Author Topic: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough  (Read 758182 times)

atmavichar100

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2200
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4545 on: February 02, 2016, 03:37:24 PM »
Quote
Likewise ,in every small detail all the wishes of Dhruvan were met by Bhagavan,but only after some preliminary 'Drama'!

Dear Sri Ravi

What you say is true . Every visit to any spiritual place has its own dramas and surprises and while we plan it in a structured way , events happen in an unstructured way but the end is sweet if we do not get trapped in our ego and start blaming or complaining .
However many holy words you read, however many you speak, what good will they do you if you do not act on upon them? - Buddha

Sadhak

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4546 on: February 03, 2016, 02:18:16 AM »
Dear Anil,
Quote
Dear Sri Sadhak, however, I do not wish to say much. Just I want to ask you whether you are opposed to what I wrote as following. Kindly reply

I cannot explain any better. Since thinking process is common to the whole of humanity, anyone can observe it in himself. There is really no need to refer to anybody else.

If this matters more to you, we can meet during one of your visits to the ashram and talk about it.

Let it rest.


Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4547 on: February 03, 2016, 09:09:13 AM »
Friends,
The thinker being a thought as well,there is no question of  which comes first.What was explained earlier by sadhak is 'conscious thinking' but even sensations of objects are also classified as thoughts(in Sri Bhagavan's terminology-as Dehatma buddhi,the 'Iam the Body' consciousness).

JK explains this as 'The Observer is the Observed'.Here is an excerpt from this talk where he summarizes his teaching:

Questioner: Is there any difference between awareness and that of which we are aware? Is the observer different from his thoughts?

Krishnamurti: The observer and the observed are one; the thinker and his thoughts are one. To experience the thinker and his thought as one is very arduous for the thinker is ever taking shelter behind his thought; he separates himself from his thoughts to safeguard himself, to give himself continuity, permanency; he modifies or changes his thoughts, but he remains. This pursuit of thought apart from himself, this changing, transforming it leads to illusion. The thinker is his thought; the thinker and his thoughts are not two separate processes.

The questioner asks if awareness is different from the object of awareness. We generally regard our thoughts as being apart from ourselves; we are not aware of the thinker and his thought as one. This is precisely the difficulty. After all, the qualities of the self are not separate from the self; the self is not something apart from its thoughts, from its attributes. The self is put together, made up, and the self is not when the parts are dissolved. But in illusion the self separates itself from its qualities in order to protect itself, to give itself continuity, permanency. It takes refuge in its qualities through separating itself from them. The self asserts that it is this and it is that; the self, the I, modifies, changes, transforms its thoughts, its qualities, but this change only gives strength to the self, to its protective walls. But if you are aware deeply you will perceive that the thinker and his thoughts are one; the observer is the observed. To experience this actual integrated fact is extremely difficult and right meditation is the way to this integration.

The complete talk is here:
http://www.jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1945-1948-observer-is-observed/krishnamurti-the-observer-is-the-observed-46-06

It is indeed more accurate and factual to say that the thinker and the thoughts arise simultaneously than to say that thoughts create the thinker.(The Observer is the observed means that the thinker and the thoughts are one and inseparable)

Namaskar
« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 09:18:59 AM by Ravi.N »

Sadhak

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4548 on: February 03, 2016, 12:30:26 PM »
The example of observer and the observed is at a general/higher level and not relevant to the specific question raised by Anil which is at a deeper level of how the observer has come into existence. He has already cited a passage from Krishnamurti that led to his question.

Quote
It is indeed more accurate and factual to say that the thinker and the thoughts arise simultaneously than to say that thoughts create the thinker.

This is NOT what Krishnamurti said on those occasions when he went into minute details of the issue or when he spoke of the origins of the thinker.

Here is a sample from the Collected Works of J.Krishnamurti, Volume 6.

"Surely, thought has created the thinker; the thinker is not beyond thought, the thinker is the product of thought. ".......

'It is thought that makes the thinker, and if there were no capacity to think at all, there would be no thinker."

" The thinker comes into being through thought, and why has this separation taken place? Obviously for the simple reason that thought is constantly changing; that is recognizing itself to be in transformation, in change, in constant flux, thought creates an entity, the thinker, to give itself permanency. So desire for permanency creates the thinker."

