Summary:
Session 13 re-defines “success” from traditional worldly view, to Vedantic point of view of Objectivity and Dispassion. We then debunk common myths what is an Enlightened person (jīvan-mukta), as answered by Krisna to Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita 2.58. “How does a person of unshakable wisdom sit, speak and walk?“.
TOPICS COVERED:
- Reason why wise people give up results of actions performed.
Even though you have free will to act (karma), once acted, the results are out of your control. Because there are too many interconnected unseen/unknown variables in the field, which you play no part in. Hence depending on fruits (rewards) of your actions is recipe for disappointment.
EG: Once a trader has invested in a stock (an action taken by free will), relying on a favorable outcome is akin to surrendering one's happiness to the unpredictable and complex dynamics of the market. Even if the trader eventually makes a profit, the outcome is contingent on countless factors beyond their control, making it a precarious foundation for lasting fulfillment.
Conversely, the unwise person tries to control or manipulate the environment to suit one's fancies. This is tiring and even if you get what you want, comes the stress of maintaining it in your life, and fear that it may leave or change into an undesirable state.
- Four common life variables preventing permanent satisfaction.
Reality is life can give you 4 possible outcomes:
I cross the road, I catch the bus. (EQUAL to expectations)
I cross the road, I miss the bus. (LESS then expected)
I cross the road, friend gives me ride in his car. (MORE then expected)
I cross the road, slip, and end up in hospital. (OPPOSITE to expectations)
Think about your own life. Aren't these 4 variables the reality in every endeavor? Where is permanent satisfaction if you only expect EQUAL or MORE then expected?
- Re-defining what does “success” mean from Vedāntic point of view.
Success is capacity to handle Realities objectively and dispassionately.
How? By understanding and appreciating the Giver (Īśvara, God). This contributes to RIGHT attitude, which results in RIGHT action.
Realities, means every moment.
Objectively, means looking at Realities without personal bias. (EG of Subjectivity: This social gathering is full of unfriendly guests. Objectivity: I'm not feeling friendly today so it seems others are not friendly to me.)
Dispassionately, means remaining neutral and Objective towards either joy (desires) and sorrow (fears). This isn't apathy. But mature intellectual reasoning vs. emotional uncontrolled outburst of joy/fear.
- All is Given.
Open your eyes. Do you have to do anything to see a ready-made world of color? No. Sight is immediately given. Sounds take place. Recall and remembering is given. You simply make use of this. Who is the giver? Īśvara.
- Physical/Mental signs of Enlightened Person (Jīvanmukti) per Bhagavad Gita 2.58.
One can not identify wise person by their physical appearance, outwards behavior. Not even by state of mind. For example, there are many compassionate, kind and intelligent people – but it doesn't mean one knows the nature of Self.
Furthermore, even if you say “You CAN identify wise person by their state of mind”; the fact is no one can accurately tell another's state of mind. And a groggy mind in the morning is very different from an alert mind at midday. Enlightenment has nothing to do with personality or state of mind. Best you can say regarding state of mind is, there are certain qualities that have increased the chances of one coming to understand one's truth. Qualities such as compassion, kindness, thoughtfulness, willing to refine one's responses, not overly reactive, etc.
Additionally, a beginner seeker is carrying all sorts of projections what a wise person is like. So their idea is completely distanced from reality.
Ultimately, only you know if you got it.
—
31 July 2018
Andre… You are Clarity Itself! Thank You.
One comment: an idea for future Videos… When audience is asking questions often one cannot hear what they say, so it could be a good idea to have a microphone they speak to, or you repeat their questions before answering. Thank you!
No prob. In future videos, the voice of audience conversation/Q is increased every time.
Man seriously. The “Toxic Illusion of control” how long have i suffered imagining that i can somehow one day take control of the entire fabric of reality. It actually sound ridiculous when you say it that way but its so true. And no one talks about it! everyone is busying thinking that everyone else out there is in control EXCEPT them. And we are all madly trying to SEEM like we are. Great stuff Andre!
Andre.
You said “ blissed out occurs in the mind, not the self.
The self just is”.
There is something important here that I can’t quite get. When we listen to or read the words of the great yogis and masters they all talk about the bliss of being united with God or spirit.
