[Advaita-l] Real vs Unreal
omeganlp at yahoo.co.uk
Mon May 15 15:05:49 CDT 2006
thank you for your excellent summary. Let me add one lilttle point: to say that something is real or unreal warrants specifying to whom it is real or unreal.
I am listening these days to the Vivekachoodamani commentary by Swami Chinmayananda and his metaphor is: when the sleeep is over, the sleeper is gone as well. This seems to mean that we need to be careful when juggling concepts like time and real/unreal... Upon waking up, the sleeper is gone and the concepts are gone as well. In this sense while "on earth" we use dvaita to differentiate (real/unreal, eternal, temporary) but the process of differentiation 'makes sense' only if it is decided to 'per practical' while on earth (work,food, etc.) There is no much sense to all these categories if we refer to Brahman. The concepts of ral and unreal are useful metaphors to navigate senosory world. Let me be simple: If the train cuts your legs off - it is real in a sense that you will need to spend more time on a wheelchair. It is unreal in a sense that it will not cut atman in two.
Best reagards to all the list members.
Krunal Makwana <krunalmakwana at hotmail.com> wrote:
Advaita Vedanta does not deny the existence of the world but accepts it as a relative reality. As long as we 'in this world' we cannot deny the existence of this world, hence 'yes' you are real so am i and so is this computer.
BUT you have to understand that brahman is 'akartA', the non-doer. We are a modification of our own projection. Now if we are a projection of our own self, you have to accept that something has to remain consistent in order for something else to work.
e.g. a projector for instance, for a projector to project something onto a wall two things are needed, 'electricity' (maya) and a stable place to put the project.
Now if we keep moving the projector, it'll be very hard to view the projection but if the projector is still, the projection will also be still. The projector does not 'do anything' itself it is akartA but through electricity (maya) a projection is formed as is projected (samsArA).
Now with all this happening the projection is dependent on the projector, hence the projection is as only real as it is projected after that there is no projection. only the projector remains. The question now remains has the projector went through any change? the answer to that is 'NO' hence it is real.
Some simple rules about Advaita Vedanta:
1. That which is beginningless is real (accept for avidyA)
2. That which has a beginning will also have an end........unreal
3. Wherever modifications take place, the modification is unreal.
4. That which always remains constant and eternal is real.
I Hope i assisted in clarifying some points for you :)
> From: elisabeth-sylvain at sympatico.ca> To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Real vs Unreal> Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 06:36:56 -0400> > (Sthanu) Why is "real" defined as the unchangeable, eternal and absolute. In > what sense is a changeable thing not real.> > *> > i understand your question since i still have exactly the same.> Does the computer used to communicate with you is "real" or "unreal" ?> It it obvious that it works since the message is sent on the list and you > reply.> Some say "unreal" is better understood by "relative", "perishable", > "dreaminess".> In this context, the computer is certainly as "real" as the family, the > house, the human body ...> It can be used to create an effect.> > Sylvan> > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "sthanunathan Ramakrishnan" > To: > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 5:54 AM> Subject: [Advaita-l] Real vs Unreal> > > >I have always wanted to clarfiy my doubts on this.> >> > Why is "real" defined as the
unchangeable, eternal and> > absolute. In what sense is a changeable thing not> > real. Is there not a dichotomy between what we> > generally think of as real and this definition of> > real.> >> > And if this definition is accepted, I guess all> > schools of philosophy would agree that Brahman alone> > is real. Then is the cause of philosophical disputes> > over the definition of what is meant by "real"> >> > regards> > Sthanu> >> > You are right...> > Real is unchangealble, eternal, absolute that is> > Bhraman> > the unreal, temporal,realtive is this "I" ego created> > by mind (manas)> >> > This is what I understood as 'Advaitha'> >> > Sylvain wrote:> > For me "real" and "unreal" are more understandable> > if we mean ...> > "real" = unchangeable, eternal, Absolute> > "unreal = changeable, perishable, relative> >> > In this context, the relative conscience of the vast> > majority of humans> > is> > "unreal", while "relative" is clearer to the mental> > (manas).> >> > Is
this compatible with advaita ?> >> > Sylvan> >> >> >> >> > __________________________________________________> > Do You Yahoo!?> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around> > http://mail.yahoo.com> > _______________________________________________> > 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 > > _______________________________________________> 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
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
Those who worship avidya enter into blinding darkness;
those who revel in vidya enter as it were into greater darkness.
===========< Isavasya Upanishad, Mantra 9 >======================
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list