Knowledge and Enlightenment

[Guest guest]

Sadananda -

 

Many thanks for your reply - I think that the position you describe best fits my

own understanding. I project a difference between EXPRESSION and ESSENCE. All

existants (many) are of course an expression of Essence (One)- thus in immediate

experience of the Divine Essence, I experience True Unity with Essence, (I am

Essence) and with that arises some knowledge of Essence, but not so much of

forms of expression, (other than perhaps further insights into forms of

expression with which I am already familiar).

 

Pilgrim Simon

 

 

 

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada

wrote:

>

>

> Dennis - PraNAms

>

> The sloka and the intended meaning have to be properly understood.

>

> In MunDaka - the student asks - sir please teach me knowing which I will know

everything.

>

> Similar aspect is addressed in the Ch. Up sat vidya where the teacher asks the

student - have you learned that knowing which one knows everything?

>

> Students says such a situation is not possible. The teacher says it is

possible if (only if) the thing I know is the material cause for the rest of the

objects - thus the example given is knowing Gold one ESSENTIALLY knows every

ornament made up of gold similarly knowing clay one knows ESSENTIALLY knows all

the pots made of clay and knowing iron one knows all the tools made of iron. It

does not mean knowing gold I will know the iron tools. The samaanadhikaraNa

applies to the cause and its effects only.

>

> Then the teacher goes in to exhaustive details in explaining the material

cause for the Universe as Brahman - existence-conscious principle that is one

without a second. Hence ALL products came from one material cause - Brahman.

Using the above principle knowing the material cause one ESSENTIALLY knows all

the products made of that material. Hence the concussion drawn by the end of the

chapter is - The ESSENCE of everything in this universe is the existence alone

and that you are. aitadaatmya idam sarvam tat satyam, sa aatmaa, tat tvam asi.

>

> Knowing the essence does not mean the details of the naama ruupa - if I know

Gold, I know the essence of gold ornaments but not the attributes of this ring

vs. that ring etc which belong to mithyaa realm not satya. I only know the

ESSENCE of all as the very existence itself - Hence does not mean jnaani who did

not know quantum mechanics will start teaching that subject after self

realization. What he would know is

>

> The self that I am is the SELF in all and all in my self. sarva bhuutastam

aatmaanam sarva bhuutanica aatmani.

>

> That means I know in ESSENCE everything that really counts - superficial

details I would not know and there will be any desire to know also. yat jnaatvaa

naaparam jneyam.

>

> Hope this helps.

>

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

>

> --- On Mon, 5/11/09, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

>

>

> Needless to say (from my previous post) I do not agree with this position

> and deny the validity of the metaphor (since east is related to the other

> directions as part of its definition; it is not a question of 'different'

> knowledge).

>

> It would be interesting to hear other view on this, although I most

> definitely do not want to trigger another marathon discussion!

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Dennis-ji:

 

In Advaita, a Jnani does not acquire any knowledge (quantum mechanics or

something else). To have knowledge of something, we must presume an object

of knowledge. However, the Self-Realization does not admit of a second.

 

Aham Brahmasmi means, " I Myself Am Brahman " , One without a second. The

question of " knowing " something becomes moot in Advaita.

 

Great Yogis can know anything through concentration and meditation (the

process of samayama). However, when the mind of a Yogi bent on

Self-Realization alaone, turns inward to its source, all is lost and

resolved in that source, which is the Heart.

 

The scriptures say, " Know That by which all else is known " . There is very

deep meaning in that.

 

I have tried to explain the difference between the Science of

Self-Realization and the other physical sciences in the following article.

 

self-inquiry-the-science-of-self-realization

 

Also, I have attempted to explain the difference between meditation and

Self-inquiry in the following article

 

meditation-self-inquiry-and-self-realization

 

 

 

Namaste and love to all

 

Yours in Bhagavan

Harsha

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of Dennis Waite

Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:49 AM

advaitin

RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

 

Hi Peter,

 

I can only repeat the relevant quotation from Swami Parthasarathy:

 

" The knowledge of Self destroys not only the ignorance of Self but all other

types of ignorance in you. For example the knowledge of Sanskrit removes the

ignorance of Sanskrit. The knowledge of science removes the ignorance of

science. But the knowledge of Self removes total ignorance. "

 

To my mind, this is saying that the j~nAnI also acquires knowledge of

quantum mechanics on enlightenment. Does it not say this to you?

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of Peter

Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:23 PM

advaitin

RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

 

Hi Dennis,

 

Yes, indeed. I thought it was knowledge of the Self that we were talking

about with your reference to " all knowing " and your quote from " Atma Bodha "

and Swami Parthasarthy's translation and commentary. Have I misunderstood?

Apologies, if I have.

 

Best wishes,

 

Peter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Peter and Dennis - PraNAms

 

The question has shifted from jnaani to God or Iswara. The two are different.

Jnaani does not become Iswara - He is Brahman. Brahman identified with local BMI

is jiiva and jiivan mukta is the one with local BMI but with the understanding

that I am Brahman and this BMI is in me.

Brahman identified with samaShTi or total BMI is Iswara; with total subtle mind

as HiraNya garbha.

 

Jnaani has a limited mind. Any knowledge takes place in the mind or with the

mind. The limited mind can know only limited 'things' or information.

 

Iswara is defined as jagat kartaa - creator of the entire universe and the

creator has to have the knowledge of creation - just as when we create the dream

world we must of what we are dreaming - not the individual localized mind in the

dream but the waker's mind that is projecting the entire universe of things and

being.

 

Hence Iswara must know all that is created in the field of creation - Hence

scripture do declare that he is sarvajnaH- sarva shaktimaan.

 

When it comes to jnaani - jnaani has localized BMI which are limited. The

knowledge that we are referring to is objective knowledge not the knowledge of

Brahman as the pure undifferentiated existence-consciousness-limitless.

 

Jnaani need not know the naama and ruupa of every object in the universe but he

knows the substantive of everything as nothing but as I am. Shankara may not

know pizza or how to make one and need not have to know also to be a jnaani.

 

Whether God knows about Pizza or not you can ask Him.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

--- On Tue, 5/12/09, Peter <not_2 wrote:

 

 

Hello again, Dennis,

 

It does imply that to me. We would need to check that Swami intends that

deduction. If so, then from this deduction not only would a jnani acquire a

knowledge of quantum mechanics but a jnani would have all knowledge in every

field of knowledge possible - present, past and future.

 

My understanding was that you found this view questionable. I agree which is

why I offered the passages from Sri Ramana Maharshi which I felt supports

your view. But I get the impression you feel I am disagreeing with you.

Have I still got the wrong end of the stick? Sorry.

 

Questioner: But does God know everything?

 

Maharshi: The Vedas declare God to be omniscient only to those who

ignorantly think themselves to be people of little knowledge. But if one

attains and knows him as he really is, it will be found that God does not

know anything, because his nature is the ever-real whole, other than which

nothing exists to be known.

 

Best wishes,

 

Peter

 

>

> advaitin@ s.com

> [advaitin@ s.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Waite

> 12 May 2009 16:49

> advaitin@ s.com

> RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

>

> Hi Peter,

>

> I can only repeat the relevant quotation from Swami :

>

> " The knowledge of Self destroys not only the ignorance of

> Self but all other types of ignorance in you. For example the

> knowledge of Sanskrit removes the ignorance of Sanskrit. The

> knowledge of science removes the ignorance of science. But

> the knowledge of Self removes total ignorance. "

>

> To my mind, this is saying that the j~nAnI also acquires

> knowledge of quantum mechanics on enlightenment. Does it not

> say this to you?

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

>

>

>

> advaitin@ s.com

> [advaitin@ s.com] On Behalf Of Peter

> Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:23 PM

> advaitin@ s.com

> RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

>

> Hi Dennis,

>

> Yes, indeed. I thought it was knowledge of the Self that we

> were talking about with your reference to " all knowing " and

> your quote from " Atma Bodha "

> and Swami Parthasarthy' s translation and commentary. Have I

> misunderstood?

> Apologies, if I have.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Peter

>

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Dennis-ji:

 

In Advaita, a Jnani does not acquire any knowledge (quantum mechanics or

something else). To have knowledge of something, we must presume an object

of knowledge. However, the Self-Realization does not admit of a second.

 

Aham Brahmasmi means, " I Myself Am Brahman " , One without a second. The

question of " knowing " something becomes moot in Advaita.

 

Great Yogis can know anything through concentration and meditation (the

process of samayama). However, when the mind of a Yogi bent on

Self-Realization alaone, turns inward to its source, all is lost and

resolved in that source, which is the Heart.

 

The scriptures say, " Know That by which all else is known " . There is very

deep meaning in that.

 

I have tried to explain the difference between the Science of

Self-Realization and the other physical sciences in the following article.

 

self-inquiry-the-science-of-self-realization

 

Also, I have attempted to explain the difference between meditation and

Self-inquiry in the following article

 

meditation-self-inquiry-and-self-realization

 

 

 

Namaste and love to all

 

Yours in Bhagavan

Harsha

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of Dennis Waite

Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:49 AM

advaitin

RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

 

Hi Peter,

 

I can only repeat the relevant quotation from Swami Parthasarathy:

 

" The knowledge of Self destroys not only the ignorance of Self but all other

types of ignorance in you. For example the knowledge of Sanskrit removes the

ignorance of Sanskrit. The knowledge of science removes the ignorance of

science. But the knowledge of Self removes total ignorance. "

 

To my mind, this is saying that the j~nAnI also acquires knowledge of

quantum mechanics on enlightenment. Does it not say this to you?

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of Peter

Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:23 PM

advaitin

RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

 

Hi Dennis,

 

Yes, indeed. I thought it was knowledge of the Self that we were talking

about with your reference to " all knowing " and your quote from " Atma Bodha "

and Swami Parthasarthy's translation and commentary. Have I misunderstood?

Apologies, if I have.

 

Best wishes,

 

Peter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Peter " <not_2 wrote:

 

 

 

Namaste Dennis,

 

As you asked for another view - there's an interesting and relevant passage

from Sri Ramana Maharshi on this question.

 

Questioner: But does God know everything?

 

Maharshi: The Vedas declare God to be omniscient only to those who

ignorantly think themselves to be people of little knowledge. But if one

attains and knows him as he really is, it will be found that God does not

know anything, because his nature is the ever-real whole, other than which

nothing exists to be known.

 

( " Be As You Are, The Teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi " , p206, by David

Godman.)

 

Sri Ramana puts the same view in his Ulladu Narpadhu (also called, Sat

Darshan).

 

" Know that that alone is true knowledge, in which there is neither knowledge

nor ignorance: the (so-called) knowledge of objects, understand, is not at

all true knowledge. The Real Self shines always alone, with neither things

for Him to know, nor persons to know Him: therefore He is only

Consciousness: do not think that he is non-being. " (verse 12)

 

Peter

 

 

 

>

> advaitin

> [advaitin ] On Behalf Of Dennis Waite

> 11 May 2009 16:33

> advaitin

> RE: Knowledge and enlightenment

>

>

> Needless to say (from my previous post) I do not agree with

> this position and deny the validity of the metaphor (since

> east is related to the other directions as part of its

> definition; it is not a question of 'different'

> knowledge).

>

> It would be interesting to hear other view on this, although

> I most definitely do not want to trigger another marathon discussion!

>

>

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Namate, all respected members,What exactly is " enlightement " ? I would be

grateful for the views of our members.Kind regards.

R. S. Mani

 

 

Bollywood news, movie reviews, film trailers and more! Go to

http://in.movies./

 

 

[Guest guest]

Shree Mani - PraNAms

 

In a simple statement enlightment is freedom from limitations or moksha.

Fundamentally it involves RECOGNITION or realization that I am already

enlightened or free from limitations. Any limitation causes dependence on

something other than myself for my happiness. Limitlessness alone is freedom

from limitations. Limitless is infiniteness and one cannot become infinite by

acquiring finite things. But the thirst for infiniteness is ingrained in ones

pursuits. Hence scriptures come to our rescue to teach that all pursuits are in

vain since they are limited by nature - what is required is RECOGNITION that you

cannot become infinite by any finite pursuits, and mostly importantly you are

already infinite that you want to become. Then the question is if I am already

infinite why do I try to become infinite by yoga or pursuit? The problem

scripture says is because you do not know that you are that infinite that you

seek to become. Thus ignorance of my true

nature is the fundamental problem.

 

Hence enlightment is recognition that I am already infinite. To appreciate that

I need a frame of mind that negates all my misconceptions that I have. For that

yoga is required - not for becoming infinite but to remove all the wrong notions

in my mind which paves the way for the realization of ever existent truth.

 

That is enlightment - that is moksha - that is nirvaana - that is the very

bottom line in all human pursuits - and that is the essence of life itself. This

knowledge takes place in the mind only like any other knowledge. Hence it is

also called akhanDaakara vRitti where reflected consciousness by the mind is

recognized by which the pure consciousness is realized as I am.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

--- On Wed, 5/13/09, R.S.MANI <r_s_mani wrote:

,What exactly is " enlightement " ? I would be grateful for the views of our

members.Kind regards.

[Guest guest]

mani ji :

 

in lighter vein,that which lightens you up,is enlighteningment..

 

suresh.

 

advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote:

>

>

> Namate, all respected members,What exactly is " enlightement " ? I would be

grateful for the views of our members.Kind regards.

> R. S. Mani

>

>

> Bollywood news, movie reviews, film trailers and more! Go to

http://in.movies./

>

>

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Mani prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

If you could permit me to put my 2 paisa worth of thoughts on mOksha or

enlightenment, I would say mOksha is unembodiedness...and this

unembodiedness is the very nature of Atman...as long as we are entangled in

BMI we are not liberated...because chAdOgya says : there is indeed no

freedom from the oppression of pleasure and pain for a being so long as it

is embodied...Since contact of these pleasure and pain is denied for the

liberated one, we can easily say enlightenment is nothing but getting rid

of false notion that we are body or saMsAri...So what would be the status

of enlightenment...kathOpanishad says the wise person who realizes the

Atman that is unembodied even while he is in the bodies, changeless among

the changeful bodies never grieves...mOksha, a state of enlightenment would

reveal you the fact that you are unembodied always and you are indeed

without prANa, without mind and ever pure (nitya shuddha)..According to

shankara enlightenment is only the dispersal of ignorance and nothing

else!!! Keeping this in mind one has to accommodate later invented

theories like reflected consciousness, parchinna chaitanya, individualised

mind, localized body etc. etc. Ofcourse, in the name of vyAvahArik

reality:-))

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> praNAms Sri Mani prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

>

> If you could permit me to put my 2 paisa worth of thoughts on mOksha or

> enlightenment, I would say mOksha is unembodiedness...and this

> unembodiedness is the very nature of Atman...as long as we are entangled in

> BMI we are not liberated...because chAdOgya says : there is indeed no

> freedom from the oppression of pleasure and pain for a being so long as it

> is embodied...Since contact of these pleasure and pain is denied for the

> liberated one, we can easily say enlightenment is nothing but getting rid

> of false notion that we are body or saMsAri...So what would be the status

> of enlightenment...kathOpanishad says the wise person who realizes the

> Atman that is unembodied even while he is in the bodies, changeless among

> the changeful bodies never grieves...mOksha, a state of enlightenment would

> reveal you the fact that you are unembodied always and you are indeed

> without prANa, without mind and ever pure (nitya shuddha)..According to

> shankara enlightenment is only the dispersal of ignorance and nothing

> else!!! Keeping this in mind one has to accommodate later invented

> theories like reflected consciousness, parchinna chaitanya, individualised

> mind, localized body etc. etc. Ofcourse, in the name of vyAvahArik

> reality:-))

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

>

 

Very true, Bhaskarji.

 

As long as we identify with our body & mind, we experience duality.

Identify with consciousness, and duality ceases, as that consciousness is the

truth of everything.

 

Ashtavakra advises Janaka:

" Give up your identification with body, and stand firmly as the Consciousness.

You will be happy, peaceful and free from bondages, right now. "

 

Regards,

Raj.

[Guest guest]

As long as we identify with our body & mind, we experience duality.

Identify with consciousness, and duality ceases, as that consciousness is

the truth of everything.

 

 

praNAms Sri Rajkumar Nair prabhuji

 

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

Hope we are not going back to that bygone history again :-)) yes, duality

ceases for the jnAni after realization as he is not going to identify

himself with BMI anymore..Then how come jnAni can read, write, teach, move,

sit, stand, who will be there to teach his Atma jnAna when he is seeing

himself everywhere?? Well, let us not again open the can of worms :-))

Following excerpts from the dialogues of Sri RamaNa Maharshi would throw

ample light on the socalled jnAni's vyavahAra :-)) (courtesy Sri Mouna

prabhuji, off the list)...But I donot know whether all these are from

vyAvahArik plane or absolute plane :-)) I am not quoting this as an

authority without considering the context...But I hope atleast this would

help us to understand the jnAni's existence on this earth during post jnAna

period & his socalled participation in worldly activities which were/are

the main botheration of us :-)) No need to mention there is an alternative

way of understanding this without bringing in any new ideas more

importantly without doing any harm to the absolute non-dual status of the

jnAni/jnAna!!!

 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

 

 

bhaskar

 

 

PS : Since moderators have already put a 'full stop' to this discussion,

this is not to trigger any further debates on the already dead subject.

Just thought of sharing something with like minded prabhuji-s on this list

:-))

 

 

// quote //

Balaram said, “Where are these two planes for the jnani? He is

only in one plane and so there is no point in Mr. Sastri’s argument

that one can’t be in two planes at the same time.†I said, “How

can we say the jnani is not in two planes? He moves about with

us like us in the world and sees the various objects we see. It is

not as if he does not see them. For instance he walks along. He

sees the path he is treading. Suppose there is a chair or table

placed across that path. He sees it, avoids it and goes round. So,

have we not to admit he sees the world and the objects there,

while of course he sees the Self?†Bhagavan thereupon said, “You

say the jnani sees the path, treads it, comes across obstacles,

avoids them, etc. In whose eyesight is all this, in the jnani’s or

yours?†He continued, “He sees only the Self and all in the Self.â€

 

The Swami then asked whether a jnani could remain with

his body after attaining Self-realisation. He said, “It is said

that the impact of Self-realisation is so forceful that the weak

physical body cannot bear it for more than twenty-one days

at the longest.†Bhagavan said, “What is your idea of a jnani?

Is he the body or something different? If he is something apart

from the body, how could he be affected by the body? The

books talk of different kinds of mukti, videha mukti (without

body), and jivan mukti (with body). There may be different

stages in the sadhana. But in realisation there are no degrees.â€

// unquote//

 

 

[Guest guest]

And here, from my chosen wilderness, I cast my vote in favour and support of

what both of you (Bhaskar-ji and Raj-ji) have said.

 

I have a promise given to Peter-ji to keep. I haven't had the right bent of mind

to do that so far. That task involves the danger of reptition. May be I will do

that in a blog. Cheers!

 

Madathil Nair

_____________

 

advaitin , " rajkumarknair " <rajkumarknair wrote:

>> Very true, Bhaskarji.

>

> As long as we identify with our body & mind, we experience duality.

> Identify with consciousness, and duality ceases, as that consciousness is the

truth of everything.

>

> Ashtavakra advises Janaka:

> " Give up your identification with body, and stand firmly as the Consciousness.

You will be happy, peaceful and free from bondages, right now. "