Why question 'why'? or 'Who wants to know anyway.'

[Guest guest]

> --- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik>

> wrote:

>

> > opinion that it is not the question but the attitude

> > of questioning

> > that leads to ahamkara.

>

> > There is no doubt that we must start from a position

> of apparent attachment but any question will have in

> it an echo of the answer. In that echo is the next

> question and answer.

> Could it be that alongside every question there should

> be a companion that asks,'Whose intention (attitude or

> tataparya) impels this question?' This may be

> demonstrated in the old practice of the 'Who am I?'

> question with the companion 'Who wants to know?'

> As you state so clearly:

>

Namaste Shri Ken and Advaitins

A good understanding of the nature of question itself could be useful.

It is my belief that one does not know 'what really the question is'

or ' have i articulated the question correctly' until the correct

answer is found!!!.

 

A question thus understood can be seen to be a tool to view the

answer,experience comfort/ discomfort, correct/refine/modify the

question,seek and view answer - repeat the process until the correct

answer and the correct question fall in place - the heart is

contented.

 

Seen thus, a question need not be perceived as a ego driven

activity.. it could be a tool or part of a pursuit where the question

and answer resolve into one improved state of understanding of the

subject matter of enquiry.

 

Many thousand namaskarams to all advaitins

Sridhar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, ken knight <anirvacaniya> wrote:

> > >But if I ask the

> > question with

> > humility, then I dissolve the question "why" by

> > realising that it is

> > maya -- because the question assumes causality and

> > entraps itself

> > into the unending chain of the seed and the plant.

>

> This has always been my question as to the efficacy of

> 'Neti, Neti.' Other than through direct experience I

> cannot see how the removal of ever finer veils can

> ever come to an end, it's like empirical scientists

> trying to measure the first moment of the 'Big Bang'.

 

Namaste,

 

As Yajnavalkya told Gargi - 'Your head will fall off'!

 

 

http://atomicshakespeare.com/word/

 

The Upanishads: Brihadaranyaka Upanishad:

Part Three Chapter VI: Yajnavalkya and Gargi (I)

(tr. Sw. Nikhilananda)

 

{1} Then Gargi, the daughter of Vachaknu, questioned him.

"Yajnavalkya ," said she, "if all this is pervaded by water,

by what, pray, is water pervaded?By air, O Gargi."

"By what, pray, is air pervaded?By the sky, O Gargi."

"By what is the sky pervaded?By the world of the gandharvas, O

Gargi."

"By what is the world of the gandharvas pervaded?By the world of

the sun, O Gargi.

"By what is the world of the sun pervaded?By the world of the

moon, O Gargi."

"By what is the world of the moon pervaded?By the world of the

stars, O Gargi."

"By what is the world of the stars pervaded?By the world of the

gods, O Gargi."

"By what is the world of the gods pervaded?By the world of Indra,

O Gargi.

"By what is the world of Indra pervaded?By the World of Virij, O

Gargi.

"By what is the World of Virij pervaded?By the World of

Hiranyagarbha, O Gargi."

"By what, pray, is the World of Hiranyagarbha pervaded?"

"Do not, O Gargi," said he, "question too much, lest your head should

fall off.

You are questioning too much about a deity about whom we should not

ask too much.

Do not ask too much, O Gargi."

Thereupon Gargi, the daughter of Vachaknu, held her peace.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

--- Sunder Hattangadi <sunderh wrote:

>>

> Namaste,

>

> As Yajnavalkya told Gargi - 'Your head will

> fall off'!

>

>

> http://atomicshakespeare.com/word/

>

> The Upanishads: Brihadaranyaka Upanishad:

> Part Three Chapter VI: Yajnavalkya and Gargi (I)

> (tr. Sw. Nikhilananda)

 

 

Namaste Sunder and Sridhar,

Once upon a time the reading of this dialogue with

friends had two of us rolling on the floor with

uncontrollable giggles as we moved though the

questions to the inevitable conclusion.

Which comes first? The answer or the question? Or is

that one of those impossible questions?

Must rush off to teach some Maths,

Best wishes

 

ken

 

 

 

New Photos - easier uploading and sharing.

