To study Brahman? Pseudo Realisation, etc.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nair-ji and Satyan-ji,

 

If I understand this correctly, we seem to have reached a pass where

we are required to judge which of the following two expressions

better explains liberation:

 

1. The oceanic experience of the wave

 

or

 

2. The igniting spark of understanding

 

 

But doesn't the igniting spark of understanding reveal the oceanic

experience of the wave? :-)

 

Both expressions - the 'igniting spark of understanding' and

the 'oceanic experience of the wave' are metaphorical devices to

explain the inexplicable.

 

Liberation is not an experience, but the expression 'igniting spark'

reduces it (linguistically) to an experience by placing it as an

event in temporality. But the point is well taken - the expression

has its indicatory mark to convey the nature of Liberation that

transcends experience. Likewise, the expression 'oceanic experience'

has the indicatory mark of the Infinite that transcends the

limitedness of experience.

 

On another note....the discriminating power of the intellect shows

the way to Advaita. But the seat of the intellect is the

vijnanamayakosha. In the cave of the Heart, the intellect gives way

to the anandamayakosha. Here the Heart sings the Song of the living

waters of Advaita. Beyond it is the Silence of Plenitude in which

there never was birth or death or samsara or liberation. IT IS ALL AT

ONCE. That too is only a metaphorical expression.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Dear Sunderji,

 

It is the same Arjuna who stood in utter awe 'seeing' the vishwarUpa

somewhere in the middle of BG and then walked at the end to the

battlefield saying nashtO mOha as if nothing had happened. That to

me exemplifies experience vs. understanding. I don't want to take

sides - I like both. But, when the heart sings the song of

plenitude (courtesy CNji), I can't help listening. It is sweet and

sugary all the way. Oh, Lord, don't deprive this diabetic of it;

pour more of it - the heart (What is it?)sings like Keats to the

nightingale!

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

________________

 

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh>

wrote:

>

> It is amusing to see Heart and Intellect pitted against

> each other , on more than one occasion! Both annihilate the 'knot

of

> ignorance' (chit-jaDa-granthi), one by dissolving it, the other by

> cutting it!

>

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

>

> It is the same Arjuna who stood in utter awe 'seeing' the vishwarUpa

> somewhere in the middle of BG and then walked at the end to the

> battlefield saying nashtO mOha as if nothing had happened. That to

> me exemplifies experience vs. understanding. I don't want to take

> sides - I like both.

 

Namaste Madathil-ji,

 

As they say - ruchINAM vaichitryam |

 

chàcun a son goût !

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Namaste Dear All:

 

The ongoing discussions on this topic area have been quite scholastic

and refreshing. Sri Satyan's posting on the distinction

between `experience' and `understanding' is quite persuasive. Sri

Nair has pointed out that an experience that brings `happiness and

peace' to the heart doesn't require any intellectual understanding!

I do agree with Sri Nair's contention because `happiness and peace'

through `body, mind and intellect' is only transitional and not

transcendental.

 

If I say, that `I am happy' then it is an experience without any

attributes and it comes from my `heart or soul.' Any explanation of

one's happiness through intellectual means is always false

because `happiness' can never be comprehended by the intellect. Sri

Satyan argues – "If Understanding and Experience are mixed up into

one indistinguishable entity, then we are left with no word to

describe the "experience" of the blueness of the sky' whose analysis

reveals the "right understanding" that 'it is false'."

Honestly, `blueness of the sky' is an intellectual understanding of

a `mystical experience' and the intellect with further understanding

and analysis was able to thrash that understanding! The heart (soul)

doesn't require any explanation for its mystical experience such as

the experience of "I am" and no word or language is necessary to

describe that experience.

 

With ignorance, questions arise, and using the intellect we look for

answers and generate further questions and this process only helps us

to sharpen our intellect to further elaborate answers and questions!

With Wisdom, we learn to subdue the intellect and accept the

experience from our `heart.' Unfortunately, I can't explain using

words and examples to describe the `experience' because `advaita' is

non-dual where we can't have `experience' and `understanding' as two

distinguishable entities.

