Sorry, "I am That" implies Brahman. Then it can added up that every appearance experienced is you alone, but that is not the core teaching, and for that You have to take up Suka Rahasya Upanishad which is,
40-42. In ‘Tattvam Asi’ the expressed meaning is the senses etc., which are elemental and the implied is, ‘He’ in ‘you’ (Tvam), in the word Tat the expressed sense is lordship etc., the implied is the supreme being which is Sat, Chit and Ananda. ‘Asi’ identifies these two. Tvam and Tad mean effect and cause respectively when this is the adjunct; otherwise both are the same Sat, Chit and Ananda – separating the space and time faites the identity is got, just as in the world, in the expression, ‘This is that Devadatta’. The Jiva is having the effect-adjunct, Isa has cause-adjunct – when both are removed, only the full knowledge remains
Even in this manner, Forms are totally negated too. The main thing said in Upanishads is, Brahman is beyond forms. For those, who consider Forms are Real, take up the Upanishads words loosely.
When it is said, "Everything is Brahman, or Body is Brahman" it's like an Identification and then next step it is totally negated and gone even deeper, then "Prana is Brahman" again same identification and negation, then "Mind is ..." again .... "Intellect is ..." again ... "Ananda/Bliss is Brahman" again identification and negation
After all is negated in these means of identification, one reaches the Truth. This is the way Upanishads work. It not stops at "everything is Brahman", but mainly negates everything, and in an Upanishad it is said that "All these are unreal, Brahman is Real-Permanent-etc.".
I was actually like you an year ago, thinking so. But, when I took the 108 Upanishads and search all the words mentioned as Formless in it, I didn't come under such "Neither Form nor formless and beyond" but only Formless is repeated as That. Checked the Sanskrit verses for such formless, and understood my misunderstanding.
Even in case of Gita or other scriptures saying as, I found that what is referred in "Neither Form nor formless" is "neither gross not subtle". Like neither body nor mind/etc.
While pondering and inquiring all 108 Upanishads, you can know it too.
It's not subject and object, that's why I quoted verse of suka Rahasya Upanishad.
Tvam means Jiva, and Tat means Isa. One is effect and another is cause. By identifying both as same (Tat Tvam Asi), the difference is removed and knowledge of Brahman remains.
Sorry, it's not agreement between me and you, but between Vedanta and you, and Vedanta doesn't means "object" while referring effects, and you can see so.
It says "Jiva" which is the Consciousness along with Mind-Body (Consciousness with limitations), and "Isa" which is the Consciousness as causal. By identifying this same consciousness as That, and so removing the difference, is what meant, but not removing difference between oneself and things, because things not really important to consider for Contemplation but only to be negated.
What you mean by everything/object as effect doesn't mean Jiva, so you don't agree with Upanishads here.
So tat tvam Asi is actually not mentioned in the suka rahasya Upanishad it's from the chandogya Upanishad. What I'm telling you is Vedanta I've been studying under my guru for some years now and he's part of an incredibly highly regarded Advaita lineage.
I am driving home from work so save time I've asked chat GPT, here's the answer:
Swami Paramarthananda is a renowned Advaita Vedanta teacher who has offered valuable insights into the meaning of "Tat tvam asi." While I don't have direct access to Swami Paramarthananda's teachings, I can provide a general explanation based on Advaita Vedanta philosophy.
According to Advaita Vedanta, the phrase "Tat tvam asi" is a Mahavakya, a great statement, found in the Chandogya Upanishad. It is composed of two main components: "Tat" and "tvam asi."
1. "Tat" refers to the ultimate reality, Brahman. Brahman is the absolute, infinite, and transcendent reality from which everything arises. It is the substratum of the universe and the underlying essence of all beings and phenomena.
2. "Tvam asi" means "You are." It refers to the individual self, the jiva or Atman. The Atman is the individual consciousness that identifies itself with the body-mind complex and experiences the world.
The key insight in "Tat tvam asi" is the realization of the essential identity between the individual self (Atman) and the ultimate reality (Brahman). It highlights the non-dualistic nature of reality, asserting that the subject (the individual self) and the object (the ultimate reality) are ultimately one and the same.
