discrimination

[Guest guest]

Dear Members,

 

Could someone clarify and state the differences among

those listed below ?

 

1. CHIT

2. CHITTA

3. MANAS

4. BUDHI

5. CHAITANYA

 

Shall be grateful for responses which can be the basis

for deeper understanding in our Self introspection.

 

Hari Om!

 

Swaminarayan

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

> 1. CHIT

> 2. CHITTA

> 3. MANAS

> 4. BUDHI

> 5. CHAITANYA

 

My basic understanding:

 

chit: consciousness, the essential nature of the self

 

chitta,manas,budhi: all functions of the mind

 

chitta: memory

 

manas: the projecting mind (capacity to speculate)

 

budhi: intellect, the aspect of the mind which analyzes and makes

decisions

 

chaitanya: consciousness, sometimes referred to as soul

 

I am also confused as to the difference between "chit"

and "chaitanya". From what I have seen, chit often carries a context

of pure consciousness, free from all attributes, whereas chaitanya

seems to hold an implication of individual consciousness, still

carrying some attachment to MY consciousness vs. YOUR consciousness.

I may be completely off the mark here...

 

In English translations of Sanskrit terms, "mind" seems to be often

used in two contexts. One usage refers to just the projecting mind,

the function that dreams about the future, speculates about possible

outcomes of action, and generally troubles us (or me at least) a

great deal when it is allowed to run free (distinct from intellect,

memory, etc). The second usage is more general, used to refer to all

functions of the mind in aggregation (memory, intellect, projection,

etc.)

 

Wayne

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Here is something related in advaita-l list:

http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m8743.html

 

regards

Shrinivas

[Guest guest]

--- Swaminarayan T <tvswaminarayan wrote:

> Could someone clarify and state the differences

> among

> those listed below ?

>

> 1. CHIT

> 2. CHITTA

> 3. MANAS

> 4. BUDHI

> 5. CHAITANYA

>

> Shall be grateful for responses which can be the

> basis

> for deeper understanding in our Self introspection.

 

Namaste,

Thank you for posing this and I look forward to

everyone's responses. Trying to define these from

scriptural contexts is a problem as they seem to

change their meaning..with the correct level of

discernment I am sure that the differences would not

appear.

Therefore I can only offer some personal reflection so

forgive my lack of understanding. I hope that future

discussion on these will lift us beyond dictionary

definitions through personal insight:

CHIT: consciousness as a substratum, inseparable from

sat and ananda.

CHITTA. The reflective manifestation of consciousness,

having the taste of 'this' and 'that' but both as

purnam.

BUDDHI: That which discriminates/separates but without

any judgment such as good,bad, I like, I do not like

for these are the product of ahankara.

CHAITANYA: Self consciousness in which there is

absolute freedom yet being in knowledge and activity.

 

This last one relates to an understanding picked up

from the first verse of the Siva Sutras

'Caitanyaatmaa'.

 

I look forward to new insights on these,

Om sri ram jai jai ram

Ken

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

The schema that has appealed to me is as follows:

 

1.CHIT = The Transcendent [unmanifest] and Immanent [Manifest]

CONSCIOUSNESS [brahman]

 

2.CHAITANYA = Immanent CONSCIOUSNESS [Manifest] [Atman]

 

(guNaatiita)

_____________

INTUITION [aatma-buddhi]

------------------------------

(guNamayii maayaa) EGO [jiiva-buddhi] (ahankara)

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

3.BUDDHI = The faculty of discrimination [Ref. Gita 18:30]

------------------------------

EGO [deha-buddhi] (ahankara)

 

4.MANAS = The faculty of perception and attention

['chitta-vritti'] [Gita 6:25]

 

5.CHITTA = The Memory store-house [of 'sanskaras'] [Gita 6:20]

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

>

> --- Swaminarayan T <tvswaminarayan> wrote:

>

> > Could someone clarify and state the differences

> > among

> > those listed below ?

> >

> > 1. CHIT

> > 2. CHITTA

> > 3. MANAS

> > 4. BUDHI

> > 5. CHAITANYA

> >

> > Shall be grateful for responses which can be the

> > basis

> > for deeper understanding in our Self introspection.

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste all,

Sorry to take so long in picking this up again but

this is a busy season for my pupils.

 

Following everyone's responses I have a couple of

questions which need your instruction.

 

Buddhi. Gita Chapter 18 29-32 gives us the difference

outcomes of each of the three possible imbalances of

the gunas in the buddhi. As Buddhi is a manifestation

of prakriti it presumably is a construct of the gunah.

If they are in balance is it a silly question to ask

if then there is no buddhi?

Secondly, why is it that translations always make

tamas out to be the 'bad guy'. Without tamas there can

be no form. Does not each guna have its demonic and

godly forms ie. kshaia and vikshepa for example?

 

My main question is not so much about buddhi as its

function is more easily known than chitta.

 

chitta: With chitta I have often heard of it being

called the storehouse of samskaaras and I understand

this in relation to sanchit etc. but this to me is

like saying that a supermarket is the food in it when

it has many other functions. I can logically produce

a chain of meaning from 'organ of reflection' to

'storehouse of samskaaras' but I do not know the

evidence beyond other people's definitions.

To illustrate:

Sunder referred us to Gita 6v20. which builds on verse

19:

'As a lamp in a windless place does not flicker..this

is the simile used for the disciplined mind of a yogi

practising concentration on the Self.

When the mind (cittam) disciplined by the practice of

yoga attains quietude, and when beholding the Self by

the self in the Self, he is satisfied in the Self.'

That to me is a simple statement upon reflection and

chitta's function as I would understand it.

Also we have Shankara's words:

Upadesha Sahasri 12v1

Just as (by a natural illusion) a person thinks of his

body characterised by light whenever it happens to be

standing in light, so also he thinks of his mind

illumined by a reflection of the Seer, as 'I', the

Seer.

and Upadesa Sahasri 17v22

'For knowledge manifests in a pure mind as it is

reflected in a clean mirror, and the mind can be

purified by the five restraints (yama etc), by the

enjoined daily sacrifices and by ascetic practices.'

 

I also have a book by Dr. Shivaram Karikal.... 'Vedic

thought and western Psychology'..... whom I met in

Kasarogod some time ago. He lists twelve properties of

Chitta in which he also includes memory and

samskaaras.

He bases much of his work on the Patanjali Yoga Sutras

and it may be there that this description of Chitta

abides.

I would greatly appreciate some guidance on this

because I would like to be able to refer people to

texts when we are discussing the structure of the

psyche in contemporary debates on consciousness as I

maintain that in Vedanta we have all that we need.

However I am lacking knowledge on this one as to where

this definition of chitta exists. All help will be

much appreciated

Om sri ram

Ken knight

 

 

 

 

Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of

your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

or bid at http://auctions.

[Guest guest]

--- ken knight <hilken_98 wrote:

> Namaste all,

> He bases much of his work on the Patanjali Yoga

> Sutras and it may be there that this description of

Chitta abides.

> I would greatly appreciate some guidance on this

> because I would like to be able to refer people to

> texts when we are discussing the structure of the

> psyche in contemporary debates on consciousness as I

> maintain that in Vedanta we have all that we need.

> Ken knight

 

Dear Sri KKenji,

Namaskar.

I have today posted the second chapter of the soul's

journey in which you will find an expalantion of not

only citta but also all other 3 aspects viz: buddhi,

manas and ahamkara. these were based on " Patanjali's

observations.

If you can get hold of the book itself, so much the

better. My summary is only 12% of the original.

The book should be avialble in USA from Vednatic

Society of North California. Alternatively, you can

ask a friend to send it to you from India where the

price is Rs 32 only (US 70 cents).

Pranams and Hari OM.

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

 

Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of

your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

or bid at http://auctions.

[Guest guest]

--- Rajan PBV <rajanpbv wrote:

> I have today posted the second chapter of the soul's

> journey in which you will find an expalantion of not

> only citta but also all other 3 aspects viz: buddhi,

> manas and ahamkara. these were based on "

> Patanjali's

> observations.

 

Dear Sir, Thank you for the posting of the book which

I will follow with interest. I live in UK but will be

visiting India again soon when book purchasing will be

one of the main objectives.

 

I am still not sure how the Patanjali vision of chitta

can be related to that of Shankara in the verses that

i quoted from the Upadesa Sahasri...12v1 and 17v22.

I will keep looking at this one as I feel it is

important in contemporary debate to have a clear

understanding of the various functions of 'mind'.

Thank you for your reply

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of

your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

or bid at http://auctions.

[Guest guest]

Discussing 'Chitta', we could explore the intrinsic

advice given by Gaudapadacharya with reference to

Chitta in his Mandukya karika as follows:

 

'Chitta spanditam eva idam graahya graahakavad dwayam

 

Chittam nirvishayam nityam anantham tena keertitam.'

 

In effect, does not the the Acharya state that Chittam

is verily Brahman? Not the Mind but the Non-Mind?

 

Or could some one clarify if Chitta and Chittam

mentioned here above are referring to two different

aspects of the Anthahkarana?

 

Hari Om!

 

Swaminarayan.

--- ken knight <hilken_98 wrote:

> Namaste all,

> Sorry to take so long in picking this up again but

> this is a busy season for my pupils.

>

> Following everyone's responses I have a couple of

> questions which need your instruction.

>

> Buddhi. Gita Chapter 18 29-32 gives us the

> difference

> outcomes of each of the three possible imbalances of

> the gunas in the buddhi. As Buddhi is a

> manifestation

> of prakriti it presumably is a construct of the

> gunah.

> If they are in balance is it a silly question to ask

> if then there is no buddhi?

> Secondly, why is it that translations always make

> tamas out to be the 'bad guy'. Without tamas there

> can

> be no form. Does not each guna have its demonic and

> godly forms ie. kshaia and vikshepa for example?

>

> My main question is not so much about buddhi as its

> function is more easily known than chitta.

>

> chitta: With chitta I have often heard of it being

> called the storehouse of samskaaras and I understand

> this in relation to sanchit etc. but this to me is

> like saying that a supermarket is the food in it

> when

> it has many other functions. I can logically

> produce

> a chain of meaning from 'organ of reflection' to

> 'storehouse of samskaaras' but I do not know the

> evidence beyond other people's definitions.

> To illustrate:

> Sunder referred us to Gita 6v20. which builds on

> verse

> 19:

> 'As a lamp in a windless place does not

> flicker..this

> is the simile used for the disciplined mind of a

> yogi

> practising concentration on the Self.

> When the mind (cittam) disciplined by the practice

> of

> yoga attains quietude, and when beholding the Self

> by

> the self in the Self, he is satisfied in the Self.'

> That to me is a simple statement upon reflection and

> chitta's function as I would understand it.

> Also we have Shankara's words:

> Upadesha Sahasri 12v1

> Just as (by a natural illusion) a person thinks of

> his

> body characterised by light whenever it happens to

> be

> standing in light, so also he thinks of his mind

> illumined by a reflection of the Seer, as 'I', the

> Seer.

> and Upadesa Sahasri 17v22

> 'For knowledge manifests in a pure mind as it is

> reflected in a clean mirror, and the mind can be

> purified by the five restraints (yama etc), by the

> enjoined daily sacrifices and by ascetic practices.'

>

> I also have a book by Dr. Shivaram Karikal....

> 'Vedic

> thought and western Psychology'..... whom I met in

> Kasarogod some time ago. He lists twelve properties

> of

> Chitta in which he also includes memory and

> samskaaras.

> He bases much of his work on the Patanjali Yoga

> Sutras

> and it may be there that this description of Chitta

> abides.

> I would greatly appreciate some guidance on this

> because I would like to be able to refer people to

> texts when we are discussing the structure of the

> psyche in contemporary debates on consciousness as I

> maintain that in Vedanta we have all that we need.

> However I am lacking knowledge on this one as to

> where

> this definition of chitta exists. All help will be

> much appreciated

> Om sri ram

> Ken knight

>

>

>

>

> Check out Shopping and Auctions for

> all of

> your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

>

> or bid at http://auctions.

>

 

 

 

 

Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of

your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

or bid at http://auctions.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Swaminarayan T <tvswaminarayan> wrote:

> Discussing 'Chitta', we could explore the intrinsic

> advice given by Gaudapadacharya with reference to

> Chitta in his Mandukya karika as follows:

>

> 'Chitta spanditam eva idam graahya graahakavad dwayam

>

> Chittam nirvishayam nityam anantham tena keertitam.'

>

> In effect, does not the the Acharya state that Chittam

> is verily Brahman? Not the Mind but the Non-Mind?

>

> Or could some one clarify if Chitta and Chittam

> mentioned here above are referring to two different

> aspects of the Anthahkarana?

>

> Hari Om!

>

> Swaminarayan.

 

Namaste Shri Swaminarayan,

 

This thread initiated by you gives us an opportunity to

discuss different aspects of the mind. Thanks for this

learning opportunity.

 

Could you post your translation of the above verse ?

 

Thanks

Shrinivas

[Guest guest]

namaste.

 

Sorry for the late entry into this discussion.

 

But, aren't manas, buddhi, citta and ahaMkAra all the

vr^itti-s of the same antahkaraNa, differing only in

subtleness? This also means that none of manas, buddhi,

citta and ahaMkAra all act simultaneously, i.e. the

antahkaraNa is the only thing that acts (or reacts)

by assuming these different names or forms. The same

holds for the much grosser sense organs as well. It

is the antahkaraNa behind the sense organs that sees,

hears, smells, feels a sense of touch, etc. It may

*appear* that some of these functions are taking

place simultaneously, but we can put a sequence in

time to the modifications of the antahkaraNa and

antahkaraNa is all there is in the functioning of

the individualized jIvA.

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

-------------------------

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Swami Krishnananda has said it this way:

 

 

http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/univ/univ_03.html

 

 

What Is the Mind?

 

" Our insistence that the world or the universe is outside us is

called the mind. It is a kind of conscious insistence. It cannot be

called a thing. It is a procedure of the consciousness by which it

asserts that the world is outside. This assertion takes the form of an

individual, localised existence, called the personality, whose centre

of affirmation is called the mind. We may call the mind, also by some

other name, such as the psychic organ. The word 'mind', especially in

the psychology of the West, is used to signify a general operation of

the psyche inside, including understanding, willing and feeling. The

word 'mind' is a general term in Western psychology, but in the

psychology of Yoga, a more detailed analysis has been made. 'Mind' is

not a proper English translation of what the Yoga calls 'Chitta',

especially in the system of Patanjali. The entire mind-stuff is called

Chitta. It is better to use the word 'psyche' instead of the word

'mind', because the former denotes a large composite structure than

the single function indicated by the word 'mind'. Mind is that which

thinks in an indeterminate manner; the intellect is that which thinks

in a determinate manner; the ego is that which asserts the

individuality of one's own self. There are other functions of the

psyche such as memory, often associated with the subconscious level.