 

The eye sees the sky, the blueness is the acquired knowledge stored

in the mind and intellect is able to recognize and declares that the

sky is blue. The same intellect with more scientific understanding

is able to thrash that understanding! This entire analysis is due to

identification of I with body-mind-intellect. As advaitins, we all

accept that `I' only exists. Somehow (due to Maya) we got tangled by

the `body-mind-intellect' and we need the wisdom for our liberation.

Our continued discussions on various questions without getting

satisfactory answers that please everyone just confirms that we are

still tangled by the `body-mind-intellect.'

 

Warmest regards,

 

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year!

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

>

> Dear Satyanji,

>

> At the outset, let me say I enjoyed all your posts in this thread.

> However, the last one to which this refers is nothing but a marvel

> due to its lucidity.

>

> I must also congratulate you for your enduring interest. It has

> surpassed mine several folds.

>

>

> ....

> Satyanji, from all your posts I perceive that you are a person with

> your head in its right place. I have lost mine with the heart

having

> pushed it off. We may, therefore, be talking at two different

> wavelengths. While I therefore appreciate the clarity of your

> thoughts, I suspect that you are missing something right at the

very

> end-point, which my heart sees.

[Guest guest]

Namaste, All Friends,

 

Thank you very much for such refreshing views, which has helped in a great

measure in “parasparabodhanam” mutual understanding. Some of the doubts got

clarified and some of the understanding got confirmed.

 

Sri Chittaranji says: “Liberation is not an experience”. Very well said.

Somewhere I read a sloka by Shankara Bhagavadpada (I am not sure), meaning of

which is “Advaita is a Bhava, and one cannot help Dwaita while living as Karma

is unavoidable, which involves Dvaita.” I do not have that sloka with me just

now. Advaita knowledge is a fact for appreciation and it guards one from getting

fooled by the effects of Maya. Only children are fooled with the notion that the

Sun is circling around the earth, till they are enlightened to the fact(?) that

it is actually the earth which is circling around the sun. The “Adhyasa”

continues but the knowledge helps one to see/appreiate “what is what”.

 

It is very *heartening* to see that 2004 is ending with such “enlightenment”

for us.

 

Wishing all a Very Happy New Year

 

Warm Regards

 

Mani

 

 

 

 

advaitin/

 

advaitin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Maniji,

 

thank you for your wishes....

Best wishes for 2005 for you...

 

we are not born in the world....

the world is born (around) in us....

 

....e new world is created each moment we "read" in it...with Awareness

 

let's share endless more moments of Awareness....

 

Regards and Love

 

Marc

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> Namaste, All Friends,

>

> Thank you very much for such refreshing views, which has helped in

a great measure in "parasparabodhanam" mutual understanding. Some of

the doubts got clarified and some of the understanding got confirmed.

>

> Sri Chittaranji says: "Liberation is not an experience". Very well

said. Somewhere I read a sloka by Shankara Bhagavadpada (I am not

sure), meaning of which is "Advaita is a Bhava, and one cannot help

Dwaita while living as Karma is unavoidable, which involves Dvaita."

I do not have that sloka with me just now. Advaita knowledge is a

fact for appreciation and it guards one from getting fooled by the

effects of Maya. Only children are fooled with the notion that the

Sun is circling around the earth, till they are enlightened to the

fact(?) that it is actually the earth which is circling around the

sun. The "Adhyasa" continues but the knowledge helps one to

see/appreiate "what is what".

>

> It is very *heartening* to see that 2004 is ending with

such "enlightenment" for us.

>

> Wishing all a Very Happy New Year

>

> Warm Regards

>

> Mani

>

>

>

>

> Sponsor

>

>

>

> Links

>

>

> advaitin/

>

>

> advaitin

>

> Terms of

Service.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn

more.

>

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "dennis_travis33"

<dennis_travis33> wrote:

>

>

> Namaste Maniji,

>

> thank you for your wishes....

> Best wishes for 2005 for you...

>

> we are not born in the world....

> the world is born (around) in us....

>

> ...e new world is created each moment we "read" in it...with Awareness

>

> let's share endless more moments of Awareness....

