Comments on: Vedic wisdom needs to be lived

By: Maria Wirth

Maria Wirth — Wed, 10 Apr 2024 05:00:45 +0000

The Christian view of ‘soul’ is different. Anandamayi Ma was asked once: how would the world go on, if we all strive for mukti. her reply: don’t worry about the world. you strive for mukti.

By: Ingo Diga

Ingo Diga — Mon, 08 Apr 2024 10:24:53 +0000

Vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort Maria. Natürlich ist Name Schall und Rauch, wie Goethe diese Wahrheit schon so schön poetisch zu beschreiben wusste.
Und doch, so man sich mit vedischer Wissenschaft beschäftigten mag ist es wie in jeder anderen Wissenschaft auch sinnvoll zu wissen, was bestimmte „Fachwörter“ bezeichnen, bedeuten oder meinen. Und da sind die Wörter Atma, Brahman oder Paramatma eben nicht dasselbe, sondern haben drei verschiede Bedeutungen! Auch wenn es viel einfacher wäre oder einfacher zu verstehen wäre, wenn das alles das Gleiche oder Selbe wäre … Stichwort Advaita Vedanta.
Das Einssein, was „man“ in tiefer Mediation erfährt ist im Übrigen nicht die eine Wahrheit und auch nicht Atma, Brahman oder Paramatman. Es ist ein sehr schöner gedankenfreier Zustand innerer Einkehr, aber zunächst erst mal nichts darüber hinaus ..
Die Erkenntnis des Selbst, Brahman oder sogar Paramatman ist schließlich nichts Anderes als Erleuchtung oder das, was heute oft gern Selbsterkenntnis genannt wird. Das ist bekanntlich etwas sehr Seltenes (!) und hat mit Meditation selbst eigentlich nicht unbedingt etwas zu tun. Es mag Menschen geben haben, die während der Mediation die Erkenntnis erlangten (mir ist nur Siddhartha Gautama Buddha bekannt), allerdings ist meiner Meinung nach unter den vedischen Gelehrten immer Konsens gewesen, dass die Erkenntnis nicht abhängig ist von speziellen Praktiken, Techniken, Streben oder bestimmten Einstellungen. Im Gegenteil. Es heißt Gott, oder wie immer sie es oder ihn bezeichnen möchten, sucht sich den oder diejenigen aus, denen er sich zu erkennen gibt.
Oft heißt es, unter anderem auch in den Upanishaden, dass man diese höchsten Erkenntnisse und spirituellen Erfahrungen nicht wirklich beschreiben kann und auch das der Sinn dahinter intellektuellem, rationalem Denken nicht zugänglich ist und am besten geheim bleiben soll. Ich bin nicht sicher ob das so ist. Geheim ist sowieso nichts mehr und bis zu einem gewissen Grad kann man es vermutlich schon verstehen, sonst wären die vedischen Wissenschaften überflüssig.

Sie, Maria, glauben nicht, dass man nach dem Tod verlischt, sondern wiederkehrt. Wohin? In die Illusion, die wir Universum nennen? In anderen Lokas, die Teil der Illusion sind? Und dann? Irgendwann?
Hindus glauben an ein Ende der Wiedergeburten! Durch Erleuchtung. Was dann? Ewiges Leben, Ewigkeit in Dimensionen des Bewusstseins jenseits von Raum und Zeit oder Auflösung der Seele?
Auflösung der Seele ist Advaita Vedanta. Sogar schlimmer oder sinnloser noch: Die Seele hat nie existiert, sondern sich nur eingebildet zu existieren … und sobald sie das erkennt, löst sie sich im Ozean reinen Bewusstseins auf.
Wer soll so was glauben? Wozu der ganze Aufwand, Millionen von Widergeburten eventuell von Etwas, was nie existierte, nur um genau dieses Nichtexistieren zu erkennen, um dann mit oder durch diese Erkenntnis zu verschwinden. Ganz schön wilde Theorie, finde ich!
Einfach zwar oder alles Eins, aber Sinn hat oder macht das wenig bis gar nicht in letzter Konsequenz. Und sinnlos, das sind die alten vedischen Erkenntnisse sicher nicht!

Wie genau ihre Erzählung von Sir Anandamayi Ma und der Frage nach dem Streben nach Selbstverwirklichung und Sorgen um die Welt zu meinem Kommentar passen erschließt sich mir jetzt nicht so ganz so schnell. Was keine Kritik darstellen soll. Ich schätze ihre Artikel und einen Großteil ihrer Arbeit sehr! In diesem Sinne … Hari OM!

By: Suresh Kumar Sharma

Suresh Kumar Sharma — Sat, 24 Feb 2024 10:26:03 +0000

Human being need structural development through a mutation process. Thought alone is not in capacity to understand all you stated. Experience is only the education in Gurukul system. An academic mind can not transfer the knowledge described here. There is a limit of words. It is matter of paralanguage or nonverbal communication. It is written between the lines here in article.

By: Arnab

Arnab — Fri, 23 Feb 2024 16:22:20 +0000

Very wisely and nicely put… .

By: Maria Wirth

Maria Wirth — Wed, 21 Feb 2024 05:05:30 +0000

In reply to Ingo Diga.

thank you for your detailed reply. there are different views, no doubt, including within ancient Indian philosophy, but Truth is only one. and it cannot be put into words or arguments. the Oneness one experiences in deep meditation has no name… is it Atma, Brahma, Paramatma? it doesn’t really matter.
regarding your question of what use is it to realise it in life, if after death one falls anyway into it… i don’t think we fall into it after death. we go to different lokas and come back, depending on our karma as long as we identify with our person.
at a Samyam Saptah in 1981 a man once asked Sri Anandamayi Ma, how would the world continue to run, if all try for self-realisation. she replied, don’t worry about the world.

