Let's expand our horizon w/Gitaji - how 2 b detached: body-world? (1 of 8 em

[Guest guest]

Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

 

I would like to respond to Bhavdiyaji's comments on my previous post

on " I " the Witness as he put it! First of all, many of us think and

believe that there is soul in each one of us which just witnesses only

and so " we " are different from these souls who provide us with life

current. This belief or interpretation need to be investigated further

based on our experience of reality. At the outset, I can tell that

even if this " I " considered separate from " me " who is thought of as

ladden with Karmas; since I the witness, or soul sustains this " me " ,

IT deserves our investigation, and is not waste of time! It will lead

to realization that " me " in reality is this " I " the soul witness and

yes, there is only One Consciousness, Atman which holds all minds and

all bodies and all that we can ever imagine!

 

The way " I " , the witness, is to be understood in ultimate sense is

that it is Conscious/Awareful Existence itself! The witness has to be

conscious and existing before it can witness anything, right? I know I

am whether or not anything I know through this witness, is real or

illusiory I cannot tell. I can dispute about God's existence but I

cannot dispute my existence, needed even to dispute anything at all

in the first place. This I is the conscious existence itself

witnessing meaning making everything in the world manifest. What is

my reality? It is being Conscious, so it has to be Absolute truth(Sat)

and Truth is God! This witness " I " is witness only relative to " things

being witnessed " . But if further investigated, these " witnessed

things " are of the nature of conscious-thoughts and feelings about

those things they point to! None can experience objects apart from

being conscious and only in terms of thoughts-feelings! Objects in and

of themselves are Absolute undifferentiated Existence(wholeness)

manifest by and as Consciousness, or Brahman. The Brahman/Ishwara

appearing as the World. Thus, " I " the witness is the Withnessed also,

and hence Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahman, Everything here is verily God!

Nothing to witness ultimately. The implication of this realization is

far reaching in one's life as manifest in the lives of Saints and

Sages through ages! And it all start with " I " , the body-mind person,

evolving as " I " the witness, and finally " I " the Brahman!

 

If Moksha is our goal, then we need to be free from karmas! And one

can be free from karmas only when one is free from being Karta, an

individual doer. And if one can be free from Karta, one is not a

person. So then doership based karmas and subsequent re-incarnations

cannot be ultimate truth but rather believed in ignorance of our true

nature, like in a dream! Krishna says " That which Is(sat), never

ceases to BE, and that which is not, can never come to being " !

Doership and karmas are asat-unreal in this sense!

 

Namaskar... Pratap

(Pratap Bhatt)

-----

Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

 

I am grateful to the group memebers and those who have started to

inquire and ask clarifying questions! In this post I want to share my

understanding relating to Hemendraji's question!

 

What happens to " I " the consciousness durng the general anesthesia! A

body-mind based person is unconscious is all what we know. But how can

we say the Consciousness which is Impersonal, Universal we all share

is unconscious, affected in someway, or absent? To be able to say

that, one has to be Conscious, right? So, " I " as consciousness, true

identity of all of us, is not affected. It is the property/guna of the

body-mind not to respond under certain conditions which is induced by

drug. (This can be looked as Intelligent design of Consciousness-God

so we can perform painful surgeries). Like an electrical gedget, such

as bulb or fan, when goes out of order by not lighting or not fanning,

Electricity is not affected at all and works just fine in other gedgets!

 

What is important to see is that this " I " doesn't refer to person,

rathher, it is impersonal consciousness that lights this person and

all persons with the sense of " I " , which person takes to be

himself/herself, an independent individual. This assumption or belief

on one's part, that this consciousness is his/her personal makes him

ask question like this.

 

That is why it is more important to realize, not only " I am

Consciousness/Atman " but This Consciousness that I am, is not my

personal. Such realization made our Rishis of Upanishadas say " Aham

Brahmasmi " or I am THAT, meaning Atman is Brahan, they are not two

different entities compared to be the same, but rather ONE Single

Experience of Being which is Consciousness! Call It " I " when referred

to in the context of a person, or Brahman when refrred to in the

universal context. This is not theory left to belief or unproven

consclusion that God is beyond mind and therefore we have no choice

but to believe He is Omnipresent, and pray! It is our experience right

now as these words are being read and understood, it is Consciousness

that comprehends them, reflects as our thoughts, called mind! One can

verify that mind steps in afterward(after-thought), to express what we

have understood, claiming " I " understand. However, mind was absent

when comprehenson-perception was taking place! So it is logical and

even experiential to know God! We need to be interested in knowing God

beyond our beliefs by looking into our experiences and reality behind

them!

