Friday, November 14, 2014

[gita-talk] Dwait (duality) and Adwait (non-duality), please explain [1 Attachment]

[Attachment(s) from Sadhak included below]

Shree Hari  

This brings closure to this topic.   Gita Talk Moderators,  Ram Ram  

In a recent sadhak daily message Swamiji  said :   When there is no such thing named as "Dwait"  (Duality), then in that, what is good and what is bad ? 
 Please kindly share the word meaning (shabdaarth),   implied meaning (bhaavaarth),  and implication of the word "Dwait",  by which I can understand what Swamiji has said.  
Also please try to explain  the word meaning (shabdaarth),   implied meaning (bhaavaarth),  and implication of the word "Adwait" as well. 
 It will not be sufficient to say -  that which is not "dwait" is itself called "adwait". 
Thank you very much.   
Humbly,   Sadhak

स्वामीजीने कहा है : जब द्वैत नामकी कोई वस्तु ही नहीं है तो फिर उसमें 
क्या अच्छा और क्या बुरा?
द्वैत शब्दका शब्दार्थ, भावार्थ और  निहितार्थ बतानेकी कृपा करें जिससे कि 
स्वामीजीका कहा हुआ समझमें आ जाय।  
अद्वैत शब्दका शब्दार्थ, भावार्थ और निहितार्थ भी बतानेकी कृपा करें। 
यह कह देना पर्याप्त नहीं होगा कि जो द्वैत नहीं उसे ही अद्वैत कहा है।   

dear brother your assumption  that when there is no dwait how come we have good and bad. yes it is the reality. when there is only adwiat nothing else remains then only "I am" or " God is." ok    Now where from this duality come. my dear it is only existent till then you believe this prakruti exists. As this creation is for the enjoyment of the Lord God. duality is created  and manifest as the manifestation of the God, hence relatively  true ( jagat mithiya). As long there is duality you have manifold encounters and corresponding joy and sorrow. you are already in know of three stages of consciousness that is deep sleep stage, where nothing exists only you are there as a witness then there is dream stage called semiconscious state where you have created your own world and ignorantly accept the dream real and enjoy the sequences as they enfold themselves in the dream state. no sooner you get up you declare it as dream and forget about it as  false. Now this conscious stage is also a sort of dream only need is to get awakned in the fourth stage of super conscious stage. there in that stage only you will be able to realize that this conscious stage is a dream and will declare that this cosmos does not exist.  ok for that you have to follow the rule and realize the truth. I hope this clears your doubt.

c k kaul

Shree Hari 
Ram Ram  

Where the predominant sentiments are one of ONLY GOD,  in other words,  everything is only God.   Besides God there is nothing else.   It is explained in Gita 7/7 
Matah parataram naanyat kinchidasti dhananjaya |
Mayi sarvamidam protam sootre maniganaa iva || (Gita 7/7)
"O' Arjuna, of this world there is no other cause higher than Me. As yarn beads are strung on the thread, so all the worlds are permeated by Me. (Gita 7/7) 
The gist is that the cotton is also God only,  the bead is also God only; the necklace is also God only  and the one rotating the beads is also God only,  in other worlds all is only God. In the path of devotion,  when the predominant  sentiments are that of only God, this is a advait.
Good and bad are in the world. But for a devotee, It is God only. One without another. Advait.  

Meera Das, Ram Ram


समझमें आया बड़े भैया!
जब एक ही तत्त्व है तो इन द्वैत आदि दर्शनसे क्या लेना-देना?
गीता-वार्ता संयोजक कृपया सूत्रका समापन करनेकी कृपा करें। 


S.Vaidyanathan जी से विनम्र प्रश्न है :
Only Krsna is GOD कथन समझना है। 
कृष्ण अवतार (या जन्म जैसा श्रीकृष्ण जन्माष्टमीको मनाया जाता है) तो जब हुआ तब हुआ। उससे पूर्व जब कृष्णावतार नहीं हुआ था, GOD (परमात्मा) था या नहीं? यदि था तो किस रूपमें (निश्चित ही कृष्णके रूपमें तो नहीं होगा क्योंकि कृष्णावतारसे पहले कृष्ण थे ही कहाँ?)
कृपया समझाइये। 



Dear Vempati,

>   Bhakti is a post-Vedic concept evolved through the blending of Karma (found in Vedas) and Upasana (found in Aranyakas).

I am not sure why you say this.   upanishats such as shwetAshwatara have used the word "yasya deve parA bhaktihi  yathA deve tathA gurou..."

So,  what is your understanding of bhakti,  when the upanishat uses that word ?.

Jay N


Earlier I put up similar topic for conversation in the forum.    Here I would like to state that Supreme God Paramatma Lord Krishna is the only advitist.   HE is 100% soul made.  That is why HE is called SAT-CHID-ANANDA.  By virtue of being 100% soul made he is beyond caste,religion and everything.     But in practice nobody else can become advitist.  Everyone is part and parcel of PARAMATMA soul and living soul.  Then where is the question of calling themselves advaitist or monists.  The Caitanya - Caritamrta(Ad: 5.142) confirms ekole isvara Krsna ara sabha bhrtya.  Only Krsna is GOD and everyone is his servant.  There is no one who can deny his order.  Every one is complying with his order.  

with namaskaram


The following is humble thought from a Sadhak. This is not an answer to the Question:

Dwait could mean that I exist separate from the Eashwara.
Dwait also implies a recognition to the world of Maya.
Dwait may be used to construct concepts to help better understanding of ADWAIT.  Dwait is perishable and not a permanent or Eternal existence. Therefore, it is fair to say that Dwait does not exist. And that Adwait is the only Truth. Idea of Dwait helps to get to the Adwait.

