Watch "Spiritual thoughts, talks, discussions." on YouTube
putran M
putran M
putran M
putran M
putran M
AI translated my talk. See attached. I had to do quite a bit of mostly-minor editing, some places as correction and others for improvement in translation, but I think that if one speaks with greater formality, the translation would be quite satisfactory. It tells me that the days when we can talk freely in public in western countries thinking no one can understand, those days are in the past.
putran M
Some notes on AI’s translation
There are places where AI seems to trim out excess conversational usages and some places where it seems to use its "intelligence" to fill in gaps or extrapolate or guess the intent instead of giving a literal translation. Some of these seem good and others may amount to interpretation. At other places, a perfectly literal translation is not necessarily better for the reader; so in that sense AI does good attempt.
For instance, I said ~ "So in the midst of all this, you find that god, hold on to him, so it [the religion] says.". AI translated as "In the midst of all this, if you find that god, hold on to him." I did like that it took out the "so it says" - it is natural in conversation but not in reading. At the same time, I did not like that it added an "if" in front of the sentence, which I did not intend there.
The very next sentence. A literal translation would be more like "What God is, something or other, it is a permanent thing." AI translated it simply as "God is something, it is a permanent thing." But this kind of difference does not alter the content.
However, there were other places where it struggled or misinterpreted.
Examples.
1.Me: Trees, plants, creepers.
AI: Trees, plants, birds.
The word "kodi" refers to creeper (imu) but internet says it (or kOdi for kOzhi) can also refer to hens or other birds.
Me:
"assume for instance I am having Shiva Lingam. Shivan or Shiva Lingam. If I take Shiva Lingam [Shiva] as my Ishta devata, Even if my eyes see the world, my mind-eye is focusing on that Shiva Lingam. It goes and settles in the Shiva Lingam.”
AI:
"if I say I am Shiva Lingam, Shiva, I am Shiva Lingam.I am Shiva Lingam, I am Shiva Lingam. Even if I see the world, the eyes in my mind are not focused on Shiva Lingam. It is not settled in Shiva Lingam."
Literally, the conversational colloquial tamil here are: “I now shiva lingam I take suppose” and "Now I shiva lingam [pause] my ishta devata thus if I take". AI decided wrongly to mean "I am shiva lingam”multiple times over. So the understanding itself got altered here. But the "mind-eye" was actually “the eye in my mind" in the conversation; so that is good by AI.
However, there was another clear error here as well. I said "It goes and settles in the Shiva Lingam" and AI has translated as "It is not settled in Shiva Lingam". Only way I could understand how this happened is: the word "goes" in tamil is pOi and the word lie (untruth) is poi, so I said "pOi settle Ayidarathu" which is "goes and gets settled" but AI seems to have taken "pOi" as "poi" and thus negated as "not settled".
Another example:
Me: Then after [that], for 2 hours, the mind doesn't know what to do. Okay, it goes and gets caught in YouTube, Can get caught, no problem. That is a type of trap in some sense. It keeps us somewhat numb and dumb.
AI: Then after 2 hours, the mind doesn't know what to do. Okay, we can get caught in YouTube. No problem. That is also a catch. It keeps us numb and dumb.
Here I did not like the "after 2 hours" replacing the "after [that], for 2 hours", but thought its streamlining of the Youtube sentence was fine. "it goes and gets caught in YouTube, can get caught, no problem" -> "we can get caught in YouTube. No problem".
Another example (earlier):
Me: other than the periods when we are actively at work, this mind is susceptible to be running around in random useless ways.
AI: other than the periods when we are actively at work. This mind has the ability to go around like a dream.
This is AI intelligence at work. I mention no dream. Although here, one may appreciate its interpretational skill if we think it gives an enhancement to the understanding.
Another example:
Me: I don't need to do anything in this world. I will worship that Shivan. That's my business.
AI: I don't need to do anything in this world. I need to worship the Lord. That's my business.
I found this very interesting. I had said "that Shivan" and AI decided I meant "the Lord" in general. It is interpretational difference that may or may not be agreeable. In this context, I wanted to express the bhakta's specific devotional-connection to his Ishta devata and not the generic Ishvara worshippable in all names and forms.
