Identity between awareness and existence

[K. Sadananda]

Shree Sanjay worte:


"and it is one without a second."
>
>Can this assertion be proved even without Sruti pramAna?


Yes - I thought I did - Here it is again - If there is a second, that
second has be different from the first to say it is second.  Hence if
there is some thing other than existence, it has to be non-existence
alone since that alone is different from existence - Hence a second
existence which is different from an existence it amounts to saying
non-existence exists - Is it not a contradiction in terms? Hence
that non-existence exists it cannot be different from existence that
exists- Hence there is - is involves existence) no second.  In  a
recent post in adviatin list under the title of Infinity and Brahman,
Professor V.K. has presented that existence cannot have sajaati,
vijaati and even swagata bheda-s - that is no internal or external
differences which is needed to establish the second. Please refer to
that article.

>
>
>" One can also look at from consciousness point - if there is
>something other than consciousness then how does one know? "
>
>I am loosing track. Who does not know?
>
>
>"If one knows that something exists then it must be within that
>consciousness itself to be aware that there is something out-there"
>
>I do not think I am following.
>
>"Hence consciousness is also boundless"
>
>Not at all clear.

I think Nanda has presented the same thing using slightly different
arguments - but the logic is the same.

Let us ask the question -  Let us question first, how do I know if
some thing exists or not, I being the knower or a conscious entity.
If I say a chair exists there, chair being inert cannot declare
itself that it exists. Conscious entity, I, can only declare that
'there is a chair'.  For me to declare that' there is a chair out
there' means the chair thought exists in my mind and I am conscious
of that chair thought in my mind - is it not? - my mind and sense
organs plus I, the conscious entity, all have to be there to declare
that 'there is chair out there'.  So chair out there is chair thought
in my mind - since mind is nothing but thoughts.  Going further -
chair thought in my mind is evident or I know only because I am aware
of that thought. That is chair thought has to be in mind which is in
my awareness since I know my mind.  Awareness is consciousness.
Essentially it only means the chair thought is in my consciousness
for me to declare that - there is a chair or chair exists.  Hence to
establish anything that exists that existence has to be in the
consciousness  so that a conscious entity can say that existence is.
Since we already established that existence is one without the
second, it follows that consciousness-existence are two sides of the
same coin.

If consciousness is limited - then the question is what is there
outside the limited consciousness.  If there is something and I know
it, it means that it is in my consciousness for me to know there is
something outside. Now you are back to the argument that that
so-called outside is inside my consciousness. Hence consciousness
cannot have boundaries.

Now how do I know I exist and I am conscious - Here I do not need any
means to know that I exist and I am conscious.  It is called
self-evident fact - We call this a aprameyam - no means of knowledge
required to establish my own existence or my own consciousness.
Hence it is called swayam siddham or swayam prakaashatvam -self is
self-effulgent entity.- like no other light is needed to see the
light.

Please read this carefully since it is easy to get lost in the words.

Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623