 

Namaskar... Pratap in Divine friendship

(Pratap Bhatt)

------

Can body be attached to anything?

Attachment and detachment is for 'sva bhaav' that resides (occupies,

dehi) in physical body. The physcal body is material, helpless, and

cannot even move not to talk of having own decision. In bootatma or

'soul in body', the 'svabhaav' is only variable; and when it is pure,

it has least attachment by more awareness, and when it is impure, it

has high attachment by low awareness. Body or bueuty or any exposure

of wealth is attachment because these physical elements are not in

control and yet we want to control these; but by awareness of the

'tatkalik' physical nature of body, and 'sanaatan' sva bhaav, these

make one worriless and not becoming watchdog of beauty and exposure of

wealth.

 

BG begins with the famous prayer of Arjun (kaparrnya dosho .....) when

Arjun says that my 'sva bhaav' has fallen because I am pushed by

several compulsions and dogmas that weakened me and I am lost. Please

decide for myself what I must do as it is desirable. Arjun has the

body and equipments but he has lost the svabhaav or ability of self

determination by ignorance that surrounded him. The atachment or

detachment is state of mind and body is really irrevalent. See Helen

Keller, Gandhi, who have become compltely changed after removal of

ignorance and got a vision unbounded by atachments.

 

In a most usual way, there are thousands of students and all able

bodied but some of those with high education, become more progressive

and take courageous decision than those who are not educated. That

means, changes in mind is more useful than giving land or property of

makeup or money. BG is very necessary for education today because any

external wealth, comfort, facility and laisure and technology cannot

save the country/society without changes in mind.

 

regards

K G

(Krishna Gopal)

---

 

, " sadhak_insight "

<sadhak_insight wrote:

>

> Dear loved all

>

> Tutorial type study of BG is truely very sensibile idea. Thanks to

> Manjula.

>

> Bhagwat Gita refers body as occupancy (deha, dehi), of different

> designs and construction (shariir, shariirani), is physical (bhoot,

> bhootani), for occupancy (kashya, kasi), and occupancy (vaasa,

> niwaas, aawaas), and field of study/inquiry (kshetra) and senses

> (indriyas). Folloing 7 words are about body i.e., physical

> occupancy and of senses and inquiry.

> body is Deha, dehi (english : living place, occupancy) i.e, Dehant

> = occpancy over or death of body. 2/13,18,22,30, 59

> body is bhoot, bhootani (english: physical). 2/30,34

> Body is indriya (english: senses) and vishaya (english: subject via

> senses) see 2/61.62,64, 67

> body is shareer or shariirani (english: specification or design)

> 2/18, 2/22 house of different design = deha (occupancy) in different

> shareer (design or construction type).

> body is kashya, kaya (english: house, occupancy) i.e., kashi where

> Shiva's living place BG 1/17

> body is vaasa (english:where one lives or in hindi aavvaas, niwaas

> where people live) See : 2/22

> kshetra is field or place of activity or subject of inquiry. It is

> inference to some extent about body.

>

> Body, very simply put is a house or occupancy. It is of physical

> (bhoot) nature and therefore visible and recognized by senses.

> Everybody needs house where he/she got a job, to be able to do the

> work what is must. 'shareer matren khalu dharma shadhan' i.e., body

> is a means of transformation in svabhaav (dharma). As do people

> change houses or cloth or cities,... it is all examples of changes

> of body. When you live in Delhi and get a new job in Mumbai, you

> cease to live in Delhi (died in Delhi), and get reborn in Mumbai in

> a new career and start a new relationship and new responsibility.

> This change in occupancy status is called death or dehant. Even it

> happens all time.. an infant becomes boy, then adult, then old ....

> and these changes in occupancy is continuity of death and rebirth in

> course of the journey from beginning of the universe till present.

>

> The phyical or bodily disposition is not very long lasting, but

> intent in the svabhaav cannot be separated, and is constantly on the

> move and this sense of transition in disposition is a reason enough

> for detachment. If the svabhhav (dharma) is uprisng, the body will

> be accordingly changes for better and so there can be no attachment

> to old one, but if the road is known, death or loss of occupancy is

> resisted by attachment. This explanation is suggesting how

> attachment to body is not very wise but stick to ones' svabhaav, and

> not let it get deteriorated.

>

> regards

> Krishna Gopal

> -

> Loving Divine,

> Pranams.

> Thanks to Pratapji and Misraji for their inspiring insight. I would

> appreciate it if you and others could take time and response to

> other questions in that same email (1 of 8) so we all can benefit.

> Thanks.

>

> For new members: Team, about couple of years ago, I had presented 8

> emails titled 'Let's Expand Our Horizon w/Gitaji:... ... ... "

> questioning various aspects to be studied for our spiritual

> evolution. I started the discussion expecting some participation.

> One can go to group achieves

> (/ and search these

> messages. You can type 'Horizon' in the search field it will bring

> all messages.

>

> I replied to my own email (1 of 8 - what is body?) just to start of

> the discussion. It can be found at:

> /message/411

> /message/451

>

> Hope we all can benefit from this discussion. Thanks again.

> humble regards,

> always at Thy Divine Feet

> ---

> With all the respects to all the seekers and believers a question:

> So what happens to " I " the consciousness during general anesthesia?

> I struggle with these concepts and so help me. Is it possible to

> logically decipher " God " Or there is no choice but to conclude

> that " He is omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, and all merciful,

> but beyond mind and matter " and just do what one must with the

> prayer that whenever we get despirited " He " hold our hand and sooth

> us. I know I have to suffer the consequences of Karma, I know that

> mind is like a wind, and all in the field is under the influence of

> PRAKRITI and GUNA.

>

> HEMENDRA PARIKH

> ---

>

> Mahoday,

>

> I wish to enumerate some of my thinking on this subject which may

> appear not so much in line with Shri Gitaji's teachings or what Shri

> Krishn Said:

>

> 1. The 'I " you are talking about is only a witness; it does not get

> involved in whatever you do or think. So, in my opinion, its role

> is mainly to supply you like an electric current or a life in your

> physical body. It just watches and records whatever you are

> thinking, what are you doing how you are spending your life;

>

> 2. The next life or getting born again and again and whether in

> swarg or narak or on earth in a high or low situation completely

> depends on your thoughts and actions in this life and before it; so

> it is your karma alone which decides your future, whether you spend

> your time thinking about money, women, wine or you spend it in

> helping your poor brother and disciplining yourself doing

> meditation, prayers and living a straight life.

>

> 3. It does not depend at all on the 'I' or the witness or the soul,

> which is supposed to be the same in each one of us. In Jain dharma

> they say that your actions stick to your soul like honey, very very

> hard and this will make for your happiness or unhappiness moksha or

> going to hell.

>

> 4. So, why we are wasting so much time talking about an 'I " over

> which we have no control and who is just supplying us with the life

> current without itself getting involved in our deeds and thinking

> and acting as a witness.

>

> 5. It would be much better to stop wasting time on our 'I' or on

> parmatma but to straighten our actions and thinking for which there

> is plenty of guidance in all Hindu religions and sub religions and

> which will bring us to a better present and future life or even

> moksha.

>

> I would be grateful for your comments, if any one will care to do so

> on this important subject. Please excuse my repetition for giving

> emphasis to the point which I am trying to make.

>

> JAI SITARAMJIKI, JAIRADHAKRISHNJIKI, JAI VEER HANUMAN,

>

> With respects to you all,

>

> Bhavdiya

> ---

>

> , " sadhak_insight "

> <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Fellow Sadhakas, Namaste!

> >

> > Inspired by the Geeta Ch 13 and Shankara's vivekchudamani(Crest

> jewel

> > of discrimination), I humbly submit the following as a way to grasp

> > the meaning of Krishna's message, and to lay emphasis on Krishna as

> > Supreme Consciousness. As we shall see this very COnsciousness is

> > what 'I' is in all of us!

> >

> > On the path of knowledge, we need to observe and understand certain

> > facts about our experiences. We can almost call them spiritual

> laws.

> > These laws are more precise than physical, natural or psychological

> > laws!

> >

> > First: Whatever I experience through senses and mind as " feelings

> and

> > thoughts " , called perceptions, cannot be I or me or mine. I

> > experience objects of which I am the subject. Objects are perceived

> > by senses and conceived by mind, intellect and memories. These

> > objects include body, sense-objects(sound, form, touch etc etc),

> > mind, intellect, memories, and objects of external world.

> > It is strange that I call body, thus perceived as mine, and act as

> if

> > I am the body-mind and memories constituting history of my life

> etc,

> > not recognizing the fact that these are objects of perceptions

> only.