>

 

Namaste,

 

Dec. 22, 2004 also happens to be Shuddha Ekadashi (also

called Vaikuntha or Mokshada Ekadashi) in the Month of Margashirsha,

celebrated as the day on which Sri Krishna conferred His grace on

Arjuna and the humanity at large, by the Dialogue known as Bhagavadgita.

 

May this day be a harbinger for all our readers, and their

families and friends, of divine inspiration.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

we are not born in the world....

the world is born (around) in us....

 

 

praNAm Marc prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

prabhuji, would it be possible for you to give more details about *the

world* born in us & *we are* not born in the *world*...

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskar,

 

thank you for your message

 

it's difficult to write lots about it...

i can imagine that the message sounded "strange" kind of......sorry

about...

it would need endless words to explain in detail about the exact

meaning of it...and still it would not make

realy "sense"....to "understand" it on an intellectual way...

 

ok...few words.....

 

every "concept" of the "world"...any appearing of the world is

related to a mind....without mind.....no world appearing....

 

so..."who" is it who perceive the world....

"who" is it who can't find peace and calmness ...just to perceive a

world...

is it Brahman?

 

i beleive it's the part of us which is still not "realised"...or

enlightended...

 

the real Nature of things....the real Nature Brahman is without

change......without perceiving mind....

just like there is birth and death of minds....there must be birth

and death of worlds.....as they are related, always...

 

Brahman is untouched by anything "limited"....because the nature of

something limited (by time and space and...) can't be the Nature of

Brahman...

 

the worlds exist....as we can see....

Brahman exist....as we can feel....and "understand"....

 

the world could exist "outside" Brahman?......

....many speculations about this...even if it sound easy to answer...

 

it's possible to "escape" the illusions about the world...and to be

no more attached to something...which is cause of many change ....all

the time.....which Is our mind.....related to Karma....related

to "tendencies"....and so on....

 

it's possible to know that we are all only "moving" minds....which

are all the time "moving" material (body mind intellect)from one

place to other....

it's possible to know that all this appearence of "different"

material is in fact....only One....

 

maybe the "spirit" of this material....is only One....

 

it's possible to enter a great "emptiness" and peace.....with this

spirit....

 

it's possible to Be our real Nature....

 

 

.....but, ok....we first need to live in complete Oneness with the

perceived world...by any practice or "Grace".....

after this.....

 

...."who" care anymore about any "world"...?

 

hope my words are not more confusing than the two sentences you asked

me about....

 

Regards and love

 

Marc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

>

> we are not born in the world....

> the world is born (around) in us....

>

>

> praNAm Marc prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

>

> prabhuji, would it be possible for you to give more details about

*the

> world* born in us & *we are* not born in the *world*...

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

[Guest guest]

the real Nature of things....the real Nature Brahman is without

change......without perceiving mind....

just like there is birth and death of minds....there must be birth

and death of worlds.....as they are related, always...

 

Brahman is untouched by anything "limited"....because the nature of

something limited (by time and space and...) can't be the Nature of

Brahman...

 

praNAm Marc prabhuji

Hare krishna

 

Yes, this is very true...without identifying ourselves with upAdhi-s

(limited adjuncts) it is impossible to *perceive* the world

outside...Thanks for your kind clarification.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramji,

 

Many praNAms to all who have expressed their views!!

 

Many thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

What you mention in case of the 'blueness of the sky' is true. The

intellect concluded falsely that 'it is blue' due to using a lower

pramANa. A higher pramANa sublates the understanding and replaces it

with the understanding that 'it is false'.

 

Is not the problem of Samsara very similar? As you point out,

the 'I', the Self is there shining in all experiences. The intellect

has made wrong conclusions about this 'I'. Over countless janmAs,

the intellect has arrived at and accumulated the wrong conclusions

due to using the 'laukika pramANas' in evaluating the Self. When the

intellect is exposed to the 'shastriya pramANa', then the Self

Knowledge thus generated in the intellect negates all the false

conclusions about the 'Self' and generates definite knowledge about

the Nature of the Self.

 

We only speak of 'Self Knowledge' being generated in the intellect,

not in the Self. The Self shines unmodified in all experiences. The

Self does not "gain knowledge". The Self never had any problem. It

just exists and shines and illuminates the experiences before the

seeking, during the seeking and after the dawn of Knowledge!! The

intellect has the problem of Samsara. The intellect gets the

solution to the Problem with 'Self Knowledge'.

 

We should note that the Problem of Samsara in the intellect is not

Real. There is only one Reality, the Self. The Problem of Samsara in

the intellect is thus an Imagined Problem. The intellect is really

seeking a solution to an 'imagined problem'. An imagined problem

only needs an imaginary solution just as Dream Thirst only needs

Dream Water. In fact, we can be more aggressive and state that Dream

Thirst can only be solved with Dream Water, not with Real Water!!

The Real water by the bedside is of no use in quenching the Dream

Thirst. Similarly, the imagined problem of Samsara in the intellect

can only be solved with the pramANa of the Shruti whose job is to

generate the valid knowledge about the Self in the intellect. Once

the pramANa does its job of generating the valid Knowledge in the

*intellect*, then its job is done. The Self just shines as it always

did, unmodified. Only the *understanding* of the Self in the

intellect is now modified.

 

Only a jnAni, who is none other than the Self, is above the pramANas

and pramANa vyApAra. An ignorant person, on the other hand, is in

the clutches of the pramANas. A seeker who is Seeking Knowledge of

the Self, being ignorant, is also not above pramANa vyApAra. Hence,

the seeker is also not above the duality of 'experience vs

knowledge' which is fundamental to pramaNA vyapara. This duality is

also in the intellect of the seeker, not in the non dual Self.

Advaita Vedanta is addressed to the intellect of the seeker, not to

the non dual Self.

 

many regards and thanks again for your thoughts,

--Satyan

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <RamChandran@a...>

wrote:

>

> Namaste Dear All:

>

> The ongoing discussions on this topic area have been quite

scholastic

> and refreshing. Sri Satyan's posting on the distinction

> between `experience' and `understanding' is quite persuasive. Sri

> Nair has pointed out that an experience that brings `happiness and

> peace' to the heart doesn't require any intellectual

understanding!

> I do agree with Sri Nair's contention because `happiness and

peace'

> through `body, mind and intellect' is only transitional and not

> transcendental.

>

>

>

> The eye sees the sky, the blueness is the acquired knowledge

stored

> in the mind and intellect is able to recognize and declares that

the

> sky is blue. The same intellect with more scientific

understanding

> is able to thrash that understanding! This entire analysis is due

to

> identification of I with body-mind-intellect. As advaitins, we

all

> accept that `I' only exists. Somehow (due to Maya) we got tangled

by

> the `body-mind-intellect' and we need the wisdom for our

liberation.

> Our continued discussions on various questions without getting

> satisfactory answers that please everyone just confirms that we

are

> still tangled by the `body-mind-intellect.'

[Guest guest]

Namaste, All

 

Sri Satyenji has very correctly said that it is the intellect which needs to be

corrected/educated, as due to ignorance, it has made wrong conclusions about

Aham and Idam, and of course Iswara. (i.e. I, Other than I and God Itself).

Intellect of each one makes its own conclusions and not only that it goes on

changing its conclusions from time to time. The Shastra corrects the intellect

and once this correction takes place there is no more vyabhichara budhi, i.e.

the knowledge no more changes.

 

Aparoksha Anubhooti itself means immediate experience. It is not an experience

available during “Samadhi” or transcendental etc. IMHO the Upanishads does not

talk of any transcendental experience, it only puts an end to the trance we are

in due to ignorance. “Experience” of “I” i.e. Brahman, Awareness, is immediate

and now, and beginingless and endless. One can escape any experience, but one

can never escape experience of Awareness, as experience or no experience,

Awareness is always there and experience of Awareness is not different from

one’s experience of his existence. When one experiences “I am” or I exist, he is

experiencing Awareness only. Other experiences are superimposed on the

experience of Awareness. This fact is Aparosksha i.e. immediate and no

particular means or instruments of knowledge are required for knowing this

fact/or experiencing this. If someone says he is not experiencing

himself/Awareness, he does not exist at all (“Asanneva Bhavati”).

 

“Darpane mukha darshanavat Shastre Atma darshanam” just like one sees his face

in a mirror, he sees (knows) his own swaroopa through Shastra. One cannot

experience one’s own face, but one knows his face. Looking at the mirror helps

him to “know” his face.

 

The Swaroopa of Brahman as Satyam Gnanam Aanandam appears to mislead one to

waiting for experiencing of some special Aanandam, which is translated as Bliss

in English. Swamiji has explained that in the “definition” of Brahman (if at all

Brahman can be defined), “Satyam Gnanam Anantham”, the word “Anantham” i.e.

limitless is adjective qualifying both “Satyam” and “Gnanam” (i.e. Existence and

Consciousness/Awarenss/Knowledge). It means Brahman is Limitless Existence and

Limitless Awareness. This limitlessness makes It “Poornam” or complete or

lacking nothing. Therefore, it cannot be but a source of Ananda. That is why

everyone loves his self most, as self is most dear to everyone, as it is Poornam

or complete. Anything to be dear must be a source of happiness for one. Since

everything known and unknown are pervaded by this Brahman, which is “Satyam

Gnanam Anantham”, i.e. “Anantham Satyam and Anantham Gnanam” therefore “Sat Chit

Anand”, everything in the creation has, as its essence,

the source of Ananda or Happiness.

 

The problem is we cannot appreciate the Poornatwa or Completeness in everything

as, due to ignorance, we expect things to be different by superimposing some

qualities on them.

 

Everything in the creation mentions itself as “I” only. If a scorpion were to be

asked “who are you”, it will say ““I” am a scorpion”. This is the case with

everything. Everything strictly speaking is “I” only, though with manifold

appearances, forms, names, qualities, etc. etc. In short everything has its

essence “I” or Anantham Satyam and Anantham Gnanm and therefore Sat Chit

Anandam, because it is Limitless, and essence of everything.

 

The Upanishad says “Aanando Brahama iti vyajanat” i.e. he knew very well or

understood very well Brahman as Happiness. It does not say he experienced

Brahman as Happiness. The knowledge is that Brahman or Essence of “I” is source

of happiness and that is why one’s Self is most dear to all. Due to ignorance of

this fact, he superimposed the source of happiness on the world of objects, and

runs after them. This earlier notion is corrected by the Upanishad as “Anando

Brahma iti vyjanat”. His budhi or intellect now stands corrected.

 

I hope I have managed to communicate my understanding with regard to

“experiencing Brahamananda”.

 

Warm regards

 

 

Satyan Chidambaran <satyan_c wrote:What you mention in case of the

'blueness of the sky' is true. The

intellect concluded falsely that 'it is blue' due to using a lower

pramANa. A higher pramANa sublates the understanding and replaces it

with the understanding that 'it is false'.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

..... Due to ignorance of this fact, he superimposed the source of

happiness on the world of objects, and runs after them. This earlier

notion is corrected by the Upanishad as "Anando Brahma iti vyjanat".

His budhi or intellect now stands corrected.

>

> I hope I have managed to communicate my understanding with regard

to "experiencing Brahamananda".

________________________

 

Maniji, perhaps you have been able to communicate your

understanding. But, I am sorry to say you haven't been able to

understand the understanding of others.

 

The one who has superimposed the source of happiness on objects runs

after them and thereby suffers and feels isolated. Brahma jijnAsa

begins here as the sufferer looks around for freedom. JijnAsa cannot

just sprout without a raison d'etre. (I don't understand the sense of

deliberateness suggested by the word 'superimposed'. There is

nothing deliberate here as our ignorance is a natural default.) When

the Upanishads correct the sufferer's buddhi or intellect, he enjoys

real freedom. Does he then 'behave' differently? I for one would

anticipate him to do so, as I, still very much in the transactional,

see that freedom as a hithertofore unknown 'experience' irrespective

of whether we like that word or not.

 

One who worries too much about his health and body and suffers

therefrom would certainly be 'happy' to realize that he in fact is

not the transient body that changes and perishes. Isn't getting cured

of or relief from a condition an experience? Knowing one's eternal

existence (Sat) is an enjoyment in itself and, therefore, an

experience. The only difference is that it is a 'transformed

experience' not in any way afflicted by upAdhis like our other

limited experiences. A fool may be aware of himself all the time as

he keeps muttering "I am, I am". That doesn't mean that his "I"

awareness is the same as that of a realized person who has known

himself through PramANa. How can we compare one who strongly believes

that he is the body with the one who knows that he is the whole

universe? There definitely is a universe of difference between the

two. How can we 'measure' that difference without experience as a

frame of reference?

