On Nirvikalpa Samadhi in Yoga and Advaita

[Guest guest]

Congratulations and admirations on an excellent post, Chittaranjanji!

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Prof VK-ji,

 

Thank you for your kind words, Sir.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

 

 

advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk> wrote:

>

> Congratulations and admirations on an excellent post, Chittaranjanji!

>

> PraNAms to all advaitins

> profvk

[Guest guest]

Namaste Chittaranjanji,

 

I thank you for this wonderful brief article.

 

 

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:33:31 -0000, Chittaranjan Naik

<chittaranjan_naik wrote:

>

>

> Namaste to all Advaitins,

>

> ON THE TWO CONNOTATIONS OF THE WORD 'SAMADHI'

>

> The on-going discussion on the status of samadhi in Advaita is quite

> interesting, and it brings to the fore a certain misconception caused

> by the use of the word 'samadhi' in different ways by two different

> darshanas. We must remember that samadhi in Patanjali Yoga has a

> different connotation than in Advaita Vedanta, and that when Advaita

> belittles samadhi it does so targeting a Yoga conception of samadhi,

> and that when it espouses samadhi, it does so from the perspective of

> samadhi as seen in Advaita. Now, what are these two connotations of

> samadhi.

>

> "Yoga is the cessation of chitta-vrittis", thus begins the Patanjali

> Yoga Sutras. In Yoga darshana, samadhi is the quiescence of the mind

> when all vrittis have ceased. Yoga is closely allied to the darshana

> of Samkhya. In the philosophy of Samkhya, which is dualistic,

> prakriti entices purusha, and having performed her dance, she frees

> him at the end of her dance so that the purusha may attain moksha.

> The vrittis are nothing but prakriti, and the cessation of vrittis is

> prakriti attaining quiescence in the undifferentiated state of

> avyakta.

>

> The key word for distinguishing the samadhi of Yoga from the samadhi

> of Advaita is 'avyakta'. In Samkhya and Yoga, avyakta is the

> undifferentiated state of prakriti. Yoga considers the purusha as

> having attained moksha once he is free of prakriti's leela i.e., when

> prakriti abides in its undifferentiated state of avyakta. Now,

> according to Advaita, avyakta is nothing but deep-sleep. It is the

> primordial slumber under which the soul transmigrates in samsara.

> Therefore, according to Advaita, the samadhi of Yoga, which is a mere

> cessation of vrittis, is nothing but a trance wherein the soul abides

> in its primordial sleep.

>

> Shankara speaks about it thus in the BSB (I.IV.i.3):

>

> "Without that latent state, the absence of birth for the freed souls

> cannot be explained. Why? Because liberation comes when the potential

> power (of Maya) is burnt away by knowledge. The potential power,

> constituted by nescience, is mentioned by the word avyakta

> (unmanifest). It rests on God, and is comparable to magic. It is a

> kind of deep slumber in which the transmigrating souls sleep without

> any consciousness of their real nature. (Br.III.viii.11)."

>

> It is in this context that both Gaudapada and Shankara warn against

> the sadhaka merging into peace, which is a state they term

> as 'sleep'. I quote here from the Karika (Advaita-Prakarana):

>

> Verse 42: "With the help of that process one should bring under

> discipline the mind that remains dispersed amidst objects of desire

> and enjoyment; and one should bring it under control even when it is

> in full peace in sleep, for sleep is as bad as desire."

>

> Shankara explains: "Moreover, laya means that in which anything gets

> merged, i.e., sleep. Though the mind be suprasannam, very peaceful,

> i.e., free from effort; laye, in that sleep; still 'it should be

> brought under discipline' – this much has to be supplied. Should it

> be asked, 'If it is fully at peace, why should it be disciplined?'

> the answer is: 'Since layah tatha, sleep, is as much a source of

> evil; yatha kamah, as desire is.' So the idea implied is this: As the

> mind engaged in objects is to be controlled, so also is the mind in

> sleep to be disciplined."

>

> Now what about samadhi in Advaita? In Advaita, samadhi is not a mere

> contrivance to still the mind, but is a means for a sadhaka with

> middling qualities to get established as a stitha prajnya. Before we

> speak about nirvikalpa samadhi in Advaita, it is necessary to get the

> context for it in the proper place.

>

> THE SUPREME PATH OF ADVAITA IS ASPARSA

>

> In Advaita, moksha is not the result of karma. It is not something

> attained. It is what is. But what is, is not seen by the jiva limited

> by avidya. When the jiva sees the Truth, it sees what is, and it sees

> that its self is Brahman. That very seeing is the dissolution of the

> non-seeingness of the jiva, and the dissolution of the jiva itself as

> an individuated being. It is the waking up to the Truth. It is

> pratyabhijna - the recognition of what always was, is, and will be. I

> do not know the Sanskrit word that is used in Advaita

> for 'realisation', but the word pratyabhijna - recognition - seems to

> convey it quite admirably.

>

> The Advaita realisation is effortless and natural. It is called

> sahaja samadhi, the effortless eternal vision of non-duality. There

> is nothing here to be rejected, no state to go into, and no state

> that is different than another. It is not something that was

> attained, it is not something that was ever lost, and not something

> to be gained.

>

> Why does every jiva not have this pratyabhijna? If we must attempt an

> answer to this question, then it can only be something like this:

> There is no pratyabhijna because the jiva is asleep. But sleep is

> nothing but not being awake i.e., not recognising. I'm afraid the

> answer cannot be anything other than a tautology because that very

> lack of pratyabhijna is nothing but avidya, the primordial deep sleep

> of the jiva. In the absence of this sleep, there is no jiva for It is

> seeing its own Infinite Radiance.

>

> The path of Advaita is not for everybody - it is for the jiva where

> the scales over the eyes have almost dropped. This readiness of the

> jiva for Advaita-jnyana shows up as certain characteristics in the

> jiva. It is these characteristics that Shankara lays down as the four-

> fold qualifications for a sadhaka on the asparsa path of Advaita.

>

> THE CONTEXT OF SAMADHI IN ADVAITA

>

> How many sadhakas are there in this Kali Yuga that have absolute

> vairagya for everything here and hereafter including the highest

> world of Brahmaloka? I'm afraid most of us are not even free of

> attachments for things like increments and promotions in the

> workplace! Most of us are attached to our families, we have our

> desires for wealth and objects, we are not yet completely free of the

> lure of feminine charm. There is nothing wrong with all this except

> that we need to recognise that we are not yet ready for the supreme

> path of Advaita. We are on the road somewhere, but we are not at that

> junction where Advaita Vedanta is initiating us effortlessly into the

> deeper mysteries. My pranams to those that are there, but I suspect

> that the majority of us are somewhere else. But that somewhere else

> is also a road that leads to the same goal. If I travel by train to

> Delhi and then take a flight from Delhi to Simla, my journey by rail

> is not leading to another destination even though the destination of

> the train is Delhi and not Simla. I may be sitting in a slower

> vehicle, my journey may be taking longer and may be more tedious, but

> I am still moving along to the same destination. How shall I go

> faster when my means are somewhat limited? You see, I have not the

> money to take a flight all the way from Mumbai to Simla. Likewise,

> without this supreme vairagya, I have not the means to take fully to

> the supreme path of Advaita. Subtle desires surreptitiously rob my

> understanding and often present even Shankara's words through the

> weave of my own raga. How do I proceed from here with all my

> limitations and attachments and desires? What use is it repeating

> again and again about a means that I am not fit for?

>

> What use is a boat to a man that is stranded on a mountaintop? What

> shall he do with a guidebook that tells him how to build a raft or

> set sail over the seas?

>

> The question of samadhi in Advaita must be seen in the light of the

> pre-qualification of the sadhaka. The highly qualified sadhaka is

> already there - the Grace of Brahman effortlessly reveals for him the

> Eternal Light. For him pratyabhijna - recognition of the Eternal

> Truth - takes place merely by hearing (shravana) the mahavakhyas.

> This is the asparsa Yoga of Advaita which is untraceable

> and 'contactless'. It is not related to anything. But there are

> sadhakas that are a little less pure, who still have traces of subtle

> desires that rob their discrimination ever so slightly but surely. It

> is for these sadhakas that Advaita prescribes a path where samadhi

> becomes of relevance. We may refer to Gaudapada's Karika (Advaita-

> Prakarana) to see that it is like this:

>

> Verse 39: "The Yoga that is familiarly referred to as 'contactless'

> is difficult to be comprehended by anyone of the Yogis. For those

> Yogis, who apprehend fear where there is no fear, are afraid of it."

>

> Verse 40: "For all these Yogis, fearlessness, the removal of misery,

> knowledge (of the Self), and everlasting peace are dependent on the

> control of the mind."

>

> Verse 41: "Just as an ocean can be emptied with the help of the tip

> of a blade of Kusa grass that can hold just a drop, so also can the

> control of the mind be brought about by absence of (mental)

> depression."

>

> NIRVIKALPA SAMADHI IN ADVAITA IS NOT MERE MIND-CONTROL

>

> How does Nirvikalpa Samadhi fit into the scheme of Advaita?

>

> Actually, there is no such thing as mere mind-control in Advaita.

> Mind-control arises in Advaita only as a subsidiary means for

> attaining jnyana. Amongst the three steps of shravana, manana and

> nidhidhyasana, it is only the first that is necessary if the sadhaka

> truly has the two qualifications of supreme discrimination and

> supreme vairagya. But if there is even a little dilution in these two

> attributes, then the other two steps become necessary. For a sadhaka

> that has done manana on the sruti and been convinced of its truth,

> mind-control becomes necessary so that the natural proclivity of the

> mind to go outward and be dispersed amongst objects is checked. Mind-

> control becomes necessary as a condition to attain an insight into

> the meaning of THAT which is the goal of 'neti, neti'.

>

> What is the significance of 'neti, neti' in Advaita? It is to know

> THAT by knowing which all this is known. It is to know the

> Substratum, the Material Cause, from which all this is not different.

> In this world that is projected by Brahman's vikshepa shakti, the

> play of forms conceals the substratum. It is hidden by the avarana

> shakti of the self-same Maya that projects the universe. Since the

> Substratum lies hidden from the unseeing eye of the sadhaka, it is to

> be known by negating the forms. This is achieved by nirvikalpa

> samadhi. Thus, nirvikalpa samadhi has for its goal not merely the

> stilling of the mind, or the cessation of vrittis, but Brahman that

> is the Substratum of the universe. The stilling of the mind is here

> not the goal, but is only a means to 'reach' THAT which the intellect

> has already been convinced of, through shravana and manana, as the

> Supreme Truth. The nirvikalpa samadhi of Advaita is not sleep, but is

> the vision of the formless Substratum attained by negating all that

> is seen as not being the Substratum. Nirvikalpa samadhi is the

> culmination of the negation of 'not this, not this' employed by the

> sruti. It is the wakeful directedness of nidhidhyasana to allow the

> pratyabhijna of Brahman to shine through. It is in this context that

> nirvikalpa samadhi must be seen in Advaita. I quote from Shankara's

> Vivekachudamani to substantiate this view:

>

> Verse 354: "Such imaginations as 'thou, 'I', or 'this' take place

> through the defects of the buddhi. But when the Paramatman, the

> Absolute, the One without a second manifests Itself in Samadhi, all

> such imaginations are dissolved for the aspirant, through the

> realisation of the Truth of Brahman."

>

> Verse 365: "By the Nirvikalpa Samadhi the truth of Brahman is clearly

> and definitely realized, but not otherwise, for then the mind, being

> unstable by nature, is apt to be mixed up with other perceptions."

>

> THERE IS ANOTHER CONTEXT OF MIND-CONTROL IN ADVAITA SADHANA

>

> There is however another context in which mind-control may become

> necessary in Advaita sadhana. One might have seen the Truth, even

> beheld it, but may not be able to retain the spontaneous and unbroken

> awareness of it due to strong vasanas persisting from the past. Such

> sadhakas are sometimes called Ishvarakotis (reference: Sri

> Ramakrishna Paramahamsa), those for whom the Truth shines but the

> vasanas keep them away from abiding in It. It is in their context

> that mind-control is advocated as the last stage of sadhana. The

> Karika (Advaita-Prakarana) speaks of this stage of sadhana as follows:

>

> Verse 44: "One should wake up the mind merged in deep sleep; one

> should bring the dispersed mind into tranquillity again; one should

> know when the mind is tinged with desire (and is in a state of

> latency). One should not disturb the mind established in equipoise."

>

> Verse 45: "One should not enjoy happiness in that state; but one

> should become unattached through the use of discrimination. When the

> mind, established in steadiness, wants to issue out, one should

> concentrate it with diligence."

>

> Vesre 46: "When the mind does not become lost nor is scattered, when

> it is motionless and does not appear in the form of objects, then it

> becomes Brahman."

>

> Both Adi Shankara and Sri Ramana Maharshi speak about samadhi in

> different contexts of instruction. It is futile to pick out any one

> statement made by these great jnyanis and try to demonstrate a

> particular thesis without considering the context of those statements.

>

> With regards,

> Chittaranjan

> __________________

>

> A postscript:

>

> I shall restrain myself from being drawn into an argument about the

> authorship of Vivekachudamani. For me, there is not the least doubt

> that Adi Shankara is the author of this great work, and I remain

> unaffected by the two reasons proffered by those that espouse the

> view that Shankara is not the author of this book. Firstly, I see no

> conflict between the perspectives of Vivekachudamani and the

> prasthana traya bhashyas, and I see no reason why I should be

> persuaded to follow the line of those that see contradictions between

> them. As for the second argument - that the language of the

> Vivekachudamani is at variance with some other works of Shankara – I

> humbly submit that for me Adi Shankara is none other than the avatara

> of Lord Shankara, the Supreme Being out of whose damaru has come out

> all the arts and vidyas of the world, and I cannot find it in my

> heart to restrict the Acharya's style within any set paradigm. I

> accept the entire range of Shankara's writings including

> Soundaryalahari, Daksinamurthy Stotra, Bhajagovindam, as also many

> other works attributed to him. Indeed I accept even the following

> erotic poem as having come from the pen of Shankara when he was for a

> time inhabiting the body of King Amaruka to learn the art of kama

> shastra:

>

> My breasts at first

> little buds

> grew plump under your hands.

> My speech

> instructed by yours

> lost its native simplicity.

> What shall I do?

> These arms

> left my old nursemaid's neck

> to creep around yours,

> but you no longer

> set foot in the neighbourhood.

>

> (From the 'Amarushataka', translated by Schelling)

>

> Such is the breadth and richness of Shankara's writings that I find

> it somewhat presumptuous on the part of those that seek to put a

> limited boundary on his style. Lastly, I hope I am not doing violence

> to the sensibilities of Advaitins by quoting here an erotic poem.

>

> Chittaranjan

>

>

> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman

and Brahman.

> Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

> To Post a message send an email to : advaitin

> Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages

>

>

> Links

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Chittaranjan-ji

 

That was a great post and hopefully should bring closure to all the

hair-splitting or should I say 'spitting' exchanges we have had so

far.:-)

 

Here are a couple of minor clarifications and references to Yoga

Sutras - some readers may find this useful.

>>

We must remember that samadhi in Patanjali Yoga has a

different connotation than in Advaita Vedanta, and that when Advaita

belittles samadhi it does so targeting a Yoga conception of samadhi,

and that when it espouses samadhi, it does so from the perspective

of

samadhi as seen in Advaita. Now, what are these two connotations of

samadhi.

>>

 

Actually Yoga Sutra itself defines two types of Asamprajnata

Samadhis,

namely Bhavapratyaya (with Samsara as seed) and Upayapratyaya (cause

of means to liberation). Advaitic acharyas commenting on the Yoga

Sutras mention that the first one is to be discarded by those

seeking

Moksha. This samadhi is also called as laya samadhi and is the one

belittled by Sankara in the Brahma Sutra Bhasya. (refer Yoga Sutra

#19

bhava-pratyayah videha prakritilayanam)

 

The second (Upayapratyaya ) Asamprajnata Samadhi is what the

vedantins

normally call Nirvikalpa Samadhi. Superior dispassion is said to be

the cause of this second type of Asamprajnata Samadhi , namely

Upayapratyaya Asamprajnata Samadhi, also called Nirbhija samadhi.

