[Advaita-l] Advaita vEdAnta - Unit (28)

prem d p prem_d_p at yahoo.co.in
Tue May 8 11:09:17 CDT 2007

  dear sri krishnamurty,
  in the space of a few posts the ground you have covered is breath-taking,
  taking in your stride some eternal controversies too. it lead me to do a
  lot of reflection and re-examination of my understanding of phenomena,
  existence,and non-existence.
  i would like your kind clarification of the following points:
  1. could positing abhava-rupa as different and un-supported by either maya or
  brahman lead to compromising the absoluteness of brahman ? is it not wrong
  even to say that there IS 'nothing' besides brahman! ie. saying 'brahman is
  everything' is not same as saying that 'there IS Nothing(ness) other than
  brahman' (?). so even if anything is cast away into a void, that void finally
  resolves into brahman (?).
  2. your exposition of the continuity between the vyashti and samashti is
  brilliant. this is how vedanta is not 'western idealism'. now the link between 
  samashti-taijasa and the vyashti-sukshma-sarira indicates that there is a
  cosmic plane of inter-action between sukshma-sariras, in the cosmic-taijasa-
  loka (?). could this be elaborated ?
  3. as you have explained, though the deep-sleep state is prajnana-ghana, it is
  not the state of realization of a jnani. this tells me that going inwards is not
  same as going towards the deep-sleep state, though quiescence of antah-karana is common to both. apparently, then there is a satvic-quiescence vis-vis
  a tamasic quiescence (?). satva allowing the light of atma to pour, as it were,
  through to one's sarira (?). what does adi shankara say ?
  4. the karana-upadhi maya makes brahman 'appear' as iswara. but being
  karana it is unmanifested. the intelligent and material support that brahman 
  provides jagat & jivas is through the agency of the Lord Iswara. Would it be
  right to say that, in this conception of cosmos, Lord & Jiva have to necessarily
  co-exist and cannot merge into each other without each of them merging into
  brahman by means of dissociation with their respective upadhis ?
  5. i was unable to grasp your statement that 'unhappiness' and 'happiness' 
  differ mainly in the difference in their distance (layers of covering) from atma. i
  can see how the difference between sensual pain and pleasure is one of 
  degree, but sadness and happiness seems like perversions of the ananda by
  association with the desire-karma-vasana chain of transformation (?). ie. 
  happiness and un-happiness themselves constitute a chain (?).

 Office firewalls, cyber cafes, college labs, don't allow you to download CHAT? Here's a solution! 

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list