Guest guest Posted October 12, 1998 Report Share Posted October 12, 1998 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy Namaste. I wonder if Shri Sadananda can publish again his article on who is the sleeper which he said he wrote after contemplating on MAnDUkya kArika. I am quite interested in seeing that article and that perspective. Hari Om Murthygaru: The article that you are looking for is attached herewith. I hope this clarifies your question. -- Ram Chandran Burke, VA Patrick S. Williams wrote: >I'd appreciate a clear explanation of what's meant when the term >"causal" is used. For example, I've been reading the treatment of >Mandukya Upanishad by Swami Nikhilananda, in which he intersperses >material from the sruti along with commentary from Shankara, Gaudapada, >and himself. The deep sleep state is referred to as "causal" because it >precedes the other two states. This makes some sense to me, although I >suspect there's some additional meaning to "causal" in this context. >But the term is also used to refer to other "states,", levels," etc. >When it is used thusly, exactly what does it mean? Why is "causal" an >apt term in these contexts? > >Thanks. >---------- I will try to provide a brief account to the best I can: The information is contained in the introductory book " The manual of Self Unfoldment" by Swami Chinmayaananda, published by Chinmaya Mission West. You can access CMW through the internet. They have book department in Philadelphia or you can give a call to the one close to you in Houston and talk to one Mr. Gaurang Naanaviti who is the achaarya there. ----------- Causal is the translation for kaarana, that which is the cause for the rest of the bodies. The following chart developed by Swami Chinyayanandaji and would help to understand the concepts Om(truth) or turiya | V(vasana) - causal state | --------------------- B- body M- Mind I- Intellect | | | P- perceiver F-feeler T-thinker | | | O-Objects E-emotions T -thoughts ------------------------------- Body with all 5 sense organs and 5 organs of action - with all pancha praanas etc constitute the gross body - stuula shareera Mind and intellect - the thought matter or thought world consisting of mind, the emotional center, intellect, the discriminative center; chitta, the memory ; and ahankaara (the ego - i thought) constitute the subtle body, suukshma shareera. and Vasanas (likes and dislikes, inclinations and tendencies) also called the avidya or ignorance constitute the causal body or kaarana Shareera. In the waking state, jagara, all the three bodies are at work, kaarana, suukshma and stuula shareeras - although the gross body is emphasized - as I am this gross body, I am here and not there etc. In the dream state, swapna, the identification with gross body is cut off, only the other two bodies, subtle and causal bodies are active. In the deep sleep state, sushupti, even the subtle body is folded - no mind and intellect that is no thoughts and only the causal body is identified. - Our experience of deep sleep state is I enjoyed but I donot know anything - so ignorance is the dominant factor. Hence the state is also called avidya, or ignorance. It is the sum total of vasanas that are the root cause - karana - for being what I am right now. Because of vasanas, I take birth in such and such family, male or female, pursuits the interests that are conducive to my vasnas. Hence causal body is the cause for type of gross body and subtle bodies that I have. ( some total of all causal bodies in the universe becomes the maaya - the creative power of the Lord - since creation is there to fulfil the total vasanaas) Vasanas are also called karma pala or karma - in the sense they are result of ego-centric actions that leave subtle impressions in the mind. The total account of my vasanas is called sanchita karma (total bank balance), of which I bring into this life only those that can be exhausted with particular body in a given environment. Thus I am borne in India and you here, both to particular parents etc all due to the blue prints which are knowingly or unknowingly made by ourselves. The part that I bring into this life is called Praarabda karma. In this life, since I am given an intellect to think and choice of action, I perform and when I do with ego-centric attitude, the action leaves more vasanas which may or may not be exhausted in this life and those that cannot be will be deposited into my account. Thus I get caught up in the vicious cycle of karma to janma to karma. And only way to break this vicious cycle is through yoga - Vasanas cause desire at the intellect level and agitations at the mental level and propels action at the body level. BMI are the only three equipments we all have, and we yoke out our experiences through them. I, a conscious, existent entity, take myself to be a perceiver, P, when identifying with body, take myself as feeler, F, identifying