Non-Dual Hinduism : Good Ego vs Bad Ego

[The Crimson Universe]

We clearly know we are not the body but something else. Something spiritual.

The non-dualist hindus believe the functions of mind/ego are witnessed by the Higher Self (Brahman) in a dream state ... and the inactive or idle condition of the mind/ego are also witnessed by the Higher Self (Brahman) in a deep-sleep state.

Because the active and inactive states of mind/ego are witnessed by something other than the mind/ego, the non-dualists therefore come to a conclusion that it is Brahman the universal consciousness who does all the witnessing.

So, when we say Brahman is universal consciousness, we're also kind of saying that IT is conscious or aware of everything. By everything i mean all illusory names and forms (the waves of the ocean).

Moving on. And from here my actual question starts.
Since we believe Brahman is conscious of everything, wouldn't it be right to say Brahman has a intellect/mind/ego of ITS own, when Brahman remains in ITS absolute, disembodied state (i.e. the portion of Brahman that lies outside the 5 sheaths)?
I asked this a few days ago to @ajay0 and his reply was something like -
Yes ... Brahman the Absolute does have a mind/ego/intellect in a sheathless state and IT can do all the thinking, willing, witnessing in that sheathless state. That was his opinion. Do the rest of you advaitins here on RF also agree with him and hold the same belief?
... If you do, then answer me this question and i really want to know this.

Even if we (as embodied jivas), go on and negate or transcend our individual minds/egos and starts dwelling in our Original Higher state Brahman, during turiya or moksha, are we completely rejecting the mind/ego?
... I mean after rejecting one type of mind/ego (the individual one) aren't we situating ourselves in another type of mind/ego (the universal one)?

Its like, transcending from bad ego to good ego.

IMO, the very thought,
"I AM Supreme, eternal, infinite, universal consciousness" is also a kind of ego (although an universal one).
What are your thoughts?

 

[Aupmanyav]

I am Brahman. Who is this the other one who witnesses me? No ego, it is fact. Till one does not realize this, one is in 'maya'.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Since we believe Brahman is conscious of everything, wouldn't it be right to say Brahman has a intellect/mind/ego of ITS own, when Brahman remains in ITS absolute, disembodied state (i.e. the portion of Brahman that lies outside the 5 sheaths)?

Do the rest of you advaitins here on RF also agree with him and hold the same belief?

No. Brahman is pure consciousness...pure being...satcitananda. It has no attributes or qualities such as intellect/mind/ego. Brahman simply is. Aham Brahmasmi. There is no other than me. Ayam Atma Brahma.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

No. Brahman is pure consciousness... There is no other than me.

If there's none other than Me, and nothing else to be aware/conscious of, then why am i called 'consciousness'?

 

[Sirona]

If there's none other than Me, and nothing else to be aware/conscious of, then why am i called 'consciousness'?

In this world, things must be named somehow, so there is "consciousness" and "non-consciousness", its opposite. But in Brahman, there are no opposites, so Brahman is beyond both "consciousness" and "non-consciousness" at the same time. Saying something "is" or something "is not" is taking away something from its true nature.

I'm no expert, but I read the Avadhuta Gita, and I found it really helpful in this context.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If there's none other than Me, and nothing else to be aware/conscious of, then why am i called 'consciousness'?

Who termed me as 'Consciousness'? What will I do with 'Consciousness'? I am uninvolved. I have no favorites to help and no adversaries to vanquish. I do nothing. As Salix said, I just, am.

Of course, you too are correct (that Brahman is Consciousness).

 

[SalixIncendium]

If there's none other than Me, and nothing else to be aware/conscious of, then why am i called 'consciousness'?

For the sake of communication and understanding from the perspective of vyavaharika. "Consciousness" is the closest word in the English language to the Sanskrit term "cit."

 

[ajay0]

Even if we (as embodied jivas), go on and negate or transcend our individual minds/egos and starts dwelling in our Original Higher state Brahman, during turiya or moksha, are we completely rejecting the mind/ego?
... I mean after rejecting one type of mind/ego (the individual one) aren't we situating ourselves in another type of mind/ego (the universal one)?

Its like, transcending from bad ego to good ego.

The false self or ego is accompanied with misery. This misery is the price of falsehood and weakness that comes with ignorance of Self-knowledge.

