Karikas

[Guest guest]

In advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote:

>

>

> Namaste Sadanandaji,

> We have been down this road before on a few occasions and from

>> *From Earlier Post*

> Hello All,

> A little postscript on the issue of what it is we are directly

aware of

> when we are aware of chair for instance. According to the

analysis of

> Sadanandaji we are aware of the form and colour and other

attributes which

> inhere in a substantive chair. This substantive chair is not

something

> that we can sense directly only its attributes are sensible by

us. Thus

> the existence of the chair as a substantive thing is an inference

from our

> perceptions. An inference is distinguished from a perception as

being a

> logical movement of the mind.

 

Namaste All,

 

It seems to be we tend to get convoluted in the middle nether

regions. My understanding of Gaudapada is that there never was

anything to be convoluted about. upnaway.com

 

 

22. Nothing comes to be whether from itself or from another. Nothing

that exists ever comes to be, nothing that does not exist, nothing

that both exists and does not exist.

 

23. The cause cannot come to be from an unoriginate effect, nor does

an effect simply happen of itself. The uncaused certainly does not

come into existence.

 

24. Knowledge must have an object, otherwise both will be non-

existent. For this reason, as also from the experience of pain, our

opponent's assertion of the existence of the object should be

admitted.

 

25. Logic demands an object as the cause of knowledge. But from the

standpoint of reality, it is evident the cause is no cause at all.

(because nothing comes to be or is caused, knowledge has no object

and therefore does not exist!)

 

26. Consciousness has no contact with objects, and no contact with

appearances of objects. Objects are non-existent and appearances of

objects non-different from consciousness.

 

27. At none of the three times (past, present, future) does

consciousness make contact with objects. Since there are no objects,

how can there be deluded perception of such?

 

28. Neither consciousness nor its objects ever come into existence.

Those who perceive such a coming-to-be are like those who can see

footprints in the sky!

 

29. It is the unoriginate [they say] which comes to be - but it is

essentially birthless and the transformation of that nature will not

happen in any way whatsoever.

 

30. If the world has no beginning it will have no end either. Moksa

cannot both have a beginning and be eternal.

 

31. What does not exist in the beginning and does not exist at the

end certainly does not exist in the middle! But like illusions, they

seem real.

 

If one adds to this the questions;

 

1. What happens to the world when we sleep?

 

2. Where does it go for the Mukta?

 

3. If it disappears for the 'Mukta' especially after the residual

body is dropped, did it ever happen in the first place?

 

4. If Brahman isn't aware of the illusion or appearance, doesn't

this mean that the appearance didn't happen either--it was ever

NirGuna Brahman......................ONS...Tony.