[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: Fwd: Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti

[H S Chandramouli]

Earlier I had posted the following


 << This vritti , accompanied by Chidabhasa , unveils the Aavarana covering
the Chaitanyam . Instead of the vritti envoloping , and associated
Chidabhasa illumining , the “ object “ ( Chaitanyam in this case ) , as
happens in respect of a vritti directed towards any object with attributes
, the vritti itself is illumined entirely by the Chaitanyam directly . >>.


 I notice I had left out another significant aspect in this understanding.
For sake of completion , I am now adding it.


 << In addition , The Chidabhasa which had all along considered itself
distinct from the Chaitanyam merges with the Chaitanyam being nondifferent
from it. What this means is that the distinct “ I “ sense which the
Chidabhasa had produced and which is resposible for all the samsaric
experiences gets destroyed . >> .

 Regards

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 5:54 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>  << This vritti , accompanied by Chidabhasa , unveils the Aavarana
>> covering
>> the Chaitanyam . Instead of the vritti envoloping , and associated
>> Chidabhasa illumining , the “ object “ ( Chaitanyam in this case ) , as
>> happens in respect of a vritti directed towards any object with attributes
>> , the vritti itself is illumined entirely by the Chaitanyam directly .
>
>
> Yes, the vRitti is still needed by the antahakarana to remove the
> ignorance of its Source,
> but illumination is "directly" by the svayamprakAsaka Chaitanya vastu (
> Source) and
> the illumination is NOT or Never by the chidabhasa, as it is never ever
> necessary :)
>
> Pranams and Regards,
>
>
>> The
>> content of the vritti is then essentially Atman itself as there is no
>> other
>> content relating to the “ I / knowerhood “ ( pramatru ) or “ know “ (
>> pramana ) components ( associated with cognition through Chidabhasa )
>> present in all cognition relating to Anatma vastus. In that sense , there
>> is no essential difference between Source ( Chaitanyam ) and the content
>> of
>> the vritti. >> .
>>
>>
>>  I know I am treading on dangerous ground and the terminology may not pass
>> close expert scrutiny . But this is the best I could do. For further
>> refinement in understanding / terminology , better to refer to experts/
>> standard texts / talks.
>>
>>
>>  Regards
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 5:51 PM, H S Chandramouli <
>> hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
>> > Date: Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 3:16 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti
>> > To: H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear Sri Chandramouli Ji
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 2:55 PM, H S Chandramouli <
>> > hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dear Sri Ravi Kiran,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  Reg << Mind is no doubt needed for both as the instrument for
>> >> cognition.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  Can you pl elaborate this statement? As you are accepting the need for
>> >> mind in self cognition, what is the role played by mind in Realization
>> >> (without the involvement of chidabhasa or reflected consciousness) ?
>> Kindly
>> >> clarify >> ,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>   I had covered this in my definition of “ akhandakara vritti “ . Mind
>> >> is the only instrument available for knowledge, whether of Atman or
>> Anatma.
>> >> In respect of Anatma, the knowledge is gained through the
>> participation of
>> >> Chidabhasa . But in respect of Atman ( Self Realization ) , it is
>> through
>> >> Chaitanyam itself and not through Chidabhasa. A drishtanta in this
>> >> connection , which has always fascinated me , goes like this. Consider
>> a
>> >> mirror reflecting light onto a dark room through a small hole,
>> illuminating
>> >> whatever vastus are covered by the reflected light . The mirror is
>> slowly
>> >> turned towards the source of light itself. When the mirror directly
>> faces
>> >> the source of light, does the reflected light illumine the source of
>> light
>> >> ?? Till this point is reached , all the vastus covered by it were
>> illumined
>> >> by the reflected light. But not now. On the other hand the mirror
>> itself
>> >> can be considered to have been illumined by the source of light. Same
>> is
>> >> the case at the time of Self Realization. As long as knowledge of
>> Anatma
>> >> vastus were being cognized by the mind ( equivalent of mirror ) ,
>> >> Chidabhasa ( equivalent of reflected light ) was illumining the
>> vastus. But
>> >> once the mind is intensely concentrated on the Atman by the sadhaka (
>> >> equivalent of mirror turned directly towards the source of light ) and
>> the
>> >> Guru pronounces the Maha Vakya “ tatvamasi “ , the resulting Vritti in
>> the
>> >> sadhaka's mind
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ok, this Vritti ( akhandakara )  that arises is not of chidabhasa, since
>> > it is directed towards the attributeless Source ( in the sense that a
>> > vritti directed towards any object with attributes,  alone is of
>> chidabhasa
>> > )...In that sense, there is no difference (of any) between the Source
>> and
>> > the akhandakara vritti ( content or substance wise)
>> >
>> >> uncovers the veil of avidya covering the Chaitanyam ( aavarana naasha
>> ) ,
>> >> leading to the illumination of the mind directly by the Chaitanyam (
>> >> equivqlent of the source of light ) . This leads to Self Realization ,
>> the
>> >> knowledge of the form “ aham Brahmasmi “ .
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  You could also usefully refer to the link
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  <<
>> >>
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2014-November/037681.html
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  for a discussion in this Forum on the role of mind in Self
>> Realization.
>> >> You have also participated in that thread.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  Regards
>> >>
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Namaste
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Dear Sri Chandramouli Ji
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for fwding your response:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 12:03 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
>> >>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  What about the knowledge of Sushupti << I know I slept well >> .
>> >>>> Chidabhasa is dormant/inactive. But still knowledge is there.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Yes, this I know in waking ( jagrat), the existence (unbroken) that
>> >>> persisted during sushupti ...there was never a moment when existence
>> was
>> >>> not..
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> This
>> >>>> knowledge is therefore not attributable to Chidabhasa.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> Yes
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  We can also consider from another viewpoint , the difference between
>> >>>> jada
>> >>>> ( inert ) and svaprakasha ( selfevident ) vastu. The fundamental
>> >>>> difference
>> >>>> is that for cognizing a jada vastu an illuminating entity is needed
>> >>>> whereas
>> >>>> for cognizing a svaprakasha vastu another illuminating entity is not
>> >>>> needed. For both nodoubt mind is involved as the instrument for
>> >>>> cognition.
>> >>>> According to you Chidabhasa is needed for both the above cognitions.
>> >>>> Then
>> >>>> there is no difference between them.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  My point is Chidabhasa is needed for cognizing all inert vastus .
>> But
>> >>>> it
>> >>>> is not needed for cognizing Svaprakasha vastu ( It is so by
>> definition
>> >>>> itself ) .
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Yes, we can say, in sushupti, the svaprakAsha vastu exists or
>> illumines
>> >>> by itself..  there is no need for mind or other illumining entity
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> Mind is no doubt needed for both as the instrument for
>> >>>> cognition.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Can you pl elaborate this statement? As you are accepting the need for
>> >>> mind in self cognition, what is the role played by mind in Realization
>> >>> (without the involvement of chidabhasa or reflected consciousness) ?
>> Kindly
>> >>> clarify
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  That the cognition is at vyavaharika level only has not been
>> disputed .
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks
>> >>>
>> >>> Namaste
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>
>