The true Self or Awareness is accompanied with bliss. Hence the saying Sat-Chit-Ananda ( Truth-Consciousness-Bliss).

The bliss is the reward that comes with wisdom and strength of Self-knowledge. Ramakrishna and other sages have stated that this bliss of the Self is a million times superior to all material pleasures, including that of sexual intercourse.

The positive energies that arised from a mind saturated with bliss is also highly auspicious to all living beings, and of a healing nature.

Just being in the presence of a saint and especially an enlightened sage, many experience blissful states of a higher consciousness . This is why Satsang or noble company is emphasized in Hinduism .

Meditators can create and sustain this blissful state within themselves, and does not have to depend on expensive transitory material pleasures for their happiness. All such material pleasures have a beginning and an end due to their temporary nature, and is accompanied with pain and misery in the end.

Most people instinctively feel this ocean of bliss within themselves, but being unable to access it due to ignorance of means and lack of Self-knowledge, they resort to drugs, alcohol and dangerous sports or activities to get a temporary high.

IMO, the very thought,
"I AM Supreme, eternal, infinite, universal consciousness" is also a kind of ego (although an universal one).
What are your thoughts?

If there is attachment to such a thought , it would mean that the knowledge is just intellectual and superficial, and not of an experiential nature.

If there is no attachment to such a thought, and one is content with the state of blissful consciousness as it is, it means the knowledge is of an experiential nature, and hence not egotistic.

 

[George-ananda]

What are your thoughts?

Brahman consciousness has best been described as infinite unchanging sat-cit-ananda (being-awareness-bliss).

Now Brahman has this mysterious creative aspect too and can impose temporary Maya (illusion) on Itself and identify with finite forms in this cosmic play/drama of the universe.

An analogy is the rich man who has everything materially concerns himself still with art and plays/dramas to 'experience' artistic creativity. In the play of the universe Brahman experiences the joy of experiencing Its expansion from a finite separate experience to return to a state of pure sat-cit-ananda.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Even if we (as embodied jivas), go on and negate or transcend our individual minds/egos and starts dwelling in our Original Higher state Brahman, during turiya or moksha, are we completely rejecting the mind/ego?

This sounds like there are two of you. Who is negating the ego? I would argue that you are the ego and therefore, you cannot negate/transcend yourself.

If Advaita is non-dualism and Brahman alone exists, then who is in bondage and is in need of Moksha?

a. If the answer is "no one" it is logically incorrect.
b. If the answer is multiple jivas, this is not a non-dual premise.

My recommendation is for you to find a clear answer to the above question. Else, you will continue to hold on to dualistic views - incorrectly identified as Advaita.

Note that "everything is Brahman" is not specific to Advaita as it is accepted by *all* variants of Vedanta. You have to understand how Advaita differs from the rest.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

If Advaita is non-dualism and Brahman alone exists, then who is in bondage and is in need of Moksha?

It is Brahman who puts Itself in avidya/ignorance/bondage with the help of its maya shakti. Such is the belief of one of the sub-schools of advaita. I don't remember which, but one of them (either bhamati or vivarna) says that Brahman is the locus of avidya.

a. If the answer is "no one" it is logically incorrect.
b. If the answer is multiple jivas, this is not a non-dual premise.

I think all sorts of multiplicity is just an illusion. Jivas and jagat are unreal as per the advaitins. But IMO, they're not actually unreal. What we mean by 'unreal' is that, the image of this physical and subtle world that we perceive and feel through our senses is not the true image of Brahman. Rather its a false image. Brahman is something else, probably Spirit, which (as they probably say) cannot be known through our senses.

My recommendation is for you to find a clear answer to the above question. Else, you will continue to hold on to dualistic views - incorrectly identified as Advaita.

Note that "everything is Brahman" is not specific to Advaita as it is accepted by *all* variants of Vedanta. You have to understand how Advaita differs from the rest.

Yes i guess i need to read more books on this topic and if possible find an advaitin teacher. But I dont see the latter happening anytime soon.

I am Brahman. Who is this the other one who witnesses me? No ego, it is fact. Till one does not realize this, one is in 'maya'.

The other one is none other than Brahman All this is a massive play of Brahman (as George explained many times) that its Brahman who puts on the veil of ignorance (imposes maya on Itself).

 

[The Crimson Universe]

If there is attachment to such a thought , it would mean that the knowledge is just intellectual and superficial, and not of an experiential nature.

If there is no attachment to such a thought, and one is content with the state of blissful consciousness as it is, it means the knowledge is of an experiential nature, and hence not egotistic.

Thanks ajay0 So i guess once we (from this plane of multiplicity) transcend to the plane of non-duality and experience that bliss or become ONE with that bliss, while being in the body, all sorts of ego, mental activities, attachment and even duality disappears. Right? ... Now after his blissful turiya/samadhi session, when the sadhaka returns back to this plane of duality, will he be able to explain the kind of bliss he experienced?
... My assumption is that he won't be able to explain anything, since there was no duality (subject and object) during his blissful session. Do you agree with this too?

 

[ajay0]

Thanks ajay0 So i guess once we (from this plane of multiplicity) transcend to the plane of non-duality and experience that bliss or become ONE with that bliss, while being in the body, all sorts of ego, mental activities, attachment and even duality disappears. Right? ... Now after his blissful turiya/samadhi session, when the sadhaka returns back to this plane of duality, will he be able to explain the kind of bliss he experienced?

The sadhaka can say that he experienced bliss and joy in samadhi to teach and motivate others to do the same or for other reasons of practical utility.

Other than that there is no need for him or her to verbally express his states. If this desire for verbal expression is of a compulsive nature, it is an another hindrance to the nondual state.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

@ajay0,
1. Do you still believe that Brahman in an Absolute and Sheathless state can do all the thinking, willing, witnessing?

2. Some other advaitin in another forum was saying that Brahman in its Absolute state can do no thinking, witnessing or willing.
If his statement is true, then how does the ONE Brahman wills or desires (in its absolute state) to become multiple jivas in its vyavaharika state?

 

[ajay0]

@ajay0,
1. Do you still believe that Brahman in an Absolute and Sheathless state can do all the thinking, willing, witnessing?

2. Some other advaitin in another forum was saying that Brahman in its Absolute state can do no thinking, witnessing or willing.
If his statement is true, then how does the ONE Brahman wills or desires (in its absolute state) to become multiple jivas in its vyavaharika state?

Brahman in its static fundamental form is pure consciousness.

In its dynamic form, it is Shakti which encompasses the grosser manifestations of matter, energy, space, time and causation, and the factors of willing, thinking and desiring as you put it.

Shakti enables the multiple jivas in its vyavaharika state, as you call it.

There is a saying attributed to Shakti or Devi in this regard in the Vedas, which emphasizes the dynamic aspect of Shakti...

I am the Queen, the gatherer-up of treasures, most thoughtful, first of those who merit worship.
Thus gods have established me in many places with many homes to enter and abide in.
Through me alone all eat the food that feeds them, – each man who sees, breathes, hears the word outspoken.
They know it not, yet I reside in the essence of the Universe. Hear, one and all, the truth as I declare it.
I, verily, myself announce and utter the word that gods and men alike shall welcome.
I make the man I love exceedingly mighty, make him nourished, a sage, and one who knows Brahman.
I bend the bow for Rudra [Shiva], that his arrow may strike, and slay the hater of devotion.
I rouse and order battle for the people, I created Earth and Heaven and reside as their Inner Controller.
On the world's summit I bring forth sky the Father: my home is in the waters, in the ocean as Mother.
Thence I pervade all existing creatures, as their Inner Supreme Self, and manifest them with my body.
I created all worlds at my will, without any higher being, and permeate and dwell within them.
The eternal and infinite consciousness is I, it is my greatness dwelling in everything.

– Devi Sukta, Rigveda 10.125.3 – 10.125.8,

 

[ajay0]

Yes i guess i need to read more books on this topic and if possible find an advaitin teacher. But I dont see the latter happening anytime soon.

It is good to have am authentic teacher. But do realize that it is you yourself in the unalloyed state that is Brahman or pure consciousness.

It is your own consciousness or Awareness that is nondual, which is understood in the state of samadhi.

Meditation can help understand this state easily due to the bliss involved.

“Even if you can be aware of your awareness for only a moment, in that moment you will touch the primal awareness/bliss at the core of yourself.” ― Sally Kempton