"Actually there is no thinker at all; there is only thought creating a permanent entity because there is fear of impermanency".

"There is integration only when thought does not create the thinker, which means that thought does not identify itself as "my" thought, "my" achievement, "my" experience.

"It is thought that has created this separate entity called the thinker."








Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4549 on: February 03, 2016, 03:58:51 PM »
Sadhak/friends,
We may refer to our own experience-In deep sleep there is no 'thinker' or 'thought' or 'world'.
In Dream there is 'Dreamer' and 'Dream world'.They occur simultaneously.The Dreamer and the Dream world are inseparable.We do not say that the Dream world creates the Dreamer.
In waking State,the 'Thinker'(Embodied sense of 'I am the Body') occurs simultaneously with 'Waking world'.In other words,identification with the Body precedes even the conscious thinking process and is common to all living beings at an instinctive level.The Identification with the Body is simultaneous with the perception of the world as apart from oneself.

All the statements of JK just reveal the one to one correspondence between the thinker and thoughts-The thinker is not independent of thoughts -and the very identification with thoughts is also a thought and in reality there is no true permanent entity ever called the 'thinker' that precedes thought.

Sri Bhagavan's self -enquiry definitely identifies  this as 'Root thought' (the 'I' sense) and in focussing the attention on this,helps reveal its non existence as a 'separate entity'.This is a very very important clue that Sri Bhagavan gives-which I am afraid JK never touched upon.

Namaskar.


Sadhak

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4550 on: February 03, 2016, 11:57:08 PM »
My post was a clarification of what Krishnamurti said and a reply to Anil's question. It is not a comparative study.


Quote
All the statements of JK just reveal the one to one correspondence between the thinker and thoughts

Yes at a general level, but it is also very clear that he is saying thought creates the thinker at the lowest level. Unless you have trouble in understanding the word 'create' which he has used over and over.

Krishnamurti is actually describing the state of jnanis when he says. "There is integration only when thought does not create the thinker, which means that thought does not identify itself as "my" thought, "my" achievement, "my" experience."  In other words, thought can exist without (creating)the thinker. Not vice versa.

Jnanis think and use thought when needed. But they have no 'I' as a thinker or ego sense. That is an example where thought does exist without the thinker.

Quote
Sri Bhagavan's self -enquiry definitely identifies  this as 'Root thought' (the 'I' sense) and in focussing the attention on this,helps reveal its non existence as a 'separate entity'.This is a very very important clue that Sri Bhagavan gives-which I am afraid JK never touched upon.

That is probably because of your (mis)understanding.

I will move on since there is no use in belabouring what is quite clear.

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4551 on: February 04, 2016, 07:50:58 AM »
Sadhak,

Agreed that your post is not a comparative study and is a comment on Anil's quote from Sri Sadhu Om.

Quote
Jnanis think and use thought when needed. But they have no 'I' as a thinker or ego sense.

Ditto with so called ajnanis as well as far as what JK calls  functional thoughts (and not psychological thoughts).
Examples:

1. 2+2 =4

2. Address of Sri Ramansramam:
Sri Ramanasramam P.O.
Sri Ramanasramam, Tiruvannamalai
Tamil Nadu, South India   606 603

It is quite obvious that these sort of functional thoughts do not create the 'thinker'.

What is the origin of 'I' and 'mine'?was it put together by conscious human thought?The 'I' and 'mine' is seen in animals as a pure instinct-Every dog zealously guards its territory and marks it by urinating on almost every 'signpost'.

There is this 'I am the body' idea which humans have also inherited  from animal origin.Only that in humans,it gets its full play fueled by conscious thought-but the basic identification 'I am the Body' is at the root of all 'clutching and accumulation'.The Conscious thought in humans only 'perpetuates' this and does not 'create' it.It just gives it its full play(which of course it need not as well!).

The Jnani is one who has ceased this identification with the body(and hence is free from 'embodiment') and if there is pain in the body ,he says that there is pain in the Body and does not say 'I am in pain'.

