Vaaman

Yad bhavam tad bhavati.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 You have read them right? Quote them. How hard is it? You came to defend, it's your responsibility.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

I don't deny the shruti. I deny your reading.

Shruti: things are dear for the self's sake. The jiva loves, the self is loved. Where does Brahman "express love for itself"?
Shankara: love for objects is secondary, so turn to the Self. Vairagya, not "Brahman is love."

But you worship a form every day. You chant mantras describing gunas and sing songs of leelas. That's exactly what Shankara calls नेदं ब्रह्म यदिदमित्युपाधिभेदविशिष्टमनात्मेश्वरादि उपासते ध्यायन्ति ।

If you're not doing that and only doing some sachchidananda meditation, why did you even join this debate? I was questioning those who do nitya anushthana: sandhya, murti puja, archana, naivedya. The objectification parts.

You got lost in the long list of arguments about what the argument is even about.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

A thought to ponder upon.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

ಖಂಡಿತ. ಓದುವಿಕೆಗೆ ಎಂದೂ ಬರ ಇಲ್ಲ.

Since you are learning, ponder this and discuss it with your acharya.
In rope-snake, the snake is entirely a mistake. It appears and gets sublated. Jivatva and Ishwaratva are the same kind of appearance on Nirguna Brahman.

So Ishwaratva is sublatable. Just as one who knows the rope knows the snake was never there, the Advaitin knows Ishwara as an entity was never there, and the jiva as an entity was never there. What was, is and will always be is only Nirguna Brahman.

Now, would someone who knows it's a rope still play the been to the snake? Would someone who knows it's shell still try to sell the silver? If they did, would you call that wisdom or naivety?

You do nitya anushtana, perform yajnas, pray to Ishwara and do bhakti of His attributes. If Advaita were true and you didn't know Advaita, all those acts would be justifiable. But you are an Advaitin. You fully accept its axioms. If you still engage in nitya anushtana and bhakti, aren't you being ignorant?

And if you say "I only know it paroksha, I'm not yet a jnani." It doesn't require for someone to do spectrometer analysis of shell to reveal that it's not silver. You have already fully agreed of its non silverness.

If you say its for Chitta shuddhi - How does admiring snake/silver or making conversation/transaction with them takes you in the path of Chitta shuddhi?
The snake can never reveal anything about the rope. Silver can never reveal anything about the shell.

How do you even engage with the ignorant acts of bhakti, Nithya anushtaana etc when you have conscious knowledge of them being ignorant acts and it's sublatablity ?

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 //What do you mean chaitanya stays without ishvaratva?// Ask yourself. Your words: "visheshana is dropped, not chetana." Nirguna chetana has no powers, no kriya. So it's not Ishwara.

Still no quote from you.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 Thank you. Your own words. Visheshana dropped, visheshya stays. Ishvaratva is the visheshana. It goes. Chaitanya stays, and chaitanya without ishvaratva is not Ishvara. Its nirguna Chaitanya.

And you still haven't quoted a single line. Siddhantaleshasangraha 4? Quote it.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

😵‍💫 This is neo-Advaita, not Shankara. "Brahman is love, worship is love for itself"? My goodness.
Even satchidananda is lakshanartha. The words point to Brahman, they don't give it qualities. And you want to give it an act of loving?

That comes from modern satsangs, not the bhashya. Shankara's Brahman doesn't love, act or worship. It's nishkriya.
And "I worship nirguna"? Your own acharya: "nedam yad idam upasate." What is worshipped is not Brahman. Stick to your acharya, if he is.

If you are some neo Advaitin then good luck.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@TheLogicMonk @kpp0915 @Kul_Mimansaka Look at what you just did. Remove the upadhi of I and you, and then “I worship you”?

Worshipping "I" is itself upadhi. Nirguna doesn’t worship anyone. So you didnt drop anything.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@TheLogicMonk @kpp0915 @Kul_Mimansaka If it’s just sachchidananda, worship yourself. Or me.

