C: I replied to the last mail, cut it short, added, etc. But I wasn’t happy with it… so I took a broom to see what is what here, came to the conclusion that ‘the data are in’. It is time to become quiet, meditate and make sure that assimilation settles, deeper let’s say, not to know more, per se. It seems that I have a quick mind, mercury-like, creative, but also something sleepy.
Sundari: Time out to contemplate so that assimilation can take place is always a good idea when things are stirred up. All three gunas are always present as you know, with two usually dominating. A quick mercurial mind can be a boon if sattva is in balance with rajas, as can a slower mind be useful if tamas is in balance with sattva. Problems arise when the relative proportions of rajas or tamas are out of balance with sattva. Highly creative people like yourself often have an imbalance, they go on a rajasic tear and have a tamasic burnout. Too much rajas always results in too much tamas (sleepy mind).
C: I, Self is without attributes – but I can speak, think, just the same. How else can there be the teaching? So, when nirvikalpa happens jiva is not or hardly present – when savikalpa happens – depending on self-knowledge; jiva is hardly or not present either.
Therefore, as you said: Brahma Satyam Jagan Mithya Jivo Bramaiva Na Parah.
Sundari: Jivatman is the Self, and being attributeless, the Self does not speak think, or act, though all happen by virtue of the presence of the Self for the jiva, the individual. I know what you mean, but nirvikalpa or savikalpa are not ‘happenings”. They are either occur spontaneously or they are not present at all, you cannot will them into being because there is no doer in either samadhi. However, when nirvilkalpa is present, there is no mind/intellect, no jiva whereas in savikalpa the jiva can be present but the mind is single-pointed on the Self, i.e., the intellect is present..
C: I have to help myself here, or jiva rather and I think I know how-to. If not, I can ask you later – but this, knowing what I know, being able to verify and adjust faulty assumptions – or pesty convictions … I will sit and teach/remove this jiva-figure here, from the inside out, as if that is not already the case 🙂 It is subtle, you said a few times, and it is – obvious also.
Sundari: Who sits and teaches who? The jiva cannot remove or teach itself. The Self does not teach or remove the jiva either as the jiva is the Self. Assuming qualifications and a qualified teacher, Self-knowledge dissolves the split between subject and object, it simply breaks the false identification with the jiva as separate, flawed, and incomplete.
C: Through the years many people came with issues and questions, thinking that I could help. Mostly I just listened, picked up on insecurities, checked whether they were true or false, given the context. Often it had to do with ‘being allowed’ more than what they knew was right, already. It’s almost always about (partial) freedom, liberation of something. (or they not-want / want by demand … that’s something different)
Now, in some sense, I have that issue. Who am I to know? But I do know, and see it and not jiva, in despite this doubt. It’s a bit vague, but ‘there’. So, buckle up and move on? Sure, but sit with it, eat it, otherwise, no digestion can take place; or so I think about it. Perhaps that’s why the idea of Ramana came along. Whatever it is – it is good, because time is not the issue anymore. Some time ago you said that there is mithya wisdom and Self-knowledge wisdom – I take this to be a difference from the karma-yogi and the jnani-yogi.
Sundari: Mithya knowledge is worldly knowledge, which can be knowledge about anything. We need knowledge to succeed and survive in life, but mithya knowledge is subject to change and error, and not always present. Self-knowledge is who you are therefore always present, it never changes and is always good in any situation and at all times. It is the one and only non-negatable factor, though it is not always known.
C: I have a question on what Nirvikalpa means, by effect/experience. Because if savikalpa happens spontaneously, so does nirvikalpa, apparently. Is that when ‘mere observation’ – a kind of thoughtlessness, as if ‘in’ forgetting, takes place?
Sundari: As stated above, either ‘state’ occurs spontaneously or not at all.
Savikalpa Samadhi involves thought, the jiva is present as it is a cognitive samadhi, in which there is objective experience or experience of “qualities”, with the triad of knower, knowledge, and known, but thought the intellect is present, the doer is not.
Nirvikalpa samahdi is non-conceptual; without the modifications of the mind, i.e., no thoughts at all, but it is not forgetting. Rather, it is complete RE Memberance, as in wholeness, oneness. The experience of being the Self. It is beyond all duality in which there is no doer, no objective experience or experience of “qualities” whatsoever, and in which the triad of knower, knowledge, and known does not exist.
It is considered the highest state of samadhi, beyond all thought, attributes, and description, which is why some people confuse it with moksa. But it is an experience nonetheless, and all experiences happen in time and end. If Self-knowledge is not firm, ignorance returns once the samadhi ends.
C: Is kalpa prior to the guna’s and affecting them?
Sundari: Kalpa is another word for time, which is synonymous with Isvara. Kalpa is the term for the length of the creation, also called the Day of Brahma. It alternates with a Night of Brahma of the same length. In the Day of Brahma creation is manifest and in the Night of Brahma is it resolved into its causal state. You are maybe confusing prakriti with kalpa?
There is no time for Awareness, so it is very difficult to explain the creation teaching, but let’s assume time existed. First and always, there is Pure Consciousness. Secondly, Maya (Pure Macrocosmic Sattva) appears and Awareness plus Maya ‘becomes’ Isvara in the role of creator. Lastly, matter appears, but Macrocosmic sattvic prakriti is present before matter appears. Prakriti is the clear mirror of Consciousness, prior to the emergence of rajas and tamas.
Prakriti as the subtle nature or substance of all matter, subtle and gross, the blueprint of all forms, existing eternally within Maya. Prakriti does not exist without Maya. There is no point in talking about the difference between them because prakriti does not mean anything without Maya. They are the same, but they are not.
Isvara associated with Maya is independent of prakriti because Isvara is trigunaatita, beyond the gunas. Prakriti depends on Isvara, not the other way around. And Isvara as Cure consciousness gives rise to creation but is always free of the creation.
C: (On Mooji – what is knowing and what is not knowing)
Sundari: It’s good to wield the knowledge correctly to clarify the difference between ignorance and knowledge, as long as the ego does not enjoy it too much…!
C: No, not much ego – it clarifies and benefits. I never say anything unless asked, or having checked a threshold. Faulty / incomplete notions, propositions – take away’s that seem cool but aren’t, it’s like correcting it and at times my internal dog howls along with it, some happy rajas. – it’s all good.
To really teach is another matter, I don’t do that – but daily use of language did change throughout. I watched my words since forever and noticed a subtle change in sequences of words. either I know or don’t know, but there are hardly any maybe’s, unless there is a maybe 🙂 Much ambivalence is gone unless options appear.
Sundari: Excellent. I like the internal howling dog reference!
C: There is a lot in your writing that I respond to – but then I go too much in the past; in which I wanted such a discipline but didn’t /couldn’t know how, exactly. I don’t like to hang out there, it tends to re-reverse. I am happy that my mind is – as it were – inward, having negated space, time and is clearing out the person.
Sundari: I am not really sure what you mean here? Please elaborate.
C: With ‘discipline’ I meant; guna management. With ‘inward’ I mean; mind not taking itself and the world as independent from me, I am independent from it. All through life/waking state, I felt/knew this and couldn’t ‘feel’ dependent. Every time experience suggested that I was, I felt awkward and uneasy. Solitude is an expression it seems, of this and – lucky jiva, I didn’t feel lonely. But, in hindsight, it seems I confused this also with legitimate needs, Artha – things. That is what I mean with ‘the past’. There had to be a way to understand existence logically … and everything that suggested or claimed otherwise I rejected.
Sundari: Very well put!
C: I was seeking through thinking to find/come to knowledge, certainty, or essence, more than ‘finding happiness’ – or felt that the truth will/must set free, so that is happiness. I also thought that moods, feelings, and emotions do have not much to do with this. Now I know they don’t but do, in a way as they, well, are gunas, and seem to have a say in the qualities of experience, i.e. useful for clarity. I am fine with a chunk of tamas, it doesn’t bother me; inherently none of the gunas are a problem to ahamkara – not per se.
Sundari: Correct, a jnani has no problem with the gunas and simply relates to (observes) them as orientation pointers and adjustments for the jiva. However, though the gunas are objects known to me, as peace of mind is prized above all, a jnani seeks to keep rajas and tamas in balance with sattva through lifestyle choices and mind management, i.e., knowledge of the typical thoughts/feelings that emerge with rajas and tamas.
C: And jiva never thought of having to deal with dark moods, in part because it has an optimistic and easy-going nature – that remains during hardship mostly. So, I take the gloominess for what it is. It goes away simply by kicking ‘its ass’ and/or a good night of rest. Pain may be a teacher, – pain, physically, without much thought, just get through, fuck it – and a blow to the ego is mostly good, but suffering .. what in the world enjoys that?
Sundari: Yep, good attitude to have to rajas and tamas! Sometimes there is nothing to do but go with rajas or tamas, no point in fighting it or point in much mind management, other than ensuring non-injury to yourself or others. But other times it is advisable to use sattva as a grappling hook to get out of manic rajas, or some rajas to get out of doom and gloom tamas.
C: At any rate, all this may be but I don’t want it to repeat. I lived an edgy life, still do in some sense, so ‘experience’ is fast, has momentum but some of it does leave a trace in the mind and becomes a memory that plays into present vasana’s, or so it seems. Hah, it sounds complicated, but it isn’t. I give it some attention, that is good, but I don’t like it in my responses to you.
The key is what jiva and Isvara share: Self, and what they don’t share, micro and macro cosmos; which, as self, makes no difference.
Sundari: Excellent.
C: I do a lot of karma yoga now, in areas that are so contrary to what I meant, intended, in life. It is pulling outward, but that’s ok, for now. Working out lists of things – calls to make, handling chaotic weather, worldly stuff. Each morning and evening I let it go again.
Sundari: Karma yoga is the way of course, but who is ‘doing’ it? We must all attend to our worldly jiva stuff, it goes with the territory of being ‘human’. As a karma yogi, we ‘do’ karma yoga to get what we want in life. As a jnani, we relinquish the idea of doership altogether.
C: Working hard enough ought to pay off, for I need to make a living, simply. To have that go ‘wrong’ is beyond comprehension; ‘Now what did I do wrong, didn’t see coming …’ And the issue is quite a drama, costly too, but the people are very open-hearted beings, so that alone is worth all my effort to restore/give what I can; someone else will fix it, but the costs are basically on me, to a degree – I am not sure yet what and how we will do this.
What I dislike the most is that (any) problems keep one selfish in a way – being busy with a problem, while there are better things to do, to give. So, I give jiva a break – also. It’s relative, so.. that eases this sense. I give/do what I can, that is good and asked for – whatever jiva may think of it, and I don’t want to avoid it either.
Sundari: To maintain peace of mind we must respond to each situation dharmically. When we do, whatever costs are involved for the jiva fade into insignificance. They just do not matter, even when they seem to sting. You are the Self, that is all that has value, and nothing touches you. Nothing is worth losing that.
C: Fuel to the doer – it’s a tight balance. I can see how it is trouble and also how gold and crow shit is the same, that ‘lack’ is unreal, relative, and so on.
Nonetheless, jiva finds it often difficult to live in this culture, basically: the downplay of dignity – self-respect of and for all that lives. Powerplay, crushing morals, authority/ obedience etc… money… I found it very distressing to experience the battle of ego’s, it makes no sense to me, whatsoever. I feel zero respect for powerplay.
Some good old competition is fine but the stakes are taken too far, to my mind – it’s nuts. The absurdity makes it humorous – but too much thought on it, I cancel, it’s not worth it.
Creation has something amazing to it, beautiful, mesmerizing. Its beauty may not be real, but to the degree that it is; how hard is that to see? Why love war, manipulation, power, and such things and act that out on such a scale? Even ‘care’ is corrupted, I see what politicians and others do with covid per opportunity – but, a thousand years ago, the same type of shit happened. I remember all kinds of complicated thoughts on ethics, discussions with academics. They said that ethics is hard, but I thought, not living by wisdom, is hard. Perhaps the wheel is in Kali-yuga … Mithya is the place to work it all out; Isvara dishes out the results. Ignorance is ignorance, a twilight zone. Ok.. enough.
Sundari: Mithya is not a place, it’s a mirage, an idea created by the play of the gunas, nobody is doing anything because none of it is real. Isvara is both dharma and adharma, it can only be that way or there would be no opportunity to work out our karma.
C: Is it right to say that ignorance may not be a problem, actually, because it isn’t real, but is a problem because it makes suffering possible, which is unnatural to freedom, the very truth of existence essentially? Unless there is a desire for suffering … but that’s really strange.
Sundari: Ignorance is only a problem when you do not know what it is. When you do and discrimination is automatic and permanent, you can enjoy it for what it has to offer, temporary bliss.
C: I often get the impression that the cosmos is a ‘reject-ion’ of what is not-self, which cannot be, so it is not; and consecrates the fact of being, as if by might; but sweet and loving. It’s like a mystery but maybe not mystical; depending on experience versus empirical notions.
Sundari: The ‘cosmos’ is not mystical, or sweet and loving, for that matter, those are just jiva projections. The cosmos is just an idea in you.
C: (…) – plus timeless, I realize, Thanks to You, Sundari-Self.
Sundari: Definitely not thanks to me. Thanks to the teachings, to Isvara, the Self. You.
C: Ok, point taken. I know what You/I am. I feel an endless Thank You for the teaching.
Sundari: ‘Going Ramana’ is a fantasy, no ‘if’ about it. You are already Ramana, there is no need to go anywhere or be anything. That is just a spiritual seduction, the idea of living the life of the pure meditative ascetic. Just accept what is and be, it’s all good.
C: I know .. you’re right, I thought it through and saw what I meant by your correction. I want to clean up the account with Isvara and insofar jiva has a job, then this is that job. No more karma to attract … accrue. Less surprising worldly trouble is what I do work for in the karma yoga spirit; less distraction for peace; also in/as expression.
Sundari: Good for you.
C: The last days much fell off, duality only seems complicated. While cutting wood, a job to build a fence, the sun was shining and birds chirping – a robin hopping around that wasn’t afraid of me, or the noise of my machines, all is peaceful.
Sundari: A state of grace. Duality is complicated if you believe it is real.
C. The difference between satya and mithya is like a blunt and brutal fact, a hard line and I mean this positively. So, everything in or of mithya seems to be below the threshold of understanding, so to speak. There is no way around this and the very inevitable is self, I that is – am. That I can say, with certainty even if the mind has some doubts still, just acting out, perhaps the traces of experience while in ignorance. The cosmos looks like one huge sculpture to jiva.
Sundari: It is hard to understand how mithya works or even how it is possible because it is not real. But Self-knowledge makes everything understandable and removes every mystery. Perhaps that is what makes it unappealing to the unqualified, the loss of mystery. Most people don’t want to understand, it’s too brutal.
Much love
Sundari
