Rajaram Sir, My God!,what are you,a great phenomenon?My write ups are just switches and you release light that spreads and vibrates in waves.I congratulate myself for functioning as the switch. YM Sarma
On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 8:57 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <[email protected]> wrote: > THE REAL PHILOSOPHY FROM B G BY TILAK ON B G > > The Philorophy of the Absolute Self (Adhyatma) > > paras tasmāt tu bhāvo 'nyo 'vyakto 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ | > > yaḥ sa sarveṣu bhūteṣu naśyatsu na vinaśyati || > > —Gītā (8.20). > > "That second imperceptible substance, which is higher than the (Sāṃkhya) > Imperceptible, and which is eternal, and which is not destroyed even when > all other living things are destroyed, [is the ultimate goal]" > > The sum and substance of the last two chapters was that what was referred > to as the kṣetrajña (Owner of the Body) in the consideration of the Body > and the Ātman is known in Sāṃkhya philosophy as 'Puruṣa'; and that when one > considers the question of the construction and the destruction of the > mutable and immutable or the moveable and immoveable world, one arrives > finally, according to the Sāṃkhyas, at only two independent and eternal > fundamental elements, namely, Matter and Spirit; and that it is necessary > for the Spirit to realise its difference from Matter, that is, its > isolation, and transcend the three qualities (become triguṇātīta) in order > to obtain the total annihilation of its pain and attain Release, Modern > natural scientists explain the order in which Matter places its evolution > before Spirit, after its union with Spirit, in a way slightly different > from the Sāṃkhyas; and, as the natural sciences are further developed, this > order is likely to be improved. But the fundamental proposition that all > perceptible objects have come into existence in a gradual order out of one > imperceptible Matter as a result of the development of the constituents, > cannot possibly be altered. Nevertheless, looking upon this as the > subject-matter of other sciences, the lion of Vedānta does not enter into > any dispute about it. That lion wants to go beyond all these sciences, and > determine what Absolute Element is at the root of the Cosmic Body, and how > a man should be merged in It; and in this its province it will not be > out-roared by any other science. > > As jackals become mute in the presence of the lion, so do all other > sciences in the presence of Vedānta; therefore, an ancient classical writer > has appropriately described Vedānta in the following words: > > tāvat garjanti śāstrāṇi jambukā vipine yathā | > > na garjati mahāśaktiḥ yāvad vedāntakesarī || > > That is: "other sciences howl like jackals in the woods, so long as the > lion of Vedānta, the all-powerful, does not roar". > > The 'Observer' which has been located after the consideration of the Body > and the Ātman, namely, the Puruṣa (Spirit) or Ātman (Self), and > imperceptible Matter with its sattva, rajas and tamas constituents which > has been located after the- consideration of the Mutable and the Immutable, > are both independent according to the Sāṃkhyas, who say that, on that, > account, the fundamental Element of the world must be looked, upon as dual. > But Vedānta goes further, and says that in as- much as the spirits of the > Sāṃkhyas are innumerable (though, they are qualityless), it would be prima > facie better and more proper from the logical point of view (i) to carry to > its- logical conclusion and without exception, the theory of the- unifying > tendency of Knowledge, described in the words, "avibhaktaṃ vibhakteṣu", > which is seen rising from lower grades to higher grades, and as a result of > which tendency. all the various perceptible objects in the universe can be > included in one imperceptible Matter, and (ii) to include both Matter and > these innumerable Spirits finally and without division in the Absolute > Element, than to believe that fundamental Matter is capable of first > ascertaining in what the good of each one of these innumerable Spirits > lies, and of behaving accordingly (Bhagavadgītā 18.20–22). Diversity is the > result of Individuation, and if Spirit is qualityless, these innumerable > Spirits cannot possess the quality of remaining distinct from each other; > or, one has to say that they are not fundamentally innumerable, but that > this innumerability has arisen in them as a result of their contact