 

Scriptural pramANa is an efficient and meticulous methodology unique

to Indian thought for the removal of self-ignorance. It is not

necessary to insist that self-realization can come about only through

pramANa. We have examples of several personages across the world who

have realized their real nature without the aid of pramANa. When self-

lessness and the chittashuddhi resulting therefrom are natural, the

Self reveals. Some persons are born so blessed. Intellect and

understanding are inventions too incapable to describe their

realization.

 

In fact, to me, the whole gamut of advaita lies not in negating

experience but in seeing experience differently. When I have an

experience, I am the experience. It is only when we analyze the

transaction that we divide it into pieces like the subject (I), the

experienced experience (object), the experiencing (the process).

Here, we employ a lot of other add-ins like sense organs, mind etc.

and bring in another element called intellect as the agency for the

analytical exercise. If we know that we are the experience without

divisions, as it is invariably in all cases, the add-ins including

the great intellect is not necessary because all of them are our

objectifications. All experiences then are seen to converge in one

point and that point is "EXPERIENCE" - Fullness, Bliss - call it by

any other name - it doesn't any more matter. We are that all the

time. Due to our eagerness to analyse, we are only inventing more

and more add-ins to confound a very simple situation and then arguing

the supremacy of one over the others.

 

You yourself once said that all experiences just float on awareness.

Are they then anything but awareness? I would like to build on your

statement by taking up an analogy. There are these lights of various

forms available in the market which have in them different designs of

various colours. When the light is switched on, the designs move

fast giving us delight. The light as a whole is like awareness. The

designs are within it. They keep changing. But, they all are

essentially light. The same applies to our experiences which keep on

changing and give us suffering if we are unhealthily hooked to them.

Be the light of awareness - then you are intellect awareness, mind-

awareness, sense-organs awareness, subject awareness, experience

awareness, suffering awareness and what not. Yet, you are total

awareness whatever way you split it for your analysis. This is the

right 'understanding' and there definitely is a joy in it. To me,

remaining as that awareness always is experiencing BrahmAnanda

(derisively inserted within inverted commas in your post).

 

So, why be so cruel to the word 'experience' when we can easily

acknowledge and accommodate other words

like 'understanding', 'intellect' etc. which are all any way

objectifications from the point of view of awareness. As awareness,

we are equally experience awareness and understanding awareness. Or,

are we inventing a caste system in Advaita with our intellectual

affinity for certain words?

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Namaste dear all:

 

Everyone of us honestly trying our level best to understand each

other but our level of understanding varies and that is the problem!

Maniji, Satyanji, Madhathilji and the rest of us have indeed been

able to communicate each our understanding using a framework that we

are comfortable with. Unfortunately, our understanding of Sankara's

advaita philosophy though in agreement on general terms, it seems

that we have differences on specificity. Let us be not too harsh on

each other just because someone disagrees with our thoughts and our

specific framework of thought. This is a holiday season and enjoy

the holidays by give and take. Give our noble thoughts to others

and take the noble thoughts from others.

 

Happy Holidays and Happy and Peaceful New Year,

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

>

> Maniji, perhaps you have been able to communicate your

> understanding. But, I am sorry to say you haven't been able to

> understand the understanding of others.

>

[Guest guest]

> In fact, to me, the whole gamut of advaita lies not in negating

> experience but in seeing experience differently. When I have an

> experience, I am the experience. It is only when we analyze the

> transaction that we divide it into pieces like the subject (I), the

> experienced experience (object), the experiencing (the process).

> Here, we employ a lot of other add-ins like sense organs, mind etc.

> and bring in another element called intellect as the agency for the

> analytical exercise.

 

PraNAm all,

 

Very well said, Madathilji! The drashTaa drishya darshan tripuTee is the

cause of all the confusion.

Shri Atmananda quotes the following from Sureshwaracharya; which confirms

what you say. The quote has the logical clarity of a geometrical theorem-

 

yadidam drushyate kinchit, darshanaat tanna na bhidyate

drashTopi darshanaat naanyat, darshTaiva tato jagat!

(Whatever is being seen here, does not differ from seeing. The seer also is

no different from seeing. Therefore, seer is the world.)

 

With best wishes

Ravi

Dr. Ravindra S. Shivde,

Shivde Hospital,

Old Pandit Colony, Nasik 422002

Maharashtra, India

Phone (0253)2578019, (0253)2315725

Telefax (0253)2570519 mobile 9823053441

E- Mail: shivde

 

 

 

 

Recently I had the good fortune of seeing our moderator Shri Ananda Wood in

person. Spending few hours in such company Merry Christmas and happy new

year to all members.

 

Ravi

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

>

> Namaste, All

>

> The Upanishad says "Aanando Brahama iti vyajanat" i.e. he

knew very

well or understood very well Brahman as Happiness. It does not say he

experienced Brahman as Happiness. The knowledge is that Brahman or

Essence of "I" is source of happiness and that is why

one's Self is

most dear to all. Due to ignorance of this fact, he superimposed the

source of happiness on the world of objects, and runs after them.

This earlier notion is corrected by the Upanishad as "Anando

Brahma

iti vyjanat". His budhi or intellect now stands corrected.

>

> I hope I have managed to communicate my understanding with regard

to "experiencing Brahamananda".

>

> Warm regards

 

Namaste Maniji and others!

 

I would like to point out that sruti does provide a distinction

between the bliss of brahman and the joys of the world.

 

I refer to taittiriya upanishad, the passage starting with:

 

"saishaanandasya meemamsaa bhavati ......"

(this then is an evaluation of that bliss)

 

This defines the happiness of a man in his prime blessed with health,

wealth and learning as one unit and compares that to the happiness of

gandharvas, devas and so on each successive example being a hundred

times more than the previous one. The multiplier reaches 10 to the

power of 20 - even this is not equalt to the Bliss of brahman!

 

Commenting on this, Sankaraachaarya says:

 

"What is there to be assessed about Bliss? The answer is: Bliss can

be studied from this point of view - whether It arises from the

contact of subject and object, as is the case with worldly happiness,

or whether It is natural. As to that, the worldly bliss attains

excellence owing to a concurrence of external and internal means. The

bliss, thus attained, is being instanced here as an approach to the

Bliss that is Brahman; for through this familiar bliss can be

approached the Bliss that is comprehensible by an intellect free from

objective thought."

 

He further states:

 

"Even worldly bliss is a particle of the Bliss that is Brahman, which

becomes transmuted into impermanent worldly bliss, consequent on

knowledge becoming covered up by ignorance..."

 

"But when the division of subject and object, created by ignorance is

eliminated by enlightenment, there is only the intrinsic all

pervading Bliss that is one without a second."

 

(from Swami Gambhirananda's translation

Eight Upanishads - volume one, published by Advaita Ashrama)

 

Imho, there is a qualitative difference in the experience of

Brahmananda (perhaps I should say the experience of Brahman itself)

as compared to the experience of objects by a subject. I think this

is what Nairji has been maintaining as well. Merely reading the above

passages, I cannot hope to experience That - I have be enlightened.

 

Learned members may correct my understanding.

 

Harih Om!

Neelakantan

[Guest guest]

Nairji,

> Dear Satyanji,

>

> At the outset, let me say I enjoyed all your posts in this

thread.

 

I was aware that I hadn't replied to this post. I needed some time

for introspection on this one and hence the delay.

> in a personal mail,

> has likened all of us to frogs croaking on a log of wood afloat in

a

> river!

 

I have also received such an email. All I can say is that we have a

common friend (its a small world!!) who is very silent and has been

having a silent influence on these discussions!!

I hope that this post will settle your concerns once and for all and

also address your later posts.

