A question on manifestation of maya

[Shrinivas Gadkari]

>Namaste All,
>
>Here are a few more points to contemplate on:
>
>Does one have senses in deep sleep ?
>No.
>
>Does one have senses in dream state ?
>Yes.
>
>Does one have senses in wake up state ?
>Yes.
>
>What then is the relation between the senses in
>dream state and that in the wake up state ?
>
>Now go through the same Q&A only replace senses by
>elements.
>
>Best regards
>Shrinivas Gadkari

Dear Shrinivas, Kindly clarify as to what exactly you mean by senses
and elements respectively?

Hari Om!

Swaminarayan

--------------------------
Dear Swaminarayan,

Senses refer to the five jnanendriyas, viz. the indriyas
associated with hearing, touch, taste, smell and sight.
Elements refer to the respective mahabhutas, viz, space,
air, water, earth and light.

Dear list members, would really appreciate your responses.
The first part relating to senses is relatively straight
forward. However how elements in dream state relate to
elements in wake up state is not obvious. My suspicion is
that the mapping is many-to-one.

Best regards
Shrinivas Gadkari
>From ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG Sat Mar 30 12:41:17 2002
Message-Id: <SAT.30.MAR.2002.124117.0530.ADVAITAL at LISTS.ADVAITAVEDANTA.ORG>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 12:41:17 +0530
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
From: hbdave <hbd at DDIT.ERNET.IN>
Subject: Re: Advaita : Some Basic Explanations - 8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
        boundary="------------737906B830E990FE11133D95"

--------------737906B830E990FE11133D95
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-kr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Srikrishna Ghadiyaram wrote:

> Hari Om !!
>
> In this posting # 8 you wrote regarding Jiva:
>
> > Reply : Atman is the basis of inanimate objects
> > also. Difference between
> > animate (live) and inanimate is not due to Kutastha
> > or Atman. It is due
> > to jiiva - reflection of Kutastha on intellect.
> >
> ------
> Here you seem to mean that the reflection is the Jiva

Strictly speaking reflection is part of Jiva.
Jiva = Reflection + Kutastha

>
> ------------
>
> In Posting # 3 you wrote:
>
> Doubt : Is not chidaabhaasa the jiiva or jiivaatmaa?
> Reply : Strictly speaking, NO.
>

because Jiva is reflection plus something, i.e. Kutastha.

>
> Doubt : This is not at all clear. What is this
> "reflection"? Whose
> reflection it is?
>
> Reply : Yes, it is a good question, but this posting
> has become too
> long. We shall discuss it in the next.
>
> In posting # 4 you wrote:
>
> {\skt jiiva} -- or what we roughly call Soul. What we
> have called
>         {\skt aanandamaya ko.sa}, "Happy" previously
> is also called
>         {\skt cidaabhaasa}
>          = {\skt cit} the brain activity + {\skt
> aabhaasa} reflection,
>         just as the sun produces a reflection on a
> water surface,
>         {\skt brahman} creates an illusion of
> Consciousness in the
> brain.
>
>         That {\skt cidaabhaasa} plus the {\skt
> saak.sii} which is the
> cause
>         of it, together are called {\skt jiiva}, Soul.
>         It is analogous to {\skt jalaakaa"sa},
> "image-space".
>         {Water in the pot is analogous to brain
> activity, pot is
> shariira}
>

Yes, this is OK.

>
> Also you wrote:
>
> Doubt : Is Self not controlling all that this body
> does? Then how can
> one say that it does not do any actions?
>
> Relpy : You are confusing between {\skt jiiva} Soul
> and {\skt aatmaa}
> Self.
> Just as on Sunrise all animals, including men, go
> about doing their
> activity
> and on Sunset take rest in form of sleep, and thus are
> as if directed
> in
> their activities by Sun, but the Sun itself does not
> do any of the
> action,
> similarly the presence of Self is sufficient for the
> lifelike
> activities.
>
> -----
>

Yes, this is OK.