(Although perhaps if I was talking more philosophically, I should also bring in more the seeing of Shivan in all things etc. But I did not think like that during that talk.)
Another example:
Me: Too much that I have to save the world, or that you have to do this for the world, then only it is worship. None of that. For me, that Shivan is enough.
AI: If I have to serve the world a lot, you have to do this for the world, then only you will have worship. For me, Shiva is enough.
Actually, here I used the word "save" in English. It is possible AI 'heard' it as serve but one wonders whether it 'decided' the more precise sense is as “serve". Again, it makes me think twice and in this case decide I would rather retain save than the specific serve.
putran M
putran M
Namaskaram,I added 7 more audio-videos at end of the playlist, on "mind world, sense world", addressed primarily to a general family-friend type of audience. The first is sort of non-english/tamil intro, taped while climbing up and down stairs. The rest in English. Most of first 6 talks approach topic from psychological (or with minimal religion terminology), the last one brings in more explicitly the religious context.
putran M
Bhaskar YR
"just as the light of our Consciousness illumines the modifications of the mind and projects the mind-world, so also (from the higher standpoint) the light of Ishvara illumines the jnana enshrined in His Maya-shakti and thereby projects the universe of cognitions in Consciousness. Ishvara plays in it, as it, through it, again by recourse to His intrinsic power, His jnana-iccha-kriya Maya-shakti."
praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji
Hare Krishna
This is more of a Astika way of looking at Ishwara srushti instead of telling everything is avidyAkruta or avidyAkalpita. Ishwara plays in it, ‘as it’, through it etc. conveys the upanishadic truth that Ishwara is the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa for this jagat. By AtmaivedaM sarvaM shruti telling us the truth without attributing the causality to brahman, jagat non-difference. But to the question : How the world emanates from nishkriya Brahman? The answer that bhAshyakAra gives is : Like the jeeva in sushupti is without any kriya and also he does not have any upAdhi sambandha to perform any activity. But the dream world is indeed created by him!! The mind-world as per your first sentence. Therefore, just as dream creation takes place by the pratyagAtman / jeeva without activity, the world could be created by Brahman without any activity. We should not try to scrutinize this shruti siddhAnta by using our dry logic because shruti itself exclaims helplessly at some place : kO adda veda ka eha pravOchat eyaM visrushtiH yata AbabhUva ( we chant this mantra in udaka shAnti) Who knows it clearly? Who can explain it how this mysterious
creation has happened? Geetaacharya also warns us not to dig too deep into it by merely using shushka tarka because even maharshi-s not even god knows his creation..geeta na me viduH suragaNaaH prabhavaM na maharshayaH…So those who consider themselves as Astika-s should not discuss this beyond what has been declared by shruti and siddhAnta.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Bhaskar
PS : Though Saturday, it is working day as it is quarter end for us…before leaving office I just saw your email & thought of sharing my views. I know I have to attend some backlogs, perhaps in new year I could be able to look into it.
putran M
This is more of a Astika way of looking at Ishwara srushti instead of telling everything is avidyAkruta or avidyAkalpita. Ishwara plays in it, ‘as it’, through it etc. conveys the upanishadic truth that Ishwara is the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa for this jagat. By AtmaivedaM sarvaM shruti telling us the truth without attributing the causality to brahman, jagat non-difference. But to the question : How the world emanates from nishkriya Brahman? The answer that bhAshyakAra gives is : Like the jeeva in sushupti is without any kriya and also he does not have any upAdhi sambandha to perform any activity. But the dream world is indeed created by him!! The mind-world as per your first sentence. Therefore, just as dream creation takes place by the pratyagAtman / jeeva without activity, the world could be created by Brahman without any activity. We should not try to scrutinize this shruti siddhAnta by using our dry logic because shruti itself exclaims helplessly at some place : kO adda veda ka eha pravOchat eyaM visrushtiH yata AbabhUva ( we chant this mantra in udaka shAnti) Who knows it clearly? Who can explain it how this mysterious
creation has happened? Geetaacharya also warns us not to dig too deep into it by merely using shushka tarka because even maharshi-s not even god knows his creation..geeta na me viduH suragaNaaH prabhavaM na maharshayaH…So those who consider themselves as Astika-s should not discuss this beyond what has been declared by shruti and siddhAnta.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Bhaskar
PS : Though Saturday, it is working day as it is quarter end for us…before leaving office I just saw your email & thought of sharing my views. I know I have to attend some backlogs, perhaps in new year I could be able to look into it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6625088CA81CCAF6304FC3F084B1A%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.
Sudhanshu Shekhar
However, that doesn’t mean someone who says mind projects world is wrong; they may want to keep in tact the unblemished nonduality of Self, and hence prefer to attribute causality to a separate causal factor (that is mithya). So there can be different presentations that lead us to advaita tattva.
Bhaskar YR
praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji
Hare Krishna
I don't think of my writing/talk as contradicting or opposing vivarana.
- But as you know as per some vyAkhyAna Ishwara shakti, his creation, his nitya Shuddha buddha mukta svarUpa etc. are just concocted fantasy theories in the conditioned mind. So even they dared to say guru-Acharya etc. are phantoms in your troubled mind.
I follow a certain "maryada" (term you often emphasize) with regards to my terminology and presentation, as it appeals to me or as generally a bhakti-laden sampradaya will teach to the general public.
Ø IMO, the bhakti pradhAna or bhakti laden jnAna mArga is not only for manda-madhya adhikAri-s, it is the core Astika teaching for doing the Advaita jnAna mArga sAdhana for even socalled uttama adhikAri-s. And the statement : Ishwara based srushti and accepting it as vedAnta siddhAnta is the ‘vedAnta maryAda’, is not from the desk of blind bhakta (a below average student of Advaita) but from the bhAshyakAra himself.
For instance, I do not like a statement like “mind [maya/avidya] projects the mind world”. If we are positing a causality, then my maryada is that the Self alone is identity of all word-objects (including mind etc.) and hence Self alone should be known as cause,
- And as well as effect. The kAraNatvaM (causality) to brahman is there to establish the shruti siddhAnta i.e. ekatvaM. Hence kAryakAraNa ananyatvaM is one of the methodologies (prakriya) used in main prakriya adhyArOpa-apavAda.
and thus it is Self identified with mind-upadhi who (appears to) projects the mind-world.
- And this self which is identified with mind upAdhi is the pratyagAtman (upAdhi parichinna chaitanyaM) strives hard to get rid of the avidyA. And those who are familiar with transactional differences between pratyagAtma and paramAtma do not want to propagate the theory of brahmAshrita avidyA through dry logic.
However, that doesn’t mean someone who says mind projects world is wrong;
- And we are also not saying that mind projected world is not there…but we say mind projected world is there within that projecting mind and it is jnAnAdhyAsa due to jnAna abhAva (agrahaNa). What is there is rope (brahman) but what our mind sees is snake (adhyAsa) due to lack of knowledge of rope. So, the mind projecting world (snake) is misconception of rope and there was / is / never will be snake in rope even though during the cognizing of snake in rope.
they may want to keep in tact the unblemished nonduality of Self, and hence prefer to attribute causality to a separate causal factor (that is mithya). So there can be different presentations that lead us to advaita tattva.
Ø When they introduce the SEPARATE CAUSAL FACTOR which is directly having the ashraya in that very non-dual brahman, I don’t know how they would succeed in establishing the non-duality of self that too even before the notions of jeeva and jagat.
(I started writing a lot more, but decided to try and avoid tripping into the maya=avidya topic :)
Ø It’s OK prabhuji, the conspicuous difference between mAya and avidyA is very clear to those who believe in Ishwara’s mAya shakti & his srushti and jeeva’s conditioned miserable state due to avidyA/adhyAsa. And avidyAkruta nAma-rUpa as well. bhAshyakAra clearly explains how jagat is brahma mAnasa pratyaya and how the snake in the rope is an antaHkaraNa dOsha of the pratyagAtman / jeeva / parichinna Chaitanya.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
putran M
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/VI1PR06MB6638D89307F03560615EB3E084BCA%40VI1PR06MB6638.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.