> > According to Bhagwat Geeta, they are Kshetra, or field of perceived

> > objects and I am Kshetragna, or the knower of them. It is clear

> this

> > knower is not the body-mind I believe to be I throughout the life.

> >

> > Second: These objects of perception or " experienced objects " are

> > defined by names and shapes(nama, rupa) with attributes such as

> > beautiful or ugly, hard or soft, pleasurable or painful, etc etc

> > limiting them. However, none of these attributes belong to I, the

> > subject knower. Therefore, I cannot be limited by them,

> particularly

> > by body or mind, which I call I or me. In summary, experienced

> > objects are limited and I, being the perceiver or the knower cannot

> > not limited, as “I†that I am, is not perceived as object of

> this

> > world(If perceived, I become limited object like other objects). I

> am

> > not perceivable and therefore, beyond mind's comprehension,

> > nevertheless I know I am experientially as conscious being! This is

> > Crest Jewel of discrimination, Kshetragna-I and its Kshetra-

> objects!

> >

> > This leads me to be open to the possibility that I am That

> Awareness

> > or Consciousness because I am undoubtedly conscious and existing

> all

> > the time I experience anything. I experience objects appearing and

> > disappearing as thoughts of those objects come and go. This shows

> me

> > that " I " that experiences, has to be Consciousness Itself and the

> > nature of objects experienced is just these thoughts, and

> therefore,

> > has to be the same Consciousness. Experientially speaking, " being

> > conscious " is my true nature, or Sat-Chit nature as it is called in

> > Upanishads.

> >

> > So what I am really is This Consciousness, which we all call I and

> > mistake for body-mind based self or ego, a false sense of

> > independently existing entity! This Consciousness is One we all

> share

> > as we cannot produce any proof of It being personal for each one of

> > us.

> >

> > If we remain open to possibility of it being One and Impersonal,

> and

> > act from this knowledge in all our dealing with world, we will

> > receive the proof miraculously from Consciousness Itself, also

> called

> > God! I as Impersonal Consciousness is eternal even as body-mind

> > organism dies. This is the realization of Immortality!

> >

> > Namaskar.... Pratap in Divine friendship

> > Pratap Bhatt

> > -

> --

> >

> > , " Manjula Patel " <manjumaa@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Loving Divine,

> > > Pranam.

> > > We have very good discussions going on with various questions

> > asked in this

> > > group. Thanks to all for their participation and the Moderator

> for

> > > facilitation.

> > >

> > > We all say and agree that we need to be detached but the key

> > concern is

> > > 'HOW?', isn't it? To address various topics of detachment I

> have

> > divided

> > > them into 8 emails so we can discuss them individually. I have

> > also tried

> > > to provide Gita sloka or chapter or a term/word used that have

> > addressed

> > > them but Gitaji has lot more to offer...!!! I am a strong

> > believer that the

> > > RIGHT UNDERSTANDING is the ONLY way that can lead us to true and

> > deeper

> > > level of detachment. So let's expand our horizon together with

> > Gitaji and

> > > supportive examples where applicable. Let's pour out our

> > understanding and

> > > experiences on how to be truly detached with love & compassion -

> > the true

> > > application of Gitaji in our life.

> > >

> > > First, let's understand what is body and world? - Just

> > *'kshetra'* - *Chapter

> > > 13* (please do not discuss about kshetrajna in this email). We

> > can also

> > > discuss *'dharmakshetra'* , *'kurukshetra'*, & *'dharmakshetra-

> > kurukshetra'

> > > - Chapter 1*.

> > >

> > > Lord said we need to cultivate this body land. As Gitaji is

> > consider to be

> > > an essence of Vedas-Upanishads, I think it is ok to bring

> examples

> > from

> > > other scriptures to support the sloka chosen from Gitaji.

> > >

> > > (Please *note*: provide related Gita Sloka 1st, support it with

> > examples

> > > from other scriptures if needed)

> > > Please *discuss*...

> > > 1) What is body, its nature?

> > > 2) Can body be attached to anything?

> > > 3) Is body subject to any pain or pleasure?

> > > 4) What is world, its nature?

> > > 5) Does material wealth carry any pleasure? Is it worth

> attaching

> > to?

> > > 6) who shall we be attached to, if anybody/thing at all? Is

> there

> > a need

> > > for us to be attached to anybody/thing? Why?

> > >

> > > Thanks in advance for your participation.

> > > Love.

> > > always at Thy Feet worthy of worship

> > >

> >

>