More on Sahaja Samadhi

[Guest guest]

My advaita sat-guru, Krishna Menon (Sri Atmananda), also wrote about sahaja

samadhi. Something that is implicit in Ramana Maharshi's words on sahaja is

also implicit in Atmananda's -- that is, sahaja samadhi has both a phenomenal

and a non-phenomenal character, depending on the viewpoint of the onlooker.

That is, for those who are looking for a psychological or meditational

definition (as you find with other samadhi descriptions), it is there. And for

those thinking that the sage can't be other than Consciousness Itself, and that

this is never personalized or localized, then this definition is also there.

 

So I'll post here what I'd sent to the AdvaitatoZen and DirectApproach lists

some time ago. Enjoy!

 

--Greg

 

================

 

There is a huge, privately circulated set of talks of his called NOTES ON

SPIRITUAL DISCOURSES. It's meatier than I AM THAT, but very hard to find. It's

almost 600 pages of single-spaced, 10pt text. There are 2 volumes, and the

organization is by year, each topic within the year sequentially numbered and

dated. I pulled out several of the Q&A's about sahaja samadhi. You can see

that the standpoint is advaitic, and Atmananda speaks about sahaja samadhi

sometimes as though it's something that one is *in*, and sometimes as though it

is Consciousness itself. As we all know, teachers often take this leeway,

shifting perspectives and levels as suitable in order to help the folks coming

to them. Sometimes, of course, teachers take this leeway in order to make

themselves special. Atmananda is one of the former!

 

Here's Georg Feuerstien's definition of Sahaja, and Samadhi, from Yoga Journal.

It's from a raja-yogic perspective. Indeed, Feuerstien averred in his

translation of Patanjali's Yoga Sutras that realization could only occur after

the death of the body!

 

Sahaja ("together born"): a medieval term denoting

the fact that the transcendental Reality and the

empirical reality are not truly separate but coexist,

or with the latter being an aspect or misperception

of the former; often rendered as "spontaneous" or

"spontaneity"; the sahaja state is the natural

condition, that is, enlightenment or realization.

 

Samadhi ("putting together"): the ecstatic or

unitive state in which the meditator becomes

one with the object of meditation, the eighth

and final limb (anga) of Patanjali's eightfold

path; there are many types of samadhi, the most

significant distinction being between samprajnata

(conscious) and asamprajnata (supraconscious)

ecstasy; only the latter leads to the dissolution

of the karmic factors deep within the mind;

beyond both types of ecstasy is enlightenment,

which is also sometimes called sahaja-samadhi

or the condition of "natural" or "spontaneous"

ecstasy, where there is perfect continuity of

superconscious throughout waking, dreaming,

and sleeping.

 

 

And now, on to Atmananda!

=========================

 

 

NOTES ON SPIRITUAL DISCOURSES OF SREE ATMANANDA of Trivandrum

Taken by Nitya Tripta

Trivandrum, India: The Reddiar Press, 1963

 

29th March, 1956

13. WHAT HAPPENS IN SAMADHI AND HOW TO DIRECT IT TO THE ULTIMATE TRUTH?

In seeking Samadhi you are trying to see the Truth through the absence of all

activities, because you do not see the Truth during the activities. But Truth

(your swarupa) is not to be found in either the presence or the absence of

activities which constitute the mental realm. Therefore you must go beyond both

to get at the Truth. The world ties you down by its presence here. The world

ties you down by its absence or non-existence in Samadhi. You must transcend

both in order to come to Truth.

 

You desire Samadhi only for the hapiness you suppose you derive from it, just as

you desire an object for the pleasure you hope to derive from it.

MANDOOKYAKARIKA advises you to take away the desire from both and you will be in

your own centre. But it does not suggest how that desire can be taken away. It

can only be done by knowing, that the happiness experienced in either case is

not the outcome of either the Samadhi or the object, but that it is your own

real nature and therefore intrinsic in you. All effort to achieve one's own

real nature is meaningless; because it stands already achieved. So the desire

for the fruit vanishes and you stand in the Reality.

 

1st January, 1953

3. CAN THE SAHAJA STATE BE CALLED A CONTINUOUS SAMADHI?

No! If you are so particular about using the word Samadhi, you may say you are

then in a permanent Samadhi.