 

[Guest guest]

Sridhar said:

 

"Namaste Shri Ken and Advaitins

A good understanding of the nature of question itself could be useful.

It is my belief that one does not know 'what really the question is'

or ' have i articulated the question correctly' until the correct

answer is found!!!."

 

Most people know that the answer to the question is '42' but, unless you

have actually read the book or seen the television series, you may not know

that the mice had to build the biggest computer ever - namely the planet

earth - in order to work out what the question was!

 

(Sorry - couldn't resist it! If, you don't know what I am talking about,

please ignore the message completely!)

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

[Guest guest]

Namaste Dennis

I could not understand, but seem to feel chastened and pleased at the

same time

Many thousand namaskarams to all advaitins

sridhar

> Most people know that the answer to the question is '42' but,

unless you

> have actually read the book or seen the television series, you may

not know

> that the mice had to build the biggest computer ever - namely the

planet

> earth - in order to work out what the question was!

>

> (Sorry - couldn't resist it! If, you don't know what I am talking

about,

> please ignore the message completely!)

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

[Guest guest]

Dennisji,

 

Hari Om!

 

I believe there is no need to say sorry. In fact, it is a very interesting

subject. When I first read the book "The Hitch Hikers guide to the Galaxy"

I couldn't stop but appreciate the height of imagination of the author. "A

Pocket Guide to Life, The Universe, and Everything"....

 

"I think therefore I am..." is truely a mind-boggling statement! When I

first read that statement the following is the notes I made for myself :-)

 

What happens when somebody really stops thinking? actually what are we

supposed to gain by thinking? We are goaded by nature to think. We can't

think anything that is unthinkable. We cant think of a plant growing on

the Sun. Because the scientific data available so far suggests to our

rational brain that it is impossible to find a plant growing on the Sun. So

even if forced upon thinking (visualizing) such a plant, our brain refuses

to accept it.

 

I think only what is available to my five sence organs. I think only what

is available here and now. I can think of past based on experience; I can

think of present based on evidence; I can guess the future based on the

present happenings. However I cant think of that which is making the

"process of thinking" possible.

 

 

Regards,

Madhava

 

 

 

 

 

Message: 18

Tue, 9 Mar 2004 11:29:57 -0000

"Dennis Waite" <dwaite

Re: Why question 'why'? or 'Who wants to know anyway.'

 

Sridhar said:

 

"Namaste Shri Ken and Advaitins

A good understanding of the nature of question itself could be useful.

It is my belief that one does not know 'what really the question is'

or ' have i articulated the question correctly' until the correct

answer is found!!!."

 

Most people know that the answer to the question is '42' but, unless you

have actually read the book or seen the television series, you may not know

that the mice had to build the biggest computer ever - namely the planet

earth - in order to work out what the question was!

 

(Sorry - couldn't resist it! If, you don't know what I am talking about,

please ignore the message completely!)

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

[Guest guest]

Namaste Madhavaji.

 

Your thoughts are interesting indeed. A couple of thoughts from my

side in [ ].

 

You said: "We cant think of a plant growing on the Sun. Because the

scientific data available so far suggests to our rational brain that

it is impossible to find a plant growing on the Sun. So even if

forced upon thinking (visualizing) such a plant, our brain refuses to

accept it."

 

[Dreams are thoughts and dreaming is akin to thinking. A dream in

which a plant grows on the Sun is a distinct possibility.]

 

You also wrote: "However I can't think of that which is making

the "process of thinking" possible."

 

[Aren't we doing that thinking here almost continuously? Or, did you

mean you can't describe it?]

 

[Our control over our thoughts is only seeming like our sense of free-

will. I can't be sure of my next thought. Thoughts are the lighting

up of Consciousness like the objects and events occurring around us

about which we have no choice. It is therefore prudent that an

advaitin relinquish `thinkership' like all the other `ships' and yet

continue thinking. Think without thinkerhip. That is freedom! That

is like non-action in action.]

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

 

 

advaitin, "Madhava Turumella" <madhava@m...>

wrote: