Tag Archives: jiva

Waking Up (Part 2)

Posted on by
2

Part 2 of the review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris

Read Part 1

Science

Another problem which adds to the book’s confusion is the attempt to utilize science, supposedly to improve upon or correct the ancient (and therefore bound to be mistaken) views of the original philosophies (be these Advaita or Buddhism). Harris explains that “Throughout this book, I discuss certain classical spiritual phenomena, concepts, and practices in the context of our modern understanding of the human mind.” Why would one want to do this? It is missing the point completely. The truth cannot be found in the mind; rather the mind is a tool with which we may discover the truth.

I explain in my article ‘Science and Consciousness’ that science can never explain the nature of ‘I’ because I am the subject, doing the investigating. The subject can never objectify himself. It is true that I can investigate both the body and the mind because I am neither of these. But this also means that understanding the human mind is not going to help in an ‘investigation’ of spirituality; it is simply not relevant to ‘who I really am’. Furthermore, if Harris is ‘talking about the nature of experience itself’, he is not talking about ‘I’, since I am the experiencer. Finding out about household electric light circuits and how they work tells me nothing at all about the one who operates the light switch.

Continue reading →

Dṛṣṭi- sṛṣṭi-vāda

Posted on by
2

There has just been a brief discussion on the Advaitin List under the heading of ‘Quotes from samkshepa shaareeraka’. This was effectively on the perceived consequences of accepting the theory of dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda – the creation theory that claims that the world is the mental imagination of the jīva; a theory equating to the Western belief of solipsism. Sri ‘Sudhanshu Shekhar’ made the original post and Sri ‘Bhaskar YR’ represented the objections (with which I agree). Rather than joining in, I thought I would ask ChatGPT for an ‘opinion’ and its response seems to me to be very reasonable. (I even find myself more disposed to DSV than I was before!) Here is the exchange:

Q: How do Advaita believers in dṛṣṭi- sṛṣṭi-vāda explain how they can discuss the topic with other believers and non-believers?

A: In Advaita Vedānta, particularly within the framework of dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda (the doctrine that perception precedes creation), explaining and discussing the philosophy with others presents an interesting challenge. Since dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda asserts that the world arises in accordance with the perceiver’s experience, the question arises: how can multiple individuals engage in a discussion if each person’s world is subjectively projected?

Continue reading →

Waking Up

Posted on by
1

Here is another old book review, this one from just over 10 years ago. It is for the book Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris.
It is an even longer review than the last, so will require at least 3 parts. Here is Part 1.

The Meaning of the Word ‘Spiritual’

Regardless of how well a book is written, and how interesting its content, if it is non-fiction it seems that its value should be judged upon how successfully it achieves its stated objective. As far as potential readers are concerned, the objective is traditionally determined from a book’s title. And, in this case, it appears that the intended purpose of this book is to teach us about ‘Spirituality’ whilst avoiding any ‘religious’ overtones.

This tells us that the author acknowledges that ‘spirituality’ is usually associated with religion. It suggests that, not only does he believe that it need not be so associated, but also he thinks that he can teach us about spirituality without needing to say anything at all about religion. Before starting to read the book, therefore, it would be useful to know exactly what is meant by the term ‘spirituality’.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 19

Posted on by
Reply

Part 18

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-5 Katha Upanishad

6-5-9 Katha 1.2.25 The mantra reads: How can one know thus as to where It (the Self) is, for which both the Brahmin and the Kshatriya become food, and for which death takes the place of a curry? Brahma Sutra 1.2.9 clarifies who is the eater. Is it fire or the individual soul, or is it the supreme Self? The doubt is because Nachiketa has asked Yama about three entities-fire, individual soul, and the supreme Self.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 4

Posted on by

Part 3

Part 4

Chapter 3 Jiva Jagat Isvara

3-1 Introduction
It is desirable to begin with the obvious, namely, the creation and human being. The world is constituted of living and non-living beings. It also includes invisible entities, e.g., thoughts, and emotions. A human being is a living being. Though Upanishads differ in the details of creation, there is consensus about a causeless creator called Brahman and that the creation is cyclic, not linear. A linear creation with a beginning and an end runs into logical fallacies. In the cyclic version, there is no beginning and no end. Pedantically, it is absurd to talk about any beginning of creation because time is a part of creation. An immediate question that begs an answer is about the source of raw materials for creation. Before the creation, there was nothing except the creator. Upanishadic answer is that the creator has the material within Himself like a spider having material inside itself. The material is the mAyA power of Brahman which does not exist separately from Brahman. Cyclic creation and the material within the creator lead to a third proposition. In one cycle, the world emerges out of the creator, runs its course according to certain laws, and then resolves into the creator to remain there in potential form and become ready at an appropriate time for the next cycle. It is called creation-sustenance-dissolution. The word ‘creation’ is a misnomer because it conveys that a new thing comes into existence which is not correct. A more appropriate word is manifestation.

Continue reading →

Q. 548 – God and germs

Posted on by

Q: It is said that God is everywhere. So God is very much in the human body as well. He is in every cell/atom of a human body. My question is: what is the position /status of God, who is within the body, when  every cell/atom becomes infected? Is infection more powerful than God?

A: God is not ‘in the  human body’. The human body is name and form of Brahman. Similarly, bacteria are name and form of Brahman. There is ONLY Brahman in reality.

At the level of appearance (world etc.), God (Īśvara ) provides an interim explanation of the laws that govern the seeming creation.  One of these laws is that bacteria can infect bodies and affect their working, even to the extent of ‘killing’ them. But God, bodies and bacteria do not exist as separate entities in reality. They are all Brahman.

Continue reading →

Advaita in the Vedas – Rig Veda 1.164.20

Posted on by

See the source image

In exploring Advaita, we may have heard of the metaphor of the two birds,

Two birds, inseparable friends, cling to the same tree. One of them eats the sweet fruit, the other looks on without eating. [1]

The two birds are the jiva (the one which eats) and paramatman (the one which looks on without eating). The jiva is bound, attached to karma and its fruits, whereas the paramatman is free from karma. Identified as the jiva, the ‘enjoyer’, we ‘taste’ the fruits of action (pleasure and pain). Identified with the paramatman, we do not experience the duality of pleasure and pain as there is no attachment to them.

The two birds highlight the contrasting ways of conducting action – with or without attachment. In the jiva, we act to attain certain fruits (desirable outcomes) of our actions. Whereas, in the paramatman, we act without any desire or discrimination between success and failure or pleasure and pain. The paramatman is the Advaitin witness, whilst the jiva is still caught up in the dualistic experience of self (subject) and ‘other’ (object).

What we may not know is that the ‘two birds’ metaphor originates from Rig Veda (1.164.20). Continue reading →

Bhagavad Gita (Topic-wise) Part 1

Posted on by

Table of contents- Annexure at the end                                          Part 2

Introduction

Bhagavad Gita (Gita, in short) has an important place in Advaita Vedanta teaching. It is one of the Trai-Prasthanas, the other two are Upanishads and Brahma-sutra. Trai means three and Prasthana means to go. It is held that to know the truth one must take recourse to the said three scriptures. Upanishad is Sruti (revealed) Prasthana, Gita is Smriti (remembered) Prasthana and Brahma-sutra is logic (Nyay) Prasthana. Brahma-sutra provides the logical foundation for Upanishadic teachings.

Gita is the teaching imparted by Sri Krishna to Arjuna on the battlefield of Mahabharata. It was occasioned because Arjuna declined to fight as he was overwhelmed with grief and sorrow by the prospect of fighting his own family members including revered Bhisma and Acharya Drona. The first chapter of Gita is titled Arjuna Vishad (Melancholy of Arjuna). Chapters 2 to 17 are the Vedantic teaching given by Sri Krishna to Arjuna. Gita does not have independent teaching. It is based on the Upanishads. It is said figuratively that the Upanishad is a cow, Gita is the milk and Sri Krishna is the milkman. 18 chapters of Gita are chapters 23 to 40 of Bhisma Parva of Mahabharat. Parva means book. The title Bhisma Parva relates to the period of battle when Bhisma was the commander of the Kaurava army. Bhisma Parva is followed by Drone Parva and so on. Sanjay, the charioteer of Dhritarashtra, blessed by sage Vyasa with divine eyesight narrates the battle scenes to Dhritarashtra. Sri Krishna delivers Gita teachings to Arjun on the first day of the 18-day battle of Mahabharat. Continue reading →

mANDUkya upaniShad Part 1

Posted on by

I have just started reading the massive commentary on the mANDUkya, Gaudapada kArikA-s and Shankara bhAShya (if it was Shankara) by Divyaj~nAna Sarojini VaradarAjan, so I thought it might be appropriate to post my own translation and commentary on the Upanishad itself from ‘A-U-M’.

The VaradarAjan book is in two volumes and, as far as I am aware, is only available from Exotic India at £65 to post to the UK. Only 500 copies were printed and these may sell out quickly as her Upanishad commentaries are unparalleled.

My own book ‘A-U-M: Awakening to Reality’ is a ‘by topic’ rather than verse by verse commentary, although it does cover all of the material. The specific translation and commentary on the 12 verses of the Upanishad itself are relegated to an Appendix, since the material is rather ‘dense’, and the tone less ‘conversational’ than the main body of the book. It is available from Amazon:

Book ($34.95): Buy from Amazon US; Kindle ($16.49): Buy from Amazon US

Book (£20.99): Buy from Amazon UK; Kindle (£6.99): Buy from Amazon UK

This series will post the whole of Appendix 1 of ‘A-U-M’ and, in general, each post will cover one verse of the Upanishad. This first post, however, covers the shAnti pATha – the traditional prayer at the beginning of an Upanishad – and Shankara’s introduction.

Continue reading →

Q.521 External Objects

Posted on by

Q: Do objects exist independently? For example, if one is not seeing the moon then does moon exist or not?

A: From the perspective of absolute reality (paramArtha), of course there is no problem; no question or answer! There is only Brahman; no creation and no objects. But I assume that your question relates to empirical reality (vyavahAra). Here, Advaita teaches that Ishvara governs the ‘creation’, setting and maintaining the physical laws that apply to the universe and the karmic laws that apply to the jIva-s. It is only some post-Shankara philosophers who try to make out that there is only one jIva so that, as soon as this jIva is enlightened, the apparent creation comes to an end. You can read all about the ‘world disappearing on enlightenment’ in the seemingly endless discussions we had on that topic beginning in 2020 (I think).

So, as regards your specific question, objects continue to exist when you go out of the room (for example). Otherwise, other jIva-s would not be able to enjoy them! Suppose that you go outside at night with a friend and both look at the moon. And suppose that you turn away but your friend doesn’t.  If the moon ceased to exist, so would your friend (who is also an object at the gross level).

Advaita is not subjective idealism. Objects are not ‘in the mind’ (although the names and forms that we give them ARE in the mind – hence we can see a rope as a snake). But the moon is not ‘real’ in an Advaitic sense; it is mithyA. The story of the sage and the wild elephant is relevant here. A seeker saw his guru run away when a rogue elephant charged. Afterwards he asked why his teacher had run when he would say that the elephant is mithyA. The teacher replied that the ‘running away’ was also mithyA. (At least, that is how I recall the story.)