tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post2021494282104902655..comments2023-10-16T13:06:42.360+01:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: The true nature of consciousness can be known only by self-enquiryMichael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-35952626930224845682009-08-24T07:39:04.589+01:002009-08-24T07:39:04.589+01:00Michael,
This is an exceedingly fine article.
I w...Michael,<br />This is an exceedingly fine article.<br /><br />I would like to make sure what you have written is the same as what is written in Advaita Bodha Deepika, a book highly recommended by Bhagwan and translated into English by Munagala Venkataramiah (author of the Talks)<br /><br />I have attached a snippet from that book on this topic.<br /><br />Advaita Bodha Deepika – Ch IV – Sravana<br /><br />26. D: How is the Self said to be witnessing the three states?<br /> M: The three states are the waking, dream and deep sleep through which the Jiva or ‘false-I’ or the ego passes, identifying itself with the gross, subtle and casual bodies respectively. The Self must therefore be the consciousness witnessing these three states; “It” is not identical with any or all of them.<br /><br />27 D: If these three states are not of the Self, of whom else can they be?<br /> M: They can only be of the ego which assumes them whereas the Self is unconcerned. Affecting the waking state, the ego in the guise of visva enjoys the gross sense experiences; similarly in dream as taijasa he enjoys subtle experiences; and in deep sleep as prajna he experiences ignorance. Therefore the ego must be the experiencer in these states and not the witnessing Self.<br /><br />28-29 D: What makes you say that the ego and not the Self is the experiencer of the three states?<br /> M: In deep sleep the ego becoming dormant, no experience or experiencer is seen; only on the rise of the ego are they found. He must therefore be the experiencer. His are the two states of waking and dream; they can not be those of the Self.<br /> D: Whose is deep sleep then?<br /> M: It is also of the ego, because just as it arrogates to itself the waking and dream states saying “I woke up – I dreamt”, so it does the deep sleep state also saying “I slept”. It can not be of the Self since It remains unconcerned as the witness of the three states and of their experiencer who remains conceited with the ideas “I woke up - I dreamt – I slept”. Therefore none of the three states is of the Self.<br /><br />30-31 D: The ego cannot be the experiencer in deep sleep also. It is not there and how can it be said to be the experiencer? In the waking and dream states, the ego is rightly said to be the experiencer; in deep sleep the Self must be the experiencer.<br /> M: You are not right. The jiva i.e. the ego, who in the waking and dream states appears as the intellectual sheath to enjoy gross and subtle things, sinks in deep sleep to remain dormant as the blissful sheath, experiencing ignorance and bliss as “I did not know anything – I slept happily”. Had the ego not been present in deep sleep, on waking there could not be the recollection “I did not know anything – I slept happily”. Only the experiencer can recollect his experiences and not another. Even the recollection can only be of what was actually experienced and not of what was not. On waking, it is the ego which says “I did not know anything – I slept happily”. From this it is clear that the experiencer in deep sleep was the ego and not the Self.<br /><br />32-33 D: But for the blissful sheath of deep sleep, what can the witnessing Consciousness be?<br /> M: As the blissful sheath, it is ignorant; this ignorance is recognized later. The recognizer must be different from recognition and he must be the experiencer of the blissful sheath.<br /> Now that he has fancied himself as the blissful sheath which is none other than ignorance, he remains ignorant himself because ignorance cannot know itself. Therefore it follows there must be the witness of this ignorance who simply illuminates the blissful sheath which appears as the idea “I do not know anything” and remains apart from it. This witness is the Self.<br /><br />The terms used sometime differ and can lead to some confusion. Hopefully this parallel reinforces the crux of the message.<br /><br />Thanks once again for bringing so much clarity.<br />RegardsJaynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-42904207817383353442008-06-22T02:48:00.000+01:002008-06-22T02:48:00.000+01:00Michael,Thank you for the clarity of this explanat...Michael,<BR/>Thank you for the clarity of this explanation.summahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08709272472448702350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-20670397666012834952008-06-21T19:27:00.000+01:002008-06-21T19:27:00.000+01:00Michael,I am finding your statement "Therefore the...Michael,<BR/><BR/>I am finding your statement "Therefore the true practice of self-enquiry is just to remain steadily balanced between thoughts and drowsiness — that is, between the activity of thinking and the dullness of sleep — in our true and natural state of perfectly clear non-dual self-conscious being." to be a wonderful way to stay focused in the enquiry. Thank you very much for this and all of your writings.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com