You specifically chose Ishvara and he is worshipped for ishvaratva, the very thing you drop.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

Sachchidananda isn’t sublated because sachchidananda isn’t ishvaratva GENIUS.

Bhaga-tyaga drops sarvajnatva, sarvashaktitva and lordship, everything that makes Ishvara Ishvara. What stays is nirguna. You just switched from Ishvara to sachchidananda.

“We don’t objectify Ishvara”? Read the line I gave: “upadhibheda-vishishtam anatma-ishvaradi upasate.” Shankara says you worship him as “idam.” That’s objectifying.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@TheLogicMonk @kpp0915 @Kul_Mimansaka WISDOM LIB, Its written clearly. I Gave shankaras exact words yesterday - नेदं ब्रह्म यदिदमित्युपाधिभेदविशिष्टमनात्मेश्वरादि उपासते ध्यायन्ति ।

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

Everything is Brahman shining through maya, from Ishvara to a pile of dirt. That was never the issue.

What makes Ishvara Ishvara, and not nirguna, is his ishvaratva. And by your own words, it lasts only because of ignorance "in us, the unrealized."
That's exactly what I said: ishvaratva is subservient to individual egos.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

Anishwara vaada vs Advaita.

[Mimaṃsaka Kulkarni @Kul_Mimansaka]

@pratyaksha321 @TheLogicMonk I know object is mithya, and I (jiva) am mithya. But has my ego been eradicated yet? Has buddhi accepted it? No. Till I remains, Ishwara would remain, choicelessly.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 Still No answer.

You claim they answered. Your responsibility to provide it. Till then My proof survives.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 😊 show me from the literature of later philosophers.

One line. Ishvara survives jahadajahad lakshana, and that Ishvara is Brahman. If you show, I'll be defeated. Its so simple.

I won't reply untill you come up with a proof which defeats my claim.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 Digression. Stay on the matter. Show me where in Advaita otbsays After Jahadajahad lakshana whatbsurvives is Ishwara alone and that is Brahman.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 Again, Show me one line from any bhaashya which says, What survives after Jahadajahad lakshana is Ishwara and that Ishwara is Brahman.

Pick from their Sea of literature. Why can't you?

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 Thank you for agreeing with me. Shankara calls the worshipped Ishvara anatma. Anatma is the opposite of atma-svarupa. Ishwara is not ever lasting Brahman. That's what I have been saying all along.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 This can be easily settled - Show me one line from any bhaashya which says, What survives after Jahadajahad lakshana is Ishwara and that Ishwara is Brahman.

Please understand the etymology of Ishwara. What makes Ishwara as Ishwara doesn't stay permanent.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

In so'yam Devadatta, kala and desha aren't half removed. They're fully dropped.

Same with tat: sarvajnatva, sarvashaktitva, all of ishvaratva, fully dropped. Only chit stays and That's not Ishvara. If you think that's Ishwara too, Shankara is fully clear in Kenopanishad bhashya. Read.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

I have showed it to you many times now.

What you saying is not Advaita. You're keeping a lasting Ishvara and dissolving only the separation.

Apply Jahadajahad lakshana properly.

First understand this - Shankara, BSB 2.1.14: Ishvara's ishvaratva, sarvajnatva and sarvashaktitva depend on avidya-made upadhis, not paramarthatah.

Read Kenopanishad bhashya.

The Ishwara you worship daily in your Nithya anushtaana are upadhi visishta, which is anatman, which is Ignorance.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@mel4345 Hence my image says - Ishwaratva is subservient to individual egoes.

[Vaaman @pratyaksha321]

@Basavarajhmath @Kul_Mimansaka @kpp0915 @Kanirudh01 My DM is open. You can ask questions on Tatvavada anytime. I wouldn't use my upavaasa as an excuse and answer it to the best I can.

Thanks for engaging.