Advaitic Soul, which again would be absurd from the Advaita standpoint, but that is also what the belief implies.

The above two situations (2 & 3) might falsely seem reconcilable with the other dualistic beliefs of Hinduism, but it is going to be an insurmountable task to reconcile with the Judo-Christian and Islamic theory of Creation.

4. There is neither an Advaitic Soul nor a Creator God, but the universe and individual souls coexist.

Now, in Jainism, there is neither a Creator God nor an Advaitic Soul, but it clearly asserts that souls get contaminated when they come into contact with the material world and only by purification of the soul one can attain liberation from the cycle of births and rebirths - reincarnations.

Ironically, similar approach is echoed not only in your posts, but also in the posts of all those who talk about Advaita.

That is why most Spiritual Masters don't stress on a direct reading of the vedanta or any such treatise without first purifying the mind.

Chitta shuddi (a pure mind) is of prime importance.

Chitta shuddhi is all that is to be strived for.

If I may use your own analogy, if there was only pure air and nothing else, it could not contaminate itself. There must be some other external agents like dust particles etc. which are not air itself but entirely different from air that contaminate the air.

Similarly, if there was only one pure Soul and nothing else, there can be nothing else that could contaminate the Soul.

The need for purification of the Advaitic Soul can only arise when there are external contaminating agents or factors that are absolutely beyond the control of the Advaitic Soul and succeed in contaminating the Advaitic Soul.

If there was only pure air and nothing else, it could not partition itself. That is why you used building-walls as partitioning agents, but the walls are not air; they are entirely different from air.

Similarly, if there was only one Soul, it could not partition itself into individual souls and in any spiritual hierarchy unless there were external agents or factors that are not the Soul itself but entirely different from it, which are beyond the control of the Soul and those external agents or factors succeed in dividing the Advaitic Soul into individual souls and arrange them in a spiritual hierarchy, exactly as you stated.

Thus, no matter how one approaches, Advaita doctrine miserably fails on every account and invariably ends-up resembling Janism when examined under the theory of soul(s), reincarnations and the approach to liberation.

I hope you and other interested readers would not fail to grasp what is explained above.

Thank you!

[PhillipHer]

It is not for me to disprove the existence of a (Creator) God; it is for the belivers of Advaita, Vishistha Advaita, Dvaita and pantheistic beliefs who should bother to disprove; or else, enjoy the Creation of an Intelligent Designer (ID).

But don’t expect to find any clues in Jainism or..............

[9mm_fan]

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.

[brraverishhh]

And last but not least, analogies remain analogies. A concept may require a number of analogies to explain all its inherent ideas independently.

And a number of concepts ( Advaita, Dvaita, Vishistaadvaita ) have been used to explain the Transcendent, No-Concept state.

All these analogies, and concepts cannot deliver Real knowledge by themselves, they might act only so much as good or bad pointers to Real Knowledge.

You know ( if you have seen 'The Matrix'), as Morpheus says, ' I can only show you the door; you have to open it '.

Which is why, by the way, the Lord Dakshinamoorthi in Hindu mythology, ( God of Self-Knowledge ) , replies with simply the Chinmudra alone and no concepts of thought word or action at all, when requested to explain Absolute Truth.

Love and Light.

[radikal]

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
.
.
.

[9mm_fan]

>>>Anyway, thank you for your try, AK.

I wasn't trying to do anything, Rohitji.

I do not advocate any philosophy publicly. I don't really care if Advaita is Buddhism or any Xism in disguise.

I am trying to find what works for me. That is all. Because I felt some misconceptions about Advaitic philosophy from your previous post ( as regards Creation, nature and purpose of Chitta Shuddi , and the differences between the objects of Creation ), I have merely pointed them as Advaita tells them to be.

I could be wrong, I could be right. It does not matter. What matters is finding what works for us personally.

I haven't seen either a true Advaita follower or a true Buddhist exploit people in any manner. All they do is empower them. All they want is to make them see the world as it really is. Of course, they suggest their way because they are passionate about it. They have been through it and naturally they are excited about it.

But basically, all they advise for this is the purification of the mind ( by different rituals, that doesn't matter, inherently everything is meditation in some form ).

Purification of the mind is recommended by all religions (in one way or another), and this alone delivers a personal experience of the Atman/God or whatever one might call it ( or not call it).

As someone said, everyone has one's own Bible, as one's life lived.

Love and Light.

[brraverishhh]

I wasn't trying to do anything, Rohitji.

I do not advocate any philosophy publicly. I don't really care if Advaita is Buddhism or any Xism in disguise.

I am trying to find what works for me. That is all.

Thank you, dear anbu_kathir for being frank.

Of course, I do understand your position, duly taken under the situation you have found yourself in. Though, there is nothing wrong in being honest.

Good luck!

[softy54534]

Neither does Advaita nor Jainism talk of a tainted, less than perfect, or a fallen Atman.

This is absolutely false claim. In Jainism, purification of the Soul/Atman is absolutely necessary.

In other words, it is the nature of the Spirit to get disentangled from matter. For this requisite purification of the soul is very necessary. Then the soul becomes a boadhisattva or Tirthankara. When a man becomes a boddhisattva, there is no mere spiritual degeneration to him. He does not commit evil or sin, on the contrary, he is taken exclusively in the well-being of others, acquires wisdom, treads upon right path and appreciates merit. Haribhadra compares the Jaina conception of Tirthankaras with the Bodhisattvas.

The gradual purification of its love of truth takes place corresponding to the purification of soul. So long the soul has not cut the knot and attained purification, our attitude is bound to be wrong, and perverse called as avidya, mithyatva or darsana-moha. Without purification of the soul, we can have only commonplace attitude of the spiritually advanced soul (yoga-drsti).

www.jainworld.com

[Lillie_Steins]

I am trying to find what works for me. That is all.

I could be wrong, I could be right. It does not matter. What matters is finding what works for us personally.

I haven't seen either a true Advaita follower or a true Buddhist exploit people in any manner. All they do is empower them. All they want is to make them see the world as it really is.

Then why not try the original and authentic and not the one that is wishfully twisted, which invariably leads one in the opposite and wrong direction?

This will certainly save one from resorting to utterly useless psychological process of "dissonance reduction", as it invariably happens when one miserably fails in portraying the counterfeit as true.

Good luck!