>
> Here you seem to mean that Jiva which is different
> from aatma. Jiva does all the work, and aatma is the
> controller by mere presence.
> ----------------

No, Jiva is not different. In our discussions, we identify these
two entities because of their different nature.
In our marriage ceremony, Mama (mother's brother) has certain
function during Kanyadana (giving away the bride). A Mama was
late, so the priest and everyone concerned said, "Where is Mama?
Why Mama is late?" even though they knew his name. Becasue that
person had Upadhi of "Mama", he is identified as such. So is Jiva
having Upadhi of Avidya, talked about as if a separate entity
from Atman.

Work is done by chidabhasa, but because it becomes active only
due to presence of Kutastha, we say that work is done by Jiva
(i.e. Chidabhasa + Kutastha).

The analogy of Sun given above is to show this "directorship"
relation. In Taittiriya Up. we have this famous mantra :

{\skt aha.m v.rk.sasya rerivaa .... }
[I am the director of the Tree of menifestation ....]




>
> Also, I am referring to sloka # 184 to 188 of
> Vivekachoodamani says:
>
> Budhirbhdhindriaih .... etc.
>
> say that the Vijnanamaya Kosa is the Jiva.
>
> What is the correct view ?
>
> If we do not consider that
>
> Antahkarana + Reflection + aatma = Jiva
>
> there is no meaning and requirement of
> BadhaSamanadhikaranya to establish Jiva is Brahman or
> Tatvamasi, which is an accepted practice.
>

Yes, you are right.

>
> But the above referred Vivekachudamani slokas do not
> seem to speak in similar lines.

Vijnanamaya is called Jiva taking into account the Jagrata
and Swapna avastha [Viveka. 189]
{\skt bhu.nkte ....}

Doubt :  the shloka includes Sushupti also, because it  says
    {\skt svapnaadyavasthaa ...}
Reply : Yes, but as a null experience. When one is woken
up from deep sleep, one says , " I was happily asleep. I did
not know anything."
The first sentence is from anandamaya,the second from
Vijnanamaya.

>
> Also, we refer to Ahamkara as EGO which is a function
> of the mind. So, it means to me that it is independent
> of any consciousness or reflection of it, for its own
> definition. In such case how is this EGO related to
> this reflection of consciousness ?

True, Ahamkara is a function of Manomaya, as far as the
waking state is concerned, but notice two points here :
(i) Manomaya is activated (seems to be chetana) only due to
Vijnanamaya, which in turn due to chidabhasa.

(ii) in non-waking (introspective, meditative or pure pleasure)
states, Ahamkara, Ego, is present but Manomaya is not active.

In summary, through proper perception of "I" Ego, occurs at
Manomaya, it happens so because of the Reflection.

>
> or is EGO itself is Jiva ??? If so, how can the
> statement Jivo Brahmaiva naaparaha hold true ??,
> because the whole effort is to live without Abhimana
> or EGO , right ?

No, Ego is not Jiva, only a result of Jiva-hood.

>
> Would you please clarify ?
>
> If EGO is Jiva then what happens to it in Deepsleep ?
> Is Jiva gone ?

In deep sleep only Anandamaya is active. Or, to maintain
consistency with Vivekachudamani, Vijnanamaya is active
but having a null experience.
Please refer the following chart from posting no. 3

env. --> [body] --> [Sensor] --> [Thinker] --> [Knower] -->[Happy   ]
                                                        |<- sleep ->|
                                |<-------- dream ------------------>|
        |<-------------------  awake ------------------------------>|




> To support the knowledge of deep sleep
> happiness we resort to the Antahkarana + Reflection +
> aatma = Jiva definition. In such case why are we
> calling Chidabhasa as Jiva (not strictly, as referred
> by you in your posting # 3, pasted at the top of this
> e-mail).

Some Acharyas include Antahkarana in Jiva and some
do not (as I have done following Swami Vidyaranya.)

>
> In any case please address the deep sleep issue and
> Vijnanamaya Kosa being called as Jiva in
> Vivekachudamani.

Some General comments before we summarize :
you should understand that the vocabulary as used by me
(defined rather precisely in Panchadasi) is called "modern"
vocabulary and is more or less standard for Vedantins of
a date later than Adi Shankara.
If you compare older texts with the later, there will be
some variations, though the general porport will be
the same. Try to understand the implied meaning or
definition.
E.g. in Viveka chudamani, in 191, Jiva is used to mean Atman,
but later the word Jivabhava distinguishes it from Atman. In
208 Vijnanamaya is called Jada, though earlier it was called
Jiva.


Summarizing all the above :
1.    In deep sleep only Anandamaya is active. It has knowledge of
its own happiness.  This leaves a residual memory in itself. It is
through this residue that we say "I was happily asleep."
"I did not know anything" comes due to the null experience in
Vijnanamaya.

2.     In 186 {\skt  buddhirbuddhiindriyai.h ...} the word Vijnanamaya
is used for both Vij. and Anandamaya. It is being used as locus of
"I" v.rtti.  As usual human experience is during waking state, the
Vijnanamaya is the innermost "I" in that state (except when we
are extremely happy or meditating).
The chetana of Abhasa is ported to Vijn. and is included as a part of
Jiva. Without chidabhasa, Vijn. can not be active, so this definition
of Jiva, i.e.
Jiva = Vijnanamaya + Kutastha
is not entirely inconsistent with the previous definition given.

Also, note that Vivekachudamani discusses from view point of
search for real "I" starting with the gross body. Till ignorance
is removed and Self is known, it is Vijn. which poses as "I", an
imposter for the Self. That is why it is identified in these verses
as Jiva.
In verse 189 it is explained why Vijn. is taken to be Jiva.


>
> Om Namo Narayanaya !!
>
> Srikrishna
>

I hope this explains.
With best wishes,
-- Himanhu


--------------737906B830E990FE11133D95
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-2022-kr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML>
Srikrishna Ghadiyaram wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Hari Om !!
<P>In this posting # 8 you wrote regarding Jiva:
<P>> Reply : Atman is the basis of inanimate objects
<BR>> also. Difference between
<BR>> animate (live) and inanimate is not due to Kutastha
<BR>> or Atman. It is due
<BR>> to jiiva - reflection of Kutastha on intellect.
<BR>>
<BR>------
<BR>Here you seem to mean that the reflection is the Jiva</BLOCKQUOTE>
Strictly speaking reflection is part of Jiva.
<BR>Jiva = Reflection + Kutastha
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>------------
<P>In Posting # 3 you wrote:
<P>Doubt : Is not chidaabhaasa the jiiva or jiivaatmaa?
<BR>Reply : Strictly speaking, NO.
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
because Jiva is reflection plus something, i.e. Kutastha.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Doubt : This is not at all clear. What is this
<BR>"reflection"? Whose
<BR>reflection it is?
<P>Reply : Yes, it is a good question, but this posting
<BR>has become too
<BR>long. We shall discuss it in the next.
<P>In posting # 4 you wrote:
<P>{\skt jiiva} -- or what we roughly call Soul. What we
<BR>have called
<BR>        {\skt aanandamaya ko.sa},
"Happy" previously
<BR>is also called
<BR>        {\skt cidaabhaasa}
<BR>         = {\skt cit} the brain
activity + {\skt
<BR>aabhaasa} reflection,
<BR>        just as the sun produces
a reflection on a
<BR>water surface,
<BR>        {\skt brahman} creates an
illusion of
<BR>Consciousness in the
<BR>brain.
<P>        That {\skt cidaabhaasa} plus
the {\skt
<BR>saak.sii} which is the
<BR>cause
<BR>        of it, together are called
{\skt jiiva}, Soul.
<BR>        It is analogous to {\skt
jalaakaa"sa},
<BR>"image-space".
<BR>        {Water in the pot is analogous
to brain
<BR>activity, pot is
<BR>shariira}
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, this is OK.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Also you wrote:
<P>Doubt : Is Self not controlling all that this body
<BR>does? Then how can
<BR>one say that it does not do any actions?
<P>Relpy : You are confusing between {\skt jiiva} Soul
<BR>and {\skt aatmaa}
<BR>Self.
<BR>Just as on Sunrise all animals, including men, go
<BR>about doing their
<BR>activity
<BR>and on Sunset take rest in form of sleep, and thus are
<BR>as if directed
<BR>in
<BR>their activities by Sun, but the Sun itself does not
<BR>do any of the
<BR>action,
<BR>similarly the presence of Self is sufficient for the
<BR>lifelike
<BR>activities.
<P>-----
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, this is OK.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Here you seem to mean that Jiva which is different
<BR>from aatma. Jiva does all the work, and aatma is the
<BR>controller by mere presence.
<BR>----------------</BLOCKQUOTE>
No, Jiva is not different. In our discussions, we identify these
<BR>two entities because of their different nature.
<BR>In our marriage ceremony, Mama (mother's brother) has certain
<BR>function during Kanyadana (giving away the bride). A Mama was
<BR>late, so the priest and everyone concerned said, "Where is Mama?
<BR>Why Mama is late?" even though they knew his name. Becasue that
<BR>person had Upadhi of "Mama", he is identified as such. So is Jiva
<BR>having Upadhi of Avidya, talked about as if a separate entity
<BR>from Atman.
<P>Work is done by chidabhasa, but because it becomes active only
<BR>due to presence of Kutastha, we say that work is done by Jiva
<BR>(i.e. Chidabhasa + Kutastha).
<P>The analogy of Sun given above is to show this "directorship"
<BR>relation. In Taittiriya Up. we have this famous mantra :
<P>{\skt aha.m v.rk.sasya rerivaa .... }
<BR>[I am the director of the Tree of menifestation ....]
<BR> 
<BR> 
<BR> 
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Also, I am referring to sloka # 184 to 188 of
<BR>Vivekachoodamani says:
<P>Budhirbhdhindriaih .... etc.
<P>say that the Vijnanamaya Kosa is the Jiva.
<P>What is the correct view ?
<P>If we do not consider that
<P>Antahkarana + Reflection + aatma = Jiva
<P>there is no meaning and requirement of
<BR>BadhaSamanadhikaranya to establish Jiva is Brahman or
<BR>Tatvamasi, which is an accepted practice.
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, you are right.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>But the above referred Vivekachudamani slokas do not
<BR>seem to speak in similar lines.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Vijnanamaya is called Jiva taking into account the Jagrata
<BR>and Swapna avastha [Viveka. 189]
<BR>{\skt bhu.nkte ....}
<P>Doubt :  the shloka includes Sushupti also, because it  says
<BR>    {\skt svapnaadyavasthaa ...}
