[Advaita-l] Jnana and ajnana (Bhakti vs. Jnana)

kuntimaddi sadananda kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 6 06:57:54 CDT 2011

These discussions reminded me an incident with Bhagavan Ramana, as was reported. A person met Bhagavan and said - Bhagavan I have this question, I have asked many mahaatmaas and they could not give me a satisfactory answer. That is why I came here to get the correct answer from you - he was about to ask the question. Bhagavan stopped him right there even before he heard the question, and said -Please - No need to ask that question since I will not be able to give a satisfactory answer to you. People around Bhagavan asked how he could say like that even without hearing the question. Bhagavan replied - He loves his question and is not going to give up that question, no matter what the answer is given. He is not inquiring about the truth but only trying to satisfy his ego to get an answer that matches the answer that he thought is correct for the question he himself formatted. 
It is not fault of the responders who answered the question as they understood, based on the way it was formatted. Nobody would have given the correct answer the way the questioner wants, since he alone knows first, the question correctly, and next, the satisfactory answer for it. He can only answer the question to his satisfaction. All others can do and did was to provide the answer to the best they can based on the question that they understood as formatted.
 That is the reason why question should be asked for learning not to question whether others can answer the way I want them to answer. If I already have the answer, there is no need to ask unless I am conducting an examination. 
Now, just for clarification based on my understanding.
Sakshii is not jnaanam or ajnaanam, as is understood referring to it at the paaramaarthika level. It is jnaana swaruupam which is different from jnaanam that is posed. From saakshii's point there is no saakshyam either. It is only from the reflected consciousness, we have for transactional knowledge, where cognitions are taking place, and we can talk about the saaskhii who is pure light of existence-consciousness that is getting reflected in the mind. It is not saaskhii to recognize I am saaskhii. Saakshii does not  need to recognize and what ever the sakshyam being inert cannot recognize. Therefore recognition involves a recognition in the mind that real congnizer is other than the mind, who is a saaskhii for all jnaanam as well as ajnaanam too. Without the mind there is no cognition either and without out the mind there is no saaskhii-recognition either. Even in the deep sleep state, that there is a saaskhii witnessing the pure causal state is also a
 statement, not by deep sleeper but by and to the waker. Within the vyaavahaarika, where there are upaadhis, the knowledge or realization that I am a saaskhii and I am nitya mukta swaruupaH is also at the upahita chaitanya level only. Once we use the word jnaanam with reference to ajnaanam, we are using the relative words valid only within vyaavahaarika not at saaskhii level. All the scriptures point out is that there is saaskhii whose nature is pure jnaanam which is beyond the jnaanam and ajnaanam that we are familiar in the transactional world - since every perception involves jnaanam of X or Y and that jnaanam comes from the all pervading light of consciousness that is reflected first in the mind as chidaabhaasa and via the mind the vRittis that arise in the mind to have vRitti jnaanam. AkhanDaakaara vRitti is shifting attention of the mind or by the mind to that pure light of consciousness or knowledge which is present in all cognitions involved
 in jnaanam and ajnaanam. Nothing more can be said than this, and in fact, need to be said also - it is recognition that I am that pure all pervading consciousness that is reflected in the mind to have the knowledge of the mind and further reflected by the vRitties to have the knowledge of the vRitties. That recognition takes place in the mind only not in the saaskhii.That recognition involves -I am not the mind but I am pure consciousness that is reflected by this mind as well as through the mind the vRittis. Without these upaadhis (mind) pure knowledge cannot be recognized, just as pure all pervading light cannot be recognized unless there an object to reflect it. It is not the object but without the object light cannot be recognized. Similarly the mind is required for the reflection but shifting attention of the mind and by the mind to that light because of which all cognitions including that of the mind can take place all the time is the abiding
 knowledge that I am that saaskhii. We can call this as saaskhii jnaanam in the normal parlor, but the truth is nothing can be said about it, since any description falls in the realm of vRitti jnaanam only. 
Truly, there is no valid answer at that level and all relative answers are relative, irrespective of what the questionnaire had in mind as the answer to his question – irrespective of what Madhusudhana or even bhagavatpaada Shankara answered in response to a particular purva pakshi asked. Advaita siddhi answers are in response to the vikalpaas provided by the puurva pakshii in criticizing advaita vedanta position.  The answers also should be understood in that context only. 

Hari Om!
--- On Wed, 7/6/11, Rajaram Venkataramani <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

If the question was unclear, you should not have answered it. I still
refuse to give marks :) for the original answer because you didn't
write about sakshi after repeated clarification of the question.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list