Footnotes to This Reflection of Consciousness I Am

1.

The more evolved the subtle body, the brighter is this reflection of consciousness.

The brighter the reflection of consciousness, the more clear is the voice of the satguru.

This is a glorious opportunity. A 50,000 watt radio station from my day goes for merely 5g today.

2.

The molecular has zero degrees of freedom. In the vegetable, there is growth, organization, reproduction, flowers!

In the animal and honeybee stage of the self-reflexive manifestation, there’s mobility, action, satisfaction, and the illusion of choice.

In the jiva and ultimate stage of so-called individual consciousness, or dominion as Young calls it, there’s this flickering of self-awareness. There shall be fire!

This Reflection of Consciousness I Am

Pure consciousness is reflecting on this thin diaphanous body of the subtle buddhi.

This reflection of consciousness moves with its subtle medium identifying with a wavering mind,

which in turn, with its newborn sentience, identifies with the outer unsubtle and suffering body.

This reflection of consciousness is the original 'I am' that the satguru is always reminding the mind about—

the light moving in the water is the water but the light reflecting in the water is the absolute light.

on the drg and the drsya

The seer is the witness of the seen.

The witness is aware and the seen is unaware. 

Thus, in the absolute awareness of brahman, there is no seen. 

And in the phenomenal seen, there's maya.

notes to transcreating jiva

1.

Some divide the drg drsya viveka into two, thinking the first 31 slokas are the real deal and the last 15 a later addition. 

For example, Tejomayananda only comments on the 31. Nikhilananda notes all 46. Who knows? After all, there’s questions as to authorship. Shankara? Vidyaranya? Bharati?

There is a progression in the 31 from the seen to nirvikalpa samadhi which seems to make it a whole. Whether it’s a whole part or a whole whole shall be argued by linguists. Mystics see these things differently.

2.

Rather than beginning with the seen, the second part begins with the jiva, which considered further, is a particular version of the seen.

“Reality of jīva is to be understood in a threefold way. It means we look at the reality of jīva from three different standpoints. There is no threefold reality but there are three points of view of the same reality.” ~Dayananda

The logician in me wants to line up limitation-containment-identification, presentation-reflection-projection, and imagination-dreaming-illusion with satcitananda.

2.

Like identification is not sat, reflection is not cit, imagination is not ananda.

Identification is not sat. Limiting oneself to the body-mind is a conditional existence. Such limitation is not pure existence.

The projection of consciousness is not cit but the reflection of consciousness is. Imagination is not ananda but love is.

4.

I first learned the concept of continuous improvement in quality control. In nondoing, I see there is no continuous improvement.

There’s continuous change and adapting to it. A tour guide taught me this in Monument Valley when I asked her about the Navajo people and climate change.

The light reflecting in the water is light. The light moving in the water is water.

Transcreating Jiva: toward Nikhilananda’s Notes on Drg Drsya Viveka sloka 32

There are these three nondual myths concerning individual consciousness. Call them limitation, presentation, and imagination.

That of limitation is like infinite space being contained in a clay pot. As if subject to the upadhis of prana, atman identifies as jiva.

That of presentation is like the sun reflecting on water, like the light of consciousness reflecting in the mind, its reflection assuming the qualities of the medium.

That of imagination is like noumenal atman (due to avidya) dreaming an individual jiva. Or like absolute brahman (due to maya) dreaming this universal isvara.

footnotes

1. limitation, containment, and identification.

2. presentation, reflection, and projection.

3. imagination, dreaming, and illusion.

The Power of Satcitananda

1.

Atman is to individual consciousness as brahman is to universal consciousness.

As the dream cannot know the dreamer in any fractal actuality of dreaming, transmigration must remain a mystery under the jurisdiction of maya, no matter how obvious fractal dreaming appears to be.

When I awaken, I still may know a dream or two. But my dreams have never known their dreamer. Lucid dreaming being the exception that proves the rule.

In other words, reincarnation is more than likely, but who knows.

No one looks for the dalai lama. The dalai lama looks for you.

2.

Sat is cit

Like existence and consciousness

Existence-consciousness is ananda

Ananda being unconditional love

Satcitananda

Sat is for the existence principle

Cit is for the awareness principle

And ananda is for the holistic principle

Satcitananda is the power of three.

3.

What’s so funny about existence, awareness, and self-love?

On self-inquiry and myth-making

Sat is never in denial

Cit is never unaware even in deep sleep

Ananda is the nondual source of love.

Ananda is preventing advaita vedanta from becoming just another belief system.

samadhi em dash

samadhi—

it’s not about what you know but how to know what is what—

all samadhi is savikalpa—

kalpa means duality—

savi remaining with—

nirvikalpa samadhi means beyond samadhi—

samadhi is a state of meditation—

its two main practices are self-inquiry and myth-making—

within and without.

Transcreating Samadhi: towards Tejomayananda's commentary on Vidyaranya's Drg Drsya Viveka sloka 22

Samadhi cannot be done by doing. Only the knowledge of nondoing does. That’s basically the understanding of jnana.

Samadhi is not about thoughts of knowing, but abiding in the consciousness illuminating the thought of knowing.

Samadhi isn't a verb but a noun. One doesn't do samadhi, but abides in samadhi. Samadhi is the alert, unwavering and balanced state of duality abiding in its nondual truth.

The practice of samadhi is within or without. That within of atman is self-inquiry, discriminating between seer and seen, in self-realization.

That without of brahman is more a metaphysical inquiry, looking beyond the superimposition to the substratum of absolute reality.

on advaita vedanta

1.

advaita vedanta is like distilled myth. but rather than starting with intoxicating stories of the mind, let's start with ten-thousand proof absolute.

begin at the beginning. what is the nature of an absolute godhead?

the nature of an absolute godhead is obviously unborn existence, immutable awareness, and wholly beloving.

2.

given that this empirical world is none of the above, how could something so unbrahman be?

and if unbrahman be, then there is no brahman.

but advaita vedanta begins with brahman! therefore unbrahman cannot be.

3.

unbrahman therefore must be an illusion, maya, dreamstate, name and form superimposed on satcitananda.

this is the genius of advaita vedanta as i see it. it doesn't start with creation. it establishes the nature of the absolute godhead, brahman, first.

rather than beginning in samsara, it establishes the primacy of nirvana. and since there is no samsara in nirvana, that's that.

On Atman and Brahman

In maya,

there's the duality of experiencer

and the world of experience.

For the mathematical purposes of nonduality, 

atman represents the experiencer,

and brahman represents the world of experience.

But beyond the universe of maya,

atman is brahman.