Ignorance vis-a-vis Self Knowledge

[Guest guest]

advaitin

 

Hari Om,

I am sorry for the delay in coming back to the Group.

People like me who have very little spiritual knowledge i.e. Vedanta,

I am sure, will find the Notes that appear in the Group very

absorbing and very useful. It is again Lord's Blessings that I

have

been introduced to this Group.

It is very thoughtful of some of the Learned List Members to go into

so much of detail with regard to Intuition. (One of the postings

read "To return to the original question...and what the original

questioner had in mind I do not know at this point") The context

which prompted me to get the views of List Members on this point was

because I had come across in many places and also from lectures on

Vedanta that "through intuition Brahman is known". Personally

I have

no idea as to what exactly this intuition is in the context of

Knowledge of Jeeva-Brahma aikyam. Is there any equivalent word in

Sanskrit for Intuition? Though there are various views on Intuition,

as very kindly expressed by some of the Learned Group Members, one

thing comes out i.e. there is a faculty called Intuition, through

which people do get at times some flashes of knowledge. However, one

cannot say it can be operated voluntarily, i.e. Karthru thantram, and

it seems that it just operates for no known reasons.

I am very grateful to Respected Prof Krishnamurthyji and Respected

Sri Sadanandaji for their lucid explanations with regard to the

apparent relationship between Brahman and Atma/Jeeva.

"In the case of brahman and Atman there is no question of one

being 'real' or not with respect to the other. Both are two words for

the same advaitic Absolute Reality. …profvk" This is the

real

position unfolded in the Upanishads.

Sri Sadanandaji's discussions on the various types of

relationships

between Brahman and Atma clear all doubts from one's mind about

Ekam

Eva Advitheeyam Brahma.

Nevertheless with regard to the snake-rope example, I have always had

a difficulty inasmuch as when the knowledge takes place the snake

disappears (!) and rope shines, which is not the case in the case of

Brahman, where only the knowledge is corrected and the world (idams)

continues to appear as same, though the earlier knowledge about the

world gets corrected as a result of the enlightenment.

In the case of rope-snake example, what exactly happens is, due to

absence of light and/or defect in the instrument of knowledge, i.e.

eye, one could not recognize the rope lying in his front as rope, and

instead a vague knowledge of that vastu takes place, and on that

vague knowledge, knowledge of a similar vastu, say a snake or a piece

of garland, or even a stick, seen earlier, gets superimposed, and

thus the rope is perceived as a snake etc. When a light is brought,

he sees the vastu clearly and recognizes it as rope and the snake

knowledge is replaced by rope knowledge on recognition of the vastu

as rope. It is not because of any ignorance of rope or snake etc. but

the circumstances lead to Adhyasa or superimposition. When the

circumstances i.e. absence of light, that led to superimposition gets

changed i.e. with the presence of light, the false knowledge also

gets rectified.

In the case of example of Sun also, what happens is, instead of the

knowledge of the vastu, i.e. sun as stationery, the vastu is taken as

changing i.e. moving, as the sun is seen from a changing platform,

i.e. earth, and such (false) knowledge takes place, again not due to

ignorance, but as a natural law. However, when this false knowledge

is corrected, the vastu i.e. the sun continues to appear as moving,

(not like snake disappearing and rope shining), but the knower is not

disturbed by such moving of the sun as he knows, it is just an

appearance only due to natural law, as natural laws cannot be changed

by him. He accepts the situation and rather enjoys the sun rising and

sun setting.

Thus when the stationery vastu is seen from a changing platform, as a

result of the false knowledge, the dharma of the changing platform

appears to get superimposed on the stationery vastu, and vice versa.

Even after the false knowledge is corrected, the mutual

superimposition of the dharmas, seems to continue, like a magic, as

it is a natural law.

In the case of Jeeva, and Brahman, such superimposition takes place

of dharma of each, because of Jeeva's attachment to Mind, Body

and

Intellect, as if it forgot its unchanging platform or substratum i.e.

consciousness. Self knowledge corrects such false knowledge on the

part of Jeeva, and thus the Jeeva gets Enlightened of its own

swaroopa, which is the Ultimate Truth, i.e. infinite existence and

consciousness or awareness, and because of its unlimitedness

(infinite), it lacks nothing and therefore Anandam or Bliss itself.

Therefore "tarati shokam", "apnoti swarjyam" or

"apnoti param" etc.

To be short, after rising of this knowledge Jeeva does not worry

about what happens to Body, Mind and Intellect, i.e. all idams,

including the enlightened Jeeva itself, and accepts everything

without getting any agitation, and thus enjoys peace i.e. Shanti.

Is there or can there be any experience other than the above as a

result of Self Knowledge, because to my very little knowledge there

is no mention of about "brahmavid having any special

experience". The

Tenth Man continues to be the Tenth Man, but totally free from the

earlier anxiety he had about the missing tenth man. It is said

through meditation one experiences the Bliss of Brahman or Atma etc.

It would be interesting if any List Members can explain what exactly

is this "experience of Brahman, or Atma" and experience of

"Bliss"

etc. I have also heard "when one transcends consciousness in deep

meditation, one experiences the Bliss".

These statements appear to be confusing as my knowledge is very very

limited on the subject.

 

Being a newcomer to the Group,I am sorry for this lengthy note,

because I know every Advaitin knows all these things, but certain

words used or written while unfolding the knowledge, confuses me very

greatly.

I request the Learned List Members to forgive me if my note is boring

and irritating to them.

For quite some time, certain points have been occupying my mind for

clarification. I would be grateful if Learned Members of the List can

help in this connection.

What is the relevance of vaidik rituals, particularly Nitya,

Upasana, Bhakti, etc. in the context of Adwaita, as all these entail

Dwaita? In this connection, what is the position of Prarabdha,

including Pratyavaya Dosha?

 

These topics might have been discussed earlier, but since I am a new

member, I hope learned members can kindly let me have their views.

Hari Om

R.S.MANI

[Guest guest]

Namaste

advaitin, "r_s_mani" <r_s_mani> wrote:

>

> > I am very grateful to Respected Prof Krishnamurthyji and

Respected

> Sri Sadanandaji for their lucid explanations with regard to the

> apparent relationship between Brahman and Atma/Jeeva.

> "In the case of brahman and Atman there is no question of one

> being 'real' or not with respect to the other. Both are two words

for the same advaitic Absolute Reality. …profvk" This is the

> real position unfolded in the Upanishads.

> Sri Sadanandaji's discussions on the various types of

> relationships between Brahman and Atma clear all doubts from one's

mind about Ekam Eva Advitheeyam Brahma.

> Nevertheless with regard to the snake-rope example, I have always

had a difficulty inasmuch as when the knowledge takes place the

snake disappears (!) and rope shines, which is not the case in the

case of Brahman, where only the knowledge is corrected and the world

(idams) continues to appear as same, though the earlier knowledge

about the world gets corrected as a result of the

enlightenment. ...........

> Hari Om

> R.S.MANI

----------------------------

 

Sri Mani, I would like to take your other questions also; but from

next month, precisely, August 4, I am going to be posting a series

on 'A Digest of Paramacharya's discourses on Soundaryalahari'

which will clear some of your doubts and answer many general

questions on advaita for every one.

Right now I hasten to refer you to Sage Ramana's answer to your above

question on the snake-rope example. You are indeed blessed, because

your question, almost in the same language, was raised by Ramana

himself and he answers it himself on the following lines.

Examples quoted in Vedanta have limitations. Each example is intended

to bring only one or two points to the focus and they should not be

stretched any further. So to understand the fact that the discordance

between the snake-rope analogy and our experience with the world, we

have to go to other examples.

Once I understand, by proper lighting, or by proper guidance, that it

is only a rope and not a snake, the snake no more comes into my view.

But even after sages tell me that what we see as the world is only

brahman, even after 'understanding' ( ! ) that statement, I still see

only the world ( snake ?) and not brahman (rope ?). Why is this so.

That means the analogy of the snake-rope is not perfect. Yes, that is

why you are advised not to stretch an analogy too much.

Now come to the mirage - water example. You see water on the distant

sand. By going near enough, we know there is no water there and we

are 'illumined'. But now come back to the same distance as earlier.

You will see the water again ! And this, after knowing that the

appearance of water is only an appearance and not the reality. So

this takes care of the doubt: Why does the world appear to me as

real, when I 'know' it is only brahman?

 

Now Ramana Maharishi, in his characteristic way, raises again another

Mani-like question ! The question is: Mirage water though it appears,

does not quench my thirst. But the world appearance satisfies my

thirst and satisfies many other wants of mine. How can it be taken as

non-real?

And Ramana himself answers this. He says: Now the analogy of the

mirage-water does not help any more. You have to go to the dream

example. In the dream, which is all non-real, the thirst that arises

in the dream is quenched by the water appearing in the dream. That is

how, in non-real appearance of the world, all wants of ours that

arise in that non-real stage appear to be satisfied by that non-real

worldly things themselves !

 

I hope all of this makes sense. Thank you.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

profvk