[Advaita-l] Knowledge and the Means of Knowledge - 21

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

--- On Wed, 9/10/08, latha vidyaranya <lathavidya at yahoo.co.in> wrote:

  
> thank you, sadanandaji, for clearing my doubt.
> you say that for a jnaani, the subjective notion is
> eliminated whereas the objective projection continues. how
> can this be possible? i understand that the projections
> remain but the falsity of it is evident to a jnaani.

Lathaji - PraNAms.

Your understanding is not different from my statement. There is a Iswara shRiShTi and jiiva shRiShTi. Like sunrise and sunset is Iswara shRiShTi and the projection of snake is jiiva shRiShTi. When I learn that sun neither rises nor sets from shaastras, I understood the truth behind the experience of sunrise and sunset. But that undersanding is does not dismiss the sunrise and sunset. Even though I enjoy the sunrise and sunset, I know that sun never rises nor sets - that is the knowledge.

But when it comes to snake/rope where snake is projection of the individual mind, with the vision of rope, the vision of snake is gone for ever. That is what is implied. Thus there are two types of adhyaasa that I had discussed in the earlier post (18?) one is to take one for the other based on the attributes perceived - like it is a snake where there is a rope. In the other adhyaasa the attributes of one is transferred to the other - like color of the cloth to the crystal or movement of trees in the opposite direction when the train is moving, etc. Here knowledge does not eliminate the perception but one understands the reality of the perception. The first adhyaasa causes individual suffering due to mental projection due to attachements. That jiivan mukta will not have -since all ego-centric desires due to attachements are disscolved - prajahaati yadaa kaamaan sarvan partha manogataan. 

But Iswara shRishTi remains as long as upaadhiis are there (due to prarabda) since the Body, mind and intellect come under Iswara shRiShti.


> similarly, the subjective notion may get eliminated, but the
> transactional truth requires an 'i' and 'me'
> and 'you', is it not? hence all things present in an
> ajnaani's world continues to remain for a jnaani too,
> but all identification has dropped from a jnaani and he
> remains untainted, like a drop of water on a lotus leaf. he
> remains in the world, yet not there!

Yes that is precisely what I meant. You understanding is correct and that is what I had implied.

Hari Om!
Sadananda