One problem is the problem with respect to existence of nama rupa, as separate from astitiva.
The word separate is a problem.
Separate should not be used, since separate conveys 'separation in terms of space'.
or 'separation in terms of time'.
With nama rupa, it is not like that.
We see a tree, we call it a tree, this is the vyavahara. This is how the universe is.
When one talks about what is it that has treeness, and says that treeness is chaitanyam, like pot and clay. there is an issue.
Pot is a name and a form, it is a knowledge.
Same way tree is a name and form, it is a knowledge, and in a tree there is infinite knowledge.
Limitless knowledge.
Name, within names with names.
Word and meaning, millions of words and meanings, each made possible by means of knowledge being operated and meanings mined.
This which is means of knowledge operating and mining meanings, IS.
That is ishvara.
That is how ishvara is, he is the karakas and the karanas, the instrument, means of knowledge, the knower as well as known object, is what ishvara IS.
This ishvara is by oneself, atma.
Atma is the ashraya, in the sense, of atma not being the underneath layer. There is no underneath layer for ishvara.
Underneath itself is a name, a word and meaning.
Then what is this atma. This atma is anantha, in all names and forms, that which is invariably present is sat, ISness, and satAnanta hence. This satananta, happens to be you, chit.
So we say that which is invariable present, not in terms of some invariable substance.
Like in clay pots, we say clay is invariable present, in a pot?? nono, clay is not present in a pot, rather pot IS clay. All of the pot is clay alone.
Same way all of the jagad, in any name and form, IS atma alone.
Atma is hence satAnanta, and happens to be oneself, hence chit.
Hence there need not be any vrtti to keep remembering about atma. What is here is atma, that is all. It is self evident, but the ignorance has to be removed.
The thing is that, in a gold chain and bangle, the fact that it is gold is known through seeing.
However, as far as jagad is concerned that fact that jagad is chaitanyam is not known through seeing, since seeing itself is chaitanyam seeing, 'seeing chaitanyam'.
Hence it is known through shabda pramana.
Shruti has to tell, ok, see all that you hear, see, shrotrasya shrotram, chakshushah chakshu, manso manoyat, tad brahma advayam aham asmi.
In the leaf, and the sky and the tree, inside of it is not atma, rather atma itself is leafy atma, skyii atma.
I need not see atma separately, since seeing is 'seeingy' atma.
I the seer is 'seery' atma.
How can such an atma, which is ever evident, but still hidden be revealed.
It is present, but hidden, How can that be. What is here is atma alone, but still it is hidden how can that be. That can be due to ignorance. I dont know that atma alone is, and atma is non dual.
That fact I dont seem to know, and shruti makes me know.
The word separate is a problem.
Separate should not be used, since separate conveys 'separation in terms of space'.
or 'separation in terms of time'.
With nama rupa, it is not like that.
We see a tree, we call it a tree, this is the vyavahara. This is how the universe is.
When one talks about what is it that has treeness, and says that treeness is chaitanyam, like pot and clay. there is an issue.
Pot is a name and a form, it is a knowledge.
Same way tree is a name and form, it is a knowledge, and in a tree there is infinite knowledge.
Limitless knowledge.
Name, within names with names.
Word and meaning, millions of words and meanings, each made possible by means of knowledge being operated and meanings mined.
This which is means of knowledge operating and mining meanings, IS.
That is ishvara.
That is how ishvara is, he is the karakas and the karanas, the instrument, means of knowledge, the knower as well as known object, is what ishvara IS.
This ishvara is by oneself, atma.
Atma is the ashraya, in the sense, of atma not being the underneath layer. There is no underneath layer for ishvara.
Underneath itself is a name, a word and meaning.
Then what is this atma. This atma is anantha, in all names and forms, that which is invariably present is sat, ISness, and satAnanta hence. This satananta, happens to be you, chit.
So we say that which is invariable present, not in terms of some invariable substance.
Like in clay pots, we say clay is invariable present, in a pot?? nono, clay is not present in a pot, rather pot IS clay. All of the pot is clay alone.
Same way all of the jagad, in any name and form, IS atma alone.
Atma is hence satAnanta, and happens to be oneself, hence chit.
Hence there need not be any vrtti to keep remembering about atma. What is here is atma, that is all. It is self evident, but the ignorance has to be removed.
The thing is that, in a gold chain and bangle, the fact that it is gold is known through seeing.
However, as far as jagad is concerned that fact that jagad is chaitanyam is not known through seeing, since seeing itself is chaitanyam seeing, 'seeing chaitanyam'.
Hence it is known through shabda pramana.
Shruti has to tell, ok, see all that you hear, see, shrotrasya shrotram, chakshushah chakshu, manso manoyat, tad brahma advayam aham asmi.
In the leaf, and the sky and the tree, inside of it is not atma, rather atma itself is leafy atma, skyii atma.
I need not see atma separately, since seeing is 'seeingy' atma.
I the seer is 'seery' atma.
How can such an atma, which is ever evident, but still hidden be revealed.
It is present, but hidden, How can that be. What is here is atma alone, but still it is hidden how can that be. That can be due to ignorance. I dont know that atma alone is, and atma is non dual.
That fact I dont seem to know, and shruti makes me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment