RE: bhagavAn ramaNa maharshi on NS/AS of patanjala yOg a

[Guest guest]

praNAm all,

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> Sri Ramana Maharshi: "In yoga the term samadhi refers to

> some kind of trance and there are various kinds of samadhi.

> But the samadhi I speak of is different. It is SAHAJ SAMADHI.

 

I prefer to interpret this as "In THAT yoga, WHERE the term samadhi refers

to some kind of trance..." since you can see that Maharshi later on says

"...But in Jnana yoga this sahaj sthiti (natural state) or sahaj nishtha

(abidance in the natural state) itself is the nirvikalpa state". Its easy to

quote randomly and think it drives home the point, missing the context. For

example, the very beginning of your mail says:

> Sri Ramana Maharshi said "This path (attention to the ' I ' ) is

> the direct path; all others are indirect ways. The first leads to

> the Self, the others elsewhere. And even if the others do arrive at the

> Self it is only because they lead at the  end to the first path which

> ultimately carries them to the goal. So, in the end, the aspirants must

> adopt the first path. Why not do so now? Why waste time?"

 

This can easily and wrongly be quoted against any path, apart from

Atma-vichAra, including vedAnta! I'm sure ramaNa did not mean it so. A

living example accompaning maharShi then was gaNapati muni, a veda/vedAnta

master!

 

I humbly submit my understanding is that though statements appear

contradictory, they're not so when seen in the proper light. Few examples

from your mail below:

> Yoga teaches CHITTA VRITTI NIRODHA (control of the activities of the

mind).

> But I say ATMA VICHARA (self-investigation). This is the practical way.

> Chitta Vritti Nirodha is brought about in sleep, swoon, or by starvation.

> As soon as the cause is withdrawn there is a recrudescence of thoughts. Of

> what use is it then?

 

ramaNa doesn't say that chitta vritti nirodha is *wrong*, he just says that

he recommends Atma vichAra, that is also a kind of chitta vritti nirodha.

Focusing the mind on one thought such as Atma vichAra is also a means to

chitta vritti nirodha. You may also appreciate that the same sutra has been

interpreted differently by Swami Vivekananda, Shri Vyasa, etc. (reference

Fernando Tola & Dragonnetti's book).

> Sofar, we have seen how even the neo vEdAntins like Swamy chidAnanda,

Swamy

> Dayananda Saraswati etc. have expressed their opinion on NS & why this is

> not in line with vEdAnta's atmaikatwa jnAna.

 

Sorry, I may have missed the point you see, but I respectfully disagree that

swAmi chidAnanda said against samadhi-s.

 

In all the points I'm trying to bring out above, all I'm trying to say is

everyone's angles are pointing towards the goal and they're not saying that

any form of *samadhi* is *wrong*, they're merely saying that it is improper

to stop till sahaja is achieved.

 

humble praNAm-s once again and I hope that my words are not taken as a

personal attack. In my limited capacity, I've tried to express my feelings

of mArga towards advaita goal being all-encompassing.

 

shri krisNArpaNamastu,

--praveeN

[Guest guest]

praNAm all,

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> kindly let us know which is that *THAT* yOga ramaNa referring here?? I

mean

> in which yOga samAdhi is some kind of trance & temporary time bound

> reality??

 

praveen:

Whichever *that* is, only those who experience a trance in yoga will be able

to say! I do not agree *that* is all the yoga Patanjali taught!

 

Bhaskarji wrote :

> So, prabhuji while talking about *trance state* & *THAT* yOga ramaNa

> definitely would not have had jnAna yOga in mind right?? what we know from

> this is jnAna yOga which is leading us to the natural state (sahaja

sthiti)

> of ours is not the yOga that fetch us the *trance state*..is it not??

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> prabhuji I didnot get this properly!! does not Atma vichAra embedded in

> vEdAnta?? The ultimate goal of all scriptures is Atmaikatva vidya says

> shankara.

 

praveen:

Swami Venkatesananda's commentary on Patanjali yoga tells me that its also

Atma vichara. So when I said one can *wrongly* interpret what Maharshi said,

I meant it can also be *wrongly* interpreted to say that *only* atma

vichara, being the direct way is recommended. And when *wrongly* interpreted

so, study of Vedas/Vedanta would mean to have indirect value too!

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> Nobody says nirOdha of chitta vruttis is wrong!! We do respect the

> methodology of chitta vrutti nirOdha as a separate school from vEdAnta.

> But whether it is Atmaikatva vichAra as enshrined in shruti-s or is it a

> separate shAstra as *yOga* propagated by pAtanjala?? is the question we

are

> striving to find answer!!

 

praveen:

May I also humbly submit that not knowing *we*, I'm *not* trying to find out

if PY is *Atmaikatva vichAra* but whether it does *aid* in the journey

towards moksha.

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> But prabhuji, you might have seen above ramaNa clearly saying his method

is

> NOT chitta vrutti nirOdha BUT Atma vichAra...if Atma vichAra is also one

of

> the kinds of nirOdha ramaNa would have not made the difference between

> these two!!

 

praveen:

Perhaps, but not in so clear words. Maybe, Maharshi made a difference

because of the interpretation of nirOdha literally, as recommended by some

PY followers.

 

Bhaskarji:

> Thanks for the reference...but I hope by this time you figured out our

> problem here!!

 

praveen:

Did I?

 

Bhaskarji:

> I didnot mean that swAmi chidAnanda telling anything against samAdhi..I am

> trying to point out that swamiji telling *some* kind of samAdhi in THAT

> yoga is *coming & going* state..nothing less & nothing more than that!!

 

praveen:

Again, no! That "coming and going" state turns into *sahaja* later is what I

understood Swamiji to have said. That is *the* reason why I posted his

article in the first place!

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> As said above, by any means we are not trying to belittle any path or

other

> schools of thought & their resultant effects!! we are just trying to find

> out whether these things have place in shankara siddhAnta & vEdAnta. Hope

> our intention is clear to you now. Infact shankara says *paramataM

> apratishiddhaM anumataM bhavati* Even yOga of pAtanjala & some of its

> methods have been taken as means for mental purification in advaita

> vEdAnta. More of this in my next mail Part-IV.

 

praveen:

It surprises me that in *finding* whether *these* things have a place in

Shankara siddhAnta & vedAnta, ramaNa is being quoted, who supported all

*means* depending on the capacity of the learner! Agreeing that I may have

possibly drifted and lost focus from the list's directives, I apologize and

draw out of discussions on this thread after this posting.

 

praNAm once again and thanks for all your enlightening postings.

 

jai bajrangabali,

--praveen

[Guest guest]

praNAm all,

 

praNAm Sri praveeN Bhat prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> kindly let us know which is that *THAT* yOga ramaNa referring here?? I

mean

> in which yOga samAdhi is some kind of trance & temporary time bound

> reality??

 

PB prabhuji:

 

Whichever *that* is, only those who experience a trance in yoga will be

able

to say! I do not agree *that* is all the yoga Patanjali taught!

 

bhaskar :

 

Again what exactly PY teaching then?? according to you it is not *that*

yOga nor trance state, according to shankara it does not teach Atmaikatva

vichAra since it is dualistic school..if it is neither *this* nor *that*

what else is PY?? Since you are telling me that *that* is not *all*

patanjala taught...I think you are familiar with YS..kindly tell me *what

all* patanjala taught in YS.... BTW, from my recent studies in PY I came to

know that it teaches asaMprajnatha samAdhi which is time bound...& it talks

a lot about repercussions when you are NOT in that state...

 

Bhaskarji wrote :

> So, prabhuji while talking about *trance state* & *THAT* yOga ramaNa

> definitely would not have had jnAna yOga in mind right?? what we know

from

> this is jnAna yOga which is leading us to the natural state (sahaja

sthiti)

> of ours is not the yOga that fetch us the *trance state*..is it not??

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> prabhuji I didnot get this properly!! does not Atma vichAra embedded in

> vEdAnta?? The ultimate goal of all scriptures is Atmaikatva vidya says

> shankara.

 

PB prabhuji:

 

Swami Venkatesananda's commentary on Patanjali yoga tells me that its also

Atma vichara.

 

bhaskar :

 

may be, I am not denying it..for that matter our tattva vAdi dvaita

prabhuji-s also say the same thing!!! but what vEdAnta teaches us is

*atmaikatva* vichAra, this anyway you cannot find in YS since it maintains

eternal difference between prakruti & multiple pUrusha-s & their chit

shakthi-s..(not in transactional (vyAvahArica) sense as we

advaitins/vEdAntin-s do..but its an eternal reality for them like in all

dualistic schools!!). KIndly refer samAdhi & sAdhana pAda-s of PYS.

 

PB prabhuji:

 

So when I said one can *wrongly* interpret what Maharshi said,

I meant it can also be *wrongly* interpreted to say that *only* atma

vichara, being the direct way is recommended. And when *wrongly*

interpreted

so, study of Vedas/Vedanta would mean to have indirect value too!

 

bhaskar :

 

when shankara categorically saying shruti vAkya shravaNa, manana &

nidhidhyAsa is direct means since it is complying with sArvatrika

pUrNAnubhava...is there still a possibility of downplaying the validity of

shAstra-s prabhuji by following *some* interpretations?? When bhagavadpAda

is there for our rescue who cares who said what!!!?? you can take

innumerable interpretations of advaita texts..but the ultimate pramANa is

bhagavadpAda, his prasthAna trayi bhAshya & personal teaching of one's guru

is it not??

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> Nobody says nirOdha of chitta vruttis is wrong!! We do respect the

> methodology of chitta vrutti nirOdha as a separate school from vEdAnta.

> But whether it is Atmaikatva vichAra as enshrined in shruti-s or is it a

> separate shAstra as *yOga* propagated by pAtanjala?? is the question we

are

> striving to find answer!!

 

PB prabhuji:

 

May I also humbly submit that not knowing *we*, I'm *not* trying to find

out

if PY is *Atmaikatva vichAra* but whether it does *aid* in the journey

towards moksha.

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes ofcourse, we do accept yOga & dhyAna as antaranga sAdhana after karma

yOga...infact this is what shankara concludes at the 5th chapter of BG

commentary. Advaita vEdAnta does not have any problem with accepting PY as

sAdhana for mental purification. Problem comes when you indiscriminately

try to compare AS/NS with shruti pratipAdita brahmaikatva/Atmaikatva

vichAra...Noway PY can teach this highest truth of vEdAnta since pAtanjala

school advocates the doctrine of eternal duality!!

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> But prabhuji, you might have seen above ramaNa clearly saying his method

is

> NOT chitta vrutti nirOdha BUT Atma vichAra...if Atma vichAra is also one

of

> the kinds of nirOdha ramaNa would have not made the difference between

> these two!!

 

PB prabhuji:

 

Perhaps, but not in so clear words. Maybe, Maharshi made a difference

because of the interpretation of nirOdha literally, as recommended by some

PY followers.

 

bhaskar :

 

I thought there is no ambiguity in bhagavan's remarks on *chitta vrutti

nirOdha* especially in that para quoted earlier..anyway thanks for *reading

more* from ramaNa's observation & clarifying your stand.

 

 

Bhaskarji:

> I didnot mean that swAmi chidAnanda telling anything against samAdhi..I

am

> trying to point out that swamiji telling *some* kind of samAdhi in THAT

> yoga is *coming & going* state..nothing less & nothing more than that!!

 

PB prabhuji:

Again, no! That "coming and going" state turns into *sahaja* later is what

I

understood Swamiji to have said. That is *the* reason why I posted his

article in the first place!

 

bhaskar :

 

Again No problem with that *later* state either prabhuji....whether it is

sahaja, turIya, chaturtha AyAma whatever it is...But swamiji observed that

there is a stage where aspirants can experience the temporary trance state

which is *coming & going* in its nature...

 

 

Bhaskarji wrote:

> As said above, by any means we are not trying to belittle any path or

other

> schools of thought & their resultant effects!! we are just trying to

find

> out whether these things have place in shankara siddhAnta & vEdAnta.

Hope

> our intention is clear to you now. Infact shankara says *paramataM

> apratishiddhaM anumataM bhavati* Even yOga of pAtanjala & some of its

> methods have been taken as means for mental purification in advaita

> vEdAnta. More of this in my next mail Part-IV.

 

PB prabhuji:

 

It surprises me that in *finding* whether *these* things have a place in

Shankara siddhAnta & vedAnta, ramaNa is being quoted, who supported all

*means* depending on the capacity of the learner!

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes there is a provision for manda, madhyama & uttama adhikAri-s of

shAstra...shankara recommends dhyAna, upAsana for those who cannot rise to

the level of uttama adhikAri-s but please note even for those manda &

madhyama adhikAri-s sAdhana phala is NOT AS/NS according to shankara...He

says they goto brahma lOka through archirAdi mArga & finally they get the

ultimate realization of svarUpa jnAna...enough said on this..

 

PB prabhuji:

 

Agreeing that I may have possibly drifted and lost focus from the list's

directives, I apologize and draw out of discussions on this thread after

this posting.

 

bhaskar :

 

I dont think you have deviated from the list's objectives...This is a

general forum wherein you can discuss all advaita Acharya-s & their view

points...But some one like me who wants to stick meticulously to shankara

would some time find some differences in interpretations of advaita as

presented by others. We just try to resolve those differences by sharing

each others' thoughts.

 

jai bajrangabali,

--praveen

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar