Experiencing Aatman

[elmec]

Re : Tarka and Shruthi

Sri Anand Hudli wrote :


“Just as the mind by its very nature runs after external
 objects of the senses, the human intellect too by its very nature tries

 to find a rational explanation for everything. Just as silencing of
 the mind is required for the direct realization of the Self, the
 silencing of the intellect too is required for the same realization”.

This sort of silencing is taught in Yoga, which I think is a temporary
phase. How long can the mind/intellect be silent ? They will naturally
return to their very nature of wandering. So whatever we realise during
those silent moments also disappear once the mind is back to its
original noisy self. We would achieve nothing by such a practice.

The true realisation can dawn only by viveka of the aatma and anaatma.
Once our mind realises that there is no permanent happiness that it can
achieve by running after annatma vasthus, it becomes docile, stops all
its wild hankering after sensory objects. There arises no need to bridle
it. Even if it were to raise its hood sometimes, it immediately awakens
to the truth and lowers its hood automatically. You just do not have to
do anything to curb it. This is my experience.

Anand once again writes :

“I completely agree that all teachings of shruti should culminate in
 direct experience. But then, even before we embark on an attempt to
 experience something that the shruti says,



..”

And Ravi writes :

“No amount of logic can convince or disprove that sugar is
sweet. One has to experience it

..”

In Ravi’s example of experiencing the sweetness of the sugar, three
things are involved. The pramaatru – ie, me , the Prameya – ie, the
sweetness of sugar and the Pramaana – our taste buds. Agreed.

But the experience of the Brahman/Aatman is not similar to this.
Because, here, the Pramaatru, Prameya and Pramaana are all one. If as
Anand says, we must have a direct experience of the dictum “ Tat Twam
Asi ” it is not plausible, because then the experiencer has to be
different from that which is experienced, which defeats the dictum !
Once we listen to the dictum of the Shruthi through a Guru, we just have
to know that we are not the other achetana things like body-mind complex
, but we are that very Chetana itself. This is very clear in all our
experience during the states of Jaagrit  and swapna , where we have
different body-mind complexes  and during sushupthi even those things
are not there, yet we are aware of that “I” which has experienced all
these three states. Only a firm conviction that that Chetana which is
avinaashi is me is all that one has to abide in always.

Shankara in his Upadesha Saahasri ( Prakarana 18, shloka 210 ) clearly
says :

itOnyOnubhavah kashchiDatmanO nOpapadyate
avijNatam vijAnatAm vijnAtAramiti shruteh

One can not have any other experience called “ Aatmaanubhava “ other
than this ( firm conviction ). One who says “ I have understood ” has
not understood. How can he understand That by Which he understands
everything – thus says Shruthi.

VijnAtAramarE kEna vijAnIyAt  -  Bri 2-3-14

I may have erred in many places in my enthusiasm to put forward my
opinion. Kindly excuse. The new kind of notation which you all use while
quoting Sanskrit shlokas in English is new to me and I may have
committed mistakes. Kindly correct me.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/advaita-l/attachments/20000219/e5006e8c/attachment.html>