sat-chit-Ananda is often used to describe that which ‘lies beyond’ description, Brahman.

sat is being, chit is consciousness, Ananda is bliss.

Is love there too? Kindness, empathy, compassion? Does enlightenment awaken these qualities?

Greetings all ’round! 🙂

Per Advaita, does one (jiva) have free will? (This obviously applies only to vyavaharika, in paramarthika there is no jiva, freedom, will, etc.)

If yes, who or what exercises this free will? And what is the proper way to do so?

If no, should one simply surrender to what-is, sit back, relax, and watch what’s happening as if it were all a movie?

Thanks!

Rick

Hi everyone. 🙂

From the (as if) paramartha level, the level where one thinks and talks about ultimate Reality, can one (correctly) say anything positive about brahman? E.g. Brahman is … <whatever>. Or is it only correct to negate that which is not brahman (neti neti)?

Thanks to you guys for helping me see that I am going around in circles with my attempt to fathom Brahman. I often enjoy circling, the repetition is soothing. But it slows down the forward momentum of my path.

So for now I’ll put my Brahman obsession on the back burner. If Brahman comes up in my studies, I’ll think of it in the way that has given me least trouble over the years:

Brahman is what-really-is.

Dennis suggested my next stop be Swami P’s commentary on the Vivekachudamani. Onward ho!

Rick

The scriptures tell us that everything is constantly changing … thus ultimately not-real.

EXCEPT for Brahman.

Why this EXCEPTion?

Why is it seen as impossible that everything, no exceptions, is constantly changing?

It would be great, for me, if we could discuss this drawing mainly upon common sense rather than doctrine. My issue with doctrine is that it is considered to be irrefutably correct and thus discourages, perhaps even prevents open investigation.

Thanks!

Rick