[Advaita-l] Fwd: Fwd: Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti

[H S Chandramouli]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti
To: H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>


Dear Sri Chandramouli Ji

On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 2:55 PM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Sri Ravi Kiran,
>
>
>  Reg << Mind is no doubt needed for both as the instrument for
> cognition.
>
>
>
>  Can you pl elaborate this statement? As you are accepting the need for
> mind in self cognition, what is the role played by mind in Realization
> (without the involvement of chidabhasa or reflected consciousness) ? Kindly
> clarify >> ,
>
>
>   I had covered this in my definition of “ akhandakara vritti “ . Mind is
> the only instrument available for knowledge, whether of Atman or Anatma. In
> respect of Anatma, the knowledge is gained through the participation of
> Chidabhasa . But in respect of Atman ( Self Realization ) , it is through
> Chaitanyam itself and not through Chidabhasa. A drishtanta in this
> connection , which has always fascinated me , goes like this. Consider a
> mirror reflecting light onto a dark room through a small hole, illuminating
> whatever vastus are covered by the reflected light . The mirror is slowly
> turned towards the source of light itself. When the mirror directly faces
> the source of light, does the reflected light illumine the source of light
> ?? Till this point is reached , all the vastus covered by it were illumined
> by the reflected light. But not now. On the other hand the mirror itself
> can be considered to have been illumined by the source of light. Same is
> the case at the time of Self Realization. As long as knowledge of Anatma
> vastus were being cognized by the mind ( equivalent of mirror ) ,
> Chidabhasa ( equivalent of reflected light ) was illumining the vastus. But
> once the mind is intensely concentrated on the Atman by the sadhaka (
> equivalent of mirror turned directly towards the source of light ) and the
> Guru pronounces the Maha Vakya “ tatvamasi “ , the resulting Vritti in the
> sadhaka's mind
>

Ok, this Vritti ( akhandakara )  that arises is not of chidabhasa, since it
is directed towards the attributeless Source ( in the sense that a vritti
directed towards any object with attributes,  alone is of chidabhasa )...In
that sense, there is no difference (of any) between the Source and the
akhandakara
vritti ( content or substance wise)

> uncovers the veil of avidya covering the Chaitanyam ( aavarana naasha ) ,
> leading to the illumination of the mind directly by the Chaitanyam (
> equivqlent of the source of light ) . This leads to Self Realization , the
> knowledge of the form “ aham Brahmasmi “ .
>
>
>  You could also usefully refer to the link
>
>
>  <<
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2014-November/037681.html
> >>
>
>
>  for a discussion in this Forum on the role of mind in Self Realization.
> You have also participated in that thread.
>
>
>  Regards
>

Thanks

Namaste

>
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Sri Chandramouli Ji
>>
>> Thanks for fwding your response:
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 12:03 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  What about the knowledge of Sushupti << I know I slept well >> .
>>> Chidabhasa is dormant/inactive. But still knowledge is there.
>>
>>
>> Yes, this I know in waking ( jagrat), the existence (unbroken) that
>> persisted during sushupti ...there was never a moment when existence was
>> not..
>>
>>
>>> This
>>> knowledge is therefore not attributable to Chidabhasa.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes
>>
>>>
>>>  We can also consider from another viewpoint , the difference between
>>> jada
>>> ( inert ) and svaprakasha ( selfevident ) vastu. The fundamental
>>> difference
>>> is that for cognizing a jada vastu an illuminating entity is needed
>>> whereas
>>> for cognizing a svaprakasha vastu another illuminating entity is not
>>> needed. For both nodoubt mind is involved as the instrument for
>>> cognition.
>>> According to you Chidabhasa is needed for both the above cognitions. Then
>>> there is no difference between them.
>>>
>>>
>>>  My point is Chidabhasa is needed for cognizing all inert vastus . But it
>>> is not needed for cognizing Svaprakasha vastu ( It is so by definition
>>> itself ) .
>>
>>
>> Yes, we can say, in sushupti, the svaprakAsha vastu exists or illumines
>> by itself..  there is no need for mind or other illumining entity
>>
>>
>>> Mind is no doubt needed for both as the instrument for
>>> cognition.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you pl elaborate this statement? As you are accepting the need for
>> mind in self cognition, what is the role played by mind in Realization
>> (without the involvement of chidabhasa or reflected consciousness) ? Kindly
>> clarify
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>  That the cognition is at vyavaharika level only has not been disputed .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Namaste
>>
>>
>