[Advaita-l] Karma yoga: the kinder, softer preparation for self-inquiry and surrender

[H S Chandramouli]

Dear Venkat,

Just now saw your latest post. I draw your attention to what you have
mentioned therein.

<< Absence of thought does not mean a void.  There must be one to know the
void >>.

This accords with what I have mentioned in my last post. Inert part and
Consciousness part.

Regards

On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 3:08 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Venkat,
>
> Reg  << My understanding is that for Ramana, like Sankara, knowledge /
> understanding is the primary path. Knowledge in the sense that you are not
> the body-mind and the world is not real.  Thereafter to understand and
> constantly apply neti, neti - discarding all thoughts - in order to focus
> on the ‘I’-thought, and thereby realise for yourself that it is not
> substantial >>,
>
> Realizing for oneself that the ‘I’ thought is not substantial??  That is
> where I think the problem lies. The ‘I’ thought is a composite, of THE
> Substantial namely *Chaitanya* or *Consciousness* and the ‘not substantial’
> namely the mind or thought. The two are inextricably intertwined and
> referred to as the *hrudayagranthi*. It is the fundamental adhyAsa on which
> successive adhyAsas/superimpositions like sense organs/body/world etc are
> overlaid. For Realization, even the way Sri Maharshi conceieves it, it is
> necessary to separate the two in the ‘I’ and discard the inert part as ‘not
> substantial’ , leaving the Conscious portion alone as The Substantial. (For
> the sake of clarity I have not paid much attention to exactness in
> language, just take the spirit of the idea). Maybe by effort the subsequent
> overlaid ahyAsas/superimpositions  can be discarded through neti neti
> principle because they are all essentially due to inert entities. But such
> is not the case with the ‘I’ principle. It involves a mixup of inert and
> Conscious principles which together is experienced as a Conscious principle
> itself. Without the assistance of Shruti , apart from supplementary things,
> it is impossible to separate the two and discard the inert portion alone as
> ‘not substantial’. That is the position of Advaita as advanced by Sri
> Bhagavatpada.
>  Regards
>
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 10:06 PM Ven Balakrishnan <ventzu at yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear HS Chandramouli
>>
>> My understanding is that for Ramana, like Sankara, knowledge /
>> understanding is the primary path.  Knowledge in the sense that you are not
>> the body-mind and the world is not real.  Thereafter to understand and
>> constantly apply neti, neti - discarding all thoughts - in order to focus
>> on the ‘I’-thought, and thereby realise for yourself that it is not
>> substantial.
>>
>> So there are stories of where 2 people were arguing in the ashram
>> kitchen, and then suddenly spotted Bhagavan watching them and they became
>> embarrassed; the story goes that he told them not to feel shy, but to use
>> the opportunity to see the ego in all its strength.  Similarly, he said,
>> whenever a desire arises look to find the one that has the desire.
>>
>> With respect to the two DSV theories, I’m not sure they are that
>> different, and in any event it is a provisional step, on the way to ajata
>> vada.  So probably don’t get distracted by the nuances of one or the other.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> venkat
>>
>>
>>