What I have pointed out -that Sri Bhagavan's self-enquiry goes into this fundamental aspect of Dehatma Buddhi ,the wrong identification with the body-that is the root thought.There is simply no knowing how this (mis)identification came about but that is not the point-what is important is that it can be ended.

Sri Bhagavan's 'self-enquiry' gives a very definitive approach to end this wrong identification with the body.

Namaskar
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 09:57:45 AM by Ravi.N »

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4552 on: February 05, 2016, 07:17:52 AM »
Quote from Sri Ravi:
"That day ,the first piece of item that was served on the banana leaf was 'apple'.Sri Bhagavan made good what was snatched away from Dhruvan.Likewise ,in every small detail all the wishes of Dhruvan were met by Bhagavan,but only after some preliminary 'Drama'!"



Dear Sri Ravi,

I read the beautiful narration of your stay in Sri Ramasramam and brooded over the lost opportunity.  I watched the video also and sensed the spirit of freedom that all creatures who enter the Arch of Sri Ramansramam at the Gate experience.


Yes, dear Sri Ravi bhai saheb, perhaps it is His Pattern or Design! It is the experience, as I have gathered, of all His loving devotees! All their genuine wishes are met by Sri Bhagwan, but only after the preliminary dramas. It is His Work to remove doubts and obstacles. Our duty is to enquire and Be!


Thanks very much, dear Sri Ravi.
Pranam,
  Anil   
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 07:19:40 AM by eranilkumarsinha »

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4553 on: February 05, 2016, 07:22:39 AM »
Dear Sri Ravi and Sri Sadhak,

I have gone through your posts but I had hardly any time to form my own response from my understanding and experience, and post.  However, right now I have time enough to say that I have clearly discerned that both of you are saying the same thing, only thing is while one is following Sri Bhagwan's line of Teaching, the other is that of Sri J. Krisnamurty's.

In my view, metaphysically, or essentially, it can be said that thought  CREATES the thinker (everything being a thought and therefore mental, for thought alone is responsible for all creation whatsoever), yet it is also true that  thought 'I' is the first thought , and only after arising the thought 'I' other thoughts arise.   

Besides, Sri Bhagwan has taught that in both waking and dream states THOUGHTS,  NAMES  AND  FROMS  OCCUR  SIMULTANEOUSLY  (Who am I?, Q. 22). 

Dear Sri Ravi, I wish to say that I am in full agreement with your following observations:

"It is indeed more accurate and factual to say that the thinker and the thoughts arise simultaneously than to say that thoughts create the thinker.(The Observer is the observed means that the thinker and the thoughts are one and inseparable)"

"Sri Bhagavan's self -enquiry definitely identifies this as 'Root thought' (the 'I' sense) and in focusing the attention on this, helps reveal its non existence as a 'separate entity'.This is a very very important clue that Sri Bhagavan gives-which I am afraid JK never touched upon."



Thanks very much.
Pranam,
  Anil
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 07:53:35 AM by eranilkumarsinha »

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4554 on: February 05, 2016, 10:17:46 AM »
Dear  Sri Ravi, Sri Sadhak and Devotees,


This, in my view,  is akin to endlessly discussing whether the hen is prior to the egg or  the egg is prior to the hen.  Rather than getting trapped in such debate, one should pay attention to the Great, Epoch-making Teaching:

"Attempting thoughts in order of value, the 'I'-thought is the all-important thought. Personality idea or thought is also the root or the stem of all other thoughts, since each idea or thought arises only as someone's thought and is not known to exist independently of the ego. The ego therefore exhibits thougth-activity. The second and the third persons  do not appear except to  the first person "I'.  Therefore they arise only after the first person appears, so all the three persons seem to rise and sink together. TRACE,  THEN,  THE  ULTIMATE  CAUSE  OF  'I' OR  THE  PERSONALITY."



Dear devotees,  this is what we are supposed to do.   Tracing the ultimate cause of 'I' or the personality or the thinker is what is needed to be practiced diligently, notwithstanding the functional as well as the psychological thoughts.  I do not think that those who practice Sri Bhagwan's  Vichara will have any difficulty in grasping and understanding  Sri Bhagwan's Teaching that all the three persons seem to rise and sink together. 