The true self is described as the eternal witness, pure consciousness that exists in a state beyond qualities.
It is a reflection of spirit, yet we are told that to be united with spirit is to be in a condition of ever new bliss and joy.
The Promised Land!
I don’t understand the apparent contradiction.
Is it that awareness is conscious of the state of bliss without experiencing it?
In terms of pay off for the Jiva, I would rather live in amity’s in a state of bliss than live in Satya in a state devoid of qualities, even if this includes being devoid of desire and fear.
Please help me to see my ignorance here.
Ignore last message. Proper reply:
You said “ blissed out occurs in the mind, not the self.
The self just is”.
========
There is something important here that I can’t quite get. When we listen to or read the words of the great yogis and masters they all talk about the bliss of being united with God or spirit.
========
Great yogis/masters for sure. But most are not teachers. Thus many confusing statements in form of one-liners come from them, which end up glorifing the master, rather then helping the student understand WHAT IS MEANT and HOW TO RELATE IT TO REAL LIFE LIVING with children/wife/job/etc.
For eg: when one hears “bliss of being united with God or spirit”, it forces mind to imagine what liberation is. Like some profound feeling.
Firstly we must define word “bliss”. It does NOT refer to an emotion/feeling (because that belongs to body-mind).
1) There is ānanda (bliss) in context of jñāni (liberated while living): He enjoys a level of freedom (owning to firm assimilated knowledge). But there is still pain in body (migrances, backpain, etc). There is still anxiety from family affairs, money issues, etc. So when we bring it down to earth in real life context, where is there place to say: bliss of being united with God or spirit.
We ALWAYS need to bring things down to earth, into relatable living. Else person lives in an imaginary bubble of how these masters/yogis are.
In reality when you meet them, they’re ordinary people like the guy sitting next to you in the train. Who then infront of an audience trumpets statements like: bliss of being united with God or spirit!
Can we see how unrealistic and unneccessary such one-liner statements become when we bring it down to earth?
2) There is ānanda (bliss) in context of (videha-mukti): Meaning jñāni who has physically died (old age, etc). What happens then is a new subtle body will NEVER again be created, therefore no rebirth into gross body. In this scenario, all that’s left from standpoint of jñāni is ānanda (bliss), which is not limited by the body-mind instrument, as is the case while jñāni is alive.
Remember, limitless bliss is impossible while jñāni (enlightened person) is alive. Because how can limitless bliss express through a limited body-mind instrument? Impossible.
========
The true self is described as the eternal witness, pure consciousness that exists in a state beyond qualities.
========
Self (ātmā) = Nirguṇa: without qualities/attributes.
Your statement is correct.
========
It is a reflection of spirit, yet we are told that to be united with spirit is to be in a condition of ever new bliss and joy.
========
See above reply the one-liner confusing statements proponded by the yogis/masters. We’re not saying they are not jñānis (liberated).
We are only saying that there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between:
a) jñāni, but NOT a qualified teacher. Majority of masters/yogis belong in this category.
b) jñāni + qualified teacher.
#a always creates contradictions.
#b’s job is to resolve the contraditions created by #a’s.
That’s why Robert’s mind has so many questions.
========
Is it that awareness is conscious of the state of bliss without experiencing it?
========
Awareness and bliss (ānanda) are exactly the same. They are not different.
For example: Where there is fire, there is heat. Where there is heat, there is fire. Thus Fire and Heat are not-two (advaita).
Total bliss is limited by body-mind as explained above.
While person is alive (whether englightened or unenlightened), he will experience mini-blisses throughout the day, in form of: kiss, hug from children, smile from lover, chocolate, etc.
But all those mini-blisses are OF the TOTAL limitless ānanda.
========
In terms of pay off for the Jiva, I would rather live in amity’s in a state of bliss than live in Satya in a state devoid of qualities, even if this includes being devoid of desire and fear.
========
Again, satyam and bliss are not-two. Just as fire-heat are not two.
Thus statement is coming from assumption they are somehow seperate.
It’s impossible to seperate Awareness from bliss. Do you know why? If there is no Awareness, who is there to KNOW about the bliss?
Hence to say satya (Awareness) and bliss (ānanda) are different, is logically impossible.
==========
Should a person be vegan and celibate to become liberated from attachment to the senses and to practice ahimsa?
==========
Celibacy/vegan/meat-eater makes 0.0% difference to pursuit of liberation. Unless it’s constantly making mind agitated.
For example, will a food addict sit down and contemplate? Yes. But on what? FOOD!
In addicts case, we would first say “Take care of your food addiction, then pursue Vedanta, which needs contemplation on satya/mithyā”.
Mitya, not Amity’s.
spellcheck doesn’t like me. ?
further comment.
Should a person be vegan and celibate to become liberated from attachment to the senses and to practice ahimsa?
Thank you so much for your detailed answer Andre.
This is really helpful.
I think so many questions arise in me because I am thinking from duality and trying to assimilate the thoughts and words of those who , while having achieved themselves, are not operating a complete teaching system.
I see that now.
Despite thinking in duality, we don’t dismiss any question. Long as contradictions remain in mind, so will seeking. Duty of teacher is to resolve every single contradiction in the mind of student.
Ishwara 1 and Ishwara 2, is the same as Siva and Sakti ?
Ishvara 1: Brahman
Ishvara 2: Maya from standpoint of creation (which we call God / Bhagavan).
Shiva/Sakti is from Tantrika school. Not from Uttara-Mimamsa (Upanishads).
However loosely speaking:
Ishvara 1 = Shiva
Ishvara 2 = Shakti
Hello, Andre.
Thank you so much for these videos. I’ve been “on the bus” with James for 7 years and have learned so much. Vedanta is it for me.
I recently discovered your website and am going through each lesson methodically. It seems in my experience I learned well so many Vedanta concepts individually with JS. Now, with your lessons, these concepts are being gathered together into the whole, each in its proper place. Does this makes good sense?
One question from this Lesson 13:
Regarding the mechanics of Sadhana and Sambandha, do I have the correct understanding that Ishwara gives ALL, including the very thought/motivation to “do a sadhana”, in the first place?…So, the loop is closed. All is Ishwara.
Hi Amy,
Ishvara is efficient/material cause of the universe. Meaning nothing is outside Ishvara (the cause of the universe).
However individual still has capacity to decide what to do with what’s provided. Ability to choose A from B.
Understanding this, one becomes highly devotional. Knowing all that is here is the Lord. Thus one makes more deliberate choices in thoughts, words and actions.
Thank you, Andre. Your online offering of Vedanta teaching is very much appreciated.
OM
Hi André,
In the above video, I suppose I heard it right:
So, when consciousness mixes with the Gross and the subtle body, we call that ATMAN or RELECTED CONSCIOUSNESS. So, reflected consciousness is exactly the same as the original consciousness. Even though there is no difference between the MIXED and the ORIGINAL consciousness, the word MIXED is used to imply reflected consciousness. However, the reflected consciousness is “NOT MIXED” at all. There is a language limitation here.
The reflected consciousness is ISHWARA-1 and the Original Consciousness is ISHWARA-1 too?
The cosmos /creation / maya is ISHWARA-2?
Please clarify. Thank you.
============
when consciousness mixes with the Gross and the subtle body, we call that ATMAN or RELECTED CONSCIOUSNESS.
============
No. We only call that “Reflected consciousness”.
Word atma has a different place.
Consciousness from standpoint of gross/subtle body is called; Atma, which in English means “Self”, or simply “I”.
Due to ignorance, “I” (atma) is mistaken as gross/subtle body. For liberated, the “I” (atma) is not taken as gross/subtle.
Therefore, the word “atma” changes depending whether there is ignorance or liberation.
While “reflected consciousness” is ONLY used when there is ignorance.
——–
The reflected consciousness is ISHWARA-1 and the Original Consciousness is ISHWARA-1 too?
The cosmos /creation / maya is ISHWARA-2?
——–
No. “Reflected consciousness” is a term that only applies to the person; when subtle/gross is included in “I”.
“Reflected consciousness” term IS NOT used in Macrocosmic sense (like to cosmos, creation, maya, ishwara).
I also recommend to get involved in our Tattva Bodha: https://www.yesvedanta.com/tattva-bodha-discourses – as it’ll explain all these terms properly.