with > the quality of Individuation possessed by Matter. There arises also another > question, namely, is the union which takes place between independent Spirit > and independent Matter real or illusory?. If you say it is real > (permanent), then, in as much as it can never be got rid of, the Ātman can > never attain Release according to the Sāṃkhya doctrines; and if you say it > is illusory, then, the statement that Matter begins to place its evolution > before Spirit, as a result of its union with Spirit, falls to the ground. > Even the illustration that Matter keeps up a continual dance for the > benefit of Spirit, in the same way as the cow gives milk for the benefit of > its calf, is inappropriate; because, you cannot explain away the relation > between Matter and Spirit in the same way as you can explain the love of > the cow for her calf on the ground that it has come out of her womb > ("Śāṃkarabhāṣya 2. 2. 3). According to Sāṃkhya philosophy, Matter and > Spirit are fundamentally extremely different from each other and whereas > one is gross (jaḍa), the other is self-conscious (sacetana). If these two > substances are extremely different and independent of each other at the > commencement of the world, why should one act for the benefit of the other? > Saying that such is their inherent quality is not a satisfactory answer. If > one has to rely on an inherent quality, why find fault with the > Gross-Non-Dualism (jaḍādvaita) of Haeckel?, Does not Haeckel say that in > the course of the growth of the constituents of fundamental Matter, it > acquires the Self-consciousness of looking at itself or of thinking of > itself? But if the Sāṃkhyas do not accept that position, and if they > differentiate between the 'Observer' and the 'visible world', why should > one not make further use of the logic by which one arrives at this > differentiation? Howmuchsoever one may examine the visible world, and come > to the conclusion that the sensory nerves of the eye possess particular > properties, yet, the one who has ascertained this, remains a separate > entity. When in this way the Spirit which sees the visible world is found > to be different from the visible world which it sees, then, is there or is > there not some way for us for ascertaining who this 'Observer' is, as also > whether the real form of the visible universe is as we perceive it by our > organs, or different from it? Sāṃkhya philosophers say that, as these > questions can never be solved, one is driven to look upon Matter and Spirit > as two fundamentally different and independent elements; and if we consider > the matter purely from the point of view of natural sciences, this opinion > of the Sāṃkhyas cannot be said to be incorrect; because, the 'Observer', or > what is known in Vedānta as the 'Ātman', cannot at any time become > perceptible to the organs of the Observer, that is, to its own organs, as a > separate entity, in the same way as we can examine the properties of the > other objects in the universe as a result of their having become > perceptible to our organs; and how can human organs examine such a > substance which is incapable of perception by the organs, that is, beyond > the reach of the organs (indriyātīta)? > > The Blessed Lord has himself described the Ātman in the Bhagavadgītā in > the following words:– > > nainaṃ chindanti śastrāṇi nainaṃ dahati pāvakaḥ | > > na cainaṃ kledayanty āpo na śoṣayati mārutaḥ || > > (Bhagavadgītā 2.23). > > That is, "it, that is, the Ātman cannot be cut by weapons, it cannot be > burnt by fire, it cannot be wetted by water or dried up by wind". > Therefore, the Ātman is not such a thing that it will be liquified like > other objects by pouring on it a liquid substance like sulphuric acid, or > that we will be able to see its interior by cutting it by sharp instruments > in a dissecting room, or that by holding it over fire it will be turned to > gas, or that it will be dried up by wind!" > > > > In short, all the devices which natural scientists have got for examining > worldly objects fall flat in this case. Then, how is the Ātman to be > examined? The question does appear to be difficult; but if one ponders a > little over the matter, it will be seen to be not difficult. How have even > the Sāṃkhyas determined that Spirit is qualityless and independent? Have > they not done that by experience got by their own consciousness? Then, why > not make use of the same method for determining the true nature of Matter > and Spirit 1 