Thanks very much.
Pranam,
  Anil   
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 10:20:24 AM by eranilkumarsinha »

Sadhak

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4555 on: February 05, 2016, 11:32:12 AM »
Quote
I have gone through your posts but I had hardly any time to form my own response from my understanding and experience, and post.  However, right now I have time enough to say that I have clearly discerned that both of you are saying the same thing, only thing is while one is following Sri Bhagwan's line of Teaching, the other is that of Sri J. Krisnamurty's.

Dear Anil,

This is the whole trouble. When jnanis describe the truth (or whatever you call it) they are describing the same state differently (which in this case both Bhagawan and Krishnamurti have also stated). Therefore, one either understands BOTH (or all if one has read many) teachings, or NONE. There is no question of saying I understand this jnani's teaching and not the other jnani. That is pure illusion. So if I say I understand or follow Bhagawan but not Krishnamurti, it only means I have not understood Bhagawan's teachings either, even though I may claim to. And vice versa. Either I have not understood the content, or I have not understood the context, or something else.

Of course you can go deeper into this issue if you are serious and ask 'Why?'  Is it because of our vasanas/background/conditioning? Do we insist that the teachings must be presented in traditional terms or non-traditional terms or in some particular way that is acceptable to us? And anything different is to be rejected?  Is it the good old 'my guru is better than your guru' feeling that may be operating even subconsciously? Who can answer except ourself?

As far as your specific question is concerned, I had already said in my post that Krishnamurti himself spoke at different levels at different times. Which is why your passage and my quotes are different from the one posted by Ravi.



Sadhak

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4556 on: February 05, 2016, 11:55:10 AM »
Quote
since each idea or thought arises only as someone's thought

But the 'someone' itself is a thought/idea that has identified and separated itself.


Quote
and is not known to exist independently of the ego.

The ego itself is thought(s). Ego does not exist independently of thought.

Quote
The ego therefore exhibits thougth-activity.

You could also say that thought activity brings about the ego. Or the ego IS thought activity.

Somehow I am not clear what you are trying to establish here with all this.

eranilkumarsinha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4557 on: February 05, 2016, 02:43:19 PM »
Quote from Sri Sadhak:

Quote
since each idea or thought arises only as someone's thought

But the 'someone' itself is a thought/idea that has identified and separated itself.

Quote
and is not known to exist independently of the ego.

The ego itself is thought(s). Ego does not exist independently of thought.
Quote
The ego therefore exhibits thougth-activity.

You could also say that thought activity brings about the ego. Or the ego IS thought activity.

Somehow I am not clear what you are trying to establish here with all this.







Dear Sri Sadhak, 

"Attempting thoughts in order of value, the 'I'-thought is the all-important thought. Personality idea or thought is also the root or the stem of all other thoughts, since each idea or thought arises only as someone's thought and is not known to exist independently of the ego. The ego therefore exhibits thougth-activity. The second and the third persons do not appear except to the first person "I'. Therefore they arise only after the first person appears, so all the three persons seem to rise and sink together. TRACE, THEN, THE ULTIMATE CAUSE OF 'I' OR THE PERSONALITY."




These are Sri Bhagwan's Words of Grace. We need to grasp, understand and assimilate them. I discern unity in all spiritual teachings by sages. However, I feel that all this discussion has been possible by overlooking two cardinal points in Sri Bhagwan's Teaching. One, it has been clearly forgotten here that Sri Bhagwan has taught that the 'I-thought is not like the associated thoughts or the other thoughts, and that it is the root thought. Obviously, you do not seem to differentiate 'I'-thought from the other myriad thoughts. For you, all thoughts are alike. Isn't it?  Secondly, Sri Bhagwan has clearly taught that in waking as well as dream states, thoughts, names and forms rise simultaneously or that there persons (I, you, he, she, it, they, etc.) rise and sink together. I would like to see your opinion on the above two points which I have raised.

And last but not the least, I would like to hear from you about the Source-Awareness or about tracing the ultimate cause of the personality, or individuality or the thinker, about the Teaching that first one must be to be able to think thoughts.
  If you have understood Sri Bhagwan's as well as Sri J. Krishnamurty's Teaching rather well, why is there difficulty in recognizing the 'I'-thought as the root thought is beyond my understanding.

Dear friend, Sri Sadhak, I am not trying to establish anything. On the contrary, I do not understand what you yourself are trying to establish. My whole life is devoted to the Feet of My Guru and practice what He taught. To practice and succeed in Self-enquiry, as taught by Him, one first must learn to segregate the 'I'-thought from the other thoughts  and focus the entire attention only and only on the 'I'-sense or consciousness, which finally reveals the unreality of the ego, mind and the body.  The Self-enquiry will certainly reveal the non-existence of the ego or the thinker as a separate entity. We need to concentrate on this rather than discussing endlessly whether egg came first or the hen. Though I accept that in a sense it can be said that thought creates the thinker, certainly it is more appropriates for us sadhaks to say that both arise simultaneously, for none can survive without the other.


Thanks very much.
Pranam,
  Anil   
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 02:56:50 PM by eranilkumarsinha »

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4558 on: February 05, 2016, 04:40:47 PM »
Friends,
Here is a wonderful excerpt from Jul/Aug 2009 edition of Maharshi that covers the core teaching from the wonderful book -Maharshi's Gospel,chapter 6 of Book 2

Aham and Aham-Vritti
 In fourteen chapters of the Maharshi's Gospel, Sri Ramana Maharshi answers the full range of doubts that could arise in any seeker that aspires to tread this royal path to eternal freedom. These pointed and well articulated questions are said to be primarily the work of Maurice Frydman. The Maharshi had once commented that Maurice did not ask the questions of the Maharshi's Gospel for his own benefit, implying that these recorded dialogues have an inher value of benefit for generations of earnest seekers the world over. The book, which covers relevant topics and explanations not found elsewhere, was first published in 1939, on Sri Ramana's 60th Birth Anniversary.Bhagavan Ramana did not just resuscitate the ancient path of Self-enquiry, he, from his own experience, expounded on every aspect of it, clarifying and molding it into an undisputable rational formula that any deep thinking mind can easily grasp and follow. In addition to this, he infused it with his grace and his guiding personality to assist those who follow his path and take refuge in him.
One chapter of particular interest in Maharshi's Gospel is Chapter 6 of Book II, titled "Aham and Aham-Vritti" In it, twenty questions are put to the Maharshi in which he says at one point, the mind becomes introverted through enquiry into the source of aham-vritti (the 'I-thought'), the vasanas become extinct, and in the absence of the reflecting medium, the phenomenon of reflection, namely, the mind, also disappears being absorbed into the light of the one Reality, the Heart. This is the sum and substance of all that an aspirant needs to know.
In spite of this unassailable statement, the questioner continues to dissect the process of how an enquiry into the "I-thought", which is inherently unreal, can reveal the Reality. The Master patiently answers him, eloquently covering every point of doubt. Contemplating these sublime answers, imbibing their innate truth and experiencing the Essence is certainly the foremost duty of every devotee of the Master.

