Carl asked for a comment about the statement below by a person named Ira Schepetin who seems to be some sort of authority on Vedanta
“Sorry. James Swartz is definitely neo-Vedanta. He teaches (among many other wrong ideas that he got from his neo-Vedanta teachers) that after enlightenment there are still vasanas that continue and some are not a problem and others are? I don’t think so. That idea is neo Vedanta, in Traditional Shankara Vedanta after Enlightenment there are no vasanas good or bad. If you think your Enlightened (as James does) and
still have vasanas your in big trouble and so are your students. Ira”
Hi Carl,
Well, it depends on Ira’s idea of “enlightenment.” He seems to think it is an event. For it to be an event reality needs to be a duality and the Self needs to be an experiencing entity that is impacted by experience. But if reality is non-dual and there is such an entity called a jiva, an individual, then it is actually non-different from the Self. Shankara, who definitely wasn’t a Neo said, “jivo brahmaiva na-parah.” The jiva and the Self are non-different. So Ira is looking at it from the point of view of an individual, which, at best, is an apparently real individual i.e. mithya. If an apparently real entity gets an apparently real enlightenment it only means something to other apparently real entities.
Does he define enlightenment as Self realization? If so, Vedanta calls Self realization indirect knowledge. A jiva who didn’t know there was a Self and that the Self needed to be known to remove its suffering is a Self-realized jiva with the addition of a bit of knowledge i.e. “there is a Self.” If the jiva realizes that it is the Self and says “I am the Self” without any doubt we call that direct knowledge. If the vasanas are rendened non-binding or apparently real (mithya) by the knowledge and the knowledge is accompanied by a palpable ever-present current of bliss, the Self has been freed of the notion that it is limited jiva prone to suffering. The vasanas are like roasted seeds; they can’t sprout but they taste good and life flows with unspeakable ease because the person (jivan mukta) is completely satisfied (tripti).
If there is no doubt in the jiva’s mind that it is the Self once it has direct knowledge but it doesn’t experience perfect satisfaction (tripti) then it has some residual samskaras, usually childhood stuff like desire for love or security, that is obstructing the bliss, which is to say there are still binding vasanas, which can be removed by continuing its sadhana: karma yoga, upsana yoga and jnana yoga i.e. Vedanta (sravanna, manana and nididyasana). Vedanta calls that stage nididyasana. It will end when the obstacles are removed and tripti comes. The apparent jiva is usually mostly satisfied in this stage but is subject to various periodic bouts of suffering which diminish in frequency and intensity.
But what if enlightenment is freedom from the jiva? If the vasanas have been burned out by yoga or negated by Vedanta sadhana, which means they are mithya, apparently real, they are as good as non-existent, in so far as they have no impact on the Self.
So direct knowledge in that case is freedom from the Jiva, meaning there is no jiva. I never said I was enlightened. Depending on who asks, I pretend like I’m a jiva. There is no sense telling someone who thinks they are a person that you are the Self because they don’t know what that means. And a person who knows they are the Self would never ask or if they did they would understand what “I am the “Self” means.
Maybe Ira knows something and maybe he doesn’t. Before a person makes a judgment it’s always best to do some in depth research and contextualize the issue as I’ve tried to do above. My statements above are from Chapter 7 of Vidyaranya’s Panchadasi. You can find them translated in my book, Inquiry into Existence. I copied them in below.
I’m not sure why it matters to him. If it pleases him to think I’m a Neo, that’s fine with me. The most anyone can say with certainty is “I am” and know that it means perfect satisfaction. Who cares about silly dualistic concepts like Neo and Traditional, my guru and your guru?
Carl. My dilemma is how, if at all to respond. On the one hand, I feel that I do not wish to get into any sort of debate. On the other hand, it leaves a mark on the internet involving you without response. I know from my studies with you that what he says is totally silly and I have no idea why he should say what he does but he does seem to teach traditional Vedanta.
James: You can post this email if you want. Or get the link from the satsang section of the website and post it.
It’s an opinion, probably born of some kind of competition The word “definitely” suggests a bias. I have no idea who this person is but he seems to think I’m a guru giving out wrong knowledge. He evidently doesn’t realize that I make it very clear that Isvara is the only guru and the scripture is Isvara’s words. He’s not well informed. He would do well to read my discussion of Neo-Advaita on the resources page of the website. Here’s the link: https://shiningworld.com/resources/ He would definitely drop the word definitely if he did. (smiley here) There are a lot of sincere smart intellectual guys out there who picked up some Vedanta through reading and visiting various teachers but who were not properly taught by a Vedic mahatma. It doesn’t take much knowledge to teach Western people. In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. And it certainly doesn’t take much to voice an opinion without contextualizing it properly.
Love,
James
Seven Stages of Enlightenment – Vidyaranya
Panchadasi Chapter VII Verses 29 to 33. (1) Ignorance of the self causes (2) veiling. Veiling is a state in which the self thinks it is only a Jiva and pursues objects for happiness when it is the source of the happiness it seeks. In the next stage – projection, or (3) superimposition – it identifies with the body and believes it is a doer/en-joyer that experiences pleasure and pain. Eventually it enjoys what it thinks is a non-dual experience or hears about the self from an enlightened teacher or from scripture. This is the stage of (4) indirect knowledge. The Jiva says, “The self exists,” not knowing that it is talking about itself. Then, by means of discrimination born of inquiry, it realizes that the self is self-evident in the form of “I.” (5) This is direct knowledge. Direct knowledge (6) cancels the doer/enjoyer idea and suffering stops. Finally, the Jiva realizes that it has accomplished everything that needs to be accomplished and experiences (7) lasting objectless satisfaction.
