It’s curious to reflect on Vedanta (end of the Veda) at this juncture. The Brahma Sutra is about Unity into Brahman. The Upanishads, assemblies of key verses from the earlier Vedas, explore Self Realization through to the Brahman shift.
When you go into Brahman and beyond, you are beyond Veda itself and there is much less that can be said about it. And yet that’s where the real “source of the source” is, where the highest reality is found. The Vedas are among the oldest and most complete texts available to us. It’s a surprise to consider that most of the Vedas really don’t cover the actual source, just the source of themselves.
Many of the core texts talk of Shiva beyond Shakti, of consciousness underlying the creation of the world. That can be true right through Brahman stage.
But it turns out this is a symptom that cosmic mind has not let go. Cosmic mind or Brahma or infinite consciousness thought they were the source or creator of the world. This is much like our personal mind took credit for our life experiences prior to awakening. But now it’s time to wake up from the illusion of consciousness as the creator.
MahaShakti is one. The true source is beyond all and yet is inclusive of everything. The power and vastness is incomprehensible even to cosmic mind.
When I say “highest reality,” this is directly related to highest ability to know. As we go beyond cosmic embodiment and into pure Divinity, we know by being. But the 7-fold structure we recognize is based on how we’re structured as a knower.
Is this an “as above, so below” that reflects the structure of Divinity? Or is this the bias of the cosmic coming to know its source? Given the profundity of Divinity, how limited is our ability to know it? Our eyes see only the tiny band of visible light in the electromagnetic spectrum. Is our ability to know Divinity itself similarly limited?
Davidya
Wow. Gorgeous. Profound and inspiring. “Who” would have thought that “we” would now need to write the next phase beyond the Vedas?
Maybe there is a reason nothing has been written?
Beyond metaphor, beyond description. Beyond language?
Or maybe this is the calling of this moment?
Hey, wait a second…I know a writer who might be just the One to write this new chapter in the evolution of Nothing beyond Brahman…
🙂
What can be said? And it’s self-verifying in many ways so what needs to be said? And yet, there seems to be things being said…
Thank you for broaching a subject often clouded in mysticism, David. From what I can tell, the glimpses we have of the Divine are in proportion to its values expressed through us.
In other words, any experience of Divinity is grounded in its practical nature. Any expansion of the Divine is due to practical considerations.
It is driven by the natural need of the heart to expand, driving values of love, peace, and compassion to the point where we want to see them manifest widely, not from a lack within ourselves, but rather carrying this grand reality of Divinity forward, into our lives on Earth. A cooperation with the Divine to reach far further than is possible as an isolated individual. A solid foundation for quiet miracles.
Agreed, Jim. At that point, it seems it’s more shown than found. We’re guided into specific ways of knowing.
Beautifully said.
Agreed
“Fulfilling the need of the times” 🙂
🙂 Both in your comment and in what we discuss…
Indeed! This is fertile ground for so much expansion, in many domains.
Nice, Jim.
Hi David!
Really, really, reeeeeaaaalllllly like that text!!!!
I felt a shiver washing over my body while reading……it is soooo deep and and soo unknowable what this text points to.
thanks for sharing!!!!! 🙂
Curious: Why do you raise these question at the end? Have you had the answers revealed to you?
All the best
Michael
Hi Michael
Nice. Well – this blog is sharing observations. I was contemplating the implications of some recent observations here and comments by Lorne. It amplified the questions raised.
In a sense, the highest reality we can know may not be the highest reality. And perhaps it’s presumptuous to think that was even possible. 🙂
But I have a ways to go yet, so I’m sure there’s much more to unfold.
Hi David,
What a beautiful post… This part jumped out to me:
“Cosmic mind or Brahma or infinite consciousness thought they were the source or creator of the world. This is much like our personal mind took credit for our life experiences prior to awakening.”
I came across something (posted in quotes within the lines below) on Parabrahman that sounded very similar to what you’ve wrote here.
I believe it is attributed to Sri Aurobindo:
——————————————————–
“The entire creation is due to Parabrahman only who is like the hidden Father. Interaction of Father and Mother was a hidden concept and it appears to the world as if the mother alone created and delivered the child. Actually, the child is born due to the father only but the world cannot see the father creating or delivering the child. The father created secretly the child in her womb and is the indirect or actual cause of the child but that remains secret. The mother appears as if she herself created and delivered the child from her womb. Similarly the Mula Maya appears as if she has created this universe but Parabrahman created this universe through Mula Maya. Parabrahman remains as a secret like the father.
This is told in Gita (Mayadhyakshena, Beejam mam, Aham Beejapradah, Tasmim garbham). Therefore Parabrahman is the cause of the creation of every item in this creation. It appears as if the items of the creation are forming the chain of cause and effect. For e.g.: If a tree has produced a flower, the actual cause of the production is Parabrahman and is like the hidden father. The tree is like the exposed mother appearing as if it is the cause of the flower. When Veda says Aatmana Aakasah, it means the pure awareness has produced space. The pure awareness (Mula Maya) is like the exposed mother generating space. But actually the hidden Parabrahman in the pure awareness has produced the space. Similarly Parabrahman is the cause of any work. When the Brahman desired to create, it is the Parabrahman hidden in Brahman desired so. Brahman means the pure awareness in which the Parabrahman is hidden. When we say that Parabrahman desired to create, we will immediately assume that Parabrahman must be awareness. It is the logic of the nature that whichever desires, must be awareness.
But Parabrahman is beyond this logic, and therefore Parabrahman desires and at the same time He need not be awareness. Veda says that Parabrahman runs without feet and catches without hands (Apani Pado Javano). This means that ParaBrahman does every thing but cannot be detected through its action. By this, you will avoid indicating the Parabrahman by the word awareness. Thus Parabrahman is the cause of every work but at the same time, it gives fame to the items of its creation. The fire burns anything and it appears as if the fire has the power to burn and convert anything into ash. But the same fire could not even heat a blade of dry grass thrown by Parabrahman. This is explained in Kenopanishat. It means that the burning power of the fire is the very power of the Parabrahman. But the fire is given the fame. Thus Parabrahman is the real hidden cause of this world and everything that happens in this world.”
——————————————————–
How does that all resonate with you? (thanks!)
Hi Chris
Thanks. One way of looking at this is “as above, so below.” Our individual tendency to take credit is a reflection of the same thing on the cosmic scale. With each stage of development, we tend to see that perspective as “highest” and sometimes forget its highest for us so far but may not actually be the highest perspective of reality. Teens would be another example. 🙂
On the quote, take care with spreading unattributed quotes around. The net is full of mis-attributed and edited quotes that misrepresent and distort teachings. I’ve run into this more than a few times. I didn’t find the quote online but parts were presented in other combinations.
That said, taking the quote at face value, we can explore it like this:
Beyond the perspective of Brahma as creator is one that suggests the Divine feminine is creator. She goes by names like MahaPrakriti and Mother Divine.
Beyond this perspective is one that sees Shiva as the source, the feminine being subservient or the partner of Shiva.
Beyond this is Divine Mother or ParaBrahman as the guru of Shiva.
The quote seems to be using ParaBrahman for what I call Brahman or Shiva and sees the Father as the highest reality. I’d suggest there is a stage further possible. This further stage is what the article and others like it point to.
It should be remembered that creation and the cosmic is a very big space (mentioned in the quote) of infinities within infinities. As we expand into progressively greater aspects of this, our perspective of reality changes.
None of these perspectives is wrong. They’re more like a progressive series. If we have some sense of the bigger picture, it can help avoid getting too dedicated to one.
Also, remember that teachers are growing too. Their perspective changes. The Yog Vasishtha is quite a bit more advanced than the Shrimad Bhagavatum, for example. (same sage, different stage) Shankaras’s teachings evolved quite a bit too. Too much of modern neoadvaita is dedicated to his early material, prior to Divine Mother.
Make sense?
It’s worth noting that pure Divinity could be related to as a masculine presence rather than feminine but most people I know relate to it as feminine. While it’s well beyond any such distinctions, that is the tendency hence Divine Mother.
However, the quote refers to things that suggest Brahman rather than ParaBrahman, in the way I use the terms. (Some also use such terms interchangeably, along with Atman and Purusha.)