(refer Yoga Sutra #20: shraddha-veerya-smruti-samadhi-prajna-

porrvakaitaresham and sutra #21:teevra-Samveganam Asannah The

attainment of Samadhi is quick for the intensely dispassionate).

 

The difference between the two Yogic samadhis according to Advaitic

Acharyas such as Sri Madhusudana Saraswati is the absence and

presence of the knowledge arising from the Upanishadic teaching "Tat

Tvam Asi".

 

 

For example the following quote from the post "YogAmRRitaM by R.

Visvanatha Sastri - 6"

http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m25269.html

can be understood to refer to the first kind

>>

In the state of samadhi, the yogi fails to see that the

non-dual brahman alone exists. He seeks samadhi because he

believes in the existence of the mind as separate from

Atman, and therefore tries to control it. By some

mechanical means he brings the mind to a state of

inactivity and thus makes himself free from all worries.

>>

 

The Samadhi referred to above is the Bhavapratyaya , brought

about my mechanical control of mind, packed with latency as in the

case of deep sleep, because there is an absence of the knowledge

arising from the meaning of the Upanishadic teaching "Tat Tvam

Asi"

(refer: Gudharta Dipika commentary on Gita verse 4.27)

 

However it is a different case with the second type of Asamprajnata

Samadhi. Discussing whether this Nirbhija Samadhi is just a state of

total absence of vrttis, Sri Vidyaranya writes in Panchadasi:

 

"If bondage is due to mind made duality, it will vanish if the mind

is stopped. So one should practice mind control only. What is the

use of knowledge of Brahman? Tell me. If it is so asked, the answer

is :

though there will be cessation of duality for the time being during

Samadhi, the cessation of future births cannot be had without the

knowledge of Brahman. Such is the proclamation of the Upanishads."

 

So even in the Yoga Sutras we find the equivalent of the advaitic

Samadhi had after proper Shravana from a Stortriya-Brahmanishta

Guru, manana and Nidhidhyasana.

 

 

In Sri Vidyaranya's view the Yoga shastra being primarily

intended to deal with Samadhi, deals with Realization of the Self

implicitly and not explicitly and so discusses both types of Samadhi.

 

regards

Sundar Rajan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, K Kathirasan <brahmasatyam@g...> wrote:

> Namaste Chittaranjanji,

>

> I thank you for this wonderful brief article.

>

>

> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 16:33:31 -0000, Chittaranjan Naik

> <chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Namaste to all Advaitins,

> >

> > ON THE TWO CONNOTATIONS OF THE WORD 'SAMADHI'

 

Namaste,

 

My sincere thanks too, to Chittaranjan-ji. However, I feel the

'seductiveness' of the logic akin to that of Arjuna's when he argues

why he should not fight the war.

 

Not being versed in philosophy, dialectics or 'prasthana-trayi',

I would like to share another perspective called 'shraddhA' (loosely

translated as 'faith').

 

Patanjali wrote (anushAsanam - meaning per tradition or sampradaya)

a PRACTICAL 'pratyakShAvagamya' (Gita 9:2) prakriya (discipline), NOT

a PHILOSOPHY.

 

1. Sri Ramana's comment on YogaSutra 3:34 is: 'saMyamana on the heart

gives Atma-jnAna'. He also says that Atma-jnAna is beyond dvaita and

advaita. For me this comment supercedes ALL other sutras, no matter

what philosophy we try to foist on Patanjali.

A scripture's test is in that which expresses the 'HIGHEST'. This

is the 'dahara vidya' of Chandogya 8:1:1-5, and Brihadaranyaka 4:4:22.

 

2. Swamis Sivananda, Chidananda, and Krishnananda, who PRACTISED,

LIVED, and THEN wrote on Raja Yoga, asserted its role in transcending

'saMsAra'. (Pl. refer to their on-line downloadable books on Moksha

Gita, Yoga Systems, and Realization of the Absolute.) They did not see

subtle or huge differences between Sankara and Patanjali.

 

The testimony of these jnAnis is far more useful for me than any

other.

 

Of course, I cannot prove whether Patanjali was a brahmanishtha,

shrotriya, jivanmukta, videhamukta, or residing in another loka

awaiting liberation at the next maha-pralaya. There is no extant

record of his explanation of the Sutras, nor dialogues with disciples.

So we do not know whether he said the spiritual 'heart' is on the

right or not. The Upanishads do not mention it either. Ramana did

refer to an ancient Tamil manuscript which did mention it.

 

3. Brahma Sutra Bhashya 2:1:9 has been referenced as an 'anti-samadhi'

statement. It should be pointed out that the context there is

're-birth', and obviously it can only refer to 'sabIja-samadhi'-s. If

samadhi and sushupti were to be equivalent, Shankara would not have

defined 'yoga-balam' (Gita 8:10) as

'samAdhija-saMskAra-prachaya-chitta-sthairya-lakShaNam'. If

chitta-sthairya is requisite for paraM padaM puruShaM upaiti divyaM

[attains the Supreme], chitta-vRRitti-nirodha cannot be ignored. It is

a mystery why nirbIja-samAdhi is not mentioned by Gaudapada or Shankara.

 

4. Shankara uses the words 'adhyAtma-yoga, mano-nigraha, dhyAna-yoga,

nididhyAsana' interchangeably, according to Sw. Satchidanandendra

(quoted by Alston from Method of Vedanta.) One then has to conclude

that the end result cannot be different.

 

5. It was said that just shravana would be enough to enlighten the

prepared jiva. EVEN this would be a prakriya, compared to

Dakshinamurty's 'silent initiation', which Ramana 'conferred'

on the 'ripe' jivas.

 

6. For those who are sticklers for occurrence of specific words in a

text, it would come as a surprise that the word 'Ananda' does not

appear in the Gita (does this mean Krishna does not believe in Ananda

svarUpa of brahman?!); nor do the words shravaNa, manana, nididhyAsana

appear even once in the Upadeshasahasri!

 

7. If I were to live my life bearing in mind this may be my very last

breath, what books would I want to remember? (OM krato smara, kRRtaM

smara - Isha upan. #17) Only the ones I have mentioned above.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

praNAm all,

 

Chittaranjanji,

 

I can't thank you enough for the timely *saviour* article that helped clear

much of the ongoing confusion!

 

Also Sundarji, for the proper appendix to the article, especially the

following:

 

Sundar Rajanji wrote:

> ... though there will be cessation of duality for the time being during

> Samadhi, the cessation of future births cannot be had without the

> knowledge of Brahman. Such is the proclamation of the Upanishads."

 

jai bajrangabali,

--praveen

[Guest guest]

Thanks to Sundar Rajanji, Sunder Hattangadiji, and Chittranjanji for sharing

eloquently on this matter. What Sunderji says below makes sense to me and I

fully share his perspective. I also deeply admire the fact Sunderji

demonstrates the firmness of his conviction and has the necessary background

as a scholar and a powerful intellect to give words to that which many of us

feel to be true.

 

 

 

If one is so inclined and ripe, every door opens to the Truth.

 

 

 

Love to all

 

Harsha

 

 

 

_____

 

Sunder Hattangadi [sunderh]

Monday, March 28, 2005 12:05 AM

advaitin

Re: On Nirvikalpa Samadhi in Yoga and Advaita

 

 

 

Namaste,

 

My sincere thanks too, to Chittaranjan-ji. However, I feel the

'seductiveness' of the logic akin to that of Arjuna's when he argues

why he should not fight the war.

 

Not being versed in philosophy, dialectics or 'prasthana-trayi',

I would like to share another perspective called 'shraddhA' (loosely

translated as 'faith').

 

Patanjali wrote (anushAsanam - meaning per tradition or sampradaya)

a PRACTICAL 'pratyakShAvagamya' (Gita 9:2) prakriya (discipline), NOT

a PHILOSOPHY.

 

1. Sri Ramana's comment on YogaSutra 3:34 is: 'saMyamana on the heart

gives Atma-jnAna'. He also says that Atma-jnAna is beyond dvaita and

advaita. For me this comment supercedes ALL other sutras, no matter

what philosophy we try to foist on Patanjali.

A scripture's test is in that which expresses the 'HIGHEST'. This

is the 'dahara vidya' of Chandogya 8:1:1-5, and Brihadaranyaka 4:4:22.

 

2. Swamis Sivananda, Chidananda, and Krishnananda, who PRACTISED,

LIVED, and THEN wrote on Raja Yoga, asserted its role in transcending

'saMsAra'. (Pl. refer to their on-line downloadable books on Moksha

Gita, Yoga Systems, and Realization of the Absolute.) They did not see

subtle or huge differences between Sankara and Patanjali.

 

The testimony of these jnAnis is far more useful for me than any

other.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

We must remember that samadhi in Patanjali Yoga has a

different connotation than in Advaita Vedanta, and that when Advaita

belittles samadhi it does so targeting a Yoga conception of samadhi,

and that when it espouses samadhi, it does so from the perspective of

samadhi as seen in Advaita. Now, what are these two connotations of

samadhi.

 

praNAm CN prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Really fabulous & timely mail prabhuji...Kindly accept my heartfelt

praNAms. I bow to your clarity in thinking & proficiency in presenting the

same.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

PS : Since you've abstained yourself from discussing on the authorship

issue of VC, I'd like to reserve my comments on your references from VC &

its contextual appearance in that text.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sundarji,

 

You wrote -

 

2. Swamis Sivananda, Chidananda, and Krishnananda, who PRACTISED,

LIVED, and THEN wrote on Raja Yoga, asserted its role in transcending 'saMsAra'.

(Pl. refer to their on-line downloadable books on Moksha Gita, Yoga Systems, and

Realization of the Absolute.) They did not see subtle or huge differences

between Sankara and Patanjali.

 

Much appreciate weblinks to the on-line downloadble books mentioned above.

 

Many thanks and pranams.

 

Mangesh Hoskote

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Thank you Harshaji, Sunderji, Praveenji, Sunder Rajanji, Katirasanji,

and Bhaskar Prabhuji for the positive response to the post on

Nirvikalpa Samadhi.

