Identification

Identifying anything,

And

Identification / Identifying oneself with anything.

--

Consciousness is attention only, and conversely; attention is consciousness only. Neither of the two exists in the  absence of the other.

Consciousness is ever so the ground upon which attention keeps shifting frim one to another object.

During the three states of mind, namely - the waking, the dream and the deep dreamless sleep Consciousness is ever so evident that only because of it all and every perception takes place, yet it is never the object of attention. On the other hand, the attention is so obvious a fact moment to moment, no evidence is  needed to prove its existence. Attention is ever so conspicuous, consciousness is so inconspicuous.

Consciousness and the attention, are so intimately associated with one another  that either of the two can be recognized and identified as such as the form of the other.

A person in the world, one as the "self" is the individual consciousness where one finds oneself as such, with so many others here, like him. Though all share the same material world and space in the waking state of mind, everyone has  a mental world also of one's own very distinct and very individual.

Does and could any individual "self" share his mental world with another?

This gives rise to the doubt

"Is there really a world common to all?"

The material world is no doubt is the same and common to all, but the world in the mind differs from man to man.

The same is also true about the world, as experienced during the dream-state of the mind.

Again, in the deep dreamless sleep state of mind all experience a deep sense of peace and tranquility where mind is free from any kind of misery or grief. One neither enjoys nor suffers still is perfectly happy in that state.

And at the same time it's also true that there is no one else there in that state where one could share this experience with another.

The experience during the waking and the dream state is unstable and differs from person to person, while the deep dreamless state is so evident, authentic and common to all that could never be doubted nor denied.

Why?

Only because during the state of deep dreamless sleep, one is so perfectly identified with the sleep state that all division disappears, while during the other two states of mind, namely the dream and the waking, there is always a partial identification with one or the other object of perception.

Let us consider - "Fear", to understand this.

In the dream state and also, just like as in the waking state, the moment "Fear" is experienced, there is identification of the object of which one is scared and there is also the acceptance of oneself, who is scared. As soon as the "Fear" is gone, the experience / experiencing and the one who was identified with the "Fear" also disappears. The mind then experiences another kind of feeling of respite or relief from "Fear".

During and through all this happening the experienced and the experiencing keep perfectly changing while the mind that is an expression of consciousness /  attention is in no way changed, is in no way affected at all.

Identification of the external things and Identification with the external things is therefore important to be considered. Identification of the things external to "self" is of help in getting free from them, while not identifying (oneself) with any of the external things results in freedom from all that that is the only essence and substance of all sorrow, misery. 

***

    

The Individualists.

Intellectuals and Ideologists.

ज्ञान-निष्ठा 

--

The most simple and  common people could be of the kind of those who are materialist. But essentially they are also seeker.

Everyone instinctively seeks comfort, joy and lasting security. They all seek something of permanent value that could never be lost. Not in the moment of death also.  Though everyone is a seeker, a materialist is one who begins with the idea that there is a world around him and there are many people and things in that world. Living and non-living. I am also one of them, seeking continuity of the pleasures and joy, lasting security and avoiding all pain and suffering.

This materialist who is essentially a seeker also, can never think,  imagine, nor believe that the world is false, unreal, something of the hypothetical kind only. He agrees that though the world is ever so changing, it is only the real a place somehow, not unreal.  It never occurs to him that there might be an underlying principle, where-from the world derives its apparent and ever-continuous existence. For him, it is always a reality, is always changing, but never unreal. 

A materialist can't think that the world could be unreal. He is always in kind of  intimate relationship with the world of his perceptions. He is the only center and the world of his perceptions revolves around him, he can never distinguish between him and the world and can't see the thin line of division between the two. There is of course a hazy borderline between him and the world like the hairline fracture. But it never occurs to him how he could separate the two in perfect isolation.

Let for the time being, the question be unresolved. Still every man without exception is either a materialist or a seeker. Or may be, he has both of these characteristics in him. What to say about the animals and the other kind of living beings?

We can take it that like the  humans, they never think, because thinking / thought depends on a language.

And Language depends upon a set of certain spoken words with a meaning or a sense attached to them. A meaning or sense could be in the form of some object or an abstract notion only.

This is what the  grammar tells us. Respectively -- about the common noun and the abstract noun. 

For living comfortably and happily, the materialist may or may not need word or a language at all. Still no doubt, like any animal, the I-sense prevails in and him without uttering this word "I".

In his case this "I" is rather inconspicuous. Still it reflects in all his actions and all his  behaviour. Thus "I" may be either a very narrow and extremely self-centred state of mind, or comparatively a  broad and may include others according to who fits in there well satisfactorily. This may create a sense of "others" who like him are also individuals or persons like him.

As a consequence he accepts a society of the people of his own kind.

After having accepted such a society he expects how he is related to other individuals and then he develops into an intellectual or individualist.

He may be happy or unhappy about it. He may then try to find out how he can help the world around him.