Herein lies the great difference between Materialistic > philosophy and the philosophy of the Absolute Self. The subject-matter of > Materialistic philosophy is perceptible to the organs, whereas that of the > philosophy of the Absolute Self is beyond the organs, that is, it is > self-perceptible, or something which one oneself alone can realise. It may > be argued that if the Ātman is self-perceptible, then let each person > acquire such knowledge of it as he himself can: where is the use of the > philosophy of the Absolute Self? This objection will be proper, if the Mind > or the Conscience of each man were equally pure. But, as we know by > experience that the purity or strength of everybody's mind is not the same, > we have to- accept as authoritative in this matter the experience of only > those persons whose minds are extremely pure, clean, and broad. There is no > sense in carrying on a foolish argument that 'I think like this' or 'you > think like that' etc. Vedānta does not ask you to abandon logic altogether. > All that it says is that since the subject-matter of the philosophy of the > Absolute Self is selfperceptible, that is, as it is not capable of > discernment by Materialistic methods, those arguments, which are > inconsistent with the personal and direct experience which supermen, > possessing an extremely pure, clean, and broad mind, have described > regarding the Absolute Self, cannot be taken as correct in the > consideration of that philosophy. Just as in Materialistic sciences, > inferences inconsistent with physical experience are considered useless, so > in the philosophy of the Absolute Self, personal experience or something > which one's Ātman has realised is considered of higher value than technical > skill. That teaching which is consistent with such selfexperience is > acceptable to the Vedāntists. Śrīmat Śaṃkarācārya has laid down this very > principle in his commentary on the Vedānta-Sūtras, and those who wish to > study the philosophy of the Absolute Self must always bear it in mind. > There is an ancient saying that:–acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṃs tarkeṇa > sādhayet । prakṛtibhyaḥ paraṃ yat tu tad acintyasya lakṣaṇam ॥ that is, > "one should not, by mere imagination or inference, draw conclusions about > those objects on which it is impossible to contemplate as they are beyond > the reach of the organs; that substance which is beyond Matter, (which is > the fundamental substance of the entire universe), is. in this way, > incapable of contemplation"; and this stanza has been, adopted in the > Mahābhārata (Śriman Mahābhārata Bhīṣma 5.12) and also in the commentary of > Śrī Śaṃkarācārya on the Vedānta-Sūtras, but with the reading 'yojayet' > instead of 'sādhayet'. (Śāṃkarabhāṣya 2.1. 7). It is similarly stated in > the Muṇḍakopaniṣad and the Kaṭhopaniṣad, that knowledge of the Absolute > Self cannot be got merely by imagination (Muṇḍakopaniṣad 3.2.3; > Kaṭhopaniṣad 2.8.9 and 22). That is why the Upaniṣads have an important > place in the philosophy of the Absolute Self. Much attention had been paid > in India in ancient times to the question of concentrating the mind, and > there was developed in our country an independent science on that subject > which is known as the (Pātañjala) Yoga science. Those venerable Ṛṣis who, > being experts in that science, had besides minds which were naturally very > pure and broad, have described in the Upaniṣads the experience gained by > them by introspection about the nature of the Ātman, or all that with which > their pure and peaceful minds were inspired. Therefore, for drawing 1 any > conclusion about any Metaphysical principle, one cannot but refer to these > Śruti texts (Kaṭhopaniṣad 4.1). One may find various arguments which > support and justify this self-experience according to one's own acumen; but > thereby, the authoritativeness of the original self-experience does not > suffer. It is true that the Bhagavadgītā is a Smṛti text; but, I have > explained in the very beginning of the first chapter, that it is considered > to be as authoritative in the matter as the Upaniṣads. I have, therefore, > in this chapter first explained with authorities, but simply–that is, > without giving reasons–the doctrines propounded in the Gītā and in the > Upaniṣads about this unimaginable Substance which is beyond Matter, and I > have considered later on in the chapter in what way those theories can be > scientifically supported. > > The Bhagavadgītā does not accept the Sāṃkhya dualism of Matter and Spirit, > and the first doctrine of the philosophy of the Absolute Self in the Gītā, > as also in Vedānta, is that there is at the root of the moveable and > immoveable world, a third Principle which is all-pervading, imperceptible > and imperishable, and which is beyond both Matter and Spirit. Although the > Sāṃkhya Prakṛti is imperceptible, it is qualityful (saguṇa), because, it is > composed of the three constituents. But whatever is qualityful is perisable. > > Therefore, that something else which, being imperceptible, still survives > after this qualityful imperceptible Matter has been destroyed, is the real > and permanent Principle of the entire Cosmos–as has been stated in the Gītā > in the course of the discussion on Matter and Spirit in the stanza > (Bhagavadgītā 8.20) quoted at the beginning of this chapter; and later on, > in the fifteenth chapter, after referring to the Mutable and the > Immutable–the Perceptible and the Imperceptible–as the two Sāṃkhya > elements, the Gītā says:– > > uttamaḥ puruṣas tv anyaḥ paramātmety udāhṛtaḥ | > > yo lokatrayam āviśya bibharty avyaya īśvaraḥ || > > (15.17) > > That is, "that Puruṣa, which is different from both these (Matter and > Spirit) is the Super-Excellent, the One which is known as the Absolute > Ātman, the Inexhaustible and the AllPowerful; and, pervading the > three-sphered universe, It protects it." > > As this Spirit is 'beyond' both the Mutable and the Immutable, that is, > beyond the Perceptible and the Imperceptible, it is properly called (See > Bhagavadgītā 15.18) 'the Absolute Spirit' (puruṣottama). > > Even in the Mahābhārata, Bhṛgu has said to Bhāradvāja as follows in > defining the word 'Paramātman': > > ātmā kṣetrajña ity uktaḥ saṃyuktaḥ prakṛtair guṇaiḥ | > > tair eva tu vinirmuktaḥ paramātmety udāhṛtaḥ || > > (Ma. Bhā. Śān. 187. 24). > > That is, "when the Ātman is imprisoned within the body, it is called > Kṣetrajña (or Jīvātman, i.e., personal Self); and when the same Ātman is > released from these 'prākṛta' qualities, that is, from the qualities of > Matter or of the body, it is known as the Paramātman (Absolute Self)". > > K RAJARAM IRS 271224 > > On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 at 07:14, Markendeya Yeddanapudi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> -- >> *Mar**Revival of the Holistic Approach or Philosophy* >> >> >> >> *Phil means love. Philosophy means the feeling and experiencing of love >> in all manifestations. The Philosopher tried to experience love in the one >> poem-verse—the Universe, not as an observer but as a participant. The >> original meaning of physics was meditation. The philosopher preferred an >> isolated place far from the bustles and disturbances to feel the universe >> concentratedly, to ultimately achieve the feeling of oneness with the >> Universe, the great song or poem of love. She/he created many >> manifestations of love in the shape of songs, poems, dances, paintings, >> sculptures...* >> >> *She/he danced and sang with the trees, seas, rivers, lakes, birds, >> beasts, insects, bees, creating the various art forms, adoring the great >> creator responsible for the bliss. God was not an opinion created by >> mechanical logic. God was feeling, bliss, sublimation, not amenable to >> Cartesian dissection.* >> >> *Even employing the Cartesian logic, if one just imagines as to what can >> happen when one can actually see everything, one can know the utter >> mistaken method behind the Cartesian approach. As it is, we are too deep in >> the mechanical or technological approach and it will be lunacy to suggest >> that we abandon all technology. I speculate on my own whether it will not >> be corrective if we adopt the following alternative via media method.* >> >> *Let us first imagine that we can see everything—atoms, particles, >> energies, their transformations due to unending interactions..., and then >> imagine the me or you, or they...as the ever changing phenomena of >> consciousness entities, as parts of that cosmic operations. As an entity of >> consciousness, you have to radically change your self definition. Atoms, >> particles, energies...flow into you and out of you. They create >> consciousness flows---yourself.* >> >> *Now what are those various cosmic flows creating, changing..., you? Can >> they be categorised, giving you the place as the subject matter? The most >> important point is that you as a consciousness entity responsible for the >> change of waves in super position into particles must always be the >> subject. Let there be a philosophical science which is not an oxymoron. We >> have to fight our total surrender to technology and the resulting >> redundancy.