 

8th August, 1952

161. WHAT IS THE SAHAJA STATE?

A Jnanin, by experiencing the ultimate Happiness, knows that he experiences

nothing new and that the limitation he used to put upon Happiness before

Realization was a mere illusion. Thus he knows that what one experiences as

limited happiness apparently ensuing from objects, is in fact that unlimited

ultimate Happiness itself. So even if a Sage appears to be leading a normal

life as before, he does not see the world as the onlookers see it. Even when

the others thing that he is hunting after objects of pleasure, He from His own

stand is always enjoying His Swarupananda. A Sage in the Sahaja state does not

bother himself -- as far as he is concerned -- with explaining the objective

world or its activities. Death for him has taken place long ago at the momeht

of his first realizing the Truth. The subsequent stoppage of prana long after,

and the consequent paralysis of the body which we usually call death does not

denote the moment of the death to be deeply convinced that the Reality is far

beyond both seeing and not-seeing by the senses. You only witness these

perceptions and the perceptions in no way affect you. Though the eye shows the

palace on the backdrop (curtain) on the stage most realistically to you, the

intellect from behind tells you it is not real, and you readily accept the

correction. So also though sense organs show the objects to be real, the

"I-Principle" standing behind the sense organs, corrects them and tells you it

is all illusion. The Sage readily accepts this position and lets the body and

mind continue to function as before, just as he who sees the curtain continues

to see the palace on the curtain as before, but does not allow himself to be

carried away by the eye's verdict.

 

You cannot help seeing if you look through the eyes. The only means of avoiding

seeing is to cease looking through the eyes. But the Sage does not want to

perform that vain labour. He is content with resting in the Ultimate Truth

whatever may be the activitythe mind and body are engaged in. We talk

ignorantly of the activities of the Sage. It is a clear contradiction in terms.

The Sage is that principle transcending both activity and inactivity. So the

Sage cannot take to any activity as the Sage, and that which is engaged in any

activity is not the Sage. In short, that which is visible to our sense organs

or mind is not the Sage. The Sage is invisible, and the background of all our

perceptions -- the Ultimate Reality. We can in no way reconcile the Sage and

the activity we so ignorantly attribute to him.

 

You say you went to Sasthamangalam in the bus. Except boarding ald alighting

from the bus you did not perform any other activity. All motion belonged to the

bus and yet you say you went, attributing the motion of the bus to yourself who

was only a silent witness to the activity of the bus. Still you claim to have

gone to Sasthamangalam. This is the play of ignorance. The Sage does not claim

the activity of anything else for himself. He always gives the devil his due

and never identifies himself with the body, senses or mind.

 

Now applying the illustration of the bus subjectively, we find that the bus

represents the objective group of the body, senses and generic mind, and 'you'

in the bu stand for the real "I-Principle". Therefore even when the Sage (the

real "I-Principle") has withdrawn all identification from the objective group,

that group is left intact to function as accurately and intelligently as before

under the guidance of the very same "ignorance" which was guiding it before.

What you call "intelligence" is based upon pure ignorance which is as much dead

matter as the body, from the standpoint of the Reality.

 

16th September, 1951

206. WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SAHAJA STATE?

You are established in what is really meant or what really happens when you say

'you know' or 'you love'. By knowing or loving, an object is actually brought

nearer and nearer to your own self, until at last it merges in you as

Consciousness or Peace. Love and Consciousness-pure, always annihilate the Ego.

 

In statements such as "He who sees", "He who hears", "He who thinks"

etc., the

unqualified "He" is the Absolute Reality itself. He who is able to realise

this, is in the Sahaja state. Even after realizing that what you have seen is a

rope, it is quite possible to see the snake in the rope with all its details.

But you can never be frightened by that snake, because you know full well that

it is your own creation. This is how a Jnanin in the Sahaja state sees the

world in the Self, but is in no way affected by it.

 

Sri Chattampiswami often used to say, "All this is the manyness of the One."

 

Sri Sankara -- "Perception of the object is but oblation to the fire of

knowledge."

 

Gurunathan (Atmananda) -- One (1) is the Truth. What you call two is not two

but "one-one" and three but "one-one-one" and so on. The word "two"

makes you

forget the one, which is the real background and substance of all numbers. But

when you say "one-one" it serves the same purposes as two, but does not make you

forget the Reality. "Two" does not really exist at any time. So look at all

objects without forgetting their common background, the "I-Principle" or

Consciousness. This is Sahaja state.

 

--end--

[Guest guest]

> Sri Sankara -- "Perception of the object is but oblation to the

fire of knowledge."

>

 

I like this a lot. To paraphrase: Look around and see, think, and

feel, but know that you are giving a continuing gift to a false God.

 

I also like the parallel between knowing and loving.

> You are established in what is really meant or what really happens

when you say 'you know' or 'you love'. By knowing or loving, an

object is actually brought nearer and nearer to your own self, until

at last it merges in you as Consciousness or Peace. Love and

Consciousness-pure, always annihilate the Ego.>

 

Love

Bobby G.

[Guest guest]

, "texasbg2000"

<Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote:

>

> > Sri Sankara -- "Perception of the object is but oblation to the

> fire of knowledge."

> >

>

> I like this a lot. To paraphrase: Look around and see, think, and

> feel, but know that you are giving a continuing gift to a false

God.

>

> I also like the parallel between knowing and loving.

>

> > You are established in what is really meant or what really

happens

> when you say 'you know' or 'you love'. By knowing or loving, an

> object is actually brought nearer and nearer to your own self,

until

> at last it merges in you as Consciousness or Peace. Love and

> Consciousness-pure, always annihilate the Ego.>

>

> Love

> Bobby G.

 

Namaste,

 

Yes Sankara teaches a Saguna type philosophy in the main....ONS..Tony

[Guest guest]

--- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote:

> , "texasbg2000"

>

> <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote:

> >

> > > Sri Sankara -- "Perception of the object is but

> oblation to the

> > fire of knowledge."

> > >

> >

> > I like this a lot. To paraphrase: Look around and

> see, think, and

> > feel, but know that you are giving a continuing

> gift to a false

> God.

> >

> > I also like the parallel between knowing and

> loving.

> >

> > > You are established in what is really meant or

> what really

> happens

> > when you say 'you know' or 'you love'. By knowing

> or loving, an

> > object is actually brought nearer and nearer to

> your own self,

> until

> > at last it merges in you as Consciousness or

> Peace. Love and

> > Consciousness-pure, always annihilate the Ego.>

> >

> > Love

> > Bobby G.

>

> Namaste,

>

> Yes Sankara teaches a Saguna type philosophy in the

> main....ONS..>

>

 

Dear Tony,

 

Here is some Nirguna type philosophy:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

notmichael

[Guest guest]

, Michael Bowes

<rmichaelbowes> wrote:

>

> --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote:

> > , "texasbg2000"

> >

> > <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote:

> > >

> > > > Sri Sankara -- "Perception of the object is but

> > oblation to the

> > > fire of knowledge."

> > > >

> > >

> > > I like this a lot. To paraphrase: Look around and

> > see, think, and

> > > feel, but know that you are giving a continuing

> > gift to a false

> > God.

> > >

> > > I also like the parallel between knowing and

> > loving.

> > >

> > > > You are established in what is really meant or

> > what really

> > happens

> > > when you say 'you know' or 'you love'. By knowing

> > or loving, an

> > > object is actually brought nearer and nearer to

> > your own self,

> > until

> > > at last it merges in you as Consciousness or

> > Peace. Love and

> > > Consciousness-pure, always annihilate the Ego.>

> > >

> > > Love

> > > Bobby G.

> >

> > Namaste,

> >

> > Yes Sankara teaches a Saguna type philosophy in the

> > main....ONS..> >

> >

>

> Dear Tony,

>

> Here is some Nirguna type philosophy:

>

>

>

notmichael

My anwer

[Guest guest]

I like it! --Greg

 

At 10:54 AM 1/28/2004 -0800, Michael Bowes wrote:

>Dear Tony,

>

>Here is some Nirguna type philosophy:

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

notmichael wrote...

Here is some Nirguna type philosophy:notmichael

Here is some Saguna type philosophy

http://www.omshaantih.com/Sahaj Samadhi.htm

verymuchjoyce