self realization

[Guest guest]

Hi Durga-ji,

 

Again, I feel that I agree with all you say (not surprising since we both

acknowledge Swami Dayananda as probably the greatest living teacher of

Advaita). But to clarify the D. B. Gangolli situation, he is a disciple of

Swami Satchidanandendra (he of the 'Method of the Vedanta'). In fact the

book is a translation of the latter's book in Kanada: paramArtha chintAmaNi.

Since his avowed intent was, as I understand it, to ensure that the modern

teaching of Advaita reflected the intentions of Shankara, the views

expressed have to be treated with respect.

 

As I made clear (I thought) to another poster, there is no question here of

the nature of reality. The prakriyA itself is ultimately just another

pointer. But there is doubt, in this mind at least, about some of the things

that are said - and you are now echoing those doubts. It is unfortunate that

the book appears not to have been edited. The English expression is poor and

some of the sentences so long that the meaning is difficult to intuit. I

really need to read the whole thing again but I'm not sure I have the

patience! I suppose I was hoping that someone else might have read and

understood and could easily field the question. Perhaps we should simply

drop the whole thing now.

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis  

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Durga" <durgaji108> wrote:

>

> Avastha triya sakshi

 

Namaste Durga ji and Dennis ji,

In response to Sri Deenis ji's latest post resolving to 'drop the

matter' for the time being, and in response to some of Durga Maata's

observations in this below mentioned post, as a last attempt to

clarify, i thought i will provide some replies.  I shall adopt the

method of placing my responses within , courtesy Sri Madathilji.

>

>

> advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Durga,

> I am reproducing the actual sentence that

> > triggered the question about the bomb:

> >

> > "Thus because in the dream the waking world does not exist at all,

> because

> > in the deep sleep neither the waking and dream states nor their

> respective

> > worlds exist at all, it becomes evident that apart from the states

> or devoid

> > of the states a separate world does not exist at all; what is

called

> 'the

> > world' or the phenomenon of the world is nothing but an appearance

> that is

> > seen or observed within a state alone." (P. 438 Adyhatma Prakasha

> Karyalaya,

> > 1986.)

> >

> > Best wishes,

> >

> > Dennis

  [ The above quote does not pose any problem to me as it is in

accordance with the position of Advaita elaborately discussed in the

Mandukya kaarikas. I would refer one to peruse the portions under the

Chapter II (vaitathya prakaranam) and the chapter III (Advaita

prakaranam) of the Mandukya Karikas along with Acharya Shankara's

commentary to get a clear understanding.]   

>

> Namaste Dennis,

> > He seems to be saying that the emperical

> waking world (or the creation) is the creation

> of the individual's mind in the waking state, and

> I would say that is not true. 

>

> The individual's mind passes through the three mental states

> waking,  dream, and deep sleep, but from the POV of Ishwara

> those three states are taking place within the creation,

> within time and space, within duality, while the Self

> is that which is untouched by, and illumines it all.

>

> The world which is perceived in the waking state through

> the awake mind of the individual is not a creation of that

> individual's mind (if this indeed is what Mr. Gangoli is

> putting forth).   (This was discussed previously in

> another thread). 

>

> The world which the individual's mind perceives in

> the waking state is Ishwara's world.  It is empirical

> reality and the individual's mind is part to the whole.

>

> In fact, IMO the individual's mind is part to the whole

> in all states, although the perceptions are different

> in the different states.  All of duality takes place

> within, and according to, the laws of Ishwara, which

> would include the three mental states, waking,

> dream and deep sleep which the individual's mind

> passes through each day.

 

[Madam, kindly wait till your Vedanta teacher takes up the Mandukya

Upanishad and the Kaarikaas for a detailed exposition.  Every one of

the above views expressed above will find a 'shocking'rebuttal

therein.  If you can't wait till then, pl. obtain your teacher's

permission and go ahead reading the above portions indicated by me. 

Only thing is, take a good translation.]

>

> Perhaps Mr. Gangolli is very scholarly (and perhaps

> he is correct in what he has said), or perhaps he has

> some theories of his own, which aren't exactly in

> keeping with the teachings of Vedanta.  I don't know.

> (And of course, perhaps I am wrong).

>

> There is one other point which I wanted to address.

> Somewhere else in this thread I believe you put forth

> that Mr. Gangolli holds that there is a deep sleep

> ahamkara.

>

> It is my understanding that there is no deep sleep

> ahamkara.  In order to have a deep sleep ahamkara

> the mind would need to be able to make a comment such as,

> "I am deep sleeping," which is not the case in the deep

> sleep state. 

>

> In deep sleep the mind is resolved.  There are no thoughts,

> no ahamkara (which is itself a thought).  So, IMO if

> Mr. Gangolli has concluded that there is a deep sleep ahamkara

> this conclusion of his is also not correct.

 

[Defining the sleep state, and naming the sleeper consciousness as

the Praajna, the Mandukya Upanishad gives the characteristics of the

sleeper consciousness both in the micro and macro cosmic aspects. Pl.

go thro the same; in the Kaarika portion Sri Gaudapadacharya writes:

 

Praajna does not comprehend anything - neither himself nor others,

neither truth nor falsehood...

 

The 'not knowing or comprehending anything' is due to the situation

in which praajna is placed there.  Nevertheless it is he who in the

waking, now called the vishwa, recollects the sleep experience as 'i

did not know anything then and i slept well'.  In order to say this,

apart from his having been in existence then, he should also have

experienced the 'not knowing' and the joy of sleep.  It is not that

the ahamkaara is non-existent then.  Each of the three, the waker,

the dreamer and the sleeper consciousness, although one only, assume

different roles.  They are not devoid of their basic ahankaara then. 

The Panchadasi chapter 11 clarifies that in the sleep state, which is

where the anandamayakosha exists predominantly, the ignorance

pertaining to the sleep state and the joy of that state are

experienced by the anandamayakosha I through the peculiar vritti,

mode of mind, called 'avidya vritti'. While any comprehension

requires a buddhi vritti, since the vijnanamayakosha which signifies

the buddhi is in a resolved state, the comprehension in the sleep

state is achieved through the avidya vritti.  The anadamayakosha

experiences the sleep state and upon waking the vijnanamayakosha

gives expression to it.  It should not be asked: how is this possible

while you say that the vijnanamayakosha is resolved then? The reply

is: It should not be forgotten that the entire manas, mind, consists

of the vijnanamaya and the anandamaya and the manomaya koshas.  It is

only the two aspects of it that are resolved in sleep while the one,

anandamayakosha, remains in sleep.  It is again not to be forgotten

that for the mind to grasp anything there has to be the reflection of

the Atman, the chaitanyam, in it.  Thus, we have the anandamayakosha

aspect of the mind containing the reflection of ATman in it available

in deep sleep and this grasps the experience there.

 

The long and short of the above explanation is: The ahankaara is not

totally resolved in sleep state.  This much is, in brief, the

adhyaropa portion.

 

The exclusivess of each of the states stems from the seventh mantra,

the apavaada portion, of the Mandukyopanishad which negates the

wakerhood, the dreamerhood and the sleeperhood of ATman.  The entire

II chapter of the Mandukya Karika is an explanation of one

word 'prapanchopashamam'( the Atman being devoid of the entire world,

in truth) contained in that mantra.  The entire III chapter is a

delineation of another vital word 'Advaitam' of that mantra.

 

In conclusion, if one has the background of the Mandukya Upanishad,

the book under reference, by Sri Gangolli, could be appreciated

best.  This is just my wild guess or fond hope; i have not seen or

heard of that book.

 

Many Pranams and warm regards to both of you.  I appreciate the

sincerety of Dennis ji in seriously pursuing this matter.  He has

taken the pains to procure the book and read it through.  That is

remarkable.]

 

subbu            

 

 

> >

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v>

wrote:

 

>

> In conclusion, if one has the background of the Mandukya Upanishad,

> the book under reference, by Sri Gangolli, could be appreciated

> best.  This is just my wild guess or fond hope; i have not seen or

> heard of that book.

>

> Many Pranams and warm regards to both of you.  I appreciate the

> sincerety of Dennis ji in seriously pursuing this matter.  He has

> taken the pains to procure the book and read it through.  That is

> remarkable.]

>

> subbu

 

Namaste Sri Subbuji,

 

Thank you for your kind reply, which I found very interesting

and informative.  It is true that I am very much a beginning

student of Vedanta and have a lot to learn.

 

I wish that we could study the Mandukya Upanishad in class,

and have asked my teacher if we could, but the nature of

our classes doesn't seem to permit very much study of

what might be considered more advanced texts.  Still I am

extremely grateful that I have been exposed to these teachings

at all, as they seem to be the ones I have searched for

all of my life. 

 

I found your explanation of the deep sleep state in particular

very helpful.  Thank you so much for your very clear explanation.

 

My pranams,

Durga           

[Guest guest]

Namaste Subbu-ji,

 

Many thanks for your reassurance that all will be explained by a detailed

study of the mANDUkya kArikA-s. I could have suspected that this would be

the case. Despite having several translations and commentaries, as well as

other treatises on the subject, I have still not succeeded in working my way

through the Swami Nikhilananda version with Shankara's commentaries.

(Although I have stated to others that this must be the single most

important book, apart perhaps from the brahmasUtra bhAShya.) I am eagerly

awaiting Sri Sadananda's continuation of his commentary!

 

I am not surprised that you haven't come across the D. B. Gangolli book. I

was very fortunate to obtain it from Alibris on the Internet - there were

only 1000 copies printed in 1986! 

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite> wrote:

>

> Namaste Subbu-ji,

>

> Many thanks for your reassurance that all will be explained by a

detailed

> study of the mANDUkya kArikA-s. I could have suspected that this

would be

> the case. Despite having several translations and commentaries, as

well as

> other treatises on the subject, I have still not succeeded in

working my way

> through the Swami Nikhilananda version with Shankara's commentaries.

> (Although I have stated to others that this must be the single most

> important book, apart perhaps from the brahmasUtra bhAShya.) I am

eagerly

> awaiting Sri Sadananda's continuation of his commentary!

>

> I am not surprised that you haven't come across the D. B. Gangolli

book. I

> was very fortunate to obtain it from Alibris on the Internet -

there were

> only 1000 copies printed in 1986! 

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Dennis,

 

Just a word of caution. Swamiji's accent is very pronounced even for our

Indian ears and it can be off-putting to English ones. Don't be put-off by

it because Swamiji's explanations are simply the BEST in the world. I am

listening through his Gita and all the Upanishad commentaries. They are so

clear and complete that one will need nothing more or else.

 

I really cannot recommend Swamiji's CDs enough.

 

Regards,

Venkat

 

Namaste Dennis ji,

>

> Thanks for the above Post.  Shall i make an extremely valuable

> suggestion? Swami Paramarthanandaji has conducted detailed classes in

> English on the  Mandukya Upanishad along with the Karikas spanning

> about 80 hours ! These are available in 8 CDs MP3.  They are simply

> incomparable.  One can listen one hour every day like attending a

> class. In case you are interested you may contact:

>

> Shastraprakashika Trust: Email: info (AT) sastraprakasika (DOT) org

> Chennai, India. Phone:044- 2847 5009, 2847 0311

>

>

> My understanding and appreciation of  this Upanishad is entirely due

> to listening these CDs.  I think the current cycle is the fifth one

> in my listening to them.  They are simply unmatched in detail and

> lucidity.  It is impossible for one to end up not understanding this

> really tough Upanishad once these CDs are heard.

>

> Regards,

> subbu

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

 

Avastha triya sakshi

Hello everyone,

 

I know Sri Gangolli personally and I believe that he is of the view that there is no ahamkara in the deep sleep state.

 

amaresh

(amareshbc@rediffmail.com)

 

 

 

advaitin, "Dennis Waite" <dwaite> wrote:

>

> Namaste Durga,

>

> Your explanation of fundamental aspects of the avasthA traya

prakriyA was

> very well expressed and clearly showed the essential import of its

message -

> thank you.

>

> However, the book to which I referred in my original post ('The

Magic Jewel

> of Intuition: The tri-basic method of cognizing the Self' by D. B.

Gangolli)

> is a book of nearly 500 pages analysing the prakriyA exhaustively to

address

> a number of different aspects of the philosophy. My question related

to an

> aspect of this analysis.

>

> Since this seems to have caused a lot of discussion and yet not

addressed

> the actual question at all, I am reproducing the actual sentence that

> triggered the question about the bomb:

>

> "Thus because in the dream the waking world does not exist at all,

because

> in the deep sleep neither the waking and dream states nor their

respective

> worlds exist at all, it becomes evident that apart from the states

or devoid

> of the states a separate world does not exist at all; what is called

'the

> world' or the phenomenon of the world is nothing but an appearance

that is

> seen or observed within a state alone." (P. 438 Adyhatma Prakasha

Karyalaya,

> 1986.)

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

 

 

Namaste Dennis,

 

Well, I would question the conclusion that

D.B. Gangoli has come to. I don't think that

his logic is correct.   I don't know who he is,

although I see that there is a lot of information

about him on the internet.  However it doesn't

seem to me that some of the ideas which he is

putting forth are correct.

 

He seems to be saying that the emperical

waking world (or the creation) is the creation

of the individual's mind in the waking state, and

I would say that is not true. 

 

The individual's mind passes through the three mental states

waking,  dream, and deep sleep, but from the POV of Ishwara

those three states are taking place within the creation,

within time and space, within duality, while the Self

is that which is untouched by, and illumines it all.

 

The world which is perceived in the waking state through

the awake mind of the individual is not a creation of that

individual's mind (if this indeed is what Mr. Gangoli is

putting forth).   (This was discussed previously in

another thread). 

 

The world which the individual's mind perceives in

the waking state is Ishwara's world.  It is empirical

reality and the individual's mind is part to the whole.

 

In fact, IMO the individual's mind is part to the whole

in all states, although the perceptions are different

in the different states.  All of duality takes place

within, and according to, the laws of Ishwara, which

would include the three mental states, waking,

dream and deep sleep which the individual's mind

passes through each day.

 

Perhaps Mr. Gangolli is very scholarly (and perhaps

he is correct in what he has said), or perhaps he has

some theories of his own, which aren't exactly in

keeping with the teachings of Vedanta.  I don't know.

(And of course, perhaps I am wrong).

 

There is one other point which I wanted to address.

Somewhere else in this thread I believe you put forth

that Mr. Gangolli holds that there is a deep sleep

ahamkara.

 

It is my understanding that there is no deep sleep

ahamkara.  In order to have a deep sleep ahamkara

the mind would need to be able to make a comment such as,

"I am deep sleeping," which is not the case in the deep

sleep state. 

 

In deep sleep the mind is resolved.  There are no thoughts,

no ahamkara (which is itself a thought).  So, IMO if

Mr. Gangolli has concluded that there is a deep sleep ahamkara

this conclusion of his is also not correct.

 

What I would question about Mr. Gangolli's

ideas is are they correct or not, rather than accepting

that they are correct, and then building a hypothesis

upon them.

 

Here is something which my teacher once said

about incorrect logic:

 

"In logical syllogisms, if what was is called,

the pratigna, the initial statement, is false,

and one does not know that, like a bouncing ball

of logical steps, one will logically come

up with very valid conclusions based upon the

false initial statement. 

 

If that initial statement is wrong, one's conclusion

can be correct in reference to the initial statement,

but it is totally incorrect in reference to what is."

 

So the question in my mind would be is what Mr. Gangolli

saying correct in reference to what is?  Is what

he saying correct according to the teachings of Vedanta? 

It does not appear to me (at least from my level of

understanding)that he is correct.

 

Best wishes,

Durga