 

Sri Sunderhi's reply strikes a chord within me like a reminder that

there is a spirit of Advaita that comes to us from a living tradition

enriched by the vision and utterances of countless jnyanis rather than

from an exclusive set of Advaita texts. At the same time, I feel

agreement with Bhaskar Prabhuji that when it comes to a contention on

any point regarding the doctrine then the Prashtana Traya alongwith

Shankara's Bhashyas are the final authority on Advaita Vedanta.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Sunder Rajan prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

SR prabhuji:

 

Actually Yoga Sutra itself defines two types of Asamprajnata Samadhis,

namely Bhavapratyaya (with Samsara as seed) and Upayapratyaya (cause

of means to liberation). Advaitic acharyas commenting on the Yoga

Sutras mention that the first one is to be discarded by those

seeking Moksha. This samadhi is also called as laya samadhi and is the one

belittled by Sankara in the Brahma Sutra Bhasya. (refer Yoga Sutra

#19 bhava-pratyayah videha prakritilayanam)

 

bhaskar :

 

can you please explain me here the word *vidEha*...strictly speaking this

type of samAdhi i.e bhAvapratyaya deals with vidEha mukti...here aspirant

who has practiced bhAvapratyaya AS will reach the state of the celestial

beings or he will be identified himself with primordial elements

(tanmAtra-s). Infact there is a provision for krama-mukti & shankara says

this is possible who have been engaging in the method of dhyAna &

upAsana..but shankara never ever said that this happens ONLY in first type

of AS in PY nor it is a *type* of AS in PY. In shankara saMpradAya it is

chitta shuddhi through archirAdi mArga...brahma lOka prApti & after mahA

praLaya final realization of those who reside at brahma lOka. If at all one

finds intentions of shankara in belittling *samAdhi* it should be PY's

nothing else. Because shankara himself says yOga is a dualistic school can

not teach Atmaikatva jnAna.

 

SR prabhuji:

 

The second (Upayapratyaya ) Asamprajnata Samadhi is what the

vedantins normally call Nirvikalpa Samadhi.

 

bhaskar :

 

We cannot simply conclude like that prabhuji..(I know the author of

*Science of Mind Control* says like that at the end of this sUtra # 20

commentary)..But this NS has been explained in much more detail in another

book called *yOga, perfection & enlightenment* (another source material for

your special affiliations to Yoga & samAdhi)...wherein it has been

accounted date & time of NS experienced by swamiji!!!!!!...So, though

second type of AS can be said as NS it cannot be anyway in line with shruti

pratipAdita shankara's lokAthIta, kAlAthIta, avasthAtIta Atmaikatwa sahaja

stiThi of jnAni.

 

SR prabhuji:

 

Superior dispassion is said to be the cause of this second type of

Asamprajnata Samadhi , namely Upayapratyaya Asamprajnata Samadhi, also

called Nirbhija samadhi.

(refer Yoga Sutra #20: shraddha-veerya-smruti-samadhi-prajna-

porrvakaitaresham and sutra #21:teevra-Samveganam Asannah The

attainment of Samadhi is quick for the intensely dispassionate).

 

bhaskar :

 

These two sUtra-s 19 & 20 should be read alongwith sUtra 18. Because

patanjali starts the definition of AS from sUtra #

18..virAmapratyayAbhyAsapUrvaH saMskArashEshOnyaH..After explaining

saMprajnATha samAdhi patanjali states this asamprajnATha samAdhi is the

result of some kind of chitshakthi which contains no object (virAma

pratyaya) but with residues of latent impressions (saMskAra shEsha) gained

through constantly suppressing the thoughts with the aid of non attachment

(vairAgya)..Ofcourse, varAgya is indispensable in any spiritual path...yOga

is not an exception...Even our tattva vAdi dvaitins also insist on

vairAgya..But question here needs to be answered is what will be the parama

siddhAnta & ultimate goal in dualistic & non-dualistic schools?? yOga

maintains like any other dualistic schools such as sAnkhya that duality is

the eternal reality even in final emancipation of a *particular*

jIva...multiple jIva-s, prakruti & purusha vishEsha Ishwara & its eternal

differences are quite conspicuous in yOga philosophy...Hence, even in the

second type of AS which you are saying equal to NS of vEdAntins does not

convey absolute non-dual realisation of Advaita since the experiencer of

any type of AS still keeps vAsana-s though he got rid of chitta vrutti-s at

the time of AS..thats what been explained in the sUtra # 18

saMskArashEShaH...

 

Further, this type of concentration can be achieved through another means

says pAtanjala in the sUtra # 23 that is through Ishwara praNidhAna

(devotion to Ishwara)..who is this Ishwara?? according to pAtanjala he is

puruSha vishEsha devoid of ignorance, not subject to karma-s or saMskAra-s

or the fruits of the Action. Please note here in PY Ishwara is a separate

entity & multiple jIva-s cannot match his caliber at any point of time...to

be precise even in the *second type of samAdhi* that you are holding very

close to your chest thinking it as Atmaikatva jnAna of advaita...In PY it

is true that jIva-s can attain liberation by gaining either type of AS.

But in both types of AS jIva can never ever come even close to the capacity

of Ishwara, like in tattva vAda he maintains safest distance from Ishwara &

eternally differs from omnipotent Ishwara. In think, yOga philosophy of

patanjali has much more proximity to tattva vAda of madhvAchArya rather

than shankara's advaita philosophy. Like tattva vAda, yOga of patanjali

also maintains eternal differences between Ishwara-prakruti & jIva-s.

 

SR prabhuji:

 

The difference between the two Yogic samadhis according to Advaitic

Acharyas such as Sri Madhusudana Saraswati is the absence and

presence of the knowledge arising from the Upanishadic teaching "Tat

Tvam Asi".

 

bhaskar :

 

the performer of yOga or experiencer of AS (both types) cannot gain

Atmaikatva jnAna & realise his advitIyatva (secondless nature) He can only

become kEvala through svarUpa ShUnyatva. At any stretch of our imagination

we cannot equate this temporary state with advaita paramArtha jnAna.

 

SR prabhuji:

 

In Sri Vidyaranya's view the Yoga shastra being primarily

intended to deal with Samadhi, deals with Realization of the Self

implicitly and not explicitly and so discusses both types of Samadhi.

 

bhaskar :

 

PYS, ofcourse, deals explicitly with samAdhi by maintaining the duality..so

neither bhAva pratyaya nor upAyapratyana samAdhi can fetch us the ultimate

knowledge of brahmaikatva jnAna as enshrined in shruti-s.

 

regards

Sundar Rajan

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Sunder Hattangadi prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Kindly bear with my attempt to stretch this farther...

 

SH prabhuji:

 

Patanjali wrote (anushAsanam - meaning per tradition or sampradaya)

a PRACTICAL 'pratyakShAvagamya' (Gita 9:2) prakriya (discipline), NOT

a PHILOSOPHY.

 

bhaskar :

 

prabhuji, kindly pardon me...I am failed to understand this. How can

there be any *prakriya* without siddhAnta?? prakriya (practical method or

methodology to understand siddhAnta) should always carry its *philosophy*,

otherwise this prakriya would be of baseless & without any goal (phala).

In advaita also we have somany prakriya-s like kArya-kAraNa prakriya,

vidyA-avidyA prakriya, avasthAtraya prakriya, paNcha kOsha prakriya etc.

etc. But as you know, each one of these prakriya-s ultimately draws our

attention to shruti pratipAdita Atmaikatwa jnAna.

 

Likewise, in patanjala yOga ShAstra also alongwith prakriya

there_is_siddhAnta as well..what is their siddhAnta?? Like sAnkhya school

they accept multiple jIvAtma-s, prakruti satyatva, prakruti kAraNatva

controlled by purusha viShEsha Ishwara for creation. As you yourself said

earlier, sEshwara sAnkhya darshana is the philosophy of PY.

 

While on the subject, it is to be noted that this is one more major

differece between advaita & yOga...advaita going with shruti asserts that

brahman is the upAdAna kAraNa for jagat & there is no *separate* existence

of prakruti/pradhAna apart from brahman whereas yOga like all other

dualistic schools categorically advocates eternal differences between

prakruti & purusha & denies the upAdAna kAraNatva of brahman!!

 

SH prabhuji:

 

1. Sri Ramana's comment on YogaSutra 3:34 is: 'saMyamana on the heart

gives Atma-jnAna'. He also says that Atma-jnAna is beyond dvaita and

advaita. For me this comment supercedes ALL other sutras, no matter

what philosophy we try to foist on Patanjali.

A scripture's test is in that which expresses the 'HIGHEST'. This

is the 'dahara vidya' of Chandogya 8:1:1-5, and Brihadaranyaka 4:4:22.

 

bhaskar :

 

Kindly tell us more how vEdAnta pratipAdita *dahara vidya* can be

reconciled with PYS..patanjali says dEsha bandha chittasya dhAraNam in 3-1,

patanjali does not explicity mention here heart...rAja yOga followers takes

this sUtra & talks about shad chakra etc. The author of PYS sri

prabhavAnanda says that this sUtra (3:34) is for subtle powers (gupta

siddhis) hardly talks about Atmaikatwa jnAna. Even the author of *Science

of Mind Control* does not even remotely mentions that it is *daharAkASha*

patanjali saying here...Moreover, shankara while commenting on

daharAdhikaraNa clearly clarifies this puzzle of localized brahman in

shruti. Under these circumstances, I am not able to match PYS with dahara

vidya. Kindly clarify prabhuji.

 

SH prabhuji:

 

2. Swamis Sivananda, Chidananda, and Krishnananda, who PRACTISED,

LIVED, and THEN wrote on Raja Yoga, asserted its role in transcending

'saMsAra'. (Pl. refer to their on-line downloadable books on Moksha

Gita, Yoga Systems, and Realization of the Absolute.) They did not see

subtle or huge differences between Sankara and Patanjali.

 

bhaskar :

 

With all due respect to those noble souls & their divine experiences, I

would like to mention that advaita paramArtha jnAna is not based on some

individuals extra-ordinary ecstatic experiences...it is intuitive knowledge

gained through vivEka after analysing the sArvatrika anubhava (universal

experience).

 

SH prabhuji:

 

The testimony of these jnAnis is far more useful for me than any

other.

 

bhaskar :

 

prabhuji, I respect your views & subjective attachment to the teachings of

those noble souls.

 

SH prabhuji:

 

 

Of course, I cannot prove whether Patanjali was a brahmanishtha,

shrotriya, jivanmukta, videhamukta, or residing in another loka

awaiting liberation at the next maha-pralaya. There is no extant

record of his explanation of the Sutras, nor dialogues with disciples.

So we do not know whether he said the spiritual 'heart' is on the

right or not. The Upanishads do not mention it either. Ramana did

refer to an ancient Tamil manuscript which did mention it.

 

bhaskar :

 

Thanks for the information prabhuji. I heard that there is a mention

about this *spiritual heart* in some minor upanishad also...

 

SH prabhuji:

 

3. Brahma Sutra Bhashya 2:1:9 has been referenced as an 'anti-samadhi'

statement. It should be pointed out that the context there is

're-birth', and obviously it can only refer to 'sabIja-samadhi'-s. If

samadhi and sushupti were to be equivalent, Shankara would not have

defined 'yoga-balam' (Gita 8:10) as

'samAdhija-saMskAra-prachaya-chitta-sthairya-lakShaNam'.

