Astitiva and nama rupa

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 knowledge

We have only functional knowledge. Knowing how to do karma, and how to quench hunger etc.
We know the means and ends, thats all. Knowledge of means and ends, is not really knowledge. It is simply a recognition that this is the means and this is the ends. It is preexisting shakti or power, which is gnana shakti.

However, the real gnanam is to know that which IS.

There is only one thing, which is what you are. You are transcending all this that you know. You are transendental reality.

Revel in this reality. Because that is your nature.

Mithya Nama Rupam

When we analyse our own experience, we can see aspects of experience.
Every experience means
1. Experiencer
2. Experience thought form
3. Experienced object
4. Awareness of difference beween all these 3

If you look at each knowledge
1. Experiencer

I know I am experiencer. Which means I have the status of being an experiencer of a thought modification in my mind.
I become experiencer w.r.t the vrtti and the object. For vrttii to take place there has to be a body mind self complex. This is also an experienced object.

Another aspect of experiencer is that, experiencer IS, the ISness. Also the experiencer is different from the experienced, in nature also. We recognize the fact, that the experiencer is aware of the experienced object, but the experienced object is not aware of the experiencer.
This makes the experiencer , fundamentally different in terms of quality from the experienced objects.
We hence call this aspect of being aware, or the ability to be aware, or the quality of awareness as non separate from the experiencer, and in fact intrinsic to the experiencer, the svarupa of the experiencer. This is a key point, which serves as a svarupa lakshana of the experiencer atma, a definition for the atma, that uniquely identifies atma. Mere awareness is not enough, since awareness, is in every living being. We will talk about the essential awareness later.

2. Experience thought form
Now this is another sort of object that the experiencer is aware of, but due to its subtle nature and its ability to remove ignorance, we call this vrtti out separately, instead of clubbing it with the experienced objects.
Vrtti has ability to remove ignorance.
Any vrtti hence comes with a shakti, a power, a capability, which is the capability to remove ignorance.
Ignorance for a jiva sareera, is natural, a jiva is born with this ignorance sharira, or ignorance present.

Also point to note is that, the experienced vrtti, also conveys another knowledge, that this vrtti IS. vrtti Asti, iti. This isness is also communicated by any knowledge vrtti.

3. Experienced object
This is the third component. This is the experienced object. Any object has a certain name, form, function which it has inherent to that object. This much is known to us through our brain, our karaka, we get this knowledge through a vrtti.
Now we also get to know the specifics of this power or name form and function of any object, again by employing the brain, and the karakas, the instruments of knowledge, they reveal the particular, name , form and function of the experienced object.

One again important thing, the karakas reveal is that the experienced object, also IS. The object IS, is our knowledge from the karakas , the instruments of knowledge themselves.

4. Awareness of difference

This difference awareness, is something the mind is capable of by itself, this seems to be the learning capacity of the mind, which the mind is endowed with.

The ignorance ( mula avidya)

Now in general, any human being takes it for granted, that these separate objects, which is experiencer, experienced, experience vrtti, the awareness of differences, means that, the objects are independent of each other, the 3 or 4 are independent of each other.
But we do not fully understand the meaning of the word independent, and without any analysis, we say they are independent, which means not related. That is also ok, they may not be related directly, we tend to agree they are perhaps related indirectly through natural cycles, this much we come to know from observation and science , that they are all related.
But still we believe, the moment an object has name form and function, its existence, is intrinsic to that particular name form and function. So we do a mix up of namarupa, with the astitiva.

This mix up, is purely an assumption, it is not obtained from any valid means of knowledge.

Due to mere proximity, we assume they are mixed up. We assume that every object has existence, that is unique to itself.

For example 'tree'. we believe, that which has 'treeness' is tree. Then that which has 'treeness' is it tree or non tree? We say non tree. Then non tree has treeness? Of course not, then is it something else? Of course it is the treeness vaala isness. What is the proof, no proof, no means of knowledge to claim that the trees isness is specific to the tree.
Nor do we have any means of knowledge to say that treeness IS when we say, that isness is related to the tree, we assume it is related.
This assumption is ignorance.

Shastra tells us otherwise. Shastra tells us, that the treeness IS when we say, the ISness is a borrowed isness. It is borrowed from a fundamental isness, which is the isness of oneself. oneself meaning the expriencer, that experiencer, who has the quality of awareness or consciousnesss, he is also ISness intrinsically and is also, limitless, as in, not having any specific attribute of itself. Like gold and gold jewellery.

This knowledge comes from a valid means of knowledge which is shruti or shastra.

