brahman / maya / ishvara (and responding to why brahman does NOT equal "energy")
16 views
Skip to first unread message
Prashant Parikh
Mar 10, 2024, 10:00:54 AM3/10/24
to vedanta...@googlegroups.com, vedant...@googlegroups.com, dharmika...@googlegroups.com
Namaste, someone asked if brahman and energy are the same. I've responded below, touching upon brahman/mAyA /ishvara... I've repeated and emphasized certain themes a few times to ensure the vision is well entrenched and not glossed over
________
hariH om ji, thanks for your query
I'm afraid your understanding of consciousness as energy is inaccurate, and will pose a great obstacle in the assimilation of self-knowledge. See reasons below:
1. While energy cannot be created or destroyed, energy can be transformed into various forms. Brahman is the changeless self, and is the content of all reality, as existence-consciousness-limitnessness.
2. Energy can be objectified and quantified (it can be measured in units, that's how we can 'sell' energy from the power-grid). Brahman cannot be quantified. It is the truth of the subject and object.
3. Also, energy is a scalar quantity, it is inert. Brahman is of the very nature of consciousness
4. Energy is sometimes more and sometimes less concentrated in various pockets. Brahman, again, is not an object nor has properties, and hence cannot be confined. Again it is the base reality or the substantive behind all substances.
5. Energy can be converted into matter, and vice versa. Thus further proving it is an 'object', just of a subtle nature. Matter is grossified energy, and energy is subtle matter. E = MC^2 justifies this. Brahman is not an object and cannot be 'transformed' into an object, brahman is the content of all objects.
6. The total matter-energy content of the universe is constant, but that cannot be equated to brahman. It is like saying the total amount of gold on planet earth is constant but it can only be passed fro one person to another. That does not make gold satyam, it is still mithya.
7. In other words, energy is mithya, just as matter is mithya, and just as this whole jagat / cosmos is mithya. All that is satyam is brahman alone
8. What is mAyA? mAyA is also mithyA 🙂 mAyA is the shakti that undergoes transformation from one form to become another form. Anything that undergoes 'change' is mithyA.
9. That which underlies all change, that upon which all changes take place without that thing changing at all, is satyam
Example: The reflection undergoes change, the mirror remains the same. Reflection is mithya, mirror is satyam
10. What about Ishvara? Ishvara, for all intents and purposes, should not be seen as different from brahman as far as we are concerned, but if one has to be technical, Brahman and Maya shakti can never be separated.
Brahman is satyam, mAyA, being mithyA, is the potential of brahman to appear as this cosmos.
11. brahman, as satyam, always is. When the world is unmanifest, mAyA is latent / dormant, potent. mAyA manifests as the world.
The unmanifest world is the latent / dormant/ potential form of mAyA
The manifest world is the active / kinetic form of mAyA
12. mAyA also manifests as matter. mAyA also manifests as energy.
13. Remember, brahman always is, but there is never a time when mAyA shakti is not. Then doesn't that make mAyA satyam? No, because if it were satyam it would not be subject to change, and mAyA always undergoes change.
When mAyA is dormant, from the standpoint of this cosmos, we refer to mAyA as Ishvara or antaryami
When mAyA has manifested sufficiently and there is a subtle cosmos, we refer to mAyA as hiraNyagarbha or the subtle totality
when mAyA has manifested fully, and there is a gross / tangible cosmos, we refer to mAyA as virAT, or the total tangible cosmos.
14. In all 3 cases, we give ishvara alone a different name (antaryami, hiranyagarbha, virAT) depending on what aspect and to what proportion mAyA has manifested. But you notice, Ishvara's various roles change, but like mAyA, ishvara remains. Ishvara sustains. Ishvara is that into which everything rests.
This ishvara from the standpoint of the limitless whole, is brahman alone.
And brahman, from the standpoint of the cosmos, is ishvara alone.
The distinction is technical, and for a student of vedanta not very important.
