Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 Namaste, I recently heard some of the Vedanta dimdima lectures on the avg satsangs website. Swami Tattvavidananda (disciple of Pujya Swami Dayananda) speaks directly to you heart and simply by listening to his lectures, one can experience the sakshi bhava. It is amazing how simple shravana can have such an impact. I have a question regarding one of his lectures. While describing the knower and known, he gives an example of the ego. Let us says somebody says - " I was an arrogant person but now I am more accepting and mellowed down " . You have already objectified this arrogant person or ego. So this ego, arrogance and change are known to you - the knower. Whatever is known or objectifiable is non-self and is different from the self. So far so good. In Gita chapter 13 it is said kshetragyam capi maam viddhi sarva kshetreshu bharataha Prof ji has already described the kshara purusha, akshahra purusha and the purushottam nicely. But in the arrogant person example, who is the knower of the arrogant person ? Is it the 'fragment' of consciousness in the jiva or is it just another thought in the mind or is it a separated consciousness ? with best regards, Shailendra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 advaitin , " bhatnagar_shailendra " <bhatnagar_shailendra wrote: > > Namaste, > I recently heard some of the Vedanta dimdima lectures on the avg > satsangs website. Swami Tattvavidananda (disciple of Pujya Swami > Dayananda) speaks directly to you heart and simply by listening to > his lectures, one can experience the sakshi bhava. It is amazing how > simple shravana can have such an impact. > I have a question regarding one of his lectures. While describing > the knower and known, he gives an example of the ego. Let us says > somebody says - " I was an arrogant person but now I am more > accepting and mellowed down " . You have already objectified this > arrogant person or ego. So this ego, arrogance and change are known > to you - the knower. Whatever is known or objectifiable is non-self > and is different from the self. So far so good. In Gita chapter 13 > it is said > kshetragyam capi maam viddhi sarva kshetreshu bharataha > > Prof ji has already described the kshara purusha, akshahra purusha > and the purushottam nicely. But in the arrogant person example, who > is the knower of the arrogant person ? Is it the 'fragment' of > consciousness in the jiva or is it just another thought in the mind > or is it a separated consciousness ? > > with best regards, > Shailendra > Namaste, Shailendra-ji My quick answer to your question (without deep thinking) is: It is only another thought in the mind. Now the intellect is taking over and analysing itself and has come to another step in its own realisation of its own earlier arrogance. PraNAms to all adxvaitins. profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 Namaste Shailendraji and Prof. Krishnamurthyji. Consciousness being indivisible, there can be neither fragmented nor separated consciousness. All knowledge is lighted up by Consciousness doesn't therefore imply there is actually a division or fragmentation like the lighter and the lighted up. Consciousness remains One despite apparent or seeming division is then the answer and paramArtha. Yet, if the question who knows he was arrogant is asked, the answer in the transactional would be the erstwhile arrogant person. It is like asking " Who is deluded or suffers from ignorance? " for which the usual answer is " the asker of the question " . Hope I haven't complicated the issue. PraNAms Madathil Nair _______________ advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk wrote: > > advaitin , " bhatnagar_shailendra " > <bhatnagar_shailendra@> wrote: > > > > ....But in the arrogant person example, who > > is the knower of the arrogant person ? Is it the 'fragment' of > > consciousness in the jiva or is it just another thought in the mind > > or is it a separated consciousness ? Shailendra _____________ > > > > > > My quick answer to your question (without deep thinking) is: It is > only another thought in the mind. Now the intellect is taking over > and analysing itself and has come to another step in its own > realisation of its own earlier arrogance. > > profvk > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.