Another issue is space. We say tree is in that co-ordinate. The co-ordinate is also further namarupa, the co-ordinate IS, that ISness is not dependent to be on the space co-ordinate. the isness is independent, isness, it is svarupa isness, it needs no evidence, it is no in turn dependent.

THe maya shakti , of experiencer , experienced and experience vrtti, is a manifestation, of knowledge, knowledge of names and forms, and for it to manifest, it needs an astitiva, astitiva alone provides a base to manifest upon. And this knowledge has to rest in a conscious being. The conscious being is I, is ishvara, is atma.

Any knowledge has its base in atma. Is atma in fact. What is knowledge, I know this tree IS.
What is this knowledge? It is a recognition. I say , I know. Which means absence of ignorance.
Ignorance means I dont know, but even here, I know ignorance, I know that I dont know.
So this I know, is inseparable.
I comes along with know.
But I know is a potential, it is not necessarily that I have to keep knowing something all that time, in order to be I.
So this one who has the potential for gnana, to be a gnani, is the gna dhatu, is the chit. since quite clearly , the jada does not have potential for gnana.
Hence all the nama rupas rest in ishvara, who is gnana svarupa, atma that is gnana svarupa.
So you look at ishvara as sarva gnana. All gnana.
Tree gnana, is ishvara as a tree.
Sky gnanan is ishvara as the sky.
So this tree knowledge manifest is nothing but atma. This sky knowledge manifest is also atma.
The knowledge is atma, and then a specific knowledge is manifest.

Gnana and bhakti

A bhakta who desires results waits for Darshan till results come , worships ishvara as results
A bhakta who prays without wanting anything strives for constant remembrance in various forms, and worships ishvaras forms
A bhakta who wants to know the lord , spends time in study of vedanta and tries to know ishvara as he really is, and worships ishvara as guru and the scriptures
A bhakta who has gained the knowledge , knows him as chaitanyam, and is ever non separate, as all that is here is chaitanyam.

Knowledge of Chaitanyam - 8 (Revisiting the pursuit of gnanam)

The previous post, made it known , that you are sathyam chaitanyam, the non dual consciousness, which is from the standpoint of totality , known as ishvara and from standpoint of an specific body mind called as jiva.

These standpoints, are purely from a mithya point of view. From the standpoint of mithya ishvara, and mithya jiva.

Even the ajnana, or ignorance of a jiva, is also mithya, and a mithya knowledge, from mithya ishvara, removes this ajanana.

When ajnana is removed, the self that you are, remains as you are, but you dont have any ignorance that you are body mind. As a matter of fact, being chaitanyam which is sathyam, you never ever were ignorant, never knowledgable.

Who you are, which shAstra calls as limtless chaitanyam and so on, has always been the same, changeless reality.

You are reality itself.

You were never 'really' ignorant, ignorance is mithya.
You never 'really' needed gnanam or knowledge, that is also mithya.
You never 'really' had to become free, both bondage and freedom is 'mithya'.

Do I need to tell you who you are, I AM. Om.

Knowledge of Chaitanyam -7 (Jiva ishvara aikyam)

Now that we know sathyam , mithya of vedanta, and we also know jiva chaitanyam, ishvara chaitanyam from previous posts, it is time to communicate the primary pratigna of shAtra, which is to reveal the oneness of jiva and ishvara.

When we say the jiva chaitanya, and ishvara chaitanya are one and the same, it has to be understood by using the right method to understand the meaning of this mahavakya ( sentence communicating oneness of jiva and ishvara)

There are various ways to understand meanings of a sentence.

Let us look at a few sentences.

Direct meaning
Ramu says, " I am hungry , I ate at the hotel next to the temple."
Here the meaning is straightforward.

1.Supplying implied meaning, and also keeping entire direct meaning intact
But next day, I ask you "Where did you go?" and Ramu say "Next to the temple". Here 'I supply' the additional implied meaning that there is a hotel, next to the temple, while keeping the 'next to temple' part intact, and I understand, "that ramu ate at a place next to the temple".

2. replacing entire direct meaning with implied meaning
Then after a few days ramu sees me and says, " I again went to the temple tonight". 
Here , I , knowing that ramu is not so religious, and based on previous conversations, I completely replace the direct meaning, and look at the implied meaning that he 'ate at a hotel near the temple'.

3. keeping half of direct meaning, and replacing other half with implied meaning
Today ramu gives out a secret. He says " You know what, I was saying all these days I went next to the temple, but truth is, temple IS the hotel".
Here now, the meaning is basically that ramu used to go to temple to eat temple prasAdam ( temple food).
This is understood, by keeping the half the direct meaning that ramu DID go to the temple, but remove the direct meaning that temple IS the hotel, but replace it with the meaning that he went there to eat.