In summary:
The truth of energy is brahman but brahman is not energy only (truth of pot is clay but clay is not pot, truth of wave is water, but water is not wave only)
Energy is one type of manifestation of Ishvara (endowed with mAyA shakti). Ishvara manifests as other things, including the knowledge content of the jagat, the order that underlies it.
If you would like to discuss further, I'd be happy to converse over a call to help clarify.
Harih Om
________
hariH om ji, thanks for your query
I'm afraid your understanding of consciousness as energy is inaccurate, and will pose a great obstacle in the assimilation of self-knowledge. See reasons below:
1. While energy cannot be created or destroyed, energy can be transformed into various forms. Brahman is the changeless self, and is the content of all reality, as existence-consciousness-limitnessness.
2. Energy can be objectified and quantified (it can be measured in units, that's how we can 'sell' energy from the power-grid). Brahman cannot be quantified. It is the truth of the subject and object.
3. Also, energy is a scalar quantity, it is inert. Brahman is of the very nature of consciousness
4. Energy is sometimes more and sometimes less concentrated in various pockets. Brahman, again, is not an object nor has properties, and hence cannot be confined. Again it is the base reality or the substantive behind all substances.
5. Energy can be converted into matter, and vice versa. Thus further proving it is an 'object', just of a subtle nature. Matter is grossified energy, and energy is subtle matter. E = MC^2 justifies this. Brahman is not an object and cannot be 'transformed' into an object, brahman is the content of all objects.
6. The total matter-energy content of the universe is constant, but that cannot be equated to brahman. It is like saying the total amount of gold on planet earth is constant but it can only be passed fro one person to another. That does not make gold satyam, it is still mithya.
7. In other words, energy is mithya, just as matter is mithya, and just as this whole jagat / cosmos is mithya. All that is satyam is brahman alone
8. What is mAyA? mAyA is also mithyA 🙂 mAyA is the shakti that undergoes transformation from one form to become another form. Anything that undergoes 'change' is mithyA.
9. That which underlies all change, that upon which all changes take place without that thing changing at all, is satyam
Example: The reflection undergoes change, the mirror remains the same. Reflection is mithya, mirror is satyam
10. What about Ishvara? Ishvara, for all intents and purposes, should not be seen as different from brahman as far as we are concerned, but if one has to be technical, Brahman and Maya shakti can never be separated.
Brahman is satyam, mAyA, being mithyA, is the potential of brahman to appear as this cosmos.
11. brahman, as satyam, always is. When the world is unmanifest, mAyA is latent / dormant, potent. mAyA manifests as the world.
The unmanifest world is the latent / dormant/ potential form of mAyA
The manifest world is the active / kinetic form of mAyA
12. mAyA also manifests as matter. mAyA also manifests as energy.
13. Remember, brahman always is, but there is never a time when mAyA shakti is not. Then doesn't that make mAyA satyam? No, because if it were satyam it would not be subject to change, and mAyA always undergoes change.
When mAyA is dormant, from the standpoint of this cosmos, we refer to mAyA as Ishvara or antaryami
When mAyA has manifested sufficiently and there is a subtle cosmos, we refer to mAyA as hiraNyagarbha or the subtle totality
when mAyA has manifested fully, and there is a gross / tangible cosmos, we refer to mAyA as virAT, or the total tangible cosmos.
14. In all 3 cases, we give ishvara alone a different name (antaryami, hiranyagarbha, virAT) depending on what aspect and to what proportion mAyA has manifested. But you notice, Ishvara's various roles change, but like mAyA, ishvara remains. Ishvara sustains. Ishvara is that into which everything rests.
This ishvara from the standpoint of the limitless whole, is brahman alone.
And brahman, from the standpoint of the cosmos, is ishvara alone.
The distinction is technical, and for a student of vedanta not very important.
In summary:
The truth of energy is brahman but brahman is not energy only (truth of pot is clay but clay is not pot, truth of wave is water, but water is not wave only)
Energy is one type of manifestation of Ishvara (endowed with mAyA shakti). Ishvara manifests as other things, including the knowledge content of the jagat, the order that underlies it.
If you would like to discuss further, I'd be happy to converse over a call to help clarify.
Harih Om
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages