Am I the watcher, knower, or karma chameleon?
They say the watcher is born of awareness and the knower is born of being.
But did you know the doer is born of bliss?
It’s not just namarupa. It’s namarupa in love.
Never misunderestimate ananda.
the watcher is born of awareness. the knower is born of being. the doer is born of bliss. it’s not just namarupa. it’s namarupa in love.
this reflection of consciousness is talking to this reflection of consciousness
lovingly disidentify with this fog of personality and rest in your subjective existence
this reflection of consciousness is pure consciousness by the way
Consciousness may shine in a dream but it's a reflection of consciousness only.
But touch one side and you’re spontaneously touching the other.
Not only is consciousness all sides of a coin, consciousness is the only capital.
Thus it's said to abide in this Aham is to abide in that Parabrahman.
Another name for pure consciousness is awareness. Awareness is the witness.
Another name for the reflection of awareness is consciousness. Consciousness is the watcher.
Another name for ahankara is I am. Aham Brahmasmi is I Am That.
There is no manifestation but only superimposition. And because the dark matter of ignorance is superimposed on the superstring of atman, the snake of mind appears.
Whereas the serpent is never the serpent and rope is never not rope, there’s this reflection of consciousness upon the mind’s appearance
It’s that reflection of consciousness which lends sentience to an otherwise insentient mind. Illusions can’t exactly act on their own.
The nature of this sentient mind is thought, intellect, memory, and aham. It’s not exactly satcitananda but it will have to do.
footnotes
Like dark matter, avidya is 85% of the world. The other 15% is the mindstuff of california dreaming is becoming a reality.
If i-self is atman, and myself i-am, the dream self is thus I am this or I am that.
This second reading of the drg drsya viveka (ddv) is truly mind-blowing. I’m currently in an infinite loop orbiting slokas 6 & 7.
To have instantaneous access to translations from each of the big three publishing houses of real advaita vedanta is like instant dharma.
The nikhilananda, published by the ramakrishna mission, is jam-packed.
The tejomayananda published by the chinmaya mission is like condensed chinmayananda. It may not be cask strength like the nikhilananda, but it’s still bottled in bond and I like it.
Ah, the dayananda. With true pranams to his nondual genius, the recently published ddv is obviously posthumous so dayananda did not do the final genius edit. But there’s still sanskrit gold in them arsha vidya hills.
Ddv is advaita on lsd. I could push this stuff. Sanskrit may be logical but it’s not beyond paradox, as I understand it.
Existence, consciousness, ananda is to atman as memory, intelligence, aham is to antahkarana.
When Nisargadatta uses the word consciousness, it is ciccaya, the reflection of consciousness, he is referring to. Balsekar paraphrases N’s intent: “Consciousness is with a form, a reflection of awareness against the surface of matter. One cannot think of consciousness apart from awareness; there cannot be a reflection of the sun without the sun. But there can be awareness without consciousness.”
Nikhilananda in a footnote to his translation of the Drg Drsya Viveka says “on account of the superimposition of ignorance a modification appears known as mind which, though insentient… appears as conscious on account of the association of Consciousness or Atman with it.”
Dayananda in his commentary to the same work says he doesn’t “use the word reflection of consciousness” but if one does, understand that “the consciousness obtaining in the mind is as good as consciousness."
Tejomayananda, in his commentary to Drg Drsya Viveka 6 uses the following analogy: “The ‘water’ of the mind in the ‘bucket’ of the body reflects the light of Consciousness. In this reflected light the entire world of objects is illumined, that is, all knowledge takes place in this reflected Consciousness."
footnotes (extended quotes)
The Conscious Self (चिदात्मा), though self-luminous, has no manifestation, because from the absolute standpoint there is no other object which can be manifested by Consciousness. But on account of the superimposition of ignorance a modification appears known as mind (अन्त:करण ) which, though insentient, (being the product of) appears as conscious on account of the association of Consciousness or Atman with it. The Atman appears as buddhi when associated with antaḥkaraṇa. The buddhi, on account of its association with Consciousness, appears to be endowed with agency, will, etc.
~Nikhilananda
Samāveśāt, buddhau bhānam explains everything. The word buddhau is used to point out the whole faculty of thinking. Cicchāyā aveśataḥ buddhau bhānam. In the buddhi there is bhānam, there is shine, it becomes conscious. I don’t use the word reflection of consciousness. If you use the word, understand in this way: sūkṣma-śarīra becomes conscious, means mind becomes conscious. The consciousness obtaining in the mind is as good as consciousness.
~Dayananda
A dark room, Impenetrable by the sun’s rays, is next to a veranda. On a particular day there is light seen within the room. Upon investigation it is found to be the light reflected from a bucket of water kept in the veranda, since sunlight did not directly illumine the room. The water by itself has no light. The sunlight reflected in the water of the bucket illumines the various objects in the room. The ‘water’ of the mind in the ‘bucket’ of the body reflects the light of Consciousness. In this reflected light the entire world of objects is illumined, that is, all knowledge takes place in this reflected Consciousness. Physical science states that pure light can never be seen and that it is only in the reflected light that all objects are seen. This reflection of Consciousness is the light of intelligence or the spark of life in man.
~Tejomayananda
One morning, when I had paid my respects to Maharaj and sat down, I found that there were only two other persons present. Maharaj suddenly said: What is the difference between ‘awareness’ and ‘consciousness’, if any? When something like this happens, one does not really know whether he expects an answer, or whether he is merely thinking aloud. One hesitates to answer for fear of breaking the flow of his thoughts. But then, he might also say: Why don’t you answer? Have you been wasting my time, listening to the talks all these days? This morning, however, he carried on without waiting for an answer.
He observed that awareness is of the Absolute, and, therefore, beyond the three Gunas (Gunatita); whereas consciousness is something fed by, and limited by, the food-body. When the food-body is destroyed, consciousness also disappears. Mind you, no one dies – the body, made of the five elements mingles with the elements when it is lifeless, and consciousness, which is subject to the three Gunas, becomes free of the Gunas. Awareness is the primordial original state, prior to the concept of space-time, needing no cause, no support. It simply is. However, the moment the concept of consciousness arises on this original state of unicity, the sense ‘I am’ arises, causing a condition of duality. Consciousness is with a form, a reflection of awareness against the surface of matter. One cannot think of consciousness apart from awareness; there cannot be a reflection of the sun without the sun. But there can be awareness without consciousness. In deep sleep, for instance, there is no consciousness (it is resting) but awareness is certainly there, because, on waking, one is aware of having slept; but only on waking.
~Ramesh Balsekar
an extra quote not in the text above:
The Self is of the nature of Existence-Consciousness. All objects are known to exist because of this alone. The objects, however, differ in their subtlety. Generally, subtlety is measured by its pervasiveness. The subtler an entity, the greater is its pervasiveness. Inert objects, including the body, pervade their own form. The mind's pervasiveness extends beyond objects. The mind, being subtler than the body which houses it, is part of the subtle body. The gross body manifests the Existence aspect of the Self only. The subtle body is capable of reflecting both the Existence and Consciousness aspects, thus appearing sentient. It is to be noted that Existence and Consciousness are not two separable aspects of the Self. Existence is Consciousness. Light and heat are the nature of fire. They are inseparable. Yet water can manifest only its heat, whereas wood can manifest both heat and light.
~Tejomayananda
In the world of Maya, there are three states of consciousness (waking, dreaming, and deep sleep as they are named in the Mandukya).
From a relative point of view, these three states exist within a fourth state, pure consciousness, named turiya.
This fourth state is the state from which the other three states are states of, in a mystical way of speaking.
From an absolute point of view, there are no three states of consciousness, never mind a fourth stateless state.
There’s only pure consciousness named brahman, the nature of which is existence, consciousness, and bliss, satcitananda.
This is three-fifths of the world as people know it. The other two are Maya, named name and form, or namarupa.
footnotes
it's only 3/5 of the world but I love it
the reflection of consciousness in this other 2/5 is a red hot mass of consciousness felt as I am
an altered state of consciousness is still within the waking state of consciousness
nonduality is nothing without duality
the mystical is nothing but paradoxical ananda
the absolute by its very nature of being absolute is neither non-existent, unconscious, nor unwell
they say the buddha said the world is suffering. suffering is the true definition of being unwell.
nonexistence is not exactly existence but it must do as a name.
unconsciousness is not exactly consciousness but it must do as a name.
non-suffering is not exactly bliss but it must do as a name.
thus existence-consciousness-bliss must do as a name. that's why it's called satcitananda.
satcitananda is not the name of a tripartate brahman. brahman is not a trinity. satcitananda is the nature of brahman. brahman is nondual.
Another name for pure consciousness is awareness. Another name for the reflection of consciousness is awareness reflected in consciousness.
Advaita vedanta warns that written words of revelation (sruti) may result in spontaneous self-realization. Caveat emptor.
Upanishads, bhagavad gita, and brahma sutra are like the gospels. The bhashyas and prakaranas are like epistles. Ramana and nisargadatta are like revelations.
Ice says begin at the unborn. What would alice do.
When it comes to english translations of advaita vedanta, chinmayananda is a go-to. His translations almost always incude sanskrit transliteration. This in itself is invaluable for ultimate digestion. Look, his commentaries may be wordy but often contain profound revelations.
Nikhilananda always.
As an aside, nikhilanda was basically joseph campbell’s guru.
Tejomayananda and gambhirananda are also excellent.
Then we come to dayananda.
Basically modi’s guru I guess. I know nothing of indian politics. I’m still trying to forget the american version.
Dayananda left the chinmayananda mission to begin his own. His spiritual right wing is respect for the original sanskrit.
Dayananda’s english translations are impeccable. And they do not suffer fools.
Dayananda almost never deviates from this wonderful fusion of sanskrit and english. His translations of the vivekacudamani and tattvabodah are revelatory, urging one to study his lessons in sanskrit in order to dive deeper into his advaitic commentary.
But the institution he left behind is beginning to release his basement tapes. To be fair, dayananda not edited by dayananda is not dayananda.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s better than no dayananda, if you’ve completed your degree in dayananda. Otherwise he’s with all of the above.
Advaita ashrama, chinmayananda mission, and arsha vidya old school are still trustworthy imho
Tmp mahadevan writes unbelievable monographs spanning guadapada to vidyaranya to ramana maharshi
Faith is not belief. Faith is like a map. One has faith in a map as long as the map is trustworthy. Sooner or later, you see, you’re the only map you trust
It’s not that the future is predetermined but there is no future. There is no time. There is awareness being self-aware. It’s not even spontaneous as such, as ever-existent.
Somehow, through the preeminent paradox called maya, this ever-existent satcitananda appears to be a process of self-forgetting and self-remembering within a manifested spacetime.
The driver thinks this track possesses a starting gun and finish line. But the race is already won. The way is unborn, ever-existent, and just a joyful whole.
footnotes
You can call me consciousness, you can call me existence, you can call me ananda aum, the joy of being whole.
Basically the ancient one first determines what the absolute must logically be to be truly absolute.
Then anything not absolute in nature (the absolute being obviously unborn, immutable, not suffering) must be an illusion, for the absolute is never not the absolute.
(The search of self to find the Self never ends. Like that mirage I saw on I-40 in New Mexico didn’t exactly end. But that coyote disappeared as I suddenly saw through it.)
The big bang is as much a story as the book of genesis. And there are no end times. There is no time.
The absolute is pure consciousness (another name for pure consciousness is awareness [another name for impure consciousness is that mass of consciousness experiencing those three mutable states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep—call this red hot mass Aham the I Am]).
The absolute is ever and all existent. I am, therefore I am the absolute. Or Atman isn’t Brahman.
afterword
Advaita vedanta is like logic laced with metaphor or paradox spiked with revelation.
Sanskrit is to Latin as tatvamasi is to dominus vobiscum et cum spititu tuo.
The thing about nonduality is it only exists within duality. Believing otherwise is not nonduality, but more duality. Nonduality is not a belief. It’s an antidote for belief.
It’s all in that same old ancient line of never knowing what one is, but only knowing what one isn’t. Such is the nature of the mind’s kind of knowledge.
On the other hand, true knowing is being only. For being doesn’t merely know the absolute. Being is the absolute.
When one becomes one with any object or action, one isn’t one with its name, form, or meaning. One is one with that satcitananda upon which such name, form, and meaning is a giant superimposition.
a technicality and note of thanks
tonight's handwriting has been manifested by a christmas-gifted lamy al-star ex-fine dark purple fountain pen with a new year's monteverde usa blueberry muffin ink.
smoke on the water, a fire in the sky.
For every seen there is a seer, and every seer is the seen of a further seer, unless that seer is the furthest seer, the witness, the atman, is brahman.
Thus only consciousness is sentient—and the eye, mind, and person is insentient—for all sentient beings are these reflections of consciousness—
that aham present in the waking, dreaming, and sleeping quarters—fusing with a twisted ego—concluding in a red hot mass of consciousness.
Look, there is no mountain but the mountain is. That is, the so-called mountain is pure existence which the mind has formed and named a mountain.
If the rope is pure existence, satcitananda—and the superimposition of a snake upon this rope is the world, namarupa—then ignorance, avidya itself, is the one and only creator.
Maya veils reality and projects the world. As the material cause is the absolute, the efficient cause is ignorance, and the instrumental cause is thought. This is the real trinity in seer and seen.
footnotes
another name for the furthest seer is the witness, the saksin, the ultimate self, atman, parabrahman.
if the body, mind, and ego are seen insentient, and i am sentient, then i am not the body, mind, nor ego.
as only pure consciousness is sentient, i am that.
the i-am, aham, is that mass of consciousness in three states. i am the fourth, that stateless state beyond deep sleep.
look, i'm not in a dream. the dream is in my ultimate self. call me atman. my mind is like a food processor. satcitananda in. name, form, and meaning out.
as the material cause is the immaterial, and as the efficient cause is this inefficient ignorance, and as the instrumental cause is misusing thought, aum.
afterword
drg drsya viveka is revelation—discriminating seer from the seen. the nikhilananda translation is very good with extensive footnotes. the tejomayananda is an excellent translation supplying sanskrit transliteration and inspired commentary. the great dayananda isn't user friendly.
1.
Deconstructing the mind is silencing the mind with reasonable argument,
logical presentation, and the mystical truth of consciousness only.
2.
Negating the false is one thing but being the truth is nonduality’s thing.
Renunciation is not what people think. No one renounces; there’s no doing in maya.
3.
When ripened in the nondualities of deconstruction and consciousness,
things naturally drop. And don’t forget the revelations.
