The Buddhi and its purifying.

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

The reason Gautama was called the Buddha was because

he had a purified

Buddhi. Yes we are talking of the awareness sheath

again. This has to

be purified to accept the reflection of the Atma to

enable final

realisation.

 

Verbal non -dualism won't do this, Why? Because

thoughts and

vibrations are the same thing. Words can only

describe ideas that have

qualities or gunas; ie. the thought or idea of

non-duality. So even

'Who am I?', is a flow of thought, and cannot be

absolute. Seekers are

looking for knowledge not seeking to realise what is

ignorance.

 

Only in a purified Buddhi can the 'Self', be

realised, Moksha is not

possible without this purification. Which naturally

entails sadhana.

 

Vibrations are thoughtlike, and as such prevent the

purification of

the Buddhi. Even the thoughtflow, 'I Am', is impeded

by these

vibrations. They are all individual and have to be

removed or

cleansed. Therefore one stream of thought at the

mental level may be

non-dual but there are myriads of others.

 

This is why the Buddhi has to be purified otherwise

one is left with a

stream of non-dual thought, but moksha prevented by

other vibrations.

 

This is one of the reasons Bhakti is much simpler

than the jnana path,

or the more difficult Vndist. The cleansing is done

by purification

and surrender.

 

OM Namah Sivaya.....Tony.

[Guest guest]

Tony - Namaskaarams to you too. Thanks for sharing your ideas with us. If

you do not mind I would like to state my understanding which differs from

yours, not in the contents but in its essence.

 

>"Tony O'Clery" <aoclery

> Namaste All,

>

>

> Verbal non -dualism won't do this, Why? Because

>thoughts and

> vibrations are the same thing. Words can only

>describe ideas that have

> qualities or gunas; ie. the thought or idea of

>non-duality. So even

> 'Who am I?', is a flow of thought, and cannot be

>absolute. Seekers are

> looking for knowledge not seeking to realise what is

>ignorance.

 

True only if the "who am I" inquiry does not lead to knowledge. What is

indicated in the above questioning is an inquiry by the buddhi only - it is

not random thoughts nor any thoughts but thoughts that lead to knowledge or

realization of who I am. I am so and so is the notional thoughts in the

buddhi only. Inquiry has to be done by buddhi only. Budhhi is nothing but

thoughts flow. Hence inquiry involves thoughts flow along the directions

pointed by shruti-s - I am not this, not this - as this and this are object

thoughts - idam vR^iit -. Please remember in the final analysis it is not

knowledge of something I am lookking for. Realization is realization of

'who I am'. This can be done by discarding 'who am not' - it is process but

the proces will take us something beyond the process like pole vault - we

use the pole to go beyond the pole. The notional mind is eliminated and

budhhi firmly establishes that by negation process an ascertion of who I

really am takes place. It is not knowledge of, but knowledge itslef since

that is my intrinsic nature. There is nothing to know but something to be.

>

> Only in a purified Buddhi can the 'Self', be

>realised, Moksha is not

> possible without this purification. Which naturally

>entails sadhana.

 

What you discuss is true in a sense but the purification is not removal of

all thoughts but removal of the notions that I am this and this etc. I being

the subject cannot be this which is an object. Hence neti neti is the

spriputural suggestion in the inquiry of who I am. It involves an inquiry

and not repetition of who am I who am I - It is not japa. One has to

recognize it as an iquiry involving buddhi and inquiry is not elimination of

thoughts but directing the thoughts properly to eliminate or reject the

notions that I am this buy I am not this - neti etc.

 

> Vibrations are thoughtlike, and as such prevent the

>purification of

> the Buddhi. Even the thoughtflow, 'I Am', is impeded

>by these

> vibrations.

 

I think one has to be very careful here. It is not "I am" that is the

problem - It is 'I am this' that notion where in this includes the body,

mind and intellectual notions.

>They are all individual and have to be

>removed or

> cleansed. Therefore one stream of thought at the

>mental level may be

> non-dual but there are myriads of others.

 

Impure thoughts are nothing but those that arise with the notions that I am

this - I am the body results all others problems as the body problems become

my problems - I am the mind notion results all the modifications and moods

of the mind as my moods. Body will have problems and mind will have moods.

What is negated is that I am differnet from the body and mind since these

belong to the category of 'this'. Body and mind and buddhi with thoughts is

not the problem the problem is the identification that 'I am that'.

>This is why the Buddhi has to be purified otherwise

>one is left with a

> stream of non-dual thought, but moksha prevented by

>other vibrations.

 

Again one has to be very careful - thoughts will be there as long as mind

and buddhi are there. What will not be there after realization is that

notions that I am those thoughts. Thoughts are in me but I am not the

thoughts, is the knowledge.

> This is one of the reasons Bhakti is much simpler

>than the jnana path,

> or the more difficult Vndist. The cleansing is done

>by purification

> and surrender.

 

Here it is catch 22 situation. Bhakti without proper inquiry can lead to

fanatism. The true bhakti is true devotion towards the object of inquiry -

whether it is iswara or myself. In that sense j~naana and bhakti cannot be

different. Bhakti and j~naana are two sides of the same coin. It is the

mind and intellect together called heart and with full heart one has to

inquire. One cannot inquire unless I am intensely devoted to the object of

my inquiry. I donot agree that bhakti is easy and j~naana is difficult.

Both are the same. Bhakti has to lead to j~naana and j~nana is bhakti

materialized.

 

Anyway this is my understanding for whatever it is worth.

Thanks again.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

>

> OM Namah Sivaya.....Tony.

>

>

>

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda@h...> wrote:

> Tony - Namaskaarams to you too. Thanks for sharing your ideas with

us. If

> you do not mind I would like to state my understanding which differs

from

> yours, not in the contents but in its essence.

 

Namaste K,

 

Yes it depends on whether we eat the apple from the left or the right

or just core it.haha. I actually posted this as a continous response

to verbal non dualists on another list. I posted it here to get some

aware input. Thank you.

 

Yes I agree, 'Who am I', isn't japa at all but an 'inner feeling'. Yes

thought is just a stream, and mind is just experiencing this stream.

 

However for those with a less than developed 'awareness sheath', isn't

that all of us? It is necessary to do sadhan to purify the Buddhi so

to speak, this weakens instead of reinforces the samskaras, enabling

them to be further fried in meditation.

 

With regard to Bhakti, at an early level, Bhakti is a good vehicle if

the person hasn't got that far into Jnana. Admittedly they both end up

at the same place, but intially for most Bhakti is a quicker vehicle.

For one hasn't to wonder why one is doing something, one just does it.

 

Ramana's sadhana presupposes a certain amount of spiritual awareness,

otherwise it is just japa, not an inward or all encompassing feeling.

 

In that respect a thought wave without removal of samskaras is impeded

so to speak. Thanks for the welcome response.

 

OM Namah Sivaya.....Tony.