> So, we are already post-pramANA with

> the ignition already begun. I agree about the process of every

> experience getting burnt into its essence that is Me. We have,

until

> this point, been treating experience as something that is

experienced

> by an experiencer. However, when experiences burn into their Real

> Essence, which is me, they are verily becoming me. Can't that be

> termed from our transactional point of view as the TOTALITY OF

> UNDIVIDED EXPERIENCE – that is both rapture and delight (not in

the

> mundane sense, of course!)? Can't it be the revelling we see in

our

> sacred texts? Or, are you denying even that by your assertion on

the

> word `understanding'?

 

Nairji, I for one certainly do not consider myself to be post

praMAna!! Hence, I will tell you what I have heard on this:

 

When there is clarity of understanding that the Self Evident Self in

*every* experience, although *apparently* limited, is *really* free

and is indeed Bramhan, this is Bramha Jnanam. Bramha jnanam

naturally has its phalam that is Bramha Jnana Phalam that includes

fullness, fearlessness, compassion, forgiveness and every great

virtue that one can imagine begins to manifest in the equipments of

the Jnani. There will be anubhava of these Phalams to the extent

that Bramha Jnanam has been assimilated.

 

Bramha Jnana Phalam need not and cannot be negated because they

causelessly manifest from the Real in the light of the right

understanding. Also, there is nothing to negate because the wrong

understanding has been already negated.

 

As long as one feels that one needs a *special* experience of

Bramhan, that means that Bramhan has not been understood and/or

Bramha Jnana has not been assimilated. Once, one gains clarity that

Bramhan is none other than the Self Evident Self, then in *every*

experience, Bramha Jnana Phalam will begin to manifest and they are

a natural consequence of the Jnanam!!

 

Hope that this addressed your concern. Many thanks for all of your

ardent/zealous inquiry in your posts.

 

Happy Holidays!!

 

warm regards,

--Satyan

>

> Best regards and praNAms.

>

> Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Sri Nairji and other learned members,

 

I am one of them trying to know how an elephant looks like, and so far I am able

to imagine that the elephant looks like a long rope only, having known only the

tail of that animal.

 

Therefore, henceforth I will concentrate on understanding the understanding of

others and refrain myself from expecting others understanding my understanding.

 

<<why be so cruel to the word 'experience' when we can easily acknowledge and

accommodate other words like 'understanding', 'intellect' etc. which are all

any way

 

objectifications from the point of view of awareness. As awareness, we are

equally experience awareness and understanding awareness. Or, are we inventing a

caste system in Advaita with our intellectual affinity for certain words?>>>

 

If in any way my understanding on the subject appeared to be an attempt in

inventing a caste system in Advaita, I am very sorry about that and my

apologies.

 

Let the year end not with any harsh/hurtful feelings on the part of anyone, and

let us continue our effort to exchange our notes on Advaita.

 

With warmest regards to all and hari om,

 

R. S. Mani

 

 

Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

..... Due to ignorance of this fact, he superimposed the source of

happiness on the world of objects, and runs after them. This

 

 

 

 

Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Satyanji,

 

Thank you for your post # 25597.

 

I am fully satisified with your answer.

 

Happy Holidays!

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

________________

 

advaitin, "Satyan Chidambaran" <satyan_c>

wrote:

> As long as one feels that one needs a *special* experience of

> Bramhan, that means that Bramhan has not been understood and/or

> Bramha Jnana has not been assimilated. Once, one gains clarity that

> Bramhan is none other than the Self Evident Self, then in *every*

> experience, Bramha Jnana Phalam will begin to manifest and they are

> a natural consequence of the Jnanam!!

>

[Guest guest]

Maniji,

 

You were indeed talking about the whole elephant and not its tail

alone. That is my understanding of your understanding. I have no

doubts about that.

 

I was delighted with the animal, whereas it looked like you weren't.

Perhaps, I thought you were rather matter of fact, while I was all

glee.

 

I had to point out this difference. There are no harsh or hurt

feelings. Why should there be?

 

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

_________________________

 

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

>>

> I am one of them trying to know how an elephant looks like, and so

far I am able to imagine that the elephant looks like a long rope

only, having known only the tail of that animal.

>

> Therefore, henceforth I will concentrate on understanding the

understanding of others and refrain myself from expecting others

understanding my understanding.

.................

> Let the year end not with any harsh/hurtful feelings on the part of

anyone, and let us continue our effort to exchange our notes on

Advaita.

..........