[advaitin] Understanding Sada's Advaita

K. Sadananda sada at ANVIL.NRL.NAVY.MIL
Tue Aug 7 12:25:59 CDT 2001

>Sada, before we go any further let's first discuss your interpretation of

Nanda - your title is amusing - by definition advaita cannot be
sada's? - is it not true?

>If I understand you right you say all the world exists only because you
>perceive it and apart from your perception/consciousness of it, the world
>doesn't exist. So you are in it and it is in you.

One has to be careful - I, the conscious entity, using the mind as an
instrument-  since mind also jadam as it is considered a upaadhi
within the vyavahaarika level - see the world.  The mind, through the
senses, observes the attributes - form, color, sound etc and
integrates and concludes or infers that there is an object out there,
with these attributes. That is the mechanism that we know is

1. Mind can only know the attributes through the senses.  Advaita
doctrine questions the reality of even these attributes too.

2. Existence of the object can not be perceived but inferred by the
mind since it gains the knowledge of attributes through the senses.

3. Object is now nothing but a thought in the mind - this is a chair
- for example.  That thought is in my consciousness since I am
conscious of the thought - thus consciousness pervades the thought.
Existent consciousness essentially lending its existence to the
thought and thus to the object - so called object out there thought.

4. Without my mind and my consciousness backing it up - there is no
way - no way is underlined - the existence of the world is
established or proved.  Be my guest if you can do that.

5. The correct understanding advaita is the world is projection of
the mind and the mind is in me or in my consciousness and not apart
from me. Hence I pervade the totality and I am the totality as well.

6. So I am in it and it is in me - is the knowledge - call it true
knowledge of the self - Then only I the self is all pervading makes
sense.  That is true advaita not sada's advaita!

7. The duality is only apparent at the mind level - no mind no
duality either - The so called object thought and subject that - This
is chair and I am the seer of the chair - both thoughts are actually
pervaded by consciousness since I am aware of both thoughts.  It is
like same gold appearing as two - a bangle and a ring for example -
This split of duality is the play of the mind.  As long as the mind
is there we can never avoid this duality.  Even jiivan mukta sees
this duality.  But he will not take it as reality.

8. Taking this duality as reality is the ignorance.  Realizing the
one-ness of both is the knowledge - that is the meaning of aham brahm
asmi - That is why we need Shruti to confirm the fact I am the
Brahman - which Brahman - from which the whole world arises, it is
sustained and it goes back into .  Now look the world - world is
nothing but thoughts in my mind - thoughts  raise in my mind,
sustained by my mind and goes back into my mind - The mind is in my
consciousness only - Identifying myself with the upaadhi I become
Iswara or the creator of the world.  I can fold the mind and see the
creation or unfold the mind and be myself as in sushupti or samaadhi.

Now your can read the rest of your comments in the light of the above

>This stance would not only include the external world but also include the
>body since you're aware of it. Not only this we have to consider the mind
>too. You've said : "I include the  mind and everything else".

Yes along as this is the body as well as the thought this is my body
or I am the body etc arise in the mind. They become objects for my
mind as thoughts- in the dream state, there is no perception of this
gross body - no body conscious thoughts.

Mind also can become object of my own mind when I say - that my mind
is disturbed or agitated - then it is object of my awareness - When I
am perceiving the objects out there through the mind as thoughts, I
forget the screen but see the projections only as in a movie.  I am
no more conscious of the scree on which these projections are taking
place since I am getting lost in the multitude of projections that
are running so fast in the mind like a movie going on. Essentially I
am not conscious of the mind on which the thoughts play and I take
the projections are real out there.

>When you perceive an object - say the computer before you - yes, it may
>exist only because you perceive it, but again are you the computer? Since
>you've said that it is *you* who perceives the computer, I take it that
>you're the subject and the computer is the object (this definition I would
>think is reasonable irrespective of whether the object exists only because
>you perceive it - you're in it and it is in you).
>So even if the object is in you and you are in the object, still you are
>different from the object. Right?
>Please verify this for me. Clearly explain what you are and what the object
>that you perceive is and the relation between you two. Then we'll take this
>discussion further.

This is what is called dR^ik - dR^isya viveka - Seer/seen
distinctions.  I would not recognize that I am the computer that I am
seeing because I give reality to the object projected in my mind.
Only a proper inquiry would lead you to correct understanding that
this seer/seen distinctions are only apparent - I pervade this
thought and I thought as the very essence as consciousness.  From the
consciousness that I am, computer exists, the world exists as
entities in me - I am the one who pervades every thought and thus the
world.  Once I crystallize each thought-  'this is computer' and
'this is me' - each thought is different - These are like paying
attention to this is bangle, this is ring - to names and forms -
names for each thought forms - or loci - but in and through these
thoughts the substratum is' I am'. The consciousness-existence that I
am.  They are in me but I am not them!  in the sense that I am not
the names and forms etc.  Now go back to my wave analogy - do not
dismiss that that is elementary.  Each wave is different from one
another with date of birth and death - but in and through each wave
is the water from which it rose, it is sustained and goes back into.
That pervading water is similar to the consciousness.  If I get
carried away with the names and forms, the world will hit me.  But if
pay attention to the essence of the thoughts waves - it is nothing
but consciousness alone.  Now I am effectively transcending the names
and forms and paying attention to their essence - the very existence
which pervades everything.  This is not my logic - Bhagavaan Ramana
says in Upadesha saara:

   dR^isya vaaritam chittam aatmanaaH
    chittva darshanam tatva darshanam|

dR^isyam is what is seen as objects - Ramana says if you remove the
names and forms of the objects as perceived by the mind -in all this
this thoughts - idam vR^itti-s-  what remains is the essence of the
mind which is nothing but the essence of the reality or tatvam - That
I am - is the truth of that tatvam.

Hence I think what I am discussing  is the essence of advaita that I know of.

Hari Om!
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </archives/advaita-l/attachments/20010807/2db28e31/attachment.html>

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list