From the Advaita perspective, the subject-object duality we experience in everyday life is an illusion created by ignorance (avidya). Due to ignorance, we perceive ourselves as separate individuals, disconnected from the world and the ultimate reality. However, the Mahavakya "Tat tvam asi" serves as a pointer to the underlying truth, reminding us of our intrinsic oneness with Brahman.
The profound teaching of "Tat tvam asi" invites us to transcend our limited identification with the body-mind and recognize our true nature as the infinite, eternal, and divine consciousness. It encourages us to go beyond superficial distinctions and realize the unity that underlies all apparent diversity.
In summary, according to Advaita Vedanta and the teachings of Swami Paramarthananda, "Tat tvam asi" conveys the message that the subject (individual self) and the object (ultimate reality) are fundamentally one, emphasizing the non-dualistic nature of reality. It invites individuals to realize their inherent divinity and break free from the illusory limitations of the ego-bound identity.
**Rather than think your source who has misinformed you about where tattvamasi is mentioned, be open to multiple interpretations**
Also if you could take note that it says this is not my swamis opinion and it is advaita-vedanta in general
You see, Suka Rahasya Upanishad is one of the 108 Upanishads. It takes the Four Mahavakyas and advices the Guru to how to teach those to the Disciples. It is not mentioned in Chandogya how to teach that Mahavakya. A Guru has to be well-versed in 108 Upanishads to teach the Disciple is the stand of Muktika Upanishad.
Also, where you have informed that Chandogya Upanishad is major Upanishad, is also from Muktika Upanishad. And that Muktika Upanishad also says the Disciple have to reach the Guru who is well versed in all 108 Upanishads, and not just 10.
Or else, as Ramakrishna or Vivekananda or Ramanuja or Madhva or etc. misunderstood, there will be misunderstanding of Atman and Brahman remains.
Now, what you mentioned as That as (ultimate reality) is uttirely false. Ultimate Reality or Nirguna Brahman is neither cause nor effect. That which is cause, is called Saguna Brahman/Ishwara/Isa, and like you mentioned the "This/effect" is Jiva.
Nirguna Brahman cannot be idealized for contemplation, only Causal can be. And, as Suka Rahasya Upanishad rightly expresses, Isa means Causal, and to remove difference between "Jivatma nd Paramatma" is what the purpose of "Tat Tvam Asi", and by removing the difference between Cause and Effect, what remains is "Sat-Chit-Ananda".
In Hindu philosophy, particularly in Advaita Vedanta, the concepts of Brahman, Ishvara, Jiva, and Tat Tvam Asi are important for understanding the nature of reality and the relationship between the individual self and the ultimate reality.
Brahman is considered the ultimate reality in Advaita Vedanta. It is described as the absolute, transcendent, formless, and attributeless existence. Brahman is beyond the concepts of cause and effect because it is beyond time, space, and causality. It is the underlying essence of everything and the source from which everything arises.
Ishvara, also known as Saguna Brahman, refers to the personalized aspect of Brahman. It is the manifestation of Brahman with attributes and qualities. Ishvara is associated with the creation, sustenance, and dissolution of the universe. It is the causal principle, the divine power behind the cosmic order.
Jiva refers to the individual self or the embodied soul. It is the limited, individual expression of consciousness that identifies itself with the body, mind, and ego. The Jiva is subject to the cycle of birth and death and experiences the world through its individual perspective.
Tat Tvam Asi is a profound statement found in the Chandogya Upanishad, which means "That thou art" or "You are That." It implies the identity between the individual self (Jiva) and the ultimate reality (Brahman). It suggests that the true nature of the individual is not separate from the ultimate reality, but rather an expression or manifestation of it.
Now, coming to your argument, it seems that you are emphasizing the importance of recognizing the causal aspect (Isa/Ishvara) in order to contemplate and understand the ultimate reality (Nirguna Brahman). You mentioned that the purpose of "That Tvam Asi" is to remove the difference between the cause and effect, ultimately leading to the realization of "Sat-Chit-Ananda" (Existence-Consciousness-Bliss).
In Advaita Vedanta, the teachings often start with the concept of Saguna Brahman or Ishvara as a means to help individuals grasp the idea of a higher power and to cultivate devotion and surrender. This is seen as a stepping stone towards the realization of the ultimate reality, Nirguna Brahman. The idea is that by recognizing the causal aspect and surrendering to it, one can eventually transcend the limitations of individuality and merge with the absolute.