<BR>Reply : Yes, but as a null experience. When one is woken
<BR>up from deep sleep, one says , " I was happily asleep. I did
<BR>not know anything."
<BR>The first sentence is from anandamaya,the second from
<BR>Vijnanamaya.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Also, we refer to Ahamkara as EGO which is a function
<BR>of the mind. So, it means to me that it is independent
<BR>of any consciousness or reflection of it, for its own
<BR>definition. In such case how is this EGO related to
<BR>this reflection of consciousness ?</BLOCKQUOTE>
True, Ahamkara is a function of Manomaya, as far as the
<BR>waking state is concerned, but notice two points here :
<BR>(i) Manomaya is activated (seems to be chetana) only due to
<BR>Vijnanamaya, which in turn due to chidabhasa.
<P>(ii) in non-waking (introspective, meditative or pure pleasure)
<BR>states, Ahamkara, Ego, is present but Manomaya is not active.
<P>In summary, through proper perception of "I" Ego, occurs at
<BR>Manomaya, it happens so because of the Reflection.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>or is EGO itself is Jiva ??? If so, how can the
<BR>statement Jivo Brahmaiva naaparaha hold true ??,
<BR>because the whole effort is to live without Abhimana
<BR>or EGO , right ?</BLOCKQUOTE>
No, Ego is not Jiva, only a result of Jiva-hood.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Would you please clarify ?
<P>If EGO is Jiva then what happens to it in Deepsleep ?
<BR>Is Jiva gone ?</BLOCKQUOTE>
In deep sleep only Anandamaya is active. Or, to maintain
<BR>consistency with Vivekachudamani, Vijnanamaya is active
<BR>but having a null experience.
<BR>Please refer the following chart from posting no. 3
<P><TT><FONT SIZE=-1>env. --> [body] --> [Sensor] --> [Thinker] --> [Knower]
-->[Happy   ]</FONT></TT>
<BR><TT><FONT SIZE=-1>                                                       
|<- sleep ->|</FONT></TT>
<BR><TT><FONT SIZE=-1>                               
|<-------- dream ------------------>|</FONT></TT>
<BR><TT><FONT SIZE=-1>        |<------------------- 
awake ------------------------------>|</FONT></TT>
<BR> 
<BR> 
<BR> 
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>To support the knowledge of deep sleep
<BR>happiness we resort to the Antahkarana + Reflection +
<BR>aatma = Jiva definition. In such case why are we
<BR>calling Chidabhasa as Jiva (not strictly, as referred
<BR>by you in your posting # 3, pasted at the top of this
<BR>e-mail).</BLOCKQUOTE>
Some Acharyas include Antahkarana in Jiva and some
<BR>do not (as I have done following Swami Vidyaranya.)
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>In any case please address the deep sleep issue and
<BR>Vijnanamaya Kosa being called as Jiva in
<BR>Vivekachudamani.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Some General comments before we summarize :
<BR>you should understand that the vocabulary as used by me
<BR>(defined rather precisely in Panchadasi) is called "modern"
<BR>vocabulary and is more or less standard for Vedantins of
<BR>a date later than Adi Shankara.
<BR>If you compare older texts with the later, there will be
<BR>some variations, though the general porport will be
<BR>the same. Try to understand the implied meaning or
<BR>definition.
<BR>E.g. in Viveka chudamani, in 191, Jiva is used to mean Atman,
<BR>but later the word Jivabhava distinguishes it from Atman. In
<BR>208 Vijnanamaya is called Jada, though earlier it was called
<BR>Jiva.
<BR> 
<P>Summarizing all the above :
<BR>1.    In deep sleep only Anandamaya is active. It has
knowledge of
<BR>its own happiness.  This leaves a residual memory in itself. It
is
<BR>through this residue that we say "I was happily asleep."
<BR>"I did not know anything" comes due to the null experience in
<BR>Vijnanamaya.
<P>2.     In 186 {\skt  buddhirbuddhiindriyai.h
...} the word Vijnanamaya
<BR>is used for both Vij. and Anandamaya. It is being used as locus of
<BR>"I" v.rtti.  As usual human experience is during waking state,
the
<BR>Vijnanamaya is the innermost "I" in that state (except when we
<BR>are extremely happy or meditating).
<BR>The chetana of Abhasa is ported to Vijn. and is included as a part
of
<BR>Jiva. Without chidabhasa, Vijn. can not be active, so this definition
<BR>of Jiva, i.e.
<BR>Jiva = Vijnanamaya + Kutastha
<BR>is not entirely inconsistent with the previous definition given.
<P>Also, note that Vivekachudamani discusses from view point of
<BR>search for real "I" starting with the gross body. Till ignorance
<BR>is removed and Self is known, it is Vijn. which poses as "I", an
<BR>imposter for the Self. That is why it is identified in these verses
<BR>as Jiva.
<BR>In verse 189 it is explained why Vijn. is taken to be Jiva.
<BR> 
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> 
<BR>Om Namo Narayanaya !!
<P>Srikrishna
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
I hope this explains.
<BR>With best wishes,
<BR>-- Himanhu
<BR> </HTML>

--------------737906B830E990FE11133D95--