* >> >> *There is electromagnetism everywhere in the Universe including in the >> hypothesized Absolute Zero situation which simply cannot happen. Because >> the Universe is full of jostling particles a package of infinite length, >> breadth, density, where which is which is impossible to determine, and >> vibrating as space-time. You are part of the universe and life is actually >> vibrating, the vibrating consciousness.* >> >> *Many Universities today do not even have the faculty of Philosophy, as >> the courses do not spin money. They are creating only those fit for >> economic occupations, the Basmasuras that destroy nature routinely as >> economic activity.* >> >> *YM Sarma* >> >> *Chat GPT* >> >> The text you've shared is a deep reflection on the nature of philosophy, >> consciousness, and the interconnectedness of life and the universe. It >> advocates for a revival of the holistic approach to philosophy, where love, >> not just logic, is the central guiding force. Let's break down the core >> ideas: >> >> 1. *Philosophy as Love*: The text begins by emphasizing that >> philosophy is not just an academic exercise or theoretical framework, but a >> way of feeling and experiencing love in all its forms. The philosopher, >> according to the author, is not a mere observer of the universe but a >> participant in it, feeling the oneness and interconnectedness of all >> things. The pursuit of this love leads to the creation of art, such as >> poems, songs, dances, and paintings, all of which are manifestations of the >> philosopher's love for the universe. >> >> 2. *Rejection of Cartesian Logic*: The text critiques the Cartesian >> approach, which dissects and analyzes the universe in mechanical, logical >> terms. Instead, the author proposes an alternative way of understanding the >> universe: as a dynamic, flowing entity in which consciousness is deeply >> interconnected with the cosmic operations. This flow of particles, >> energies, and consciousness creates a "self" that is ever-changing and >> shaped by the cosmos. >> >> 3. *A New Philosophy of Science*: The author imagines a philosophy >> of science that merges consciousness with the physical world. It is not >> enough to merely view the universe as a collection of particles and >> energies; we must recognize that we, as conscious beings, are also integral >> parts of this cosmic flow. The text calls for a philosophical science, one >> that does not reduce everything to mere mechanical processes but >> acknowledges the significance of consciousness and the subjectivity of >> experience. >> >> 4. *Technology and Surrender*: The author expresses concern about >> humanity's total surrender to technology and its consequences, such as the >> destruction of nature and the reduction of human beings to mere economic >> agents. There is a critique of the narrow focus of modern education, which >> prioritizes economic utility over philosophical exploration and a deeper >> understanding of life and existence. >> >> 5. *Cosmic Vibrations*: The text also delves into the idea that >> everything in the universe is vibrating, including consciousness itself. >> Even in the most extreme conditions, like the hypothesized Absolute Zero, >> there is still movement and energy at play, which reflects the >> interconnectedness and constant flow of the universe. >> >> 6. *The Decline of Philosophy in Academia*: Finally, the author >> laments the decline of philosophy departments in modern universities, as >> courses that do not generate immediate economic returns are often >> sidelined. This, the author suggests, contributes to a society that values >> economic gain over deeper intellectual and spiritual exploration. >> >> In essence, the text calls for a paradigm shift in how we view ourselves >> and our relationship with the universe. It advocates for a more holistic, >> integrative approach that recognizes the importance of consciousness, love, >> and interconnectedness alongside technological progress. Philosophy, in >> this view, is not just a tool for understanding the world but a way to >> engage with it emotionally, spiritually, and creatively. >> >> >> > -- *Mar* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHC%2Ber%2B1hdWi-ORr00%2B-uVe27iB8SXOcxJCigYvG1xrx_UQ%40mail.gmail.com.