By: Ingo Diga

Ingo Diga — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 14:47:44 +0000

Very good and profound contribution or article. It deals with what is ultimately the only important topic of human life.
I would like to make a few comments or describe different points of view. Let’s start in order:
You say that Atman and Brahman are one. I would like to reply, yes, but not the same or equal. You go on to write “this pure I, … (Atman) is the same in everyone …” .
I do not agree with that. An Atman is someone or something that experiences this world, universe and beyond .. an eternal, immortal observer. I can safely say that my Atman does not see the world through your eyes Maria, does not experience the world through your senses and off course vice versa.
What is actually the same for everybody is Brahman, the consciousness of which our atman consists.
Yes, Brahman is only one. Atmans are many or more than one. For example, the Vedas distinguish between Atman and Paramatman, as you correctly describe. So there are at least two … . Because Atman and Paramatman are also Brahman, but not the same as Brahman. They are certainly not all one and the same … Of course not. Why else would the ancient rishis have differentiated between the two and so often mention them side by side?
Ayam Atma Brahman. If Ayam really means “this” (I think it actually means the same as Aham), then that would mean that something or someone can recognise an Atman, which is Brahman. But then who is he, she or that which wants to have realised this, if everything is ONE? Let us remember that the Mahavakyas are not intellectual statements, but (in the best or true case) mental, thoughtful expressions of immediate, highest spiritual knowledge, self-realisation or enlightenment.
Personally, I can no longer do so much with the comparison of the ocean and the waves. Also because the waves are not just the ocean, but contain the energy of gravity, wind, climate and more, and the ocean is not one and the same thing, but contains countless living beings, some of which can also create very high waves on their own or in combination … It’s not that simple! Or perhaps better, it is much simpler:
The actual and apt comparison for Brahman or pure consciousness is, as is well known, the ocean of milk from the Mahabarata, Ramayana and some Puranas.
Pure consciousness means not only thought-free consciousness, but consciousness free from any illusion, dream, imagination, any emotion of the mind, perception of the universe, etc. Yoga Chitta Vritti Nirodha does not mean restraining anything, but denotes a state free from all mental agitation and sensory perception including all control with full consciousness. Controlling or restraining anything always means activity of the mind, which does not go together with the perception of pure consciousness. Exactly the same is the case with intuition, love, bliss … it is all illusion or maya. Pure consciousness is, just as you write, free of any movements or attributes that we could associate with our human mind. Which is not to say that pure consciousness cannot be described at all, as countless Hindu texts attest.
Let it be what it is. Intellectual considerations and thought experiments are of no use anyway, as you quite rightly describe. However, I do think it is important to ask about the meaning of realization. What use is it if we realize Brahman, pure consciousness, Atman, Self and all that? Here I miss a satisfying answer at this point. If everything in universe is a finite illusion one way or another and our personality or soul inevitably sinks or dissolves into the only ONE ocean of pure consciousness after death … Why should it be of any use to recognise this during our “lifetime”? Where is the advantage or sense in that …?
An extreme weak point in Advaita Vedanta Philosophy, in my opinion … . Thinking the whole Advaita topic through to the end, it simply makes absolutely no sense! There is something missing in the teaching, namely the whole meaning behind our existence … If Advaita Vedanta were everything, then everything would be meaningless. And in view of the complexity and size of the universe alone, who would seriously believe that there is not at least as great and wonderful meaning behind it and that the pinnacle of Hindu, Buddhist and other teachings, namely enlightenment or self-realisation, knowledge of Brahman and Atman etc., has no results or effects worth mentioning in the highest sense? With such thinking or belief, are we not underestimating the cognitive ability of the rishis from Vedic times, who never tired of emphasising that enlightenment or realisation of the highest truth is the only true or important goal and cause of human life and the entire universe? Does the Advaita Vedanta teaching and philosophy in its naivety possibly underestimate the ancient knowledge that works behind Hinduism or Sanathana Dharma?

By: Kuldeep Chandra

Kuldeep Chandra — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 12:45:42 +0000

Respected Ms Maria Wirth,
Congratulations, for communicating the core principles of Vedic life so very lucidly. and so concisely and precisely
Kuldeep Chandra
—————————————————————————————————————————————

Developing connectivity with the Brahman, the imperishable or Sanatan consciousness and experiencing it to be present within us is Sanatan Dharma or as the goal of life., or Swadharma or Purushartha
The imperishable phenomenon or the Brahman has all levels of consciousness and all levels of energies suitable for existence of each entity that exists in the universe and t any entity, is nothing else but combinations of Divine atomic and molecular intelligence emanating from the Brahman. However no entity that exists in the universe is meant to exist for itself. Thus purpose of life as against the goal of life is to be of some use to others (Parmartha)
it is true that to meet the goal of life is necessary to fulfill the purpose of life. There is no escape to live the vedic life to lead a purpose life.
Kuldeep Chandra

By: Maria Wirth

Maria Wirth — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 07:13:07 +0000

In reply to Deepak Srivastava.

it’s sad that Hindus were deliberately kept away from their inherited wisdom…

By: Maria Wirth

Maria Wirth — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 07:12:15 +0000

In reply to Radhika Nagrath.

thank you Radhika

By: Radhika Nagrath

Radhika Nagrath — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 07:08:13 +0000

Profound wisdom explained in simple words