It is impossible for anyone to be aware that something is outside,

unless there is an isolated thinking or an individualising principle,

known in the Vedanta psychology as the Antahkarana, and in the Yoga

psychology of Patanjali as Chitta.

"Antahkarana" is a Sanskrit term, which literally translated into

English, would mean, "the internal organ". That is perhaps the best

way we can put it in English. The internal organ, by which we cognise

or perceive things outside, is the Antahkarana. The same thing is

called Chitta in Yoga psychology. "

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

advaitin, "gmurthy_99" <gmurthy@m...> wrote:

>

>

>

> But, aren't manas, buddhi, citta and ahaMkAra all the

> vr^itti-s of the same antahkaraNa, differing only in

> subtleness?

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

Greetings for the new year.

 

Over the holidays, devoted some time to

study of Samkhya literature. Just scratched

the surface. Here is a brief summary:

 

Samkhya/Sankhya text that I referred :

Bhagvatam Book 3, Chapter 26.

 

1. The state of purusha where the creation

is contained in the seed state is termed

kutashta !

(the akshara purusha of chapter 15 Gita).

 

2. Kutastha is in a tamasaic state.

(This seems to support associating kutastha

with deep sleep. This is what Jnaneshwar does

in his commentry on Chapter 15).

 

3. When he overcomes the tamas, then pure

chitta manifests. The term coined for

such a pure chitta is Vasudeva.

(Looks like Chitta is identical with

Chaitanya here.)

 

4. Chitta when it assumes limitations

due to ignorance becomes Ahankara.

 

5. Manas, Buddhi and Indriyas are products

of Ahankara under influence of sattva,

rajas and tamas respectively.

 

 

Notes:

 

a. Since Vyasa is the compiler of both Gita

and Bhagvatam, it is reasonable to expect

consistency of terminolgy in Gita and

Bhagvatam. Esp. concerning the point 1

above.

 

b. Patanjali defines yoga as chitta vritti

nirodha. And it is clear that by chitta vritti

he refers to tendencies of chitta rooted in

ignorance. The yoga of patanjali then

aims to transform the confused chitta = ahankara

into pure a pure chitta = chaitanya

mentioned in point 3 above.

 

Best regards

Shrinivas

[Guest guest]

--- sgadkari2001 <sgadkari2001 wrote:

 

Namaste Shrinivas,

Thank you for this posting, which I will return to

later today, after I have replied to Swami Narayan's

previous posting on this thread in which he asked for

a translation of the verse from Gaudapada which you

had posted. I could not find a follow up to his

request so will do that now in a reply to his posting

which will save me the task of typing out the verse in

Sanskrit.

Your study has taken my previous enquiry forward some

steps which are finding their place is some allied

study......the power of 'coincidence' indeed.

Thank you,

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shrinivas and Swaminarayan,

I am sorry but in my other psoting of today I confused

which one of you had asked for a translation.

>>given by Gaudapadacharya with reference to

> > Chitta in his Mandukya karika as follows:

> >

> > 'Chitta spanditam eva idam graahya graahakavad

> dwayam

> >

> > Chittam nirvishayam nityam anantham tena

> keertitam.'

> Could you post your translation of the above verse ?

 

On this verse 4.72

Swami Gambhirananda writes:

'This duality, possessed of subject and object, is a

mere vibration of Consciousness. And Consciousness is

objectless; hence It is declared to be eternally

without relations.'

Swami Nikhilananda writes:

'This perceived world of duality, characterised by the

subject-object relationship, is verily an act of the

mind. The mind (from the standpoint of Reality) is

without touch with any object ( as it is the nature of

Atman). Hence it is declared to be eternal and

unattached.'

 

Both these translations give insights but my attention

was caught by the use of 'spanda' in this as I am

presently also studying the spandakarikas. Also they

present the possibility of chitta as being placed

before the buddhi..ie. no subject/object

differentiation, in a reflective capacity.

The following verse from Ksemaraja's commentary on

Spanda gives this:

'In reality nothing arises, and nothing subsides, only

the spanda-shakti which, though free of succession,

appears in different aspects as if arising and as if

subsiding.'

To this we may add 4.71 of Gaudapada's Karika that

precedes the first verse discussed above:

'No kind of Jiva is ever born nor is there any cause

for any such birth. The Ultimate Truth is that nothing

whatsoever is born.'

 

Together with these verses and Shankara's commentary

and Shrinivas' very valuable contribution of today I

hope to be able to contribute again later today,

Om Sri Ram

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

> Samkhya/Sankhya text that I referred :

> Bhagvatam Book 3, Chapter 26.

>

> 1. The state of purusha where the creation

> is contained in the seed state is termed

> kutashta !

> (the akshara purusha of chapter 15 Gita).

>

> 2. Kutastha is in a tamasaic state.

> (This seems to support associating kutastha

> with deep sleep. This is what Jnaneshwar does

> in his commentry on Chapter 15).

>

> 3. When he overcomes the tamas, then pure

> chitta manifests. The term coined for

> such a pure chitta is Vasudeva.

> (Looks like Chitta is identical with

> Chaitanya here.)

>

> 4. Chitta when it assumes limitations

> due to ignorance becomes Ahankara.

>

> 5. Manas, Buddhi and Indriyas are products

> of Ahankara under influence of sattva,

> rajas and tamas respectively.

 

Namaste Shrinivas,

Once again thank you for the above. As modifications

of the parkriti we must be correct to use the trigunah

to understand the various functions of mind. The

trouble is that different writers allocate a different

gunah to the same function ie. Shantanand Saraswati,

one claimant to the Seat of the Shankaracharya of

Jyotir Math, places tamas as the correct dominant guna

in the buddhi. Maybe it is the wrong working of the

manas that gives the impression that it is dominated

by rajas...in my normal state.... and that when it is

working correctly then sattva dominates.

This then causes me to ask: What is the structure that

'holds' these counterbalancing gunah? As

manifestations in the prakriti are they not but the

gunah themselves? I really need a wise man to give

some direction on this and then the experience to

illuminate.

Re Chitta.

In order to overcome tamas, rajas is needed; as we

know, after a heavy sleep there is no point in trying

to study sattvic writings straight away. Could this

rajasic state in the chitta be the iccha, the stirring

of the Divine Will as in the spanda? Would the

arising sattva then reflect that stirring as

'Creation'

and tamas give the appearance of subject/object as

stated in Gaudapada's verse?

These are just some of my ponderings on this but no

flash of understanding yet. Each sentence is provoking

another question.

Following my posting of this morning on Gaudapada's

Karika 4.72 and the use there of the word 'spanda'

which one translation correctly gave as a vibration in

consciousness, I offer the following further parts of

Jaideva Singh's translation of Kemaraja's commentary

on Spandakarika...page 10. He writes:

'Therefore the Svaatantrya Shakti (the Power of

Absolute Freedom) of the Lord is called spanda. This

power though non-distinct from the Lord goes on

presenting the entire cycle of manifestation and

withdrawal on its own background like the reflection

of a city in a mirror. This shakti of the Lord who is

non-moving, being of the nature of consciousness is

known as spanda in accordance with the root meaning of

the word signifying 'slight movement'. Thus the

essential nature of the Lord is perpetual spanda

(creative pulsation). He is never without

spanda............

This spanda-shakti consists of the compact bliss of

I-consciousness which holds in its bosom endless

cycles of creation and dissolution, which is of the

nature of the entire world of the pure and the impure,

which is of the nature of exhibiting limitation and

expansion of subjects and objects, which is worthy of

adoration of all esoteric knowledge, which is

simultaneously of the nature of absorption and

emanation.'

This is being offered in this posting as an extension

to my earlier quotes from this work which resulted

from my thoughts on the words of Gaudapada. I suspect

also that there is something on the pure chitta in

there.

I apologise for the wnadering around on this but

maybe, like a moth, a spiral is being followed towards

the light of understanding,

Om sri ram

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shri Ken,

 

Wanted to add a note to my earlier posting:

> 1. The state of purusha where the creation

> is contained in the seed state is termed

> kutashta !

> (the akshara purusha of chapter 15 Gita).

>

> 2. Kutastha is in a tamasaic state.

> (This seems to support associating kutastha

> with deep sleep. This is what Jnaneshwar does

> in his commentry on Chapter 15).

>

> 3. When he overcomes the tamas, then pure

> chitta manifests. The term coined for

> such a pure chitta is Vasudeva.

> (Looks like Chitta is identical with

> Chaitanya here.)

>

> 4. Chitta when it assumes limitations

> due to ignorance becomes Ahankara.

>

> 5. Manas, Buddhi and Indriyas are products

> of Ahankara under influence of sattva,

> rajas and tamas respectively.

>

 

I am comfortable with points 1-4. Point 5

however says that ignorance is a pre-requisite

for the world of name and form. Does it mean

that chaitanya and world of name and form

cannot co exist ? We seem to have an ability to

to take pure delight in creation (though such

moments may not last long). Or is it that those

moments must be understood as:

 

triggerd by some image we go into chaitanya and then

there is no name and form at that point, then again assume

minimal ignorance experience the image and again

go into chaitanya and keep jumping ....

 

If we accept this picture then where will we place

ishvara ? The state of ishvara then will have to

include ignorance - though the level of ignorance

in the state of ishvara will have to be vanishingly

small. This will mean that the state of ishvara is

subtler than can be possibly imagined. I have read

at places (dont remember where )that the state of

ishvara is an asymptotic state, it can be approached

without ever reacing it. Such a view of ishvara will

be in keeping with this statement.

 

Best regards

Shrinivas

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shrinivas,

In reply to your following points that are an accurate

description of the seeming ebb and flow may I

respectfully offer the words..to follow after your

comments...taken from a study of the grammar of the

Mahavakyas by Dr T N Ganapathy. You wrote:

> however says that ignorance is a pre-requisite

> for the world of name and form. Does it mean

> that chaitanya and world of name and form

> cannot co exist ? We seem to have an ability to

> to take pure delight in creation (though such

> moments may not last long). Or is it that those

> moments must be understood as:

>

> triggerd by some image we go into chaitanya and then

> there is no name and form at that point, then again

> assume

> minimal ignorance experience the image and again

> go into chaitanya and keep jumping ....

>

> If we accept this picture then where will we place

> ishvara ? The state of ishvara then will have to

> include ignorance - though the level of ignorance

> in the state of ishvara will have to be vanishingly

> small. This will mean that the state of ishvara is

> subtler than can be possibly imagined. I have read

> at places (dont remember where )that the state of

> ishvara is an asymptotic state, it can be approached

>

> without ever reaching it. Such a view of ishvara

will

>

> be in keeping with this statement.

>

Dr. Ganapathy writes:

'Before we proceed further let us make clear the

meanings of 'Tat' and 'Tvam' in Tat Tvam asi.

Caitanya is either associated with antahkarana or it

is not. Caitanya associated with antahkarana is Jiva.

Caitanya not associared with antahkarana is pure

Brahman. The Jiva associated with antahkarana is the

primary meaning (vacyartha) of the word tvam and

Brahman is the secondary meaning (laksyartha) of tvam.

Similarly, the words denoting Jiva in the other

mahavakyas have both vacyartha and laksyartha.

Caitanya is either associated with maya (nescience) or

free from maya. The caitanya associated with maya is

Ishvara and the caitanya not associated with maya is

pure caitanya. The pure chaitanya is called Brahman.

The vacyartha of Tat is Ishvara, the laksyartha of Tat

is Brahman. Similarly the words denoting Ishvara

(Brahman) in the other mahavakyas have both primary

and secondary meaning. When associated with the

limiting adjunct (antakarana or maya) jiva is

different from Brahman. Without the limiting

adjuncts, Jiva and Ishvara are identical with

Brahman.'

 

 

You may well be aware of this tradition in the

grammar but I found it very useful when it was first

read a little while ago.

Referring to the delight in creation and name and form

may I use the experience of my wife. She delights,

quite justifiably, in knowing the names through the

forms of flowers and trees when we are out in the

countryside. One day she caught/(was in) the essence

of a tree before naming it as a tree even. This was a

moment of great freedom for her as she can now

continue naming the flowers without the attachment to

the lower knowledge by saying 'I know its name,' and

getting frustrated when the name is forgotten. I would

say that this is a switch from 'my' delight to a

delight emanating in the original pulse of creation; a

release from the ahankara, true use of buddhi and

chitta as a refelecting organ. However I am using

'mind' to rationalise this and there may be other

explanations.

Apologies for not writing the sansrit accurately but I

still have to learn the correct symbols for the

transliteration,

Om sri ram

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

--- ken knight <hilken_98 wrote:

> Dr. Ganapathy writes:

> Caitanya associated with antahkarana is Jiva.

> Caitanya not associared with antahkarana is pure

> Brahman. The Jiva associated with antahkarana is

> the primary meaning (vacyartha) of the word tvam

and

> Brahman is the secondary meaning (laksyartha) of

> tvam.

> The caitanya associated with maya is

> Ishvara and the caitanya not associated with maya is

> pure caitanya. The pure chaitanya is called Brahman.

 

Dear Shri Kenji,

 

First Pardon my Igonrance if you have mentioned it

earlier but Can you please let me know the name of the

book written by Dr Ganapthy, si can geta copy of it.

 

In the first chapter of the Book "The Soul..Destiny."

being posted on a weekly basis, Swami Ashokanada

mentions something similar and traced the phonemenon

to assumed (as it were) degeneration.

 

I feel this approach useful in understanding life as

periceived and as explained in scriptures.

 

Pranams.

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

> Namaste Shrinivas,

> Once again thank you for the above. As modifications

> of the parkriti we must be correct to use the trigunah

> to understand the various functions of mind. The

> trouble is that different writers allocate a different

> gunah to the same function ie. Shantanand Saraswati,

> one claimant to the Seat of the Shankaracharya of

> Jyotir Math, places tamas as the correct dominant guna

> in the buddhi. Maybe it is the wrong working of the

> manas that gives the impression that it is dominated

> by rajas...in my normal state.... and that when it is

> working correctly then sattva dominates.

> This then causes me to ask: What is the structure that

> 'holds' these counterbalancing gunah? As

> manifestations in the prakriti are they not but the

> gunah themselves?

 

Namaste Shri Ken,

 

Thanks for your detailed comments.

 

I hope to pursue my inquiry into Sankhya viewpoint.

My present understanding of trigunas is not deep enough

to clarify the issue that you have raised above.

 

Thanks again and best regards

Shrinivas

[Guest guest]

>Can you please let me know the name of

> the

> book written by Dr Ganapthy, si can geta copy of it.

I feel this approach useful in understanding life as

> periceived and as explained in scriptures.

>

> Pranams.

