Two levels of consciousness

[Guest guest]

>That's fine - we agree here, a quite important point. Atmananda speaks

of

>two levels of witnessing. The lower witness, which is what I've been

>talking about, which is given to students who no longer see physical

>objects, but just perhaps subtle objects. This level of witness gets

them

>to see the subtle apparatus and its objects as objects of

consciousness.

>Then the higher witness is taught, which is synonymous with Atman.

 

How can there be two levels of witnesses?

 

The fundamental point is being missed. Tat tvam asi - YOU are that. The

Atman is not anything separate from you. YOU are a composite of both

being and non-being. Our normal perception or "to know" is only

applicable to objects. Objects are both gross (empirical objects) and

subtle (mental objects - thoughts etc). YOU are the subject. To try to

"know" the subject like you would a object, is but an effort in vain - a

wild goose chase - for as the eye can't see itself, the knower can't

know itself - but there's no need to know - for YOU are IT.

 

Stop trying to "know" it. You are it. You can only talk about things

which you are not. So if you talk of two different level of

consciousness, one is apart from the other and hence one's not the Self.

 

During meditation, there's one trap to avoid. There are states and

there's YOU. By nature consciousness spreads out from you, there is a

tendency for the consciousness to settle in a state, apart from

yourself. With Advaitam in your mind, you might delude yourself into a

"state" of bliss or emptiness or non-individuality or nirguna etc But

remember whatever state one may evolve into, you can de-evolve from that

too. Do not divorce yourself from reality with ideas. The truth - that

which really matters and is constant - is only your natural state - no!

not "state" - only YOU - whatever it may be. Just as the sun enlivens

the world with it's rays, the Self enlivens the body with consciousness.

"Suck" all your "consciousness" into yourself and just "be".

[Guest guest]

Sadananda wrote:

>You are right - it is just two levels of understanding of what is

>witnessed

>- that is only from the point of Jeevanmukta.

 

Are you a JeevanMukta? If not, you can't tell the point of view of

JeevanMukta. If you are, will you please explain about JeevanMuktha

state. If one attained JeevanMukta state, how he react to worldly

things? Will he suffer when he injured? Will he get different states of

mind like happiness, sorrow, anger etc.,

 

>The subject-object distinction is apprent and I am the

>subject and the object is only my projection - when one has that firm

>conviction - Ramana says - druDhaiva nishhTa - then the distinction

>becomes adhyaasa or only superimpostion on the reality. From the point

>of

>that reality there is no duality - I am the subject and I am the object

>too.

 

If one has the firm conviction that he is the subject and he is the

object too, is it possible to keep that feeling always? Because, for

long years, he had the feeling that the subject is different from him.

So,I think, in order to be in wisdom, he has to think that firm

conviction again and again for long years to get rid of his old

thoughts.

 

Regards

Madhavan

[Guest guest]

>"nanda chandran" <vpcnk

>

>>That's fine - we agree here, a quite important point. Atmananda speaks

>of

>>two levels of witnessing. The lower witness, which is what I've been

>>talking about, which is given to students who no longer see physical

>>objects, but just perhaps subtle objects. This level of witness gets

>them

>>to see the subtle apparatus and its objects as objects of

>consciousness.

>>Then the higher witness is taught, which is synonymous with Atman.

>

>How can there be two levels of witnesses?

 

You are right - it is just two levels of understanding of what is witnessed

- that is only from the point of Jeevanmukta.

 

For a samsaari - it is only one level of understanding - plurality is real.

 

For a JNanni - the plurality is only a projection - apparently real but not

really real. Experientially real but the truth of that experience is, it

is only apprent and there is substratrum that is really real.

 

It is just like the sun raise and sun set that is what is witnessed. But

one can have an experience of the sun raise and sun set and enjoy that

experience, yet understanding that sun never raises not sets. He has the

JNaana of the sun raise and sun set.

 

But one has to be careful when one talks about the witnessing

consciousness. There is only one all the time. The misunderstanding that

witnessing consciousness is different from that which is being witnessed

(object of the witnessing) and that difference is real - these are notions

in the mind. The subject-object distinction is apprent and I am the

subject and the object is only my projection - when one has that firm

conviction - Ramana says - druDhaiva nishhTa - then the distinction

becomes adhyaasa or only superimpostion on the reality. From the point of

that reality there is no duality - I am the subject and I am the object

too.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

I wonder if, rather than ask who is Jeevanmukta, it might be wiser to see

all except the perceiver in this way. Wouldn't our vision and receptivity

change radically? Just an idea. What do you think?

 

Tamra