Tuesday, April 9, 2013

The ‘I’ is absent when form, time and space are absent.***




The world in which you exist is the   product of ignorance. If there is no ignorance then the worlds in which you exist cease to exist.  The ignorance is present in the form of ‘I’. ‘I’ is not limited to the form alone because the ‘I’ is present only when the form, time, and space are present.

 The ‘I’ is absent when form, time and space are absent.  Deeper Self-search reveals the fact that the ‘I’ itself is an illusion.

There is no point in inquiring ‘WHO AM ‘I’? WHO AM ‘I’?  ‘WHAT AM ‘I’?,   inquiry limited to form. It helps the expose the unreality of the ego. In later stages WHO AM ‘I’?  ‘WHAT AM ‘I’?, inquiry the seekers will find it inadequate and useless to reach the ultimate end of understanding.  

Only sincere and serious seeker will be able to acquire Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.  Those who are sentimentally involved with the Gurus, yogis will remain ignorant hallucinating about the promised bliss or enlightenment.  

What is the use of getting enlightenment on the false Self (ego or waking entity) within the unreal world (waking)?  It will be false enlightenment.


Self-realization is to realize the ‘Self’ is not you but the ‘Self’ is the formless Soul, which is present in the form of the consciousness.  The ‘Self’ is not within the body because it pervades everything and everywhere in all the three states.   Thus limiting the Self to the physical body within the illusory world will not yield the truth of the whole.

 Thus, it is necessary to realize the ‘Self’ is not the ‘I’ and ‘I’ is not the Soul, the innermost Self.  The Soul, the innermost Self is the witness of the ‘I’ which appear and disappears.

Bhagavad Gita: ~ The permanent is always there, only the transient ‘I’ comes and goes. (2.18)


The ‘I’ hides the truth of the whole. .

The earliest ancient sages used the word ‘I’ to the witness of the three states not to the ego as moderns use it and think the ‘I’ without the body is the Self. The seeker has to understand the fact that the fact that ‘I’ is not the Self, but the witness of the ‘I’ is the true Self, which is eternal. 

That is why Ashtavakra Gita 16:10:~ If you desire liberation, but you still say "I," If you feel the ‘Self’ is the ‘I’, You are not a wise man or a seeker. You are simply a man who suffers.


Posted by sunthosh2009@hotmail.com at 9:45 PM
Labels:

Adyathmic Discussion - 394 (logic and reason)


FORMLESS PATH: How can the ‘I’ know the truth, when ‘I’ itself is false?
sunthosh-formlesspath.blogspot.com
1Like · · · · Promote
  • Ed Muzika I can know the truth because the I sense and I thought are not the knower. The knower of all things conscious is beyond consciousness.
  • Santthosh Kumaar The knower and known are one in essence. That essence is the soul,which is present in the form of consciousness (spirit). Thus consciousness alone is all else(universe) is mere an illusion.
  • Ed Muzika Well, that is one theory. Nisargadatta and others hold that the Witness, ParaBrahman is ontologically prior to Consciousness. Ramana says Consciousness is all. Both say the universe is illusion. In the end, what does either theory mean in terms of pragmatics, such as how much we pay for a gallow on gas, or even how to practice self-inquiry?
  • Santthosh Kumaar People speak of getting rid of conditioning or samskara but they themselves are unaware of the fact that, the universe in which they exist is product of the inborn samskara or conditioning. The ignorance is cause of the inborn samskara or conditioning...See More
  • Ed Muzika I have no idea of what you just said. It is a theory, based, I am sure, on someone's experience which when talked about becomes knowledge passed from person to person as teachings.

    However, nothing in my experience fits this knowledge.

    My experiences and conclusions drawn from those experiences are closer to those of Nisargadatta, who concludes even Consciousness is illusory.
  • Santthosh Kumaar I respect your views and wisdom. Holding any teaching or teacher as a yardstick causes all the confusion.

    As per my conviction:-The self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana is not based on any theory because the seeker has to reject what is not t    ...See More
  • Ed Muzika I am sorry, I do not follow either the logic of your argument, nor many of the terms you use without definition. I don't know what inborn conditioning means, waking dream means, what 'I' or 'I am" means to you, duality, grip of duality, or experiencing "illusory duality as reality."

    These terms are entirely too abstract and removed from my experience to be meaningful.
  • Santthosh Kumaar I respect your opinion and wisdom.

    As per my conviction:-

    There is neither logic nor argument is needed to realize the ultimate truth beyond form, time and space. The logic and argument are useful in egocentric discussion. When the self is not th    ...See More
     
  • Santthosh Kumaar Without knowing what truth is, how can one know what is untruth? Mere bookish knowledge or knowledge based on speculation and assumption is mere playing with the words not non-dual wisdom. Intellectuality is based on the false self thus it will not y...See More
  • Santthosh Kumaar Logic is misunderstood. People cannot distinguish between reasoning and intellect as a Gnani does. Reason applied only to waking experience (duality) is called logic, intellect. Vedanta learns not only such reason but also reasoning based on waking, dream and sleep . To say rise above logic, is generally confused with saying "Rise above Reason." It is wrong to give up reason. Life does not consist only of waking state. We must take all three states into account.
    If one sticks to the old formal logic, he cannot get at truth. People seeing this insufficiency of logic, therefore wrongly say "Give up logic and go to intuition." Their error is “What is it that told them that logic was not enough?” It was Reason itself; not intuition. Thus there is confusion between logic and reason.

    Reasoning is interpretable in two ways. The defective interpretation is to apply it only to waking state. The correct interpretation is to apply it to the three states. The latter leads to final settlement of the problems because it takes all data into consideration.
Posted by sunthosh2009@hotmail.com at 9:02 AM
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)