[Advaita-l] Mechanics of Self-Realization -2

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

Now we can define who is samsaari jiiva and who is a mukta jiiva (or
jiivan mukta) – the divergence occurs between the two at this time,
because of knowledge or lack of it. Knowledge does not change any of
the above process.

ajnaani or samsaari is the one who takes the chidaabhaasa or reflected
consciousness as the REAL I am, since he has no knowledge (which can
be only gained by Vedanta vichaara) that I am is pure, original, the
all-pervading consciousness that has no reflection of any kind
anywhere, whatsoever! Hence he takes chidaabhaasa or image as -  I am
this – which involves two parts – I am part coming from the original
(remember face example) and this part coming from the mind that is
reflecting the original. Thus the image chidaabhaasa takes itself as
the original guy – claiming this BMI as mine (mamakaara) as a first
step, and I am the BMI (ahankaara) as the second step. These steps of
confused understanding is referred to as adhyaasa – superimposed
error, where I am part is superimposed on this part – Shankara
describes in his adhyaasa bhaaShya how the confusion of this
superimposed error drips down to further confusions and thus samsaara
tree spreads around like ashwatha or banyan tree (although  the
starting seed is very small).

Then jnaani is the one who distinguishes the two part aspects of this
(unitary) chidaabhaasa ( I am part and this part), differentiates the
two using intellect (viveka) and discarding I am not this part (neti,
neti) but I am is the reflected light of consciousness – reflection of
the original light of consciousness that is all pervading ever shining
pure sat chit ananda swaruupam.  Please notice the mechanics here. It
is the chidaabhaasa that has the wrong notions that I am this, in its
unitary entity, which contains both I am part and this part (like milk
with water where hamsa (swan) can distinguish the milk from the water
in the apparently inseparable mixture). Here it is not physical
separation of I am and this part – it is separation by analysis or
inquiry or by viveka only, involving separation of what is
transcendental part and what is transient part. Who does that? –It is
chidaabhaasa only that has to do since any of this has nothing to do
with the all pervading eternal pure light of consciousness. In our
example of face-image – it is the image that has the problem not the
original face. Image has to recognize the attributes of that I am
existent entity and conscious entity comes form the attributeless
existent-conscious entity, the aatma, the self.

Thus aatma, the all pervading entity has to nothing to do with all
these processes and from its reference there is no mind even to have
reflection; then what to talk about jnaani or ajnaani.

The BMI – also cannot do this separation process since they are jadam or inert.

Chidaabhaasa, the reflected consciousness because of its conscious
part, it has the capacity to do the analysis (saadhana involving
shravana, manana and nidhidhyaasana) has to shift its identification
from this inert things to the original light of consciousness that is
getting reflected. A simple example is like when I see in the
full-moon light, I have to recognize that I am seeing the light from
the sun, which is reflected by the moon and of course further
reflected by the objects (or thoughts). Sun is self-shining entity
nothing to do with these reflection. Interestingly, moon is the
presiding deity of the mind. Thus all pervading consciousness first
gets reflected in the mind as chidaabhaasa. The light from this
chidaabhaasa further gets reflected by the thoughts of the objects
that arise in the mind. The second order reflected light from the
thoughts is the knowledge of the thoughts since what is reflected is
the light of consciousness.

Self realization then involves - I, a living entity, which is
chidaabhaasa, taking myself as I am the matter entity BMI, has to
understand that I am pure light of consciousness that is forming image
in this mind ( since I am the light of consciousness and not the mind
which is like a mirror). This is clear understanding at the
intellectual level since confusions are at that level. Jiivan mukta is
one who is jiivan or living in the BMI as chidaabhaasa recognize his
original nature while living or as chidaabhaasa. Essentially it is the
chidaabhaasa that has to realize since it is the one that has
confusion about itself.

Chidaabhaasa is same as ego when identifying with BMI as I am this and
is normally equated with ahankaara of ajnaani since when action is
being performed by BMI he takes that I am doing it. Hence the
ahankaara has the normal connotation that I am the BMI notion and
operation involving that notion.

As long as BMI is there, chidaabhaasa will be there and vRitti or
thoughts etc also will be there – along with avasthaatraya – waking,
dream and deep sleep states, etc, go on.

As a jnaani I can do two things: 1. just be a witnessing consciousness
witnessing the operation of BMI since they are part of prakRiti. –
this is called aatma rati. In this I am reveling in myself while BMI
is doing what it is supposed to do- living through its destined
results of actions.

2, I can also deliberately identify for the time being with BMI and
perform action knowing that I am not really acting. This is called
aatma kriiDa or play. KriiDa involve apparent duality. Then it becomes
his glory. Whatever he plays is not for his fulfillment (unlike
ajnaani) but for the benefit of the totality – or loka kalyaanam.

Both choices are possible since chidaabhaasa is there and/since BMI is
there. BMI can just do what is destined as in the first case or do
deliberately as required by the situations, even though they are not
pre-programmed – as in teaching the deserving student. In the later
case one can also say that Jnaani who understood that I am pure sat
chit ananda or Brahman – taking the role of a teacher teaching the
deserving student using the BMI available. Both descriptions are
equivalent. Is jnaani doing deliberately as a play or he is just
watching the BMI as saakshii – Both possible, but this has to be
answered by jnaani only. His answer, of course depends on who is
asking the question. He can say I am doing it or I am writing the
bhaashyam or he can equally say the bhaashyam is being written in my
presence as saakshii. Both descriptions are equivalent and possible
for a jnaani.

Up to this point I have omitted the fact that full jnaanam involves
recognition that I am the substantive of BMI too. Complete knowledge
involves tat and tvam both parts – tat standing of the total universe
along with the creator of the total and tvam involves  the saakshii
chaitanyam. This we will discuss next.

Hari Om!
Sadananda