Negation?

May 13, 2006

Namaste, all

I hope, the learned members of the group will kindly help in clearing my doubts with regard to “neti neti” which involves negating something to “arrive” at Brahman or Self, or to logically appreciate Brahman or Self as the the one and the only substratum of all known and unknown..

What exactly is to be negated?

Is the negator, being mithya, also need to be negated, and in that case who will be the second negator?

The Upanishad says:

“Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma”

i.e. all (are) indeed Brahman.

What is the exact meaning of “Idam” in this context?

In the context of this Mantra, is it necessary to negate any thing?

Is it necessary to do any negation at all to “experience” the Self? If it is necessary, who is the negator, and who is going to experience the Self?

Warm regards

Mani

R. S. Mani

Mail goes everywhere you do. Get it on your phone.

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin Homepage at: Terms of Service.

May 13, 2006

Namaste Mani,

I am not a teacher but since I have been under the kind guidance

of a realized teacher perhaps I can put my humble view on this.

What is to be negated? Everything. There remains "something"

after everything has been discarded. That something is the real

Self. My teacher calls it "vaccuum", but it does not matter how you

call it, he says, it is only different names for the same thing. You

and I can call it Brahman or Atman. What is this everything to be

negated? It is all concept superimposed upon the experiencer.

Examples: experiencer is Fred or Mani, it is fat or athletic, it has

blue or brown eyes, it is smart or beautiful, it has some traumas

from childhood, it has the habit of thinking

pessimistcally/optmistically, it is male or female, it has a body.

Negating all that and whatever arises lead to a more direct

experience of the Self. I say more direct because you and I are the

Self even now, but we don´t see it because there´s so much trash

superimposed on it. It´s like a very dirty window, when it is

cleansed, it remains transparent. It has no more marks on it so that

you can see what is on the other side of the window. The same with

us. We need to cleanse ourselves of all these concepts, then we

arrive at that purified stage. The window was there all along but

the window was dirty, we couldn´t see that it was actually

transparent.

I hope this helps. Warm regards,

Fred

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin Homepage at: Terms of Service.

May 14, 2006

Hari Om

~~~~~~

"R.S.MANI" wrote:

Namaste, all

I hope, the learned members of the group will kindly help in

clearing my doubts with regard to "neti neti" which involves

negating something to "arrive" at Brahman or Self, or to logically

appreciate Brahman or Self as the the one and the only substratum of

all known and unknown. What exactly is to be negated?

Namaskar Mani,

I hope we find you in good spirits and health...

As I understand it, and as Fred has been commented, this "neti neti"

is a profound thing.

This means not this, not this.... that is, I am not this, not this

that I see. I am not the environment, this body, these thoughts.

One then goes to finer and finer levels of thought, creation and the

tattvas - space, air, fire, solid ( earth), water, the elements of

creation. All this is not my core SELF.

Also, so is the same for renunciation... I 'renounce' I am not what

I see.

this is a beginnning of an in-depth conversation of the seer, the

mechanisn of percepttion and the seen... Sri Shankara has spoken

about this and will be a good reference if we sih to proceed.

pranams,

yajvan

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin Homepage at: Terms of Service.

May 14, 2006

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

The Upanishad says:

ï¿½Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahmaï¿½

i.e. all (are) indeed Brahman.

What is the exact meaning of ï¿½Idamï¿½ in this context?

In the context of this Mantra, is it necessary to negate any thing?

Is it necessary to do any negation at all to ï¿½experienceï¿½ the Self? If it is necessary, who is the negator, and who is going to experience the Self?

From

Sankarraman

Dear Sir,

The dissolving of the drisya in the drik as per the process of neti, neti, does not involve an intellectual analysis, negating the objective pheonmena, and lookiphenomenamething at the end. This, according to Ramana, is only a kosa-vichara and not the atmavichara. Bhaghavan clearly says that the mind that negates everything will not negate itself, conclding thereby thconcludinglf is an object of experience. The quest, on the other hand, consists in turning back all drishya in the drik till even the relative drik, the individual subject creating the subject-object dichotomy, also vanishes, and there is no experience of any kind- any vision,sound, etc. Bhaghavan says that prior to the irreovcable experienirrevocableelf taking place-experience is a misnomer, but one has to use that word perforce- there is the awakening of sphurana, the state of awareness constanly animating constantlyiences, and the sphurana also dies, there being no residual being left to

contemplate, know anything. Drig-drisya viveka consists in understanding the position that drisya has no reality independent of the drik, and the drik also is not the subject of anything. There is nothing to be negated.. This will result in anavastha dhosa, infinite regress. One has to only look for the source of all phenomena, which is not paying attention to any phenomena, but to see the source. This is not a logical, intellectual, process. Logic is only a tool of the unreal mind, which cannot be relied upon in knowing the first principles of life. In the mantra, 'Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma,' only when one understands through self-enquiry that there is no all, nor is an idam, the understanding of there being nothing to be negated would arise. The idam and all are only upadhis.yours ever in Bhaghavan Ramana,

Sankarraman

Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Messenger with Voice.

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin Homepage at: Terms of Service.

May 14, 2006

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to you all

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

Namaste, all

I hope, the learned members of the group will kindly help in clearing my doubts with regard to “neti neti” which involves negating something to “arrive” at Brahman or Self, or to logically appreciate Brahman or Self as the the one and the only substratum of all known and unknown..

What exactly is to be negated?

Is the negator, being mithya, also need to be negated, and in that case who will be the second negator?

The Upanishad says:

“Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma”

i.e. all (are) indeed Brahman.

What is the exact meaning of “Idam” in this context?

In the context of this Mantra, is it necessary to negate any thing?

Is it necessary to do any negation at all to “experience” the Self? If it is necessary, who is the negator, and who is going to experience the Self?

Warm regards

Mani

Dear Sri Mani,

I am sure that a study and manana on the commentaries of Sri Shankara on the following two Mantras will resolve your doubts:

a) " sarvaM KalvidaM brahma tajjalAniti ||" Chandogya

Upanishad 3-14-1

b) " brahma vA idamagra AsIttadAnamEvAvEt |

ahabrahmAsmIti | tasmAttatsarvamaBavat ||"

bRhadAraNyaka Upanishad 1-4-10

The question of "WHO" and "HOW" will never remain when once you understand the commentaries of Sri Shankara on the above two Mantras. The questioner , the doubter, the seeker will disappear completely.

May the Jagadguru Shankara bestow upon you the Vedantic Wisdom.

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

Mail goes everywhere you do. Get it on your phone.

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin Homepage at: Terms of Service.

May 14, 2006

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

Namaste, all

I hope, the learned members of the group will kindly help in clearing my doubts with regard to “neti neti” which involves negating something to “arrive” at Brahman or Self, or to logically appreciate Brahman or Self as the the one and the only substratum of all known and unknown..

What exactly is to be negated?

Is it necessary to do any negation at all to “experience” the Self? If it is necessary, who is the negator, and who is going to experience the Self?

Warm regards

Mani

Dear sir,

There are only two stages:

1.You can't negate anything.

2. There is nothing to negate.

Adrunkard (drunk of ignorance..avidhya..maya...anything you name it), came home in a totally intoxicated state.His little girl was standing at the door. He shouted at her to move aside and pushed her violently.

She fell down and there was no sound from her. The bewildered drunkered hesitated, moved back, and slowly went near the child. He shook her slowly telling that 'HE DIDNT DO ANYTHING'. There was no reply,nay a sound. Now the bewilderment turned into fear. He shook the child vigourously. Shouted at the top of his voice. 'NEGATED HIS DOING'. Cried aloud, did everything in his capacity to"NEGATE HIS HAND IN THE TRAGIC EVENT". But HE COULDNT BELIEVE HIMSELF. But ,when the INTOXICATION WORE OFF, he found that it was not his child, but the big teddy bear the daughter used to play with.Now ,what is there to negate!.

CAN THE DREAMER KNOW THE DREAM AS A DREAM IN THE DREAM.

The scorching of the sun is true, the gnawing of the hunger is true ,the swelling of the head after some glimpse into Vedanta is true, true, true, and no negation is going to practically help out until the intoxication lasts...until mis identification lasts. Just wake up from 'you can't negate anything' into'there is nothing to negate'

Spguptha.