with the mind, and thinker, T, identifying with the intellect. This happens because I donot know completely about myself. I know about myself only partially, that I exist(sat) and I am conscious (chit), but I do not know that I am ananda ( happiness or limitless state) too. This is non-apprehension about myself or avidya. This is the part of the problem. Ignorance itself is not bad - hence sushupti state where the I -identify myself with ignorance - is sill unagitated and blissful. But when the mind wakes-up in the dream and waking state, non-apprehension of myself leads to mis-apprehension of myself as I am the body, mind and/or intellect which are actually objects of my awareness. I mistake the objects as subject I and suffer the consequence of that. Questions that normally asked is when did this ignorance, avidya started and who has that ignorence. These are one of the burning issues of advaita vedanta that others such as Sri Ramanujachar of VishiTaadviata and Madwacharya of dvaita find fault with. Shankar responds to this as it is beginningless - In atma bodha he says:- anaadi avidyaa anirvaachyaa karanopadhih uchyate| This avidya is beginningless and inexplicable and is called as causal body. Of course the others interpret this as not the answer but escapism. But we advaitins know that Shankar is very logical. Ignorance has to be beginningless. This is true to all types of ignorance. When did my ignorance of chemistry started - It was there from the beginning from the moment you told me that is something called chemistry. If ignorance starts in time, then before that one is knowledgeable and knowledgeable person cannot become ignorant. Of course another problem in the vasana state is beginning and end are the concept of time. Vasanas are there even before the intellect or thoughts process and hence the time starts. Hence it is before even the time is conceived. Shankara also says it is inexplicable - anirvachaneeyam - because the explanations belong the realm of intellect and thoughts. It is before even the thoughts raise and it is the very cause for thoughts. Logically it is perfect. ( The fact of the matter is the other achaarya's although criticize advaita, donot have any better answers to the question - when and how this all started - their answer is it is all the leela of the Lord - His play - Christianity comes with similar vague answer as the original sin - but it is considered as blasphamy if one askes why I am borne when somebody else commited a sin - There is no answer. This original sin is the anaadi) Some time back I had article on who is the deep sleeper I, may be one can download from the files if one is interested - it analyzes the anirvachaniiyam aspect. In the past, there were several interesting discussions on that topic on advaita list. I hope the concept of causal body is somewhat clear. Typed fast, as usual the some of the errors can be attributed to that! Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 5, 1998 Report Share Posted November 5, 1998 On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: > Thus the waking state > is no more important than the dream state (or the deep-sleep state), all > superposed on the sleep state. Taking that sentence as summarising the gist of the post (as a reminder, for it was a few weeks ago), there is another way to consider these states that may be helpful. The perspective is just different, not necessarily correct: whether it casts more light or more shadows is up to you. INDIVIDUAL VIEW The waking state is more useful than the dream or sleep states, for it is more durative than the other two, i.e. there is a common thread linking experience in the waking states from day to day, and year to year (more or less), whereas there is a lack of continuity of experience from one dream to the next, and in deep sleep there is nothing to experience. >From this _relative_ constancy of the waking state a number of useful lessons can be drawn from the other two states. (A) You dream of some object, say a mountain: where was it? It couldn't fit inside your head, so it must have been in the mind. So you wake up and get out of bed, look out the window, and there is a mountain: where is it? Having doubts about this so-called reality of the waking state, can be the start of the search for the true Reality. The dream state helps to simplify matters for analysis: there is just you and the dream, free of complicating factors such as external objects and senses and sunlight and so on. They say that "Seeing is believing", and they are quite right: it is _believing_, not _knowing_. So much for perception. (B) This mountain that you dreamed about was millions of years old in your dream: you could tell that by the weathering of the rocks. But your dream lasted only a few minutes: what then is time? So much for concepts. © Dream seems to be a chaotic rehash of past experience (although it appears consistent within the dream), i.e. it is based upon memories stored during the waking state, and is not a new creation where fire is cool and pigs fly. This implies that dreams are "controlled" from the waking state, and not the other way round. This in turn means that new knowledge can only enter into the waking-dream cycle in the waking state. And so there are scriptures and discussion groups and so on, where new knowledge may arise: the same could be said of newspapers and TV of course, but you do have some choice in the company that you keep, and thus what is stored in memory. (D) If dream is a rehash of previous waking-state experience, could it be that the waking state is a rehash of previous lives? (E) In dream and sleep, as in the waking state, the biological functions of breathing, circulating blood, digesting food, and so on, continue without your control (or interference). Clearly you are not the body or its vital functions. In dream the voluntary muscles rest, and in sleep the mind rests as well: where are you? Could it be that Life expresses Itself through the human instrument? Note: instrument not agent. Isn't that the essence of bhakti: surrendering agency, accepting instrumentality? (F) On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 "a c" <ac wrote: > Perhaps you've had the experience of being deeply asleep and oblivious to > very loud noises in the environment when you suddenly awaken because of one > small but significant sound ( maybe a baby stirring ) ? Something seems to > be deciding which sounds are important and which are not and this > "something" has the ability to switch on the waking state if necessary. > These are only states as far as the ego is concerned: in the waking state it "controls" the body; in dream it "controls" the mind; and in sleep, where there is no "control", i.e. agency, it disappears. Intelligence is there all the time -- in spite of the activity of the mind! Mental activity is what the world calls intelligence, but it is merely tiring and stressful: life is much easier and more efficient when the mind is as still and silent as it is in deep sleep. When a wise man sits, he just sits, when he walks, he just walks: a sage is called a muni (silent one) because that describes the state of his mind. ______ Life is like a school: if you understand the lessons, then, come the day of judgement, you pass on to a higher level; otherwise you just repeat the course. UNIVERSAL PERSPECTIVE The ego views the waking-dream-sleep states in terms of its scope for agency, and thus values the waking state most highly; the scriptures turn this upside-down, or rather, the right way up. Hence BG 2:69 gives: yaa ni"saa sarvabhuutaanaa.m tasyaa.m jaagarti sa.myamii | yasyaa.m jaagrati bhuutaani saa ni"saa pa"syato mune.h || What is night to all beings, therein the self-controlled one is awake. Where all being are awake, that is the night of the sage who sees. The deep sleep state is avyakta, the seed state of the whole creation, the causal world of infinite potential. It is also the primal ignorance: it is not a separate substance as the dvaitins assume, it is simply an absence of Self-knowledge. This is commonly experienced in deep sleep: there are no objects, there is no "other", and the Self is not known. The primary ignorance of the Self is a necessary condition for the projection of the not-Self. The projection takes place in the subtle world of the mind: this is a vast world, containing all the laws of creation; all cultures, traditions, and religions; all values, desires, expectations, hopes and fears; and it is governed by language. But it is all a dream: a movement in the ever unmoving Consciousness. The physical world is the final product of the mind, the end result: it is fixed, limited, jaDa; is is but one manifestation of infinite possibilities. ______ There is a common view that the mind is contained within the body, and that the soul is a tiny speck somewhere within that. Could it be the other way round? The mind is larger than the body -- much, much larger -- and the Spirit is larger again, in fact beyond measure. ______ It may be useful to test this "dual vision" of the states, on the scriptures, for example the section where Janaka asks Yajnavalkya "What serves as the light for a man?" (Br. 4.3.1 ff.) Regards, Charles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 1998 Report Share Posted November 8, 1998 Namaste. I welcome Charles on to the List and I recall the many very pleasant discussions I had with him both on the list and privately [i will comment on the word "recall" that I used here, later on in the post]. My fundamental premise in this topic is that we are giving, incorrectly, too much importance to the wake-up state and thus the whole perception of duality is on us because of this. The three states are fundamentally different, and the time scales of the three states are different. We falsely attribute and assume that it is the same worldly entity that goes through the three states. It is not the same Gummuluru Murthy that goes to sleep and the one that wakes up. The situation is different and the jagat is different from one moment to the next. But it is the intellect that tries to find the *worldly* commonality in all the three states and argues falsely that the world is the same and continuous in the wake-up state. However, the only commonality in all the three states is the Consciousness, that turIyA which is ever wakeful (I use the word wakeful in the worldly sense here). And that is the only commonality in all the three states. And there is no *worldly* commonality. However, by wrong concepts which were drilled in to us from birth, we grope for the *worldly* commonality in all the three states and try to say that it is the same Gummuluru Murthy that has gone to sleeping, that is awake, that is dying and so on. Further, the common example that is given about *turIya* being the common link in all the three states is that when we wake up, we say that " I have a good sleep" and the one that carries that common link is the turIya state. I see the turIya being the common link, but I submit THAT is the ONLY common link. The scenario which I see is the following and I hope the learned members clarify my concept. When the jeeva X goes to deep sleep, a new mode is initiated. The wake-up jeeva is gone. The common link turIya that combines the wake-up, dream and deep-sleep states of jeeva X is the same for jeevas X, Y and Z. Jeeva X, by saying that I had a good sleep, is claiming that turIya to be his/her own. That is not so. That turIya, that common link is not only the common link between what jeeva X thinks to be his/her own three states, but also the common link for what various jeevas think to be their own three states, but also the LINK between jeevas. Thus, jeeva X has no monoploy on that turIya. Thus, there is no *worldly* common link between the three states of jeeva X. Jeeva X, by saying that he/she had a good sleep is wrongly claiming a worldly connection while the connection between the states (and between jeevas) is at paramArtha understanding. I welcome comments and refutations of the above. Now I will try to respond in a point-wise fashion to the many points made by Charles. On Thu, 5 Nov 1998, Charles Wikner wrote: > Charles Wikner <WIKNER > > > On Mon, 12 Oct 1998 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: > > > Thus the waking state > > is no more important than the dream state (or the deep-sleep state), all > > superposed on the sleep state. > > Taking that sentence as summarising the gist of the post (as a reminder, > for it was a few weeks ago), there is another way to consider these states > that may be helpful. The perspective is just different, not necessarily > correct: whether it casts more light or more shadows is up to you. > > INDIVIDUAL VIEW > > The waking state is more useful than the dream or sleep states, for it is > more durative than the other two, i.e. there is a common thread linking > experience in the waking states from day to day, and year to year (more > or less), whereas there is a lack of continuity of experience from one > dream to the next, and in deep sleep there is nothing to experience. > >From this _relative_ constancy of the waking state a number of useful > lessons can be drawn from the other two states. > The time scales for the three states are different. The wake-up state assessment of the duration of the three states says that the wake-up state duration is longer than the other two. From the wake-up state stance, the dream might have lasted only 5 minutes (of wake-up time). But that is irrelevant, in my view. So is the question: at what time did you sleep ? That is an attempt to get everything reduced into the time frame of the wake-up time and that, in my view, is unnecessary and is a wrong approach. Although the dream might have lasted only five minutes of wake-up time, within the dream, twenty years of life might have taken place. Similarly, the nishchalatvam of the deep sleep state has no time frame attached to it. To look at it in the time barriers of the wake-up state may not be useful, and in my view, may be the source of our wrong concepts. Further, is there really more continuity in the wake-up state than the dream state? Even within the wake-up state, the jagat changes from moment to moment as the progression of our thoughts. Just like we do not have continuity from one dream to the next dream, so also there is no continuity from one wake-up state to the next, or from one life to the next. Even within one wake-up state, the jagat has changed from one moment to the next. Is analysis of one state available from another state ? I doubt it very much. The sages of the Upanishhads analyzed the dream state versus the