> P.B.V.Rajan

 

Namaste Mr Rajan,

This work will be easiest to get if you live in

India. It is a short monograph ...about 30

pages...that Dr Ganapathy wrote in 1982. He was then

at:

Department of Philosophy

Ramakrishna Mission

Vivekananda College

Madras (Chennai)

I first found a copy at the British Library in London

and then wrote to Vivekananda College. I was sent a

copy but I think that it came from the main

Ramakrishna Temple in Chennai.

Last year I discussed the work with Swami Bodhananda

when he was in London and in relation to the passages

that I quoted he said, 'That is the ???????

tradition.' Unfortunately he said so much else I did

not register the particular name of the tradition.

Maybe someone else can enlighten us all on this one or

we can contact Swami Bodhananda some time. Clearly

from your own meeting with the same structure it must

have its roots somewhere. To me it is a beautifully

clear summary of advaita which has the simplicity of

true understanding.

Swami Tapasyananda who was the president of the Math

in Chennai in 1982 writes an introduction to the work

in which he refers to the grammatical analysis of Dr

Ganapathy as the Kevalaadvaita tradition. A search

under this title of the Web may throw up some further

ideas so I will try it later on,

Om sri ram

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

--- ken knight <hilken_98 wrote:

> This work will be easiest to get if you live in

> India. It is a short monograph ...about 30

> pages...that Dr Ganapathy wrote in 1982. He was then

> at: Department of Philosophy, Ramakrishna Mission

> Vivekananda College, Madras (Chennai)

= Hari Om

Shri Kenji,

Thank you for the prompt response.

At the moment I am not in India, but in one of the

countries in Arabian Gulf, but Chennai is my home

town, so I hope to either get a copy when I return or

atleast look it up in the library.

Pranams.

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

 

Send your FREE holiday greetings online!

http://greetings.

[Guest guest]

dear sir

allthough i am not supposed to know much when

compared to so many learned scholars in the group, i

still would like to put up my views

 

i don't think that you can say that such and such guna

is predominant in budhi.

it actulay changes from time to time.

 

that is why Lord ( in bhagavad gita) has talked about

overpowering by one guna over the other two 14.10

 

what happens when one guna predominates others 14.11

to 14.13

 

what happens when a man dies under influence of a

particular guna 14.14 to 14.15

 

you may see them in

http://in.geocities.com/gitabykrishna/index_text.html

 

it may be interesting to click on

satvika/rajasika/tamasika in the index(concepts)and

see how the budhi,dhriti,duty,joy,action etc are

treated differentely under the influence of each guna

 

 

we can particularly try to mould ourselves to have

the attitudes shown in satvika

 

i suggest to all friends to atleast study these once

and contemplate on them. there are only 8 to 10

shlokas

 

for ready ref. click here and select satvika

http://in.geocities.com/gitabykrishna/index_index.html

 

 

with regard

n k bali

 

 

sgadkari2001 <sgadkari2001 wrote: > --- In

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...>

> wrote:

> > Namaste Shrinivas,

> > Once again thank you for the above. As

> modifications

> > of the parkriti we must be correct to use the

> trigunah

> > to understand the various functions of mind. The

> > trouble is that different writers allocate a

> different

> > gunah to the same function ie. Shantanand

> Saraswati,

> > one claimant to the Seat of the Shankaracharya of

> > Jyotir Math, places tamas as the correct dominant

> guna

> > in the buddhi. Maybe it is the wrong working of

> the

> > manas that gives the impression that it is

> dominated

> > by rajas...in my normal state.... and that when it

> is

> > working correctly then sattva dominates.

> > This then causes me to ask: What is the structure

> that

> > 'holds' these counterbalancing gunah? As

> > manifestations in the prakriti are they not but

> the

> > gunah themselves?

>

> Namaste Shri Ken,

>

> Thanks for your detailed comments.

>

> I hope to pursue my inquiry into Sankhya viewpoint.

> My present understanding of trigunas is not deep

> enough

> to clarify the issue that you have raised above.

>

> Thanks again and best regards

> Shrinivas

>

>

>

 

=====

 

with best wishes,

 

N.K.BALI

 

Visit my site on ' Bhagavad Gita ', a spiritual delight.You will love it.

http://in.geocities.com/gitabykrishna

 

 

 

______________________

Looking for a job? Visit India Careers

Visit http://in.careers.

[Guest guest]

> i don't think that you can say that such and such

> guna

> is predominant in budhi.

> it actulay changes from time to time.

>

> that is why Lord ( in bhagavad gita) has talked

> about

> overpowering by one guna over the other two 14.10

>

> what happens when one guna predominates others 14.11

> to 14.13

>

> what happens when a man dies under influence of a

> particular guna 14.14 to 14.15

 

Dear Mr Bali,

Thank you for these verses. It may be that we should

change the heading for this thread for although buddhi

has often been mentioned it has been the modification

of mind known as chitta that has been our main enquiry

since the original question on chit, caitanya, chitta,

buddhi and manas was first posed.

There are different approaches to such study as ours

and I find my own path swings from the devotional to

what some may call academic. Sometimes there is a

strong impulse to analyse...correctly this means to

loosen the bonds of ignorance....through reasoning and

implication, and at other times there is the sheer

bliss in hearing the very sound of scriptures, the

inner sound not thr form of the words...I am being

careful here not to use sruti because as you know the

Gita is not considered to be sruti by the orthodox.

Having said that, may I take us back to the chapter

before the one you use, to Chapter 13 of the Bhagavad

Gita.....Kshetra Kshetrajna Vibhaga Yoga; the Yoga of

the discrimination of Kshetra and Kshetrajna.

This is the chapter most relevant to that original

enquiry in this thrad. All of it is very important but

here are verses 21 to 23:

'Purusha seated in Prakriti experiences the gunas born

of Prakriti;attachment to the Gunas is the cause of

his birth in good and evil wombs.

The Supreme Purusha in this body is also called the

Witness, the One who permits, the Supporter, the One

who experiences, the Great Lord and the Supreme Self.

He who knows the Purusha and Prakriti together with

the Gunas is never born again, in whatever way he may

live.'

Ultimately, of course, it is only Brahman that reveals

Self in Self and the renunciation of all dharmas in

the Lord is one way of expressing this fundamental

truth.....'Take refuge in me.etc' On the path we first

must seek our individual path then offer each step of

the way to the Supreme, in so doing our footsteps

become easy and Light. That is the joy of this

discussion group for all our different approaches the

substratum is single so thak you for sharing your

journey,

Om sri ram

Ken Knight

 

 

 

Send FREE video emails in Mail!

http://promo./videomail/

[Guest guest]

Without changing the heading of this thread I would

appeal to all who are contributing to the same thread

to dwell more in detail with Chitta and Chaitanyam.

 

After going through many a different passage in

various commentaries in Srutis involving "Chitta", I

am finding that "Chittam" is indeed used loosely by

different Acharyas to denote generally any one of the

three out of four elements of the 'Anthahkarana'

except 'Ahamkaara',viz,Chittam, Manas and Budhi.

 

On ruminating, I wonder if the base of Chittam is

Chaitanyam.If Chaitanyam is Brahman then what is

"Pragyaanam"?

 

For Chittam to be Brahman, It has to be "Tri guna

rahitam" The same goes for Budhi and Manas!

 

Once again quoting Gaudapada:

 

"Yada na leeyate Chittam na cha vikshipyate punaha,

Aninganam anaabhaasam nishpannam Brahma tat tadaa."

 

Hari Om!

 

Swaminarayan.

--- ken knight <hilken_98 wrote:

> > i don't think that you can say that such and such

> > guna

> > is predominant in budhi.

> > it actulay changes from time to time.

> >

> > that is why Lord ( in bhagavad gita) has talked

> > about

> > overpowering by one guna over the other two 14.10

> >

> > what happens when one guna predominates others

> 14.11

> > to 14.13

> >

> > what happens when a man dies under influence of a

> > particular guna 14.14 to 14.15

>

> Dear Mr Bali,

> Thank you for these verses. It may be that we should

> change the heading for this thread for although

> buddhi

> has often been mentioned it has been the

> modification

> of mind known as chitta that has been our main

> enquiry

> since the original question on chit, caitanya,

> chitta,

> buddhi and manas was first posed.

> There are different approaches to such study as ours

> and I find my own path swings from the devotional to

> what some may call academic. Sometimes there is a

> strong impulse to analyse...correctly this means to

> loosen the bonds of ignorance....through reasoning

> and

> implication, and at other times there is the sheer

> bliss in hearing the very sound of scriptures, the

> inner sound not thr form of the words...I am being

> careful here not to use sruti because as you know

> the

> Gita is not considered to be sruti by the orthodox.

> Having said that, may I take us back to the chapter

> before the one you use, to Chapter 13 of the

> Bhagavad

> Gita.....Kshetra Kshetrajna Vibhaga Yoga; the Yoga

> of

> the discrimination of Kshetra and Kshetrajna.

> This is the chapter most relevant to that original

> enquiry in this thrad. All of it is very important

> but

> here are verses 21 to 23:

> 'Purusha seated in Prakriti experiences the gunas

> born

> of Prakriti;attachment to the Gunas is the cause of

> his birth in good and evil wombs.

> The Supreme Purusha in this body is also called the

> Witness, the One who permits, the Supporter, the One

> who experiences, the Great Lord and the Supreme

> Self.

> He who knows the Purusha and Prakriti together with

> the Gunas is never born again, in whatever way he

> may

> live.'

> Ultimately, of course, it is only Brahman that

> reveals

> Self in Self and the renunciation of all dharmas in

> the Lord is one way of expressing this fundamental

> truth.....'Take refuge in me.etc' On the path we

> first

> must seek our individual path then offer each step

> of

> the way to the Supreme, in so doing our footsteps

> become easy and Light. That is the joy of this

> discussion group for all our different approaches

> the

> substratum is single so thak you for sharing your

> journey,

> Om sri ram

> Ken Knight

>

>

>

> Send FREE video emails in Mail!

> http://promo./videomail/

>

 

 

 

 

Send FREE video emails in Mail!

http://promo./videomail/