Friday, August 19, 2016

'manana' on brahman and ahamkAra

'manana' on brahman and ahamkAra

Question: When I say that I exist and I am that existence and the knowing principle which is the same as Brahman, am I referring to my 'ahamkAra' or to the ultimate Witness Consciousness ? Can I experience this Awareness? 

Kindly assist by sharing your thoughts.

(From the Discussions of a Group on What'sup)

***


 That is a great way of "manana" that our scriptures recommend to all sAdhak-s who have already heard the Non-dual message. One way of 'manana' is to reflect and analyse the message internally in one's own mind. Another way is to discuss with like-minded people and this is recognized to be far better - a true satsanga.

Forget for a moment what the content of the question or the answers is. Let us find the "source" from where they (both the question and the answers) are arising.

Can they come up from the body which is apparently mouthing them?
After all the body consists of 'matter' which is inert. An inert thing is not sensitive and intelligent to be able to raise questions or give answers.
The body is  like the instrument Telephone. If you hear sounds (words) do you ever think that it is the phone speaking and giving raise to the words?  So the source cannot be the body.

Can the source be the mind?
Just like the body is made up of inert matter, the mind is nothing but thoughts. A thought does not perceive - a thought is perceived, much like you perceive any other object out there.

Can any object "shine" by itself, as though, announcing its own presence and asking you to notice it?

How do you see an object? You see it only when there is an illuminating medium - light for seeing. For other senses you need an appropriate illuminating medium like pressure (for touch) or sound (for hearing), some organic chemical compounds for smell and taste etc.

What is it then which illuminates the thoughts? It cannot be the mind because mind is nothing but a bunch of discrete thoughts. Clearly mind or thoughts are insentient like matter.

Hence, there has to be some other "Thing" illuminating the mind or thoughts.

Whether a thought is in the form of a Question or an answer, basically they are all varieties of "thought." An interrogative thought is labeled as a Question and an informative thought is called an answer. Except the difference in the name, there is no difference in the substance between them. It is like seeing two objects - a dead rat or a flower. Whether it is rat or flower, you are actually 'seeing' the light photons only. A rat or a flower are never known to you. What is known is  only the reflected light. Does the reflected light by itself, by its own nature,  differ depending on where  it is coming? Clearly no.

Therefore, what is "actually illuminating" both the  question and answer has to be one and the same.

That "illuminating thing" cannot have another illuminating thing behind it -  It will then become an object only leading us to an infinite regress. So let us take that  very last "illuminating thing." That thing has to be "Self-illuminating."

Can any inert 'object' which is matter "see" the illuminating light in which it is appearing? Again clearly No.

The bodies and minds (of the people ....) are "objects" which are perceived. So the bodies and even the mind cannot "know" that "Illuminating Thing," whatever that is.

The "illuminating thing" is the only One thing in town which has the capacity to "know." So it knows Itself by 'being' Itself.

All objects 'seen' in day light are actually the reflected 'sunlight' seen, all words 'heard' are actually 'sound vibrations' and so on.  Similarly, all questions and answers are that "illuminating thing" appearing in that form at that moment - much like the light appearing as a rat or a flower modulated by those objects. Your throat and mouth modulate the exhaled air into different sounds (which are cognized as words having a specific meaning).

Hence it is the "Illuminating Thing"  appearing in the form of thoughts when It gets "expressed" as statements - I exist, I ask, I answer.

Our interest is to know the "Illuminating Thing," the real "source," and not be carried away by the form in which it is 'perceived.'

Now you apply the above model to your questions/answers and see what happens.



No comments: