the Nature of realization (please ignore previous post)

sadananda sada at ANVIL.NRL.NAVY.MIL
Mon Apr 27 14:04:08 CDT 1998

>The point is, who is supposed to realize it?
>There's only one jivanmuktha, no?
>If the ego or jiva imagines itself into being,
>it then imagines that it must gain realization.
>This is where everything goes haywire.  This is
>why the ajatavaada doctrine says there is no
>liberation because there's no jiva to liberate.

Blessed self,

The question of who realizes - can be simply answered as - the one who is
asking the question - Now who is asking the question? The one who
identifies that I am the questioner that chaitanya (conscious entity) vastu
who is currently identifying himself with the limited mind realizes that he
is no more limited although the particular mind that he has been
identifying continues to be limited.

The truth is very simple.  My advice is not get entangled with the
doctrines.  The doctrines are there to resolve the confusion in the  mind
and not to increase the confusion. Once you understand you can propose your
own doctrine if that helps to explain the truth better.

I am conscious entity is a fact.  I am an existence entity is a fact.
Conscious entity is the existence entity is also a fact - since there
cannot be non-existent conscious entity.  I am also ananda or happiness
since happiness that I get from by fulfilling desires is not from the
objects but from myself who is momentarily free from the mind that is
wanting.  Thus I am sat chit ananda - is a fact.- sat is chit and sat chit
is ananda. These are not attributes but the very lakshaNas or definitions
that reveal my true nature.

As J.K puts it realization is the understanding as an understanding as a
fact and not  understanding as an understanding as a thought.

Let me clarify based on my understanding!  Jeevanmukta - is the liberation
from the notion that I am a Jeeva  or an individual. It is mukti,
liberation, from that notion of Jeeva (hood) - while  life is still
pulsating in the body.

>If the ego or jiva imagines itself into being,
>it then imagines that it must gain realization.
>This is where everything goes haywire.

I am failing to see any haywire. - Here is the clutch - not only ego or
jiiva imagines itself into a limited being, it imagines that its
imagination is not an imagination but is real - And that is where the
problem arises. If it knows that it is only an imagination then the problem
is solved - just as the actor knows that he is not really the role he is
playing but he is only acting and his true nature is some thing other than
what he is playing.  Hence there  is no problem is playing as long as he is
playing.  The bondage is attribution of the unreal as real, this is what is
called Vikshepa in the Vedanta - This arises because the real is not known
( AvaraNa). -  I forget that I am the actor,  and then take the role that I
am playing as real. Now who realizes that he is really the actor and  not
any more the character that he is playing - is essentially  your question.
The one who is playing the role is the one who is asking the question as
who am I, not knowing he is only playing the role, while his true nature is
that he is an actor even beyond any action and acting! Once the actor
realizes that he is an actor, there is no more misunderstanding, he can
continue to play the role and in fact play better since the suffering in
the scenes is not real but is only apparent.

Since the problem is an apparent problem or imagined problem (without
knowing that it is an imagined problem) there can not be any real solution
to the problem.  The apparently real problem is taking the apparent problem
as real and try to solve an apparent problem. And that is the only problem
we have.  There cannot be real solution to an apparent  problem however
much we can try. Only solution to the problem is to know that the problem
is not real but is only apparent.  That is the knowledge or realization.
The problems become apparent when I realize that I am not the individual
but the total.  The self in me is the self in all. - please study B.G. ch.
6 where Krishna elaborately explains this from many points of view.

If it is complete ignorance, there is no problem. In deep sleep state there
is no problem and there is no dwaita and there is no one to question..
Notions start with the mind and intellect working as in  the waking and
dream sleep states.

>Of course this will prove too much to handle for most.
>The yogas are thus prescribed.  However, a number
>of people on this list are quite aware and more than ready!
>At least that's the way I see it.  Maybe I'm wrong.
>> There is nothing in the world that deserve a shed
>> of tear. If we understand that, life becomes a real sport.
>> Winning and loosing, is not the goal - playing itself is
>> the fun and that is the sport!
>Again, who's doing the playing?  Is it not Brahman?

- Since question is asked the answer as I understand from scriptures is
given. Ones faith (a) in the scriptures and (b) in my understanding of the
scriptures is required to appreciate the answer.  Both can be rejected in
turn until one discovers in one self by one self in one self - then he is
happy with one self and no more questions left for asking. - aatmanaa
aatmaanam atmani pasyan tushyati.

>From Brahman's  point there is no play.  He is - period.

akartaaham abhoktaaham ahamevaaham avyayaH| I am neither a doer nor an
enjoyer and I am one without a second and infiniteness I am - Says Shankara
in Brahmaavali.

>From Jeeva's point it is real and not a play!  - That is where the problem is.

Then from whose point it is a play -

A simple answer is from Iswara point. - That is why he is called Maayaavi -
the one who wields the maya.

The projection of the whole world will be Leela or play of the Lord.

Who is that Lord.  The one who has realized that he is not the limited but
unlimited.  Then the unlimited is the player playing the game of life.  -
It is called Leela vibhuuti of the Lord or from self point atmakreeda and
atmarati - Kreeda means play.  atmarati means reveling in oneself.

For the jeeva the world is real - even thought he learns from the
scriptures or through discussions such as these, that it is not real - that
understanding is only as understanding as a thought and not as a fact.

>From the Brahman point there is no world - ekamevea advitiiyam - one
without a second.

>From Iswara point - there this is Leela or play.  Whose play  - of course
it is his/her play. -(By the by Iswara exits from the Jiiva's point, as
long as there is jiiva there is the world that is real and their is the one
who is the creator who is different from Jiiva! - all are notion in the
mind of Jiiva!)

All this explanation is only to quench the curious intellect so that one
can sit down and contemplate and discover by oneself what real truth is.  -

>If the ego wants to maintain itself, it will invent
>clever ways of doing so, like in the pragmatic ideology
>of Kashmir Shaivism,equating moksha with an
>independence-based free will. This is a trick.
>It perpetuates ego.

You are absolutely right.  That includes even this notion that the ego is
there that wants to perpetuates itself along with all isms to help in its
moksha., since in truth the bondage itself is self-imposed and not real.
The is beautifully explained in VivEkachuuDaamani by the student himself,
how bogus the problem was or is, after he has realized that it was bogus

I stop here since I ran out of my time, which it self is a questionable
along with this answer.

Hari Om!

K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list