the Nature of realization (please ignore previous post)

[sadananda]

>I concur with this entire post, except for the issue of "who realizes?"
>This may be a semantic gap in understanding, so let it be clear that
>the word "realize" is being translated as "jnana."  In this sense, the
>jiva can only recognize what is ajnana.  The idea that there is a positive
>shift in awareness within the jiva itself is one of the most misleading
>assumptions being made.

Blessed Self,
Enjoyed your discussions.

It could be just the semantics as long as the vision is clear, with no more
doubts about the nature and the means for mukti, the liberation or
realization.

Here, there is what is commonly known as avinaabhavaa sambhandha - a
relation-less relationship since the problems is an apparent problem.

This is what is called also as two fold aspect of the same - that is why I
brought AvaraNa and Vikshepa aspects in my last post.

Your statement -> In this sense, the
>jiva can only recognize what is ajnana.  The idea that there is a positive
>shift in awareness within the jiva itself is one of the most misleading
>assumptions being made -

This has to be understood clearly.

As long as he is still recognizing aJNaana, he is still in aJNaana since he
is there to recognize aJNaana.

A true negation by Jiiva involves a dissolution of jiiva itself,  and can
only occur with the positive assertion of oneself as the self in all -
Essentially it implies that one cannot truly negate ( I am  obviously
excluding a process involving thought negating another thought as I am
not this, neti neti etc.) without the assertion of I am sat chit ananda.
Both are the same thing looking  differently. That is why I repeated the
statement of JK as it is understanding as a fact not a  thought.  If that
aspect is clear then we are addressing only the semantics.

Hence, it is not assertion of gaining some knowledge as knowledge of etc.
but being as oneself since aJNaana is the lack of the knowledge of oneself
as oneself which results in taking oneself as other than oneself. A
non-apprehension of oneself as oneself causes a mis-apprehension of oneself
as other than oneself.  Hence I cannot stop taking myself other than myself
until I am fully aware of myself as myself. Hence these are related by
avinaabhaava sambandha.  In the vedantic terminology - JNaana praapti is
identical to the aJNaana nivRitti.  - Jiiva dissolves with the spontaneous
awareness of -I am the totality.  Bhagavan Ramana beautifully puts this in
a simple  looking sloka in Upadesha saara:

 ahami naashabaagyahamaham taya|
 spurati hRiswayama parama purna sat||

 ahami naasha baagi - when the notion that I am the jiiva is destroyed -
aham aham taya hRit swayam spurati - I am that I am arises spontaneously in
ones heart or in the very core of ones individuality where there was a
nation of I am only a jeeva notion was there. and this so called new - I am
-  understanding that raises is different from the previous I am notion, in
the sense that it is paramam and purnam and sat swarupam - It is supreme,
complete and of the nature of the very existence principle (without any
qualifications). As you said it is not positive assertion in the sense of
it is not by a thought process. Yet it involves a firm understanding of
ones true identity as I am complete - oneself in all - not by thought but
by fact.

JNaana praapti cannot occur ( automatically aJNaana nivRitti cannot take
place) unless even the notion that I want to realize is dropped - since
their the notion of desiree and desired - dwaita is there.  Because of the
interlinking of the these two, realization is not by effort since effort
involves a thought process.  It is not the problem with the thoughts but
dependence on the thoughts as the means.  But that is all we have - mind
and intellect.  Hence using the very thought process of inquiry we have to
go beyond the thought process - like pole waltz - go beyond the pole using
a pole that can not go beyond the pole. Hence Krishna declares in Ch 13

        dyaanenaatmani pasyanti kaschit atmaaanam atmanaa|

By process of meditation one sees oneself by oneself.  Seeing oneself is
being oneself as oneself, since I am the seer and I am the seen.  This is
also beautifully brought out by Bhagavan Ramana in the very first sloka in
the Sat Darshan. I forgot the sloka fully ( or correctly) but it goes like
this:

        sat pratyaayaH kinnu vihaaya santam
        hRidyeshhu chintaa rahito hRidaapyaH|
        katham smaraamaH tamameyamekam
        tasya smRiti tatra dRiDaiva nishTaa||

This is a prayer of JNaani - He says: Before writing the book I want to
think of the Lord who is in the very nature of the existence, He who dwells
in every heart as the very core of the personality, free from all thoughts.
OH Lord how can pray or thinking of you, who is beyond all thoughts.  All I
can do is be established firmly in myself that is Just being myself. This
itself is the prayer and very first sloka of Sat Darshan.  Actually the
very first prayer sloka itself is the essence of the book Sat Darshan.


>This to me suggests a semantical factor in what amounts to an apparent
>difference of opinion.

Apparent problem is manifested by the apprent difference of opinion.  All
problems and opinions are dissolved when the apparent becomes apparent!

Oh Maaya is enchanting and beautiful!

Hari Om!
Sadananda



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