Existence inheres every worldly object. Before creation, all the worldly objects are in seed (unmanifest) form in Existence and the creation unfolds gradually. Existence manifests everywhere whereas consciousness is manifested in subtle body only, e.g., mind, intellect. A jiva is a mind-body system and is sentient and has emotions of happiness and sadness. Consciousness (Chit) does not undergo any change as it is present in the mind like a reflection (ChidAbhAsa. It is individual self or individual soul ( jivAtmA).
Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 35
Part 34
Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-10 Taittiriya Upanishad Bhrigu Valli – On Bhrigu’s enlightenment
6-10-1 Anuvaka – 1 to 6 Bhrigu requests his father Varuna to teach Brahman. The father says that Brahman is the cause of food, vital forces, mind, eye, ear, and speech, and unto which they resolve. Bhrigu conducts inquiry. That Brahman is the cause of creation means that It is the ultimate substance from which all the products come into existence. There is an important difference between Brahman and other causes. The latter undergo modifications themselves to become the product, e.g., wood becomes furniture. Brahman is not subject to change. It is vivartavAd of creation. All other causes undergo modification and are parinAmi upAdAna cause. Knowing Brahman through inquiry about product is an indirect approach. Here the creation is inquired in reverse order.
Q.558 Knowledge and Experience
Q: I am still confused about the relative value of experience and knowledge. Some teachers seem to say that scriptures only give you ‘intellectual’ knowledge and you then have to convert this into actual ‘experience’ in order to become enlightened. But then there are metaphors like rope-snake and dream-waking. The snake that we experience is not real and we have to wake up from the dream. This means gaining knowledge, doesn’t it?
A: You cannot experience the Self/Brahman/Absolute. But then neither can you ‘know’ it in the usual sense of the word. Reality is non-dual. The empirical, experienced world of duality is an appearance; name and form of Brahman. All of this can be intellectually understood by the mind. When it is firmly believed to be true, without any doubt, that is enlightenment.
You should also understand that it is not the case that ‘all of this is unreal’. ‘Unreal’ is not the correct adjective. Every empirical perception is name and form of Brahman and therefore ultimately real. Just not ‘real’ as its perceived ‘object’. This is why the world does not disappear on enlightenment. The scriptures tell us ‘sarvam khalvidam brahma’ – all of this is Brahman. So, if it disappeared, it would mean that Brahman disappeared!
Continue readingTat Tvam Asi (Part1)
In the commentary on Ch Up 6.1.3, ShankarAchArya says that even if a person has studied all the Vedas and knows all other things which are to be known, he indeed remains unfulfilled if he does not know the Self. As the word ‘unfulfilled’ is not explained, let me do. Unfulfilled means unfulfilled desires. Though a particular human desire is finite, there are countless desires and in this sense they are infinite. A person will have to take infinite births to fulfil them, and he will be in bondage forever. Conversely, with Self-knowledge, a person is complete and has no desires or alternatively all desires are subsumed in his ‘completeness’. He is free in the present life and is also free from rebirth.
Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part34
Chapter 6 JnAna and moksha
6-9 Taittiriya Upanishad- Brahmananda Valli
6-9-5 AnuvAka 8 – Ananda MimAmsa There is harmony and order in creation. Celestial entities are all the time engaged in their activities in a disciplined manner. It is possible if there is a ruler different from them. He is Brahman of Vedanta who is inactive but at his command all the worldly entities act as if He is the source of terror. This is one aspect. The Upanishad says that Brahman is the source of bliss in the world and in particular, the one enjoyed by a jiva. Whereas bliss is the nature of Brahman and is without any gradation and cannot be experienced, the bliss experienced by a jiva is graded and can be evaluated. Ananda MimAnsa is discussed in detail in (Ananda Mimansa | Advaita Vision)
Dialog with Jeff Foster (conc.)
*** Read Part 2 *** *** Go to Part 1 ***
13. You then talk about:“the collapse into not-knowing, the profound mystery…”I don’t know (!) what this means – sounds a bit too mystical for me.
