Chandogya Upanishad (Chapters 6 to 8) Part 13

Posted on by
Reply

Part 12

Part 14

Chapter 8 Sections 10 (8.10.1 to 8.10.4), 11 (8.11.1 to 8.11.3), and 12 (8.12.1 to 8.12.6)
Impressions are formed on the mind during waking state. These impressions are projected by the mind during dream. The dreamer jiva is different from the waking jiva. For the dreamer, the dream is as real as the world in the waking state is for the waking jiva. Brahmaji says that the one who moves around in the dream is Atma. He is fearless, immortal. He is Brahman. He is referring to consciousness blessed by which the mind functions. However, Indra wrongly takes the dreamer as Atma because he thinks that the dreamer is not affected by the afflictions of the waking state. He leaves satisfied. On his way back, he doubts his understanding. The dreamer too changes and suffers in the dream. It cannot be immortal and fearless Atma. He returns to Brahmaji and expresses his doubt. Brahmaji confirms his doubt and agrees to teach further on the condition that Indra lives in the gurukul for another 32 years. Indra lives for another 32 years.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 5)

Posted on by

Part 4

Chapter 6 Negation of attributes                                                                                     6.1 to 6.3 The author has earlier explained the method of negation (of objects) whereby Self is revealed. In this chapter, it is explained that negation of objects also means negation of attributes. Attribute is distinct from nature. That fire is hot is its nature and does not change. There is no cold fire. Smokiness is the attribute of a smoky fire. Attribute is a qualification and a limitation. The whiteness of a white cow is a limitation because it excludes all other colours. Since infiniteness is the very nature of Self, It is attribute- free. It is the ultimate subject and is the only entity having no attributes.   

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part 13)

Posted on by

Part 12

part 14

Chapter 4 Section 1 (4.1.1 and 4.1.7)
Janaka tells Yajnavalkya that he has learnt from a teacher that fire deity is Brahman. Yajnavalkya says that it is only one aspect of Brahman and there are three more aspects. Organ of speech is its abode; ether is its support, and it should be meditated as intelligence. Organ of speech is intelligence because through organ speech, the meditator knows his relatives, learns different types of knowledge. His speech never deserts him. And people come to him to learn. The dialogue continues in the same pattern.

Continue reading →

Self Seeking – AI Review

Posted on by

For those potential readers who are unsure what is covered by this book, here is an overview summary by Dennis-AI in lieu of an answer to one of the many (none) questions posed by readers:

The book Self Seeking functions as a guide for seekers overwhelmed by the variety of modern non-dual teachers, providing criteria for identifying authoritative sources while highlighting the fundamental flaws in non-traditional teaching methodologies. The paramount concern of the text is how a seeker can attain Self-knowledge (jñāna), which alone removes ignorance and results in liberation (mokṣa),

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part4)

Posted on by

Part 3

Part 5

Chapter 4 The nature of right knowledge                                                                     

4.1 and 4.2                                                                                                                        In chapter 1, it has been explained that a jnani is free from ahankara (egoism). He considers himself as a witnessing consciousness and is therefore akarta (non-doer) and abhokta (non-enjoyer). In the verse 4.1, the author makes a general statement that action of a jnani, free from egoism, does not produce any punya or papa karma. It is so because, right knowledge has burnt the ego. In verse 2, states a possible objection: is that it is seen that even though action is burnt by the fire of knowledge, it produces result.

Continue reading →

Akhaṇḍākāra Vṛtti

Posted on by

I wrote last week that I have set up a NotebookLM database of all my books and writing for the past 25 years+ and I invited readers to submit any (Advaita!) questions on which they would like to read my ‘considered’ views. I have not had many (any) requests, so hear is another one I made myself. There are a number of points with which I would now take issue and I refer to these after the answer.

Q2. What is the nature of the akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti and how does this affirm that there is nothing else to be done after gaining the intellectual conviction that ‘I am Brahman’? Are there any quotes from Śaṅkara to support this?

A (AI-Dennis): The concept of the akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti is pivotal in Advaita Vedānta as it defines the precise mental event through which Self-ignorance (avidyā) is destroyed, affirming the completeness of the liberation gained through knowledge.

Continue reading →

Chandogya Upanishad ( Chapters 6 to 8) Part 12

Posted on by

Part 11

Chapter 8 Section 6 [8.6.1 to 8.6.4]                                                                                 By practicing meditation, a jiva after death goes to Brahm- loka where he has two choices. He may enjoy the available pleasures, take rebirth. Alternatively, he may choose to get Self-knowledge from Brahmaji and be liberated. It is krama mukti. It is not of much relevance to a seeker of liberation in the current life. Therefore, it is briefly discussed. Death is fall of physical body and separation of subtle body from it.  The jiva is in the form of subtle body. As the death approaches, the subtle body is gradually withdrawn from gross body towards heart. From the heart through a special capillary (susuma nadi), it reaches a subtle aperture in the head and leaves the gross body. Thereafter, it travels through shukla gati (bright path) and reaches Brahm loka.

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part 12)

Posted on by

Part 11

Part 13

Chapter 3 Section 9
3.9.1 to 3.9. 27                                                                                                                    As these verses do not have VedAntic teaching, they are not discussed in detail. Sakalya asks question relating to worldly entities including Isvara. Though YVK has earlier answered them, he again answers them and then asks Sakalya to answer a question on Nirguna Brahman and warns that if he does not answer, he will lose his head. Sakalya fails and he dies. Shankaracharya comments. “The moral of the story is that one should not be disrespectful, but rather obedient to a true knower of Brahman. That story is here referred to in order to teach conduct and also to extol the
knowledge of Brahman. How can that Brahman which has been indicated
as ‘Not this, not this’ by the elimination of everything else, be positively indicated? In order to answer this, as also to state the cause of the universe, the Sruti again resorts to the story.” [ Brihadarankya Upanishad with commentary of Shankaracharya, Translated by Swami Madhavananda, Advaita Ashrama] There is a message that as long as a person is within the worldly realm including Saguna Brahman, he is not free from death. Knowledge of Nirguna Brahman alone ensures immortality. 

Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Supplementary)

Posted on by

*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 10 ***

Does AI ‘understand’ what it is talking about?

This is probably the most important part of the series and the most interesting (although not actually very relevant to Advaita). AI explains how it works and why it does not ‘understand’ in the way that we mean this word. AI is a ‘mirror’.

Q: Would it be true to say that you do not ‘understand’ anything, in the usually accepted sense of the word? What you are doing is retrieving data on a particular topic from various sources, comparing the content of these and presenting those data (which happen to equate to ‘opinions’) that appear most frequently? Obviously this is putting a complex process very simplistically. Presumably you have to verify that summary data does not contradict data from sources on topics not directly related to that being questioned. But would you ‘agree’ that this effectively summarizes what is happening? If not, can you explain why not? Could you argue, for example, that this is also what humans do?

Continue reading →

Upadesa SAhasrI (Part 3)

Posted on by

Part 2

Part 4

Chapter 2 Negation
2.1 to 2.4                                                                                                                        Sruti (Br Up 2.3.6) says: Not this, not this. Self is the left over after negation of everything, i.e., objects of experience. As they are mithyA and changing, they are negated to realize the unchanging remainder. This remainder, the negator cannot be negated. It is the Self and is of the nature of consciousness. It is the true nature of the negator. Self cannot be negated because it is based on pramAna (evidence). Self is the ultimate subject and is the reality. It has an independent existence. Objects are non-Self and are mithyA.

Continue reading →