Hello Sundari,
I have first a simple question and then a second more “philosophical” “question which I’d be greatly honored to hear your response to
First simple question:
On the Shiningworld website, there’s a reference to a “course” for the beginning of enlightenment topics. I cannot see if this is just self-directed with the help of a book and the films or if it’s an actual curriculum that I would pay for… Could you clarify please how this works. Thank you.
Sundari: Always a pleasure to help if I can. The courses we have online are based on the relevant scriptures and the teaching videos associated with them. If you do not have them, you can purchase them on the website. The idea is to follow the steps as prescribed, and to write to us if you have a doubt or need help.
EL: And now to my second question, which I’d be very happy to hear an answer if you could provide…
I’ve been studying James’s teachings through The Essence of Enlightenment and his YouTube talks. I’m doing my best to meet the prerequisites James outlines—including the recognition that lasting joy is not found in objects and that life is a “zero sum game”.
Sundari: Very good, keep that up. But please note that the prerequisites James outlines are not his, none of the teachings are his. James is following in the great tradition of the sampradaya upon which all his teachings are based. Vedanta does not belong to or come from anyone, it is the timeless logic of existence and stands alone. He is however a highly qualified teacher of traditional Vedanta and has explained the methodology of Vedanta in very clear terms.
EL: However, I’ve come up against a recurring obstacle that I hope you or James can help clarify. The screen/film metaphor—that awareness is the changeless screen and the content of life is the impermanent film—makes conceptual sense. But emotionally and philosophically, I still feel a deep contradiction.
Sundari: First of all, who is the ‘I’ that feels a deep contradiction? Is it the Jiva/egoic identity, or the Self? It can only be the former because the Self is never conflicted about anything. Whenever you use the word ‘I” press pause and ask yourself a simple question: who does this refer to?
EL: Life’s transient experiences—love, heartbreak, great works of art, even something like any compelling film (or I suppose book – the paper then being the “screen” —can carry intense moral and emotional truth. How can one regard the events that determine a life or give it poignancy and experience be “unreal” in any meaningful sense?
Sundari: The nondual teachings of Vedanta do not deny or denigrate the experiences of life, good or bad. This is a nondual reality, and though we experience it as a duality when we are under the spell of Maya, everything must resolve in Awareness, even all experiences.
The nondual teachings simply provide the means to discriminate between satya (that which is always present and unchanging – nondual Consciousness) and mithya (that which is not always present and always changing – the jiva/egoic identity). Though the Self, Consciousness/Awareness is not an experiencer, all we are ever experiencing, the ground of our being, is Consciousness.
Therefore, all of life’s experiences have one central message to impart: who is the unmoved, always present, unchanging knower of the experience and the experiencing entity? That can only be nondual Consciousness because it is the only factor that can never be negated and is always present. All experiences are in time, so begin and end. But you, the unknown knower that makes knowing/experiencing anything possible are not an experience, and not ‘in’ time.
You, the Self, do not begin or end, you are unborn and cannot die. You are unaffected by any experience, do not condition to anything, yet you are the unchanged source of all that changes. To know the difference between the two is called moksa, freedom from limitation, and the end of existential suffering.
EL: This leads me to the broader issue: if everything mithya (apparent reality) is considered provisional, then what do we make of the utterly necessary facts of existence—breathing, eating, metabolizing, living among others? How can these be viewed as less real than awareness itself, when they are the very conditions that make awareness function in a living body?
Sundari: The apparent reality is not only provisional, it is not real – defined as not always present and always changing, as stated. This includes the body mind, all its faculties, and its field of experience. However, apparently real does not mean non-existent. It does exist because ‘you’ experience it. The question again is – who or what is that you? Suffering comes when we are identified with the finite unreal body mind which is born and dies, meaning, we are ignorant of our true nature as infinite eternal unborn Consciousness.
The body comes from, belongs to, and returns to Isvara, the uncaused cause of the creation, also called karma phala datta, the giver of our life karma. Isvara in association with Maya keeps the body and the whole mithya show going, giving us what we need to live out our karma as a jiva. It takes care of the needs of the Total – which is why karma yoga is so important.
Do you understand what karma yoga entails? You need to as you will not progress without it. Basically, it states the obvious – that we can take appropriate action, but we – as a body/mind – are never in charge of the results. Only Isvara is. Which means, you not only need to understand what the jiva is and why it is conditioned the way it is, you need to understand Isvara in order to discriminate between satya and mithya.
This is covered in detail in many of James’ books and teaching videos. We provide detailed information on how to conduct self-inquiry thoroughly and methodically. You cannot ‘study’ your way to moksa. It is not a course that you can pass with flying colours. All the requirements for self-inquiry must be understood, and properly followed with great dedication, under the guidance of a teacher.
It is not a question of ‘more or less’ than Awareness. Everything is Awareness and depends on Awareness, but Awareness depends on nothing. It does not need a body/mind/field of experience to know itself. It is Self-knowing. Everyone ‘knows’ they are conscious/aware, but unless the qualifications for self-inquiry have developed and you are lucky enough to find a qualified Vedanta teacher, you will not take the Self to be your true identity. You will be hypnotised by Maya and thinking within the box of mithya – where there are no answers and no solution to life’s ephemeral nature. In mithya, pleasure and pain are woven fine.
Again, the real question is discrimination. If you are identified with the body/mind and speaking from the perspective of the jiva (duality), which you are, you have a satya/mithya confusion. So, Who or What are you?
EL: I’m not seeking to argue— rather I’m truly trying to understand. If satya alone is bliss, how are we to reconcile that with the profound importance of embodied life, which doesn’t feel like an illusion, even if it doesn’t last? Thank you for your time. I would be sincerely grateful for any help in resolving this point of tension so I can proceed with confidence.
Sundari: I know you are not trying to argue, and it is pointless to argue with Vedanta because it is the logic of Existence. Satya alone is the bliss that does not come and go. But it is not the bliss we (as a jiva) are accustomed to identify with – which is experiential bliss. The bliss of the Self has nothing to do with who you are as a person, though when Self-knowledge (nondual vision) is firm, you will feel blissful most of the time. The difference is that kind of bliss is knowledge, and though it can give rise to intensely blissful feelings, it does not depend on them, or on any experience, to be present. No matter how profound or profane.
You are most welcome, happy to help any time.
Hari Om
Sundari