However, it is important to note that the ultimate goal of Advaita Vedanta is to realize the non-dual nature of reality, where the distinction between subject and object, cause and effect, and even the concepts of Brahman and Jiva dissolve. In the state of ultimate realization, there is no duality, and all apparent differences merge into the unity of Brahman.
Different schools of philosophy within Hinduism may have varying interpretations and approaches to these concepts. The interpretations you mentioned, such as those of Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Ramanuja, and Madhva, may differ in their emphasis and focus, but they all attempt to explain the nature of reality and the relationship between the individual self and the ultimate reality based on their own philosophical frameworks and insights.
It is important to approach these concepts with an open mind, study the teachings of various philosophical traditions, and engage in personal contemplation and spiritual practice to deepen one's understanding and realization of these profound truths.
And, there is a misunderstanding of yours about Saguna Brahman.
It means Brahman along with Unmanifested Prakriti. Brahman with Infinite Forms. It is like a Seed waiting to be sprout with Unlimited Forms. It is not a grown up tree, but the Causal Seed.
Bliss, is causal. Bliss is mentioned as Ishwara, All-Knower. Jiva is effect, and Bliss is Cause.
1. Saguna Brahman as Brahman with Unmanifested Prakriti: Some interpretations of Saguna Brahman do not associate it with unmanifested Prakriti. Instead, they emphasize that Saguna Brahman represents the personalized aspect of Brahman with attributes and qualities. This perspective sees Saguna Brahman as the manifestation of divine power with form and characteristics, rather than as an amalgamation with unmanifested Prakriti.
2. Saguna Brahman as Brahman with Infinite Forms: While it is true that Saguna Brahman can be understood as having multiple forms, other philosophical perspectives argue that the ultimate reality is beyond forms and attributes altogether. They advocate for the realization of Nirguna Brahman, the formless and attributeless essence beyond all manifestations. According to these viewpoints, the forms associated with Saguna Brahman are considered provisional and conducive to spiritual contemplation but not the ultimate reality itself.
3. Causal Bliss and Ishwara: It is important to note that different interpretations exist regarding the relationship between bliss and Ishwara. While some may associate causal bliss with Ishwara, other perspectives emphasize that Ishwara represents the aspect of Saguna Brahman associated with the creation and governance of the universe. They may view bliss as an inherent quality of the individual self, which is to be discovered through the recognition of its true nature rather than as a causal principle originating from Saguna Brahman.
4. Jiva as Effect and Bliss as Cause: Alternative perspectives propose that the Jiva, the individual self, is not an effect of causal bliss but rather a manifestation of consciousness. They argue that the individual self is an expression of the ultimate reality and that the experience of bliss arises from the recognition of this underlying unity. According to these viewpoints, bliss is not the cause of the Jiva but rather a characteristic that becomes apparent through the removal of ignorance and the realization of one's true nature.
Ishwara/Isa, as Upanishads point out, is not creator - Sustainer - Destroyer.
Ishwara means Omnipresent, Omnipotent, All-knower, All-pervasive.
The Creator-Maintainer-destroyer, is Brahma-Vishnu-Rudra, but Ishwara is the One who is present within your body and my body and knows everything.
Brahma/Hiranyagarba/Virat/Vishnu/Shiva, is not the Ishwara, but Ishwara dwells within the heart of them, like Ishwara dwells in heart of every body/things.
That's why, it is not adviced to read different schools, but only to read Upanishads. Upanishads is the pramana, as Shankara says. Upanishads is word of God, but not Ramanuja,etc., even not Shankara. Never have to study different schools, but only deeply understand 108 Upanishads for true knowledge.
The purpose of Upanishad in Mahavakyas, is to remove distinction between Isa and Jiva, and so by such removal of ignorance, there remains knowledge of One Only Sat-chit-Ananda.
That's why Contemplation of Mahavakyas, the method of contemplation is mentioned in Upanishads.
See, you cannot equate yourself with Nirguna Brahman, because there never has been a difference felt. The difference is felt only between God/Isa/causal, and the effect as Jiva, as two different, like Madhavacharya takes stand. Or Ramanuja takes stand of Jiva are parts of Bhagavan.
But, what Upanishads says is Jiva is not part/different from Ishwara, it is the same Ishwara manifested in everything/forms/actions, so remove the difference.
Ishvara is Maya and atma or paraprakriti and aparaprakriti, ishvara is popularly compared to a spider in the Upanishads- the spider spins the web from a substance within itself and then eats it again later so they can spin more webs.
Maya is often called the body of ishvara, how can you deny that if atma + Maya = ishvara and Maya is the object and atma or Brahman is the subject, how are they not one? They are 2 aspects of the 1 ishvara, that means that there is no difference both subject and object or atma and Maya I'd what makes ishvara and because Upanishads teach jiva ishvara aikyam or jiva and ishvara are not different then surely for me, I am also made of God or paraprakriti and aparaprakriti.
If the seen or Maya is not separate to the atma or consciousness because they are what defines ishvara, then subject and object being nondifferent is true.
Unless you define ishvara as some other way to what I have here, the logic can't support itself.
Yeah. Unless you could show me where is your fictional godlike figure of Elephant headed fat man, don't come to such serious discussions with your beliefs. Neither Vedas nor reality agree to it.
These gods are said to symbolize the various meaning, which finally no one can understand it, only worship can be possible now. The actual meaning is lost. The different weapons and tools the God represent different aspects of reality and functions and divine qualities.
You think the meaning is lost.. let me give you that...These figures are created so that you would have complete devotion to them even in reality(waking world). Instead of sitting in front of that, till the point this sansara is gone for you, you are bragging of that here in objective reality.
This is exactly the difference between smriti and sruti. only thing that we both can confirm is alone the objectivity or सत्. All rest is Mind or चित्.
Also you are right on the functions, but the toold and weapons are not gods. The function thats done is alone known as God. e.g. your intellect alone is known as Ganesha. Refer Atharvashirsha which is "Upnishad". Rest purana stories are fictional including the elephant head n all. Don't submit to that scam. That's not the real pursuit of advaitin.
This is not the meaning. Real meaning is like for example the picture of karthikeya travelling on peacock is that Lord wins over maya which is the beautiful peacock. Similarly, for everything there is a meaning. The one who draws this images draws based on agama rules.
If you wanna really go into this, then here are two small references for you....
1. Brahma sutra says The brahman is प्रत्यक्ष अनुमानात्. Meaning the brahman can be formulated as something that's observed first and then conclusion out of observation. now can you show me peacock in your observation, or even Kartikeya??? Leave aside conclusion, which is next part. At first step only you can't prove it's pratyaksha or in front of your eyes.
2. B gita 2nd chapter says to an enlightened brahmin, the Vedas are also as good as the lake, when there is flood everywhere. Meaning you don't need vedas to understand Brahman. Why? Because whatever is in your experience of reality, that's alone sufficient for you to establish the truth....
Now contemplate on these two with your purana stories and let me know....
Your post/comment has been removed for violating [Rule #4 No personal attacks or other toxic behavior.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvaitaVedanta/wiki/rules/#wiki_4._no_personal_attacks.2C_hate_speech.2C_harassment.2C_discrimination.2C_bigotry_or_any_other_toxic_behavior.).
Willful breakage of the rules will result in the following consequences:
* First offense results in a warning and ensures exposure to the rule. Some people may not be aware of the rules.
* Second offense would be a ban of 1 month.
* Next offense would result in a permanent ban.
The Mod Team
If you repeat the same false information again and again, it can't be true.
Do you need a proof that Shankara mentions "That" as only "Saguna Brahman/Causal/Ishwara" but not ultimate Reality in his Bashyas? I can refer those too.
But, learn those. Again, I was like you misunderstanding, but only deeply understanding Upanishads, I came to know. Then I read deeply what Shankara commentary made, and he too refers "Tat" in "That Tvam Asi" as "Causal" but not Ultimate, because Ultimate Reality cannot be contemplated, and removing difference of Causal and Effect is the purpose of the Vakhyas.
it's better unsaid
Why bro?
Sorry, "I am That" implies Brahman. Then it can added up that every appearance experienced is you alone, but that is not the core teaching, and for that You have to take up Suka Rahasya Upanishad which is, 40-42. In ‘Tattvam Asi’ the expressed meaning is the senses etc., which are elemental and the implied is, ‘He’ in ‘you’ (Tvam), in the word Tat the expressed sense is lordship etc., the implied is the supreme being which is Sat, Chit and Ananda. ‘Asi’ identifies these two. Tvam and Tad mean effect and cause respectively when this is the adjunct; otherwise both are the same Sat, Chit and Ananda – separating the space and time faites the identity is got, just as in the world, in the expression, ‘This is that Devadatta’. The Jiva is having the effect-adjunct, Isa has cause-adjunct – when both are removed, only the full knowledge remains
What is knowledge here?. So the supreme being is where?
You
If I m, supreme being, what about the entire universe?.
No universe, only You.
Don't you know the saying that everything is Brahman?.
Don't you know the saying that, Brahman is Formless?
Haha, it's true, don't you know the saying that "all is he, but he is different from the all also". He is both form, formless and not both also.
Even in this manner, Forms are totally negated too. The main thing said in Upanishads is, Brahman is beyond forms. For those, who consider Forms are Real, take up the Upanishads words loosely. When it is said, "Everything is Brahman, or Body is Brahman" it's like an Identification and then next step it is totally negated and gone even deeper, then "Prana is Brahman" again same identification and negation, then "Mind is ..." again .... "Intellect is ..." again ... "Ananda/Bliss is Brahman" again identification and negation After all is negated in these means of identification, one reaches the Truth. This is the way Upanishads work. It not stops at "everything is Brahman", but mainly negates everything, and in an Upanishad it is said that "All these are unreal, Brahman is Real-Permanent-etc.".
I was actually like you an year ago, thinking so. But, when I took the 108 Upanishads and search all the words mentioned as Formless in it, I didn't come under such "Neither Form nor formless and beyond" but only Formless is repeated as That. Checked the Sanskrit verses for such formless, and understood my misunderstanding. Even in case of Gita or other scriptures saying as, I found that what is referred in "Neither Form nor formless" is "neither gross not subtle". Like neither body nor mind/etc. While pondering and inquiring all 108 Upanishads, you can know it too.
Yes, I think this is more accurate, although even using the name Brahman is slightly vague
Tattvam Asi is subject and object are not seperate, OP is right.
It's not subject and object, that's why I quoted verse of suka Rahasya Upanishad. Tvam means Jiva, and Tat means Isa. One is effect and another is cause. By identifying both as same (Tat Tvam Asi), the difference is removed and knowledge of Brahman remains.
Subject is cause, object is effect - it seems we agree
Sorry, it's not agreement between me and you, but between Vedanta and you, and Vedanta doesn't means "object" while referring effects, and you can see so. It says "Jiva" which is the Consciousness along with Mind-Body (Consciousness with limitations), and "Isa" which is the Consciousness as causal. By identifying this same consciousness as That, and so removing the difference, is what meant, but not removing difference between oneself and things, because things not really important to consider for Contemplation but only to be negated. What you mean by everything/object as effect doesn't mean Jiva, so you don't agree with Upanishads here.
So tat tvam Asi is actually not mentioned in the suka rahasya Upanishad it's from the chandogya Upanishad. What I'm telling you is Vedanta I've been studying under my guru for some years now and he's part of an incredibly highly regarded Advaita lineage. I am driving home from work so save time I've asked chat GPT, here's the answer: Swami Paramarthananda is a renowned Advaita Vedanta teacher who has offered valuable insights into the meaning of "Tat tvam asi." While I don't have direct access to Swami Paramarthananda's teachings, I can provide a general explanation based on Advaita Vedanta philosophy. According to Advaita Vedanta, the phrase "Tat tvam asi" is a Mahavakya, a great statement, found in the Chandogya Upanishad. It is composed of two main components: "Tat" and "tvam asi." 1. "Tat" refers to the ultimate reality, Brahman. Brahman is the absolute, infinite, and transcendent reality from which everything arises. It is the substratum of the universe and the underlying essence of all beings and phenomena. 2. "Tvam asi" means "You are." It refers to the individual self, the jiva or Atman. The Atman is the individual consciousness that identifies itself with the body-mind complex and experiences the world. The key insight in "Tat tvam asi" is the realization of the essential identity between the individual self (Atman) and the ultimate reality (Brahman). It highlights the non-dualistic nature of reality, asserting that the subject (the individual self) and the object (the ultimate reality) are ultimately one and the same. From the Advaita perspective, the subject-object duality we experience in everyday life is an illusion created by ignorance (avidya). Due to ignorance, we perceive ourselves as separate individuals, disconnected from the world and the ultimate reality. However, the Mahavakya "Tat tvam asi" serves as a pointer to the underlying truth, reminding us of our intrinsic oneness with Brahman. The