Once Dwait-Adwait are understood. We can switch to such words as: Sanatan, Eternal, Truth, Eashwar. Most people take a whole life to come to its conclusion; our tradition allows one that freedom.

humbly submitted.
Shrinarayan Chandak
I can share a small article that I gave to our Temple magazine on this question which may clarify to a common man the differences in all the three systems without going into any detail description. 
B. Vempaty


हरि ओम

स्वामीजी के उद्धृत कथन में "द्वैत" शब्द का भावार्थ, निह्तार्थ इत्यादि सरल हैं  - "द्वैत" अर्थात् परमात्मा के सिवाय अन्य किसी सत्ता का अस्तित्व स्वीकार करना है ! यहाँ कोई द्वैत, अद्वैत, द्वैताद्वेत् आदि सिद्धान्तों की व्याख्या नहीं है , उसकी व्याख्या की कोई साधन संबंधी आवश्यकता भी नहीं है - सीधा, सरल मतलब है - परमात्मा के अलावा अन्य किसी सत्ता का अस्तित्व मानना - यह है " द्वैत" का मतलब !

और भाई साहेब, यह क्या बात हुई कि - " यह कह देना पर्याप्त नहीं होगा कि द्वैत का अभाव ही अद्वैत है " - यह आग्रह क्यों ? पर्याप्त को अपर्याप्त तो आप ख़ुद ही बना रहे हैं !!! आप किसी भी उत्तर देने वाले को स्वयं की बुद्धि से , आग्रह से क्यों जोड़ रहे हैं ? बताईये !!! क्या प्रकाशँ का अभाव अन्धकार नहीं होता ? क्यों नहीं होता? कैसे नहीं होता ? क्या दु:ख का अभाव सुख नहीं होता ? आपको कोई ऐतराज़ है क्या ? इस तरह का आग्रह कोई काम का नहीं होता । मतलब आपको जो जंचे वैसा आपको कोई जवाब दे । क्यों साहेब ? अाप उत्तरदाता के लिये मर्यादा बाँधते समय स्वयं भी तो गलत हो सकते हैं ! नहीं हो सकते क्या ? यदि हाँ , तो इस तरह के आग्रह से आपको पूरी सीख नहीं मिलेगी । प्रश्न बड़ा सोच समझकर बनाना चाहिये ! 

फिर भी आपकी भावनाओं और इस तरह के आग्रह के कारणों की परवा किये बिना, आपके प्रश्न का आदर करते हुए लिखँ रहा हूँ कि " केवल मात्र एक सत्ता का ही अस्तित्व मानना , स्वीकार करवाना - " अद्वैत " कहलाता है ! जहाँ केवल एक सत्ता है, वह " अद्वैत" कहलाता है ! 

देखिये, यह द्वैत, अद्वैत , द्वैताद्वेत्, आदि दर्शन कहलाते है । गीता किसी दर्शन के आधीन नहीं होता ! एक होते हुए भी परमात्मा अनेक हैं, और अनेक होते हुए भी एक हैं ! अनेकता में एकता, और एकता में अनेकता सनातन धर्म की विशेषता है - इसलिये साधक को वाद, दर्शन के पचड़े में न पड़कर सीधा साधा मतलब निकालकर आगे बढ़ना चाहिये ! जहाँ एक से अधिक सत्ता को स्वीकार किया - "द्वैत" होगया ! 

जय श्री कृष्णा

व्यास एन बी 


श्री Jay N एवं B>S जी,
काश आपके उत्तर हिन्दीमें होते। 
यह VedOpanishats हिंदीमें उपलब्ध हैं क्या? 



Dear Sadaks,
You are in to understand as common man, saying your leg, your hand etc. Means, you are telling your hand, which implies that you are separate from you. This is Duwaitha (Duality).But when you think your hand is not part of you but part of Prakurthi, YOU alone stand. Then you become like Jada Baratha, Christ, Buddha, Gyaneswar, Tukaram etc as NON Destructible. Example Prahalad never feared any punishment of his father. So his body and Athuma , Paramathuma became as ONE PART. Many of think my wife, son, daughter etc. Nothing wrong. That thought is given by GOD, so that you think my GOD also. The problem starts, when you show attachment on them in not detaching when they neglect you. There are number of Bakthas all over India  when they lost their son/ daughter, said "Oh GOD YOU gave me and YOU took it". How many of us can do this. If we do we are ADVAITHA else my son and me duwaitha
 Dear All,

What is dvaita ? and what is advaita ?.

Both these words are vedic words  and hence we need to understand them as Veda uses them.   It is quite wrong to use them for names of schools of thought, as it is often done.

When Veda is eternally present,  to claim that  'Brahman alone exists'  would be quite against that eternally present Veda,  and to call such a vedAnta as advaita would be against Veda, because that is not how Veda uses the term advaita.

The term 'advaita'   is used  in the Veda to imply  uniqueness,  adviteeya.   There is nothing in this world that is like Parabrahman.   That is His uniqueness.   Hence advaita means Parabrahman.   It never meant, there is nothing else apart from Brahman.   After all,  it is quite silly to talk about uniqueness where there is only one thing.  Veda has indeed accepted a hierarchy among all that exists as this universe.

Similarly,  when the AcArya himself says, "ekam tu shubhamuddishTam ashubham dvaitamucyate"  to  call his vedAnta as dvaita  would be quite wrong.

Solution ?.

Enquire into VedOpanishats without getting hung up on these words.

Jay N.

HINDI BLOG: http://


Attachment(s) from Sadhak | View attachments on the web

1 of 1 File(s)

Posted by: Sadhak <>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)
All past 4925+ messages are accessible and searchable at

28,000+ sadhakas

A list of all topics discussed in 2009 along with their links are at



No comments: