Tag Archives: existence

ChAndogya Upanishad (Chapters 6 to 8) Part 5

Posted on by
Reply

Part 4
6.9.1 to 6.9.4 and 6.10.1 to 6.10.3
During sleep, mind is resolved and jiva’s individuality is suspended and therefore he does not know his merger with Brahman during sleep.  Bees collect juices from different flowers and make honey by mixing the juices. In the honey, there is no trace of individual juice. Eastern and western rivers flowing towards east and west respectively merge in ocean and lose their individuality. Similarly, during sleep, at the time of death, and dissolution of a cycle of creation, all the creatures lose their individuality, and they resolve in Brahman. During sleep, the karmAs are in potential form. On becoming awake, they become live and functional. Hence going to sleep does not mean moksha. There are two types of entry of an individual into pure Being:  involuntary and voluntary. In deep sleep, one’s entry is involuntary.  There is no knowledge of the entry, and it is not permanent, and one comes back from that state.

Continue reading →

Tat Tvam Asi (Part 2)

Posted on by

Part 1

Part 3

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).

Continue reading →

Tat Tvam Asi (Part1)

Posted on by

Part 2

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.

Continue reading →

Dialog with Jeff Foster (conc.)

Posted on by

*** 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 reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 33

Posted on by

Part 32

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.

Continue reading →

Dialog with Jeff Foster (part 2)

Posted on by

*** 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 reading →

Dialog with Jeff Foster (part 1)

Posted on by

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 →

Existence / Esse

Posted on by

 Esse – is an abstract term referring to a primal reality or metaphysical principle – the principle of being (a synonym of existence). As such, it cannot be defined, since it has no parts or relationships – it only has to be admitted as a ‘given’, an undeniable fact of experience. The more one thinks about it – existence in and by itself – the less you will be able to find a definition.

To add or apply ‘meaning’ to the word ‘existence’ implies purpose, which is an anthropomorphic derivation, such that empirical scientists will object to. However, as thinking and reflective beings, we can question everything and also have intuition – direct apprehension of the reality or essence of things behind their appearances.

Formerly this apprehension was called ‘truth, or truths, of the Heart’. Whether that truth or meaning is Love, Compassion, or Unity, it is up to one to consider and reflect upon – no one can do it for you.

… Can you define (or ‘explain’) what or who you are, making abstraction of your body and your mind?

The Darkness of Ignorance (Part 4)

Posted on by

*** Read Part 3 ***

Observations triggered by Ghaṭa bhāṣya

If X is ‘bhāvarūpa’ – really existing, that ought to mean that it exists ‘in all three periods of time’. I would have said that, by that definition, like every other worldly perception or conception, darkness is not real. Every perception or conception is ‘mithyā’, neither ‘real’ (sat), nor ‘unreal’ (asat).

When Śaṅkara talks about ‘pot-absence’, it is obvious that he doesn’t mean that it is a really existing thing, in the way that a chair in the room ‘really exists’. What he means is that, in a discussion in a particular context such as this, we can treat something as ‘effectively existing’ when we both know what we are talking about and there is no confusion.

Suppose that you and I are having an argument about the pot that we believe to be on the table in room X of the museum. Suppose a third person comes in and tells us he has seen this pot on the table in room Y. This being the case, if I go into room X, I could say that I become aware of the absence of the pot. In that sense, it has a sort of meaning to say that the pot-absence exists in room X. But why anyone would want to talk in this way eludes me. I would just say that the pot isn’t in room X so I am prepared to accept the third person’s claim that it is in room Y.

Continue reading →

Advaita in the Vedas – Rig Veda 10.129.4

Posted on by

Alongside Purusha Sukta (10.90), the Nasadiya Sukta (10.129) is one of the most famous Suktas of the Vedas. Known as the Creation Hymn, its fourth mantra says,

In the beginning, there was the disturbance of desire, from which sprung the first seed, which was born of the mind. Sages, searching in their hearts, realised the wisdom of the connection between existence and non-existence.

The creation the Nasadiya Sukta discusses is often believed to be the origin of the universe. However, 10.129.4 does not refer to any ordinary creation but, rather, the illusion of duality. This is attributed to desire in the mind – the first ‘seed’ of ignorance which gives the impression that we are separate. Before this disturbance, there was nothing to realise and no one to know because there was no appearance which was taken to be real as separate from the Self or Brahman. Continue reading →