Discriminating The Discriminator

Isaiah: Hi Jeff. My name is Isaiah Sanders. I've been told you're a serious inquirer and
judging from this email I can see it is true. Since you know your stuff, I am going to cut
to the chase as directly as possible in my replies.
Jeff: Thanks for what you said about devotion/gratitude and more generally about
neutralizing the doer, rending the vasanas non-binding and making firm the knowledge.
This morning I listened to a Swami Paramarthananda lecture on Panchadasi 1.54 that
was very timely for me, talking about nididhyasana and making the knowledge firm.
The thing I related to that he said was a remark comparing nididhyasana to sadhana
catustaya sampannah, the qualifications to receive the knowledge in the first place.
What is happening for me is just that shakiness he describes, though the shakiness
(measured by the duration and intensity of reaction to certain types of situations that
recur in my life) is lessening significantly.
Isaiah: Happening for who Jeff? These reactions to certain types of situations are only
occurring in the subtle body. Nididhyasana is the assimilation of the knowledge that
you are never affected or changed by the subtle body or any other object. If your
knowledge depends on the condition of the subtle body then you are in trouble,
because as you know, it is always subject to change. To be clear, the way the subtle
body reacts to situations in no way shape or form validates or invalidates your self
knowledge. Using discrimination, if you understand why you are the ever free self, and
why you are not the subtle body, then what does it matter what the subtle body is
doing?
Jeff: Certain kinds of vedantic thoughts consistently help me in certain recurring outer
situations; Ram calls this 'answering by the opposite thought' I think ('I don't have to
figure out this situation; Isvara is taking care of all of it'...'This is not my problem to
work out; I just need to do the actions that are called for by the situation (karma
yoga)'...'All of this, all of these situations, disappear entirely in deep sleep and dream;
where did they go then?; they are not really real now either'...'This seems real and solid
now, but I have already seen numerous times that this same situation and associated
set of feelings is not solid and real'...'I am whole, unbroken and complete already; there
is nothing in this person or situation that can complete me more or threaten that
completeness'.

Isaiah: Again, who is being helped by certain kinds of Vedantic thoughts? You, the self?
No. It is the subtle body. Don't get me wrong, your discriminations are flawless.
However, at this point you need to discriminate between yourself, awareness, and the
discriminator, the subtle body. Are you the discriminator, or are you the self, the one
who knows the discriminator?
Jeff: Pancha-kosha viveka, especially manomayakosha and vignanamaya kosha
are another track I follow; I identify the feeling the comes up, exploring it as a feeling
and identifying the corresponding sensations in the body, until I am able to make a
polaroid snapshot of the feeling of sorts. Then I essentially drop the snapshot on the
table, knowing that I am the one that sees that snapshot, that object. If I can name the
feeling, then I can find the opposite thought to apply also; naming the feeling and
finding the opposite thought is also getting easier and easier.
Isaiah: Same answer here. The discriminations are spot on which is a necessary step.
But take it one step further, are you the discriminator or the self, that which knows the
discriminator? Notice, I am not answering these questions because I know you know
the answers.
Jeff: I also (with a slightly different sort of effort and attention) separate the 'I-thought'
(which is thinking about things) from thoughts about objects, and make that I-thought
the object; I find the overall sense of 'me' in that moment, and look at that 'me',
putting some distance between the witness and that me-object. I have recently been
experimenting with exploring that space that separates the witness from the I-thought,
'trying it on for size' (the space). Swami Abhuvananada has a great way of suggesting to
'play' being space.
Isaiah: Why play being space Jeff? Space is not conscious, you are conscious. Also, are
you the space between the witness and the thought or are you the witness? If you do
not have the confidence to own your identity as awareness, then if nothing else, play
being awareness, not an object that is known in awareness like space. Swami
Anubhavananda is a wonderful and charming teacher but this practice sounds
unproductive to say the least. I can only assume this is something he would
recommend to seekers that are not nearly as advanced as you.
Jeff: It is helpful to hear from you about this, and helpful for me to write this all down. I
am not looking for a big-wow enlightenment experience, I am comfortable with the
distinction between doing/experience and knowing/knowledge. It is the discrimination

between myself and subtle or not-so-subtle objects that trips me up a little right now.
But again, that 'discriminative challenge' itself is reducing a lot. My wife noticed it the
morning I stepped in the dog poop in the dark by the kitchen in my bare feet, and
essentially went 'ho hum'. This was not the way I would have reacted a few months ago
:-).
Isaiah: You point out correctly that you are having trouble discriminating between
yourself and subtle objects because throughout this email you make several references
to Jeff's reactions (the subtle body). Who is reacting, who is getting tripped up, for
whom is the discriminative challenge reducing? It is nothing but the subtle body, and
you know that it isn't you, don't you? If you are aware of these reactions, trip ups and
challenges, are you reacting, tripping up or being challenged? No. Not one bit. You are
the witness of it all. So whether Jeff steps in dog shit and says, ho-hum or steps in
dog shit and screams, Goddammit! it doesn't matter at all. Firm discrimination
(which is the definition of knowledge) between yourself, and the objects proves that it
is so. I know you say that you are not looking for the big wow enlightenment
experience but I think you may be looking for an experience of enlightenment all the
same, meaning that you think Jeff's behavior will somehow indicate his knowledge. But
you know very well that Jeff is an unconscious thought in you, awareness, so he can't
know anything. Only you, the self, can know you are the self. It sounds like Jeff is a
very decent and dharmic fellow, no doubt about it, and this good. But if you are the
self and you know you are the self, what Jeff does or does not do doesn't mean squat.
That is firm discrimination, that is knowledge. It doesn't feel like anything, it doesn't
look like anything. Please keep this in mind and it will save you a lot of grief.
Jeff: So thank you Sundari; it is very helpful to be able to write to someone truly
knowledgeable and get a helpful response.
Jeff
Isaiah: I'm glad to get the opportunity to speak with you. Feel free to write back to me
if you have further questions.