Still Confusion regarding Shankara’s comments

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Dennis Waite wrote:

> Thanks to Anand and Frank for their responses to my query but I still do not
> understand. Perhaps I didn't make my problem sufficiently clear. Sankara
> seems to be saying that, when one sees a pot and says that it exists, there
> are two sorts of consciousness acting, one which is conscious of the pot and
> one which is conscious of existence. Now whilst I am perfectly happy with
> the idea of an eternal existence and a transitory object (which is just name
> and form imposed upon that eternal existence), I do not understand why the
> consciousness of those two things should be different. Indeed I would have
> said it is the same consciousness (there *is* only one).
>

Think of looking at the pot in a mirror.  As long as the mirror is perfect
you are seeing the pot as it is.  If it is distorted like one of those fun
house mirrors that make you look fatter or thinner, what you see as the
pot is different from what the pot actually is.  But it is possible if
you know the distorting properties of the mirror for you to know the true
nature of the pot even if you only see the reflection.  The mirror in
this case is Maya which distorts the true natures of things.  Thus the two
kinds of consciousness, that of a thing as it appears and that as it is.
Everyone has the first kind but the second kind needs to be developed.

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas [jaldhar at braincells.com]   And the men .-_|\ who hold
Consolidated Braincells Inc.                          /     \
http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/ -)~~~~~~~~  Perth->*.--._/  o-
"Witty quote" - Dead Guy   /\/\/\ _ _ ___ _  _ Amboy       v      McQ!