4 ms·
> Translation: “The Self hidden in all beings does not shine forth, but it is seen by subtle seers through their one-pointed and subtle intellect.” That doesn'
by dsubburam 2y ago
> Translation: “The Self hidden in all beings does not shine forth, but it is seen by subtle seers through their one-pointed and subtle intellect.”
That doesn't look sound to me. If the "seers" are seeing "The Self", are they beyond and separate from "The Self"? If they do so with their "subtle intellect", is that intellect outside of "The Self"?
If affirmative, then "The Self" is something external to the seer, making the term a misnomer. And furthermore, there is something outside of The Self (that which is seeing The Self), which remains to be explicated.
- chandureddyvari 2y agoI'll try to slightly dive into Advaita philosophy here. Both the Upanishads and the Yoga Vasistha affirm that the distinction between the seer and the Self is an illusion created by the mind. When this illusion is dispelled, the oneness of the Self is realized. The intellect, which seems to function as a separate tool, is ultimately part of the same illusion. True knowledge is realizing that there is no separation—everything is the Self. Quoting one from Katha Upanishad 1.3.10: "Indriyebhyaḥ parā hy artha, arthebhyas ca param manah, manasas tu parā buddhir buddher ātmā mahān parah" Translation: "Beyond the senses are the objects, beyond the objects is the mind, beyond the mind is the intellect, beyond the intellect is the Self." This quote emphasizes that the intellect is still a part of the illusion. Beyond even the intellect lies the Self, which is one and undivided.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]