[Advaita-l] Inward and outward contemplation

[Ven Balakrishnan]

The beauty of ‘who am I”, is that it is the most proximate thought-feeling that we have, from which everything else sprouts.  So asking that question goes to the root of addressing “tvam”, because it the “twam” that is the fundamental misconception.

Asking who is the Sun, carries no meaning; it is not something that is actionable.  But who am I can be done moment to moment, every time a thought - desire, fear - arises, it brings attention back to the ‘I’ that has that desire / fear, and away from the body-mind.  It implicitly carries viveka and vairagya within it.

[Apologies, I had mis-posted this initially to only Jaldhar-ji]

> On 26 Aug 2021, at 08:09, jaldhar at braincells.com wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2021, Ven Balakrishnan via Advaita-l wrote:
> 
>> The thrust of Gaudapada and Sankara is to regard the world - and most particularly the body-mind - as unreal, illlusory.
> 
> 
> Incidently I am uncomfortable with the use of words like illusion and unreal.  They suggest to the English speaker the idea of falsehood; that the world is some kind of mental construct.  As far as I know the only major Indian darshan that believed this was the Bauddhas and only the Vignanavadis amongst them.  Although it is a little unwieldy, I prefer to talk of lower-order reality.  After all, vyavaharika satya is still satya, just a lesser kind.  Atleast we should say it is delusion not illusion.
> 
> Other than this quibble though, I agree with you.
> 
>> Ramana’s ‘who am I’  is doing just this.
> 
> Contemplating thus will lead one to the realization that what was conventionally thought of as "I" is also delusion just like the world-appearance. "who am I" is an upasana for coming to that conclusion.
> 
> Shastras contain many other upasanas.  We can also (note also not instead) profitably ask "who is the Sun", "who are the five fires", "who is the Gayatri mantra" etc. etc.
> 
> 
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2021, H S Chandramouli wrote:
> 
>> As per the Advaita Sidhanta advanced by Sri Bhagavatpada,  Realization is
>> possible ONLY through  जीवब्रह्मैक्यज्ञानम् (jIvabrahmaikya j~nAnam).
>> "inward" contemplation  is compulsory.
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> Reg  <<  It
>> should defintely include inward focus but sometimes I think it gets
>> forgotten that Brahman is "pervades all this and ten fingers beyond" as
>> the purushasukta puts it.  The root bR^inn from which brahman is derived
>> also means growth or increase.  Brahman is as much "out there" as "in
>> here." >>
>> 
>> But for successful  "inward" contemplation leading to जीवब्रह्मैक्यज
>> (jIvabrahmaikya j~nAnam), Vairagya is an essential sAdhana. This is 
> aided by
>> जगन्मिथ्यात्वज्ञानम् (jaganmithyAtvaj~nAnam). It is essential to understand
>> what is “out there” is mithyA.
>> 
> 
> Yes.  What I am trying to get at is that to do this one must rigourously inquire "what is it that is out there".  As a question, this is on the same level as "who am I"
> 
> 
>> Reg  << Some experience a massive collapse of sense of self
>> where one seems to be nothing at all >>,
>> 
>> This does not represent Realization.
>> 
> 
> Shakyamuni described his experience as nirvana, "snuffing out" like as a flame that is extinguished.  No wonder Gaudapadacharya says that though he may have been dvipadAnAm varam ("The best of men".  Literally "of the two-footed.") he did not understand the truth.
> 
> 
>> Reg  << Others have an equally massive
>> expansion of consciousness where one becomes everything >>,
>> 
>> This indeed is Realization.
>> 
> 
> if jnana is only jIvabrahmaikyam than how to get from there to "becoming everything"?  There must jagadbrahmaikyam too no?
> 
> -- 
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>