 

bhaskar :

 

But prabhuji as you know shankara says in sUtra bhAshya that mere sushupti

vivEka is enough to realise our advitIya nature...yAjnAvalkya in

bruhadAraNyaka while answering janaka's question talks about only three

avasthA-s & in kArika gaudapAda too while talking about turIya considers

only avasthA traya. PY sabIja & nirbIja samAdhi hardly found any place in

these major texts!!

 

SH prabhuji:

 

If chitta-sthairya is requisite for paraM padaM puruShaM upaiti divyaM

[attains the Supreme], chitta-vRRitti-nirodha cannot be ignored.

 

bhaskar :

 

No prabhuji, even shankara at one place accepts *chitta vrutti

nirOdha*..but resultant fruit definitely not that of PY's AS/NS (I'll show

that reference in my Part-IV). Advaita does not have any problem with CVN,

it is advised for mental purification as an antaranga sAdhana part.

 

SH prabhuji:

 

It is a mystery why nirbIja-samAdhi is not mentioned by Gaudapada or

Shankara.

 

bhaskar :

 

If you ask you, I simply say it is because nirbIja samAdhi of PY is not

their cup of tea:-))

 

SH prabhuji:

 

4. Shankara uses the words 'adhyAtma-yoga, mano-nigraha, dhyAna-yoga,

nididhyAsana' interchangeably, according to Sw. Satchidanandendra

(quoted by Alston from Method of Vedanta.) One then has to conclude

that the end result cannot be different.

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes, prabhuji, you can see shankara never uses the words like saMprajnAtha,

asamprajnAtha samAdhi-s though these words occupy the centre stage in PY.

Its once again shows that when shankara talks about adhyAtma yOga, manO

nigraha yOga or dhyAna yOga definitely AS/NS of PY was not there in his

mind. Atleast once he would have explicitly mentioned technical term of PY

i.e. AS or its two types, if at all he is advocating PYS's AS/NS is it

not??

 

SH prabhuji:

 

6. For those who are sticklers for occurrence of specific words in a

text, it would come as a surprise that the word 'Ananda' does not

appear in the Gita (does this mean Krishna does not believe in Ananda

svarUpa of brahman?!);

 

bhaskar :

 

First of all, IMHO, this question does not arise when shruti mAta herself

talks a lot about Ananda at various places...secondly krishna does not

anywhere say brahman IS NOT anada svarUpa either so...*Ananda* is still an

open question...but this is not the case with yOga..shankara explicitly

mentions both sAnkhya & yOga darshana-s dualists & donot teach Atmaikatva

of vEdAnta...So, prabhuji, I think sticklers have every valid reason to

search certain terms when remarks by PY followers contradicts shankara's

own observation.

 

SH prabhuji:

 

nor do the words shravaNa, manana, nididhyAsana appear even once in the

Upadeshasahasri!

 

bhaskar :

 

interesting...but prabhuji what do you think about *shAstrOpadEsha* in

prose section of upadEshasAhasri??

 

Kindly pardon me for my fussy nature prabhuji...if your precious time

permits kindly clarify my doubts prabhuji. I also humbly request your

goodself to avoid *codified* replies..I am not smart enough to de-code it &

understand your intentions in it...

if you want to fire me, kindly fire me directly prabhuji....sometimes even

my guruji also taps on my head if I repeatedly asking him some stupid

questions :-)) there is absolutely no hard feelings ..I wholeheartedly

accept it as a compliment.. I am the one among other members who respects

& adores your in-depth knowledge in our scriptures.

 

Humble praNAms onceagain,

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

_____

 

bhaskar.yr [bhaskar.yr]

Friday, April 01, 2005 1:07 AM

advaitin

Re: Re: On Nirvikalpa Samadhi in Yoga and Advaita

 

 

 

 

 

bhaskar :

 

Thanks for the information prabhuji. I heard that there is a mention

about this *spiritual heart* in some minor upanishad also...

 

***************************************

 

Yes, in Bhagavad Gita, Sri Krishna says to Arjuna, “I am in the Heart of all

Gudakesha.”

 

The cave of the Heart is mentioned in the Upanishads. How the nature and

meaning of “Heart” is understood probably depends on the ripeness of the

seeker.

 

 

 

Love to all

 

Harsha

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

_____

 

bhaskar.yr [bhaskar.yr]

Friday, April 01, 2005 1:07 AM

advaitin

Re: Re: On Nirvikalpa Samadhi in Yoga and Advaita

 

 

 

 

Kindly pardon me for my fussy nature prabhuji...

 

 

 

Certainly Bhaskarji. You are pardoned for being fussy. You should feel happy

that you have found a guru and have a beautiful and powerful intellect to

follow the subtle teachings of Shankra.

 

 

 

With regards to Sunderji, you wrote, “I am the one among other members who

respects

& adores your in-depth knowledge in our scriptures.”

 

 

 

Your adoration for Sunderji is not misplaced. Again the fact that you are

able to follow Sunderji pays tribute to you. You write long eloquent letters

stating your point so logically and this speaks volumes for your stamina,

passion, and energy.

 

 

 

The main thing is to be satisfied that you have the right understanding and

to be content with that. A mind that is calm and content is able to grasp

the subtle truths of the scriptures easier. “I am That”…… that is the

mahavakya. So that is the essential teaching which should be understood with

clarity. The rest is entertainment.

 

 

 

Love to all

 

Harsha