[Advaita-l] I am Alone in the Universe?

[Keshava PRASAD Halemane]

> IMHO:

> 
> After all, every analogy has its limitation; analogy itself is not the 
> object(subject?) being analogized, right? 
> So, even the dream-(avasthaatraya)-analogy cannot be pushed too far - any 
> analogy when pushed too far it shows such 'cracks/holes' (they say it 
> cannot/doesn't hold water) in such arguments/reasoning. 
> Analogies are used only as pointers/arrows to help us to go far far beyond the 
> tip of those pointers/arrows - all the way to reach the object(subject?) being 
> pointed at - like pointing fingers to show the sun, moon & the stars. 
> 


I had a first hand experience of how a child can grasp what it's parent is referring to when pointing finger towards an object in an attempt the show it.
I am different from the child; my line of sight when looking at the object-of-interest starts at my eye(s) and the vector is directed towards that object.
When i point my finger at the object, the finger approximates that vector that refers to my line of sight, and not the child's line-of-sight.
The therefore can/may misunderstand the instruction/guidance and 'develop' its own line-of-sight vector, a line-of-sight that starts at its eye(s) and uses the tip-of-my-pointing-finger as a reference, and extends that line forward.
Naturally the child would miss the object that i am referring to, unless its eye-position coincides with my eye-position which is just impossible.
Therefore, if you go through this line of argument/reasoning one can p-r-o-v-e that no one can use a pointing-finger to help another to see the object that one intends to refer to.
However, our common experience is that it is such a natural thing to learn - for everyone's experience in one's childhood. 
Similarly, the same words, the same analogies, the same models, can possibly 'invoke' a different set of 'response(s)' in different individuals. 

What i did then was to bring the child close to oneself, and use my pointing-fingers-vector to help 'develop its line-of-sight-vector' - w.r.t. from its standpoint rather than from my standpoint. 

I have seem this very same problem among adults who try to give (driving)directions to reach some place, say; explaining right-turns & left-turns; wherein all the turns get completely messed up; especially for example if the person giving the directions happens to be your co-passenger in the front seat of the car that you are driving and especially when you are heading in a direction other than north.
Continuously rotating the map does not work out to be useful - that exacerbates the confusion - unless the turns are very infrequent and fairly separated afar - it seems to be a good solution for a novice. 
The ideal solution is to develop a dynamically changing mental orientation (ability to re-position/re-orient oneself as one moves forward by developing a mental meta-presence in the map that is being followed. 

All this looks to be quite silly - just/same as a jeevanmukta may (how am i to be sure of that) consider all these silly - futile discussion on alternative-models-of-reality and the arguments put forth to defend one and to attack another etc. etc. etc. 

Yes, indeed. 
I AM. 

"Alone" refers to a (even thought maybe a very remote) possibility for otherwise-ness! 
That is all there is to IT. Nothing else/more. 

i think that I AM ALONE IN THIS UNIVERSE.  That statement made by an i is wrong.
I in the UNIVERSE can not be ALONE, because the very statement talks about a UNIVERSE IN which I AM.
No universe, then I AM. 
My dear, the UNIVERSE IS IN ME(I). 

Now coming to the problem with analogies - caused basically because of the 'shifting-of-the-focus' - or in this case the shifting of reference - or shifting the 'identification'.
Identifying oneself with the upAdhi(s) i feel i am different from what I AM. 

Let us carefully watch our words when we use terms like the dream-I the dream-you etc. 
Who is talking, who is dreaming whom ? 
Is there some shifting-of-focus/shifting-of-identity. 
Is this problem similar to the problem of the child trying to develop its own line-of-sight-vector to reach/see the object being pointed to ? 

Good Food for Thought.