--

Having noted this much I felt have nothing more to say. So just closed the tab and put the device away.

It was 10:55 a.m. 25 minutes before now.

Thought of taking bath, but somehow skipped it and was feeling hungry and took the meals. 

While eating I was kind of watching myself in a way.

A comment from within my own came onto the surface of the conscious mind :

यदा ते मोहकलिलं बुद्धिर्व्यतितरिष्यति।।

तदा गन्तासि निर्वेदं श्रोतव्यस्य श्रुतस्य च।।

A verse from श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता / Shrimadbhagvad-gita. 

And suddenly an old memory came in the mind.

During 1984, I was suffering from Jaundice and was on a long leave from the job.

Before that I had been (so as to say) meditating a lot. Had a few deeper experiences too.

During that time a man of my age came in my contact. Can't say, exactly what might have brought us together but now I saw he was in the same state of mind as of mine and how I am presently also. That may be how the above lines came to mind.

We didn't talked much, would meet once in a few days, but still had for sure some cord of deep connectedness. 

These were the days during 1995-97. My father passed away on 24th July 1997. After 2 days he too left his body. He breathed last in the hospital where he was admitted after a serious medical condition.

Like me, he too was a fan and fond of J.Krishnamurti.

Now after so many years I came to see what might have brough us together.

I don't remember if I ever had such a deep and close affinity with anyone else.

Now I see and I can dedicate this post to the memory that was such a great revelation

*** 

The Interpretations

The Poetic and The Political.

--

The scriptures of all religions could be read, interpreted and understood as if they are Poetry or Political Thought.

Their interpretations, implications, the repercussions, the reactions, the responses and the consequences too follow accordingly.

This is, how and why this world of ours is, looks to us or appears to us.

***

अश्विनी उपाध्याय

Ashwini Upadhyay 

--

From the very childhood when I was given the sacred thread I knew that I belong to the भारद्वाज गोत्र the lineage of a RShi  ऋषि :  bhAradwAja / भारद्वाज .

I spontaneously performed the practice accordingly that was my lot in this life.

In Vedika stream of knowledge, this is said to be as decided by brahmA /  ब्रह्मा  the Creator, who himself manifests with the manifestation of the world. And the world too is the individual only.

लोक / loka is the word that means the world of the individual as well as the individual himself too.

This manifestation and the dissolution takes place repeatedly for all and every individual without beginning or end.

In this program of the cycle of repeated manifestation and dissolution, after so many repeated births and subsequent deaths one gets finally liberated from this cycle and attains the Deliverance. This is again a way of explanation only and not a final, ultimate philosophical, hard and fast, strict conclusion. Because the logic / intellect too follows this rule. Following my destined course of life, I came to know what it is all about! 

Just for no specific reason, I learnt Veda and could understand the secret of the scriptures.

Thereafter I was given the knowledge of the Abrahmic religions, and their significance, relevance with reference to and in contrast with the original Vedika stream of knowledge.

My all search and research concluded when I came to know Sri Ashwini Upadhyay through his videos and his approach to Dharma or the Sanatana Dharma.

I thereafter related all my knowledge in a way so as to find how rShi Jabala ऋषि जाबाल was / is the very origin and source of Abrahmic religions.

On the internet I came across about the information how Gabriel was the Angel who delivered the sacred knowledge to all the three prophets of the Abrahmic religions, namely the Jew, the Christian and the Islam.

I through the insight and the evidence also knew that the word Angel was but a cognate of Sanskrit अंगिरा / अंगिरस्  that finds mention in the famous Vedika text Mundakopanishad  / मुण्डकोपनिषद् .

The words "Anglo-Saxon" is again also a reminder of how the Sanskrit words : अंगिरा शैक्षं might have assumed this in the old English. However there were also  the Greek and Roman influences upon this, which modified this all stream of languages to such an end that the very origin was lost to sight.

In my I've written about the story of Nachiketa / and the Kathopanishad.

This whole chain is with reference to ushanA who finds a reference in the Gita  कवीनामुशना कविः।।

The  गोत्र  / Gotra / descendence of all is from the rShi  ऋषि भृगुः / भार्गव / गौतम, and there we discover how Buddha too belonged to this because Buddha was referred to as " गौतम / gautama".

Therefore we could conclusively infer that सनातन वैदिक धर्म / Sanatan Dharma is the only Dharma that was prevalent all over the globe ever so timelessly.

Again about Ashwini Upadhyay

अश्विनी उपाध्याय 

If you can watch this Hindi video you can at once see what I want to point at. 

I've elsewhere stated that the word God / Gott is but the cognate of this Sanskrit word  गोत्र.  The  देवता  has quite different a meaning, not sane as the Gotra. Hence and therefore there are / were so many Gotra or the lineage of the sages / ऋषि. 

Once we discover the roots of humanity and the human, and find out our Gotra all differences and disputes will come to end. Indian or any other, all people can discover for themselves this truth. 

***