– Well, I suppose those words do sound a bit mystical! I’m talking about the huge relief, the liberation, the sense of freedom when the mind’s endless search for something MORE than the present moment dies down, and there is only what is, and nothing more. It’s the “profound mystery” because nothing can be known about it.
OK, I’m happy with ‘relief’ and ‘liberation’ but I would use ‘fascination’ instead of ‘mystery’ – after all, ‘I amThat’. ‘Not-knowing’ is quite misleading.
14. “If anything, I’m saying the exact opposite, that the Mystery could NEVER be contained in ANY belief (especially simplistic neo-advaita beliefs!) ”Words never ‘contain’ the ‘mystery’, but they can be used to point to it. “Everything is here right now” does not provide any pointers that might overcome the essential ignorance.
– Yes, words as pointers….of course.
Continue readingEight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 33
Chapter 6 JnAna and moksha
6-9 Tattiriya Upanishad- BrahmAnanda Valli
6-9-4 AnuvAka 7 (Pt 2) The universe is made of matter and is essentially inert. But living and non-living beings are found in the universe. It means that there is an outside source of sentiency. This source is Brahman. Consciousness is the nature of Brahman. The consciousness is reflected in the subtle body of a jiva and the latter becomes sentient. Brahman is also the source of happiness. When consciousness is reflected in a calm mind, happiness is felt. Vedanta claims that there is not an iota of happiness in worldly objects. If happiness is the essential nature of an object, it should give happiness to everybody all the time. But it is not so. An object liked by a person may not be liked by another person. And an object liked by a person now may not be liked later.
Dialog with Jeff Foster (part 2)
*** Go to Part 1 ***
The Discussion
1. You say: “But the message asks – what reality does this person have in the first place? This isn’t about DENYING that person, or REJECTING that person.”
So are you saying that the person exists or not?
– I see this as a false dichotomy. The mind believes that something has to “exist or not”. But who would know whether a person existed or not? A person?
Without Consciousness, nothing exists. But it seems that this is the usual absolute versus empirical reality problem. Since we are using language and having a dialog, both of us are implicitly assuming the existence of separate persons. You cannot deny this without making nonsense of your position as a teacher and writer. So the answer to your question ‘what reality does the person have’ is that he has an empirical reality. This has to be accepted as a given at the level of the world appearance. The question as to whether this person has an absolute and separate existence is another question entirely.
Continue readingEight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 32
Chapter 6 JnAna and moksha
6-9 Taittiria Upanishad- BrahmAnanda Valli
6-9-3 AnuvAka 6
If a person says that Brahman is non-existent, he is adhArmic. Brahman-knowledge cannot be the goal of such a person. He does not accept the authority of the Vedanta sastras. For such a person a preparatory righteous life constituting karma yoga and upAsanA yoga would not make any sense. His life is meaningless. On the other hand, a seeker initially accepts Brahman because the scriptures say so and eventually, he clearly understands that Brahman exists not as an object, but as I, the very subject. It is different from and witness to the five sheaths.
Dialog with Jeff Foster (part 1)
Continuing to look for essays and reviews etc. that are no longer available online, I came across the following dialog that I had with Jeff Foster in June 2007, after I had read his book ‘Life Without a Centre: awakening from the dream of separation’. In fact, the dialog is still available at the advaita.org.uk site but, since that site does not seem to be much visited these days, I thought it would be a good idea to republish here, as a follow-up to the recently posted article on neo-Advaita. A link to an extract from the book is included below and you can purchase the book at Amazon.UK or Amazon.com. Jeff’s website is here.
This post will be in several parts. This first part contains our initial exchange; the remainder will contain the ensuing discussion. Readers should always remember that this was nearly 20 years ago and views may change. I understand that Jeff has said that he no longer holds some of the views that he did then.
In all parts, my words are in blue (Dennis Waite) and Jeff’s are in red (Jeff Foster).
The reason I am writing is that Julian Noyce (Non-Duality Press) periodically sends me review copies of new books and, some time ago he sent me yours, which I read with interest. I just sent the following message back to him and he suggested that I contact you directly.
Continue reading