To understand the one-ness of jiva and ishvara chaitanyam, shAstra uses the 3rd type of meaning, which is keeping half of the direct meaning, but replacing other half  with an implied meaning.

This is technically called 'lakyartha' (implied meaning) or 'bhaga thyaga lakshyartha' ( 3rd type among implied).

Let us now apply this bhaga thyaga lakshyArtha, to the equation jiva IS ishvara, or jiva chaitanya IS ishvara chaitanya.

The direct meaning which is retained, is chaitanya, and that which is let go off is jivaness and ishvaraness.
This means the attribute of being the owner of the body is let go off for jiva chaitanya, and attribute of being lord of the universe ( maker and material) is let go off for ishvara chaitanya.
What is looked at,  is the truth of this 'ishvara form' and 'jiva form', which is simply chaitanya itself, which is in fact sathyam, which is formless, like our clay in the clay pot and gold in the gold chain , formless, attributeless, limitless, non negatable truth, or sathyam.

The ishvaratvam ( ishvaraness) and jivatvam ( jivaness) is Mithya.

Chaitanyam is satyam. This chaitanyam is you only.

So truly speaking, the truth is that, you are chaitanyam, and you just 'happen' to be playing the role of a jiva. Ishvara happens to be a role.

There is only one chaitanyam, and that is who you are, the non dual chaitanyam, truth of both ishvara and any jiva, is you.

This is the shift, you have to make, from identifying with body mind, which is mithya, you shift identity to your true identity, which is the non dual chaitanyam.

Knowledge of Chaitanyam -6 (Mithya in Vedanta)

Afrer introducing jiva and ishvara chaitanyam, we started to understand how shAstra communicates the oneness of two opposite principles of jiva and ishvara.

We went onto understanding the meaning of the word 'sathyam' in the general wordly way, and then understood in previous post, how vedanta, lends a special meaning to the word sathyam, and sathyam in vedanta, refers to absolute, non negatable, limitless truth.

ShAstra says chaitanyam is this absolute anatham sathyam, or limitless truth, and saying so, we wanted to understand, if chaitanyam is sathyam, then what about the manifold universe of names and forms.

That is where we introduced the word mithya, and said mithya refers to, a degree of reality, that is neither altogether false ( like horn of a hare, that does not even exist for any functional utility), nor as true as sathyam of vedanta, which is a word that can ONLY be used for the non dual cause of the universe, which is ishvara, and ishvara being chaitanyam, means the word sathyam can only be used for chaitanyam.

The question can be, if ishvara is chaitanyam, and he has become this world, why do we even need a new word mithya. Since by definition, it appears sathyam chaitanya became sathyam universe.

This is where we need to add discuss in more detail about the nature of sathyam.

What is the nature of clay in a clay pot, or gold in a bracelet. From the golds point of view, has it become anything other than gold? From golds point of view, there is gold ALONE, it has not undergone any change whatsoever to become a bracelet, it remains GOLD as it is.

Thus if we are to say, if ishvara chaitanyam, were satyam, then ishvara chaitayam, never ever should have desired or created this world out of himself ( as claimed by upanisad), since creation, means change. ShAstra says tad AkAshaH sambhootaH, akAshAt vayuH, vayoh tejaH, etc.
Which means from chaitanyam, came space, from space came air, from air fire, from fire water, from water earth.This means change in name and form.

However if we are to look at chaitanyam as 'sathyam' ( like gold of a bracelet), gold never has any name and form of itself, other than being just gold. Gold does not BECOME the bracelet from its OWN point of view, but the bracelet will say ' I am gold'. Same bracelet if you melt and make it a bangle, bangle will also say ' I am bangle', but if you ask gold, gold will say, well I was , am and will be ONLY gold .

So it appears shastra is contradicting itself. It says chaitanyam is changeless satyam. It also says from chaitanyam universe arose and resolves back into chaitanyam that makes it appear as though chaitanyam undergoes change.

Well shAstra solves this problem, by saying, in truth, or as far as absolute truth is concerned, chaitanyam, never became many, never underwent change, never took up the role of creator, preserver or destroyer, never created the world out of itself, but is was and will simply remain as it is, as chaitanyam.

The ishvartvam, ishvaraness, of chaitanyam, which we call as ishvara chaitanyam, is in fact an incidental FORM or attribute to chaitanyam, like a bracelet is form of gold. So chaitanyam becoming the universe, being the cause for the universe, this causal status is mithya. a dependant reality.

Hence ishvaratvam, or ishvara chaitanyam, is in fact mithya. Same applies to jiva chaitanyam also, jivaness is also mithya.