wake-up and the deep sleep states, but not of one worldly entity going from one state to the other. Even if we consider that the same worldly entity is going through the three states, contents of the dream may be available for the worldly entity for a trifle second of the wake-up state (if the dreaming entity slips on to the waking state directly from the dream state). The dream contents may be available for a longer time if the thought is re-inforced *during the waking state* of the content of the dream. But surprisingly and pleasantly, even from that very brief availability of the dream state during the wake-up state, the worldly entity correctly concludes during the wake-up state that the dream state is an illusion. Similarly the worldly entity might have concluded during the dream state that the wake-up state is an illusion. That conclusion is not available to the worldly entity during the wake-up state. The post is already too long. I will address the other points in the next post. I would be most grateful for any comments. Finaly, a comment on the word "recall" that I used in the first sentence of this post. The recall, or memory which the jeeva is blessed with, may be the biggest source of trickery in a human life. It seems to me the purpose of "memory" is to sort out the many events in the brain and find a common link between two happenings. That establishes, wrongly, an *apparent* link between two remote worldly events and puts us on a wrong track. I am not a philosopher by profession and my comments above may be off-base. If so, I would like that to be pointed out so that I can clarify my thoughts. > [...] > Regards, Charles. > Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Yadaa sarve pramucyante kaamaa ye'sya hr^di shritaah atha martyo'mr^to bhavatyatra brahma samashnute Katha Upanishhad II.3.14 When all the desires that dwell in the heart fall away, then the mortal becomes immortal, and attains Brahman even here. ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 1998 Report Share Posted November 9, 1998 On Sun, 8 Nov 1998 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: > My fundamental premise in this topic is that we are giving, incorrectly, > too much importance to the wake-up state and thus the whole perception of > duality is on us because of this. We give too much importance to the object of the three states (not-Self), and hence give too much importance to the ego (Self plus not-Self). > The three states are fundamentally > different, and the time scales of the three states are different. Which is surely sufficient proof of the presence of not-Self. The Self is is changeless, constant, ever the same. > We falsely attribute and assume that it is the same worldly entity that > goes through the three states. Yes, the Self plus some relatively constant aspect of the not-Self called Gummuluru or Charles or whatever. > It is not the same Gummuluru Murthy that > goes to sleep and the one that wakes up. Does your wife know that? :-) > The situation is different and > the jagat is different from one moment to the next. But it is the > intellect that tries to find the *worldly* commonality in all the > three states and argues falsely that the world is the same and > continuous in the wake-up state. Does your employer know that? Why should he pay a salary to you at the end of the month if it was a different Gummuluru working for him yesterday and another Gummuluru last week? > However, the only commonality in all the three states is the > Consciousness, that turIyA which is ever wakeful (I use the word wakeful > in the worldly sense here). And that is the only commonality in all the > three states. And there is no *worldly* commonality. The commonality of the three states is ignorance. That ignorance is superimposed on Consciousness. > The scenario which I see is the following and I hope the learned members > clarify my concept. Certainly not! Much better to relieve you of concepts altogether! If you need a concept to put experience into perspective, here is a finer one: having mentioned the Yoga Vasishtha's seven stages of wisdom to Greg, let me give you its seven stages of ignorance. [ Don't read anything between the lines there :-) It is not personal, just relevant to the topic. ] Delusion or ignorance is sevenfold, though the permutations and combinations and combinations are countless. I shall descibe them to you: (1) bIja-jAgrat: The first is the consciousness which is nameless and pure but in which the jIva, etc, exist potentially associated with their corresponding concepts and names. Because all these exist in their seed state, this is known as the "seed of wakefulness". (2) jAgrat: In the consciousness the pure, natural and unperverted notions of "I" and "mine" arise for the first time and it is known as the "waking" state. (3) mahA-jagrat: When jAgrat expands to include the "other" and when such notions as "I am so and so" and "This is mine" arise, however feebly, it is known as "great wakefulness". (4) jAgrat-svapna: When the mind is totally occupied with the objects of perception whether they are gross or subtle and when this mind is constantly busy creating images in itself which it believes to be real, that is known as the "waking dream" state. This is also characterised by the appearance of division and diversity which, though illusory, appear to be reality on account of repeated indulgence. (5) svapna: That is the "dream" state in which for a short time one experiences various objects which are later remembered in the waking state as having been seen in the dream. (6) savapna-jAgrat: That is known as "dream wakefulness" in which the memories of the distant past are revived and experienced as if "now". (7) sushuptam: When one abondons these six [states described above] and when there is total inertia in which the seeds of sorrow are still present, that state is known as "deep sleep". In that state the world vanishes into dense darkness. Regards, Charles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 1998 Report Share Posted November 10, 1998 Namaste. I thank Charles for pointing out the deficiencies in my logic. It is greatly appreciated, particularly the statement on the seven states of ignorance from Yoga VashishhTA. I should read that work thoroughly. Leave aside whether my wife thinks I am the same person or whether my employer can use that argument to deny a paycheque. That is not the point of discussion. That thought has arisen because of the fundamental problem of the interchange between the subject and the object. The Atman is always the subject, and can never be the object. The superimposition on this, the intellect and the ego is always the object and can never be the subject. However, for the world functioning, the object has become the subject so much so the actual subject is unfortunately masked by the object. That is the way the world functions and the world functioning is not the point of discussion. Now, coming to the three states and continuity: if we say it is the same Mr. X that goes to sleep and wakes up again, and there is continuity throughout the wake-up state (as Charles seem to be saying), are we saying then there is continuity at the worldly level ? Are we saying then that *in addition to* the continuity at the paramArtha, the turIyA, there is *another* continuity at the worldly level ? That cannot be the case, unless the two continuities are one and the same. The question is: does the jeeva's thinking (i) that it (the jeeva) is the same throughout the waking, dream and deep sleep states (ii) and it is the "jeeva" Mr. X that is the same, is that thinking of the jeeva consistent with the advaita teaching that the unchanging thing in the jeeva is not the jeeva but the turIyA that is nameless, formless. By saying yes to the jeeva's thinking (that the jeeva is continuous throughout the three states), are we not giving a name and form to the turIyA which cannot be done ? When Charles Wikner says he has a good sleep, who is saying that ? Is it Charles Wikner, the intellect, or is it the turIyA state which you are naming as Charles Wikner ? Charles Wikner, the intellect, cannot say that it has a good sleep, because it does not know that. The turIyA cannot say that it has a good sleep, because firstly, turIyA does not speak or sleep and secondly, turIyA does not have a name. That is the gist of my argument. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Yadaa sarve pramucyante kaamaa ye'sya hr^di shritaah atha martyo'mr^to bhavatyatra brahma samashnute Katha Upanishhad II.3.14 When all the desires that dwell in the heart fall away, then the mortal becomes immortal, and attains Brahman even here. ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 1998 Report Share Posted November 11, 1998 On Tue, 10 Nov 1998 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: > Now, coming to the three states and continuity: if we say it is the > same Mr. X that goes to sleep and wakes up again, and there is continuity > throughout the wake-up state (as Charles seem to be saying), are we saying > then there is continuity at the worldly level ? That it the way it _appears_ to us. The Lord's creation is rather more durable than thee or me: we connect somewhat with His dream in our waking state, and with our own creation in the dream state. > Are we saying then that > *in addition to* the continuity at the paramArtha, the turIyA, there is > *another* continuity at the worldly level ? That cannot be the case, > unless the two continuities are one and the same. The second _apparent_ continuity is the Lord's creation: imagining this creation to be separate from the Lord, is ignorance. Under ignorance we identify with a tiny part of this creation, and believe "I am this." > The question is: > > does the jeeva's thinking > (i) that it (the jeeva) is the same throughout the waking, dream and deep > sleep states > (ii) and it is the "jeeva" Mr. X that is the same, > > is that thinking of the jeeva consistent with the advaita teaching that > the unchanging thing in the jeeva is not the jeeva but the turIyA that > is nameless, formless. The jIva is the unchanging Self reflected in the ever-changing not-Self: the two are superimposed upon one another, like the analogy of the red-hot iron ball, so that we seem unable to distinguish between the two. > By saying yes to the jeeva's thinking (that the jeeva is continuous > throughout the three states), are we not giving a name and form to the > turIyA which cannot be done ? It is the not-Self aspect of the jIva that has the name and form. > When Charles Wikner says he has a good sleep, who is saying that ? > Is it Charles Wikner, the intellect, or is it the turIyA state which you > are naming as Charles Wikner ? > Charles Wikner, the intellect, cannot say that it has a good sleep, because > it does not know that. > The turIyA cannot say that it has a good sleep, because firstly, turIyA > does not speak or sleep and secondly, turIyA does not have a name. Charles Wikner says "I had a good sleep last night." I did too. :-) But that "I" is the Self identified with this particular human body here in Cape Town on 12 November 1998, which is a very small part of the not-Self. > That is the gist of my argument. The argument seems to be based on the meaning associated with the word jIva. PancadaShI 4:11 gives: caitanyaM yad adhishThAnaM li"nga-deha"s ca yaH punaH | cic-chAyA li"nga-deha-sthA tat-saMdho jIva ucyate || The substratum or pure consciousness, the subtle body, and the reflection of consciousness in the subtle body -- these together constitute the jIva. It is the jIva that experiences the three states of waking dream and sleep. TurIya transcends these states, it transcends the duality of Self and not-Self, it is beyond bondage and liberation. Regards, Charles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 1998 Report Share Posted November 13, 1998 Namaste. Thanks Charles for elucidation of some of these concepts and for giving additional references for me to pursue. I agree, of course, with what you are saying. On Thu, 12 Nov 1998, Charles Wikner wrote: > Charles Wikner <WIKNER > > > On Tue, 10 Nov 1998 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: > > > > When Charles Wikner says he has a good sleep, who is saying that ? > > Is it Charles Wikner, the intellect, or is it the turIyA state which you > > are naming as Charles Wikner ? > > Charles Wikner, the intellect, cannot say that it has a good sleep, because > > it does not know that. > > The turIyA cannot say that it has a good sleep, because firstly, turIyA > > does not speak or sleep and secondly, turIyA does not have a name. > > Charles Wikner says "I had a good sleep last night." I did too. :-) > But that "I" is the Self identified with this particular human body > here in Cape Town on 12 November 1998, which is a very small part > of the not-Self. > So, as you say, it is the not-SELF which is saying "I had a good sleep last night.". Surely, you will agree with me that the not-SELF is not there witnessing the deep sleep. So, the not-SELF is inferring it. The SELF, which is the witness to the not-SELF sleeping, is not saying anything. (MuNDAka upanishhad two bird analogy fits in here nicely). This is another example of the object claiming to be the subject and doer of the action (similar to the example given by Greg sometime ago about the clown taking the bow after the ballerina's dance). Now, what is the basis for this inference by the not-SELF "I had a good sleep." ? Is it not the false assumption by the not-SELF that it is the same in the wake-up state and that it is the wake-up state not-SELF that has gone to sleep and has woken up again ? If that false assumption were not there, there is no need for the above inference. It seems to me, that accepting the not-SELF is not the same from one state to the other is closer to the TRUTH and involves lesser number of assumptions than clinging to the thinking that it is the same not-SELF that is going through these three states. By natural extrapolation of that argument, we can say that the three states and the existence of the not-SELF are all in the realm of the not-SELF. That may give a clearer perspective of the separation of the not-SELF from the one that really is there, the SELF. Again, I appreciate your comment. > > Regards, Charles. > Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Yadaa sarve pramucyante kaamaa ye'sya hr^di shritaah atha martyo'mr^to bhavatyatra brahma samashnute Katha Upanishhad II.3.14 When all the desires that dwell in the heart fall away, then the mortal becomes immortal, and attains Brahman even here. ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.