Aham and Aham-Vritti
D. How can any enquiry initiated by the ego reveal its own unreality?
M. The ego's phenomenal existence is transcended when you dive into the Source wherefrom arises the aham-vritti.
D. But is not the aham-vritti only one of the three forms in which the ego manifests itself? Yoga Vasishtha and other ancient texts describe the ego as having a threefold form.
M. It is so. The ego is described as having three bodies, the gross, the subtle and the causal, but that is only for the purposes of analytical exposition. If the method of enquiry were to depend on the ego's form, you might take it that any enquiry would become altogether impossible, because the forms the ego may assume are legion. Therefore, for purposes of jnana-vichara, you have to proceed on the basis that the ego has but one form, namely that of aham-vritti.
D. But it may prove inadequate for realizing jnana.
M. Self-enquiry, by following the clue of aham-vritti is just like the dog tracing its master by his scent. The master may be at some distant, unknown place, but that does not at all stand in the way of the dog tracing him. The master's scent is an infallible clue for the animal, and nothing else, such as the dress he wears or his build and stature, etc., counts. The dog holds on to that scent undistractedly while searching for him, and finally it succeeds in tracing him.
D. The question still remains why the quest for the source of aham-vritti, as distinguished from other vrittis, should be considered the direct means to Self realization.
M. The word "aham" is itself very suggestive. The two letters of the word, namely A (A) and H (HA), are the first and the last letters of the Sanskrit alphabet. The suggestion intended to be conveyed by the word is that it comprises all. How? Because aham signifies existence itself.
Although the concept of "I"-ness or "I-am"-ness is by usage known as aham-vritti, it is not really a vritti like the other vrittis of the mind. Because unlike the other vrittis which have no essential interrelation, the aham-vritti is equally and essentially related to each and every vritti of the mind. Without the aham-vritti there can be no other vritti, but the aham-vritti can subsist by itself without depending on any other vritti of the mind. The aham-vritti is therefore fundamentally different from other vrittis .
So then, the search for the source of the aham-vritti is not merely the search for the basis of one of the forms of the ego but for the very Source itself from which arises the "I-am"-ness. In other words, the quest for and the realization of the source of the ego in the form of aham-vritti necessarily implies the transcendence of the ego in every one of its possible forms.

continued....

Ravi.N

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
    • View Profile
Re: Self-enquiry as taught by Sri Bhagwan is enough
« Reply #4559 on: February 05, 2016, 04:48:08 PM »
Maharshi's Gospel continued...

D. Conceding that the aham-vritti essentially comprises all the forms of the ego, why should that vritti alone be chosen as the means for Self-enquiry?
M. Because it is the one irreducible datum of your experience; because seeking its source is the only practicable course you can adopt to realize the Self. The ego is said to have a causal body, but how can you make it the subject of your investigation? When the ego adopts that form, you are immersed in the darkness of sleep.
D. But is not the ego in its subtle and causal forms too intangible to be tackled through the enquiry into the source of aham-vritti conducted while the mind is awake?
M. No. The enquiry into the source of aham-vritti touches the very existence of the ego. Therefore the subtlety of the ego's form is not a material consideration.
D. While the one aim is to realize the unconditioned, pure Being of the Self, which is in no way dependent on the ego, how can enquiry pertaining to the ego in the form of aham-vritti be of any use?
M. From the functional point of view, the form of the ego or its activity (whatever you may call it is immaterial, since it is evanescent), has one and only one characteristic. The ego functions as the knot between the Self which is pure Consciousness and the physical body which is inert and insentient. The ego is therefore called the chit-jada granthi. In your investigation into the source of aham-vritti, you take the essential chit aspect of the ego: and for this reason the enquiry must lead to the realization of the pure consciousness of the Self.
D. What is the relation between the pure consciousness realized by the jnani and the "I-am"-ness which is accepted as the primary datum of experience?
M. The undifferentiated consciousness of pure Being is the heart or hridayam which you really are, as signified by the word itself (hrit + ayam = heart am I). From the heart arises the 'I am'-ness as the primary datum of one's experience. By itself it is suddha-sattva in character. It is in this suddha-sattva svarupa (that is, uncontaminated by rajas and tamas), that the 'I' appears to subsist in the jnani".
D. In the jnani the ego subsists in the sattvic form and therefore it appears as something real. Am I right?
M. No. The existence of the ego in any form, either in the jnani or ajnani, is itself an appearance. But to the ajnani who is deluded into thinking that the waking state and the world are real, the ego also appears to be real. Since he sees the jnani act like other individuals, he feels constrained to posit some notion of individuality with reference to the jnani also.
D. How then does the aham-vritti function in the jnani?
M. It does not function in him at all. The jnani's lakshya is the heart itself, because he is one and identical with that undifferentiated, pure consciousness referred to by the Upanishads as the Prajnana. Prajnana is verily Brahman, the Absolute, and there is no Brahman other than Prajnana.
D. How then does ignorance of this one and only Reality unhappily arise in the case of the ajnani?
M. The ajnani sees only the mind which is a mere reflection of the light of pure Consciousness arising from the heart. Of the heart itself he is ignorant. Why? Because his mind is extroverted and has never sought its Source.

continued...