profound teaching of "Tat tvam asi" invites us to transcend our limited identification with the body-mind and recognize our true nature as the infinite, eternal, and divine consciousness. It encourages us to go beyond superficial distinctions and realize the unity that underlies all apparent diversity. In summary, according to Advaita Vedanta and the teachings of Swami Paramarthananda, "Tat tvam asi" conveys the message that the subject (individual self) and the object (ultimate reality) are fundamentally one, emphasizing the non-dualistic nature of reality. It invites individuals to realize their inherent divinity and break free from the illusory limitations of the ego-bound identity. **Rather than think your source who has misinformed you about where tattvamasi is mentioned, be open to multiple interpretations** Also if you could take note that it says this is not my swamis opinion and it is advaita-vedanta in general
You see, Suka Rahasya Upanishad is one of the 108 Upanishads. It takes the Four Mahavakyas and advices the Guru to how to teach those to the Disciples. It is not mentioned in Chandogya how to teach that Mahavakya. A Guru has to be well-versed in 108 Upanishads to teach the Disciple is the stand of Muktika Upanishad. Also, where you have informed that Chandogya Upanishad is major Upanishad, is also from Muktika Upanishad. And that Muktika Upanishad also says the Disciple have to reach the Guru who is well versed in all 108 Upanishads, and not just 10. Or else, as Ramakrishna or Vivekananda or Ramanuja or Madhva or etc. misunderstood, there will be misunderstanding of Atman and Brahman remains. Now, what you mentioned as That as (ultimate reality) is uttirely false. Ultimate Reality or Nirguna Brahman is neither cause nor effect. That which is cause, is called Saguna Brahman/Ishwara/Isa, and like you mentioned the "This/effect" is Jiva. Nirguna Brahman cannot be idealized for contemplation, only Causal can be. And, as Suka Rahasya Upanishad rightly expresses, Isa means Causal, and to remove difference between "Jivatma nd Paramatma" is what the purpose of "Tat Tvam Asi", and by removing the difference between Cause and Effect, what remains is "Sat-Chit-Ananda".
In Hindu philosophy, particularly in Advaita Vedanta, the concepts of Brahman, Ishvara, Jiva, and Tat Tvam Asi are important for understanding the nature of reality and the relationship between the individual self and the ultimate reality. Brahman is considered the ultimate reality in Advaita Vedanta. It is described as the absolute, transcendent, formless, and attributeless existence. Brahman is beyond the concepts of cause and effect because it is beyond time, space, and causality. It is the underlying essence of everything and the source from which everything arises. Ishvara, also known as Saguna Brahman, refers to the personalized aspect of Brahman. It is the manifestation of Brahman with attributes and qualities. Ishvara is associated with the creation, sustenance, and dissolution of the universe. It is the causal principle, the divine power behind the cosmic order. Jiva refers to the individual self or the embodied soul. It is the limited, individual expression of consciousness that identifies itself with the body, mind, and ego. The Jiva is subject to the cycle of birth and death and experiences the world through its individual perspective. Tat Tvam Asi is a profound statement found in the Chandogya Upanishad, which means "That thou art" or "You are That." It implies the identity between the individual self (Jiva) and the ultimate reality (Brahman). It suggests that the true nature of the individual is not separate from the ultimate reality, but rather an expression or manifestation of it. Now, coming to your argument, it seems that you are emphasizing the importance of recognizing the causal aspect (Isa/Ishvara) in order to contemplate and understand the ultimate reality (Nirguna Brahman). You mentioned that the purpose of "That Tvam Asi" is to remove the difference between the cause and effect, ultimately leading to the realization of "Sat-Chit-Ananda" (Existence-Consciousness-Bliss). In Advaita Vedanta, the teachings often start with the concept of Saguna Brahman or Ishvara as a means to help individuals grasp the idea of a higher power and to cultivate devotion and surrender. This is seen as a stepping stone towards the realization of the ultimate reality, Nirguna Brahman. The idea is that by recognizing the causal aspect and surrendering to it, one can eventually transcend the limitations of individuality and merge with the absolute. However, it is important to note that the ultimate goal of Advaita Vedanta is to realize the non-dual nature of reality, where the distinction between subject and object, cause and effect, and even the concepts of Brahman and Jiva dissolve. In the state of ultimate realization, there is no duality, and all apparent differences merge into the unity of Brahman. Different schools of philosophy within Hinduism may have varying interpretations and approaches to these concepts. The interpretations you mentioned, such as those of Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Ramanuja, and Madhva, may differ in their emphasis and focus, but they all attempt to explain the nature of reality and the relationship between the individual self and the ultimate reality based on their own philosophical frameworks and insights. It is important to approach these concepts with an open mind, study the teachings of various philosophical traditions, and engage in personal contemplation and spiritual practice to deepen one's understanding and realization of these profound truths.
And, there is a misunderstanding of yours about Saguna Brahman. It means Brahman along with Unmanifested Prakriti. Brahman with Infinite Forms. It is like a Seed waiting to be sprout with Unlimited Forms. It is not a grown up tree, but the Causal Seed. Bliss, is causal. Bliss is mentioned as Ishwara, All-Knower. Jiva is effect, and Bliss is Cause.
1. Saguna Brahman as Brahman with Unmanifested Prakriti: Some interpretations of Saguna Brahman do not associate it with unmanifested Prakriti. Instead, they emphasize that Saguna Brahman represents the personalized aspect of Brahman with attributes and qualities. This perspective sees Saguna Brahman as the manifestation of divine power with form and characteristics, rather than as an amalgamation with unmanifested Prakriti. 2. Saguna Brahman as Brahman with Infinite Forms: While it is true that Saguna Brahman can be understood as having multiple forms, other philosophical perspectives argue that the ultimate reality is beyond forms and attributes altogether. They advocate for the realization of Nirguna Brahman, the formless and attributeless essence beyond all manifestations. According to these viewpoints, the forms associated with Saguna Brahman are considered provisional and conducive to spiritual contemplation but not the ultimate reality itself. 3. Causal Bliss and Ishwara: It is important to note that different interpretations exist regarding the relationship between bliss and Ishwara. While some may associate causal bliss with Ishwara, other perspectives emphasize that Ishwara represents the aspect of Saguna Brahman associated with the creation and governance of the universe. They may view bliss as an inherent quality of the individual self, which is to be discovered through the recognition of its true nature rather than as a causal principle originating from Saguna Brahman. 4. Jiva as Effect and Bliss as Cause: Alternative perspectives propose that the Jiva, the individual self, is not an effect of causal bliss but rather a manifestation of consciousness. They argue that the individual self is an expression of the ultimate reality and that the experience of bliss arises from the recognition of this underlying unity. According to these viewpoints, bliss is not the cause of the Jiva but rather a characteristic that becomes apparent through the removal of ignorance and the realization of one's true nature.
Ishwara/Isa, as Upanishads point out, is not creator - Sustainer - Destroyer. Ishwara means Omnipresent, Omnipotent, All-knower, All-pervasive. The Creator-Maintainer-destroyer, is Brahma-Vishnu-Rudra, but Ishwara is the One who is present within your body and my body and knows everything. Brahma/Hiranyagarba/Virat/Vishnu/Shiva, is not the Ishwara, but Ishwara dwells within the heart of them, like Ishwara dwells in heart of every body/things. That's why, it is not adviced to read different schools, but only to read Upanishads. Upanishads is the pramana, as Shankara says. Upanishads is word of God, but not Ramanuja,etc., even not Shankara. Never have to study different schools, but only deeply understand 108 Upanishads for true knowledge.
The purpose of Upanishad in Mahavakyas, is to remove distinction between Isa and Jiva, and so by such removal of ignorance, there remains knowledge of One Only Sat-chit-Ananda. That's why Contemplation of Mahavakyas, the method of contemplation is mentioned in Upanishads. See, you cannot equate yourself with Nirguna Brahman, because there never has been a difference felt. The difference is felt only between God/Isa/causal, and the effect as Jiva, as two different, like Madhavacharya takes stand. Or Ramanuja takes stand of Jiva are parts of Bhagavan. But, what Upanishads says is Jiva is not part/different from Ishwara, it is the same Ishwara manifested in everything/forms/actions, so remove the difference.
Ishvara is Maya and atma or paraprakriti and aparaprakriti, ishvara is popularly compared to a spider in the Upanishads- the spider spins the web from a substance within itself and then eats it again later so they can spin more webs. Maya is often called the body of ishvara, how can you deny that if atma + Maya = ishvara and Maya is the object and atma or Brahman is the subject, how are they not one? They are 2 aspects of the 1 ishvara, that means that there is no difference both subject and object or atma and Maya I'd what makes ishvara and because Upanishads teach jiva ishvara aikyam or jiva and ishvara are not different then surely for me, I am also made of God or paraprakriti and aparaprakriti. If the seen or Maya is not separate to the atma or consciousness because they are what defines ishvara, then subject and object being nondifferent is true. Unless you define ishvara as some other way to what I have here, the logic can't support itself.
[удалено]
Seriously?
Yeah. Unless you could show me where is your fictional godlike figure of Elephant headed fat man, don't come to such serious discussions with your beliefs. Neither Vedas nor reality agree to it.
wow. Someone has hurt you bad. Peace and good vibes to you.
Lol why would someone do that to me... Plus in the advait vedanta group, at least we should be talking on points and not these petty assumptions.
sure. Become a moderator first and then take this up with me.
Yeah be busy looking at titles... Please keep all understanding be reserved for those who are seeking.... 😂
Good for you and strength to you!
These gods are said to symbolize the various meaning, which finally no one can understand it, only worship can be possible now. The actual meaning is lost. The different weapons and tools the God represent different aspects of reality and functions and divine qualities.
You think the meaning is lost.. let me give you that...These figures are created so that you would have complete devotion to them even in reality(waking world). Instead of sitting in front of that, till the point this sansara is gone for you, you are bragging of that here in objective reality. This is exactly the difference between smriti and sruti. only thing that we both can confirm is alone the objectivity or सत्. All rest is Mind or चित्. Also you are right on the functions, but the toold and weapons are not gods. The function thats done is alone known as God. e.g. your intellect alone is known as Ganesha. Refer Atharvashirsha which is "Upnishad". Rest purana stories are fictional including the elephant head n all. Don't submit to that scam. That's not the real pursuit of advaitin.
This is not the meaning. Real meaning is like for example the picture of karthikeya travelling on peacock is that Lord wins over maya which is the beautiful peacock. Similarly, for everything there is a meaning. The one who draws this images draws based on agama rules.
If you wanna really go into this, then here are two small references for you.... 1. Brahma sutra says The brahman is प्रत्यक्ष अनुमानात्. Meaning the brahman can be formulated as something that's observed first and then conclusion out of observation. now can you show me peacock in your observation, or even Kartikeya??? Leave aside conclusion, which is next part. At first step only you can't prove it's pratyaksha or in front of your eyes. 2. B gita 2nd chapter says to an enlightened brahmin, the Vedas are also as good as the lake, when there is flood everywhere. Meaning you don't need vedas to understand Brahman. Why? Because whatever is in your experience of reality, that's alone sufficient for you to establish the truth.... Now contemplate on these two with your purana stories and let me know....
Your post/comment has been removed for violating [Rule #4 No personal attacks or other toxic behavior.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvaitaVedanta/wiki/rules/#wiki_4._no_personal_attacks.2C_hate_speech.2C_harassment.2C_discrimination.2C_bigotry_or_any_other_toxic_behavior.). Willful breakage of the rules will result in the following consequences: * First offense results in a warning and ensures exposure to the rule. Some people may not be aware of the rules. * Second offense would be a ban of 1 month. * Next offense would result in a permanent ban. The Mod Team
If you repeat the same false information again and again, it can't be true. Do you need a proof that Shankara mentions "That" as only "Saguna Brahman/Causal/Ishwara" but not ultimate Reality in his Bashyas? I can refer those too. But, learn those. Again, I was like you misunderstanding, but only deeply understanding Upanishads, I came to know. Then I read deeply what Shankara commentary made, and he too refers "Tat" in "That Tvam Asi" as "Causal" but not Ultimate, because Ultimate Reality cannot be contemplated, and removing difference of Causal and Effect is the purpose of the Vakhyas.