On drishti-shristi-vada

[Guest guest]

Namaste to all Advaitins,

 

Some contemplations of an Advaita traveller on drishti-shristi-

vada....

 

It is not untrue that drishti-shristi-vada is part of Advaita

Vedanta. But the context of drishti-srishti is Brahman and not the

individual self. The Mahavakhya 'Tatvamasi' would not have been

necessary if the self was not encumbered with avidya and embroiled in

samsara. The Mahavakhya indicates that the difference between the

self and the Supreme Self is due to the limiting adjuncts

superimposed by avidya, and that by removing these limiting adjuncts,

the self within is seen to be the Supreme Self of the Universe. In

Advaita, we are presented with the analogy of the sameness of the

space in the pot and the space of the all-pervading akasha. In this

analogy, the limiting adjunct is the pot. But what really are the

limiting adjuncts of the self - the deadly symptoms of avidya - that

separates this self from the Supreme Self?

 

I believe that it is not fruitless to try and understand the nature

of the gandharva-nagara that has to be crossed in the pathless

journey of self to Self. This is an attempt in that direction.

 

 

This self is the supported. The Self to be reached is the

unsupported. What separates the self from the Self is the abyss that

the self will have to enter where there is no support. This self that

is that Self is separated from IT by the support it seeks.

 

The abyss where there is no support is the abyss of fear. To leap

into the abyss is to lose all fear. The Self to be reached is the

fearless One. The Self to be reached is not this self that is

fearful. This self that is that Self is separated from IT by its

fear.

 

The Siva Sutra begins with the sutra: chaitanyam atma – Consciousness

is the Self. And the very next sutra states: jnanam bandhah –

knowledge is bondage. The first two sutras of the Siva Sutra reflect

the difference between self and Self. The knowledge that the self has

binds it - it is a fixation. The Self to be reached is unbounded

knowledge. Its Knowledge is the Universal Knowledge from which

particular objects arise as limitations. The Self to be reached is

not this self that is bound by knowledge. This self that is that Self

is separated from IT by the boundaries of its knowledge.

 

This self is caged in the body. The Self to be reached is the great

unembodied Self. The self must break free from the fetters of the

body before it can reach the Self. The knots of the heart that bind

it to the body must be unravelled – layer after layer – before it

sees that it is in truth the un-embodied Self. The knots are the

terrible prisms of avidya. They warp the vision of the self and place

it in the confines of the body. (In Sri Vidya, the knots of the heart

are called the chakras and Kundalini is the fire of Consciousness.

The six chakras are called the rope of Brahma for they bind a man to

the body.) The self shall become unembodied before it can reach the

Self. This self that is that Self is separated from IT by its

embodiedness.

 

This self has no capacity of determination over nature. The sun

shines, the clouds bring rain, the rivers flow, and natural

calamities happen without the determinations of this self. The self

has a will that can only move the karmendriyas, that can maybe change

the world to a limited extent through the workings of its intellect

and karmendriyas. But that is an infinitesimal part of the great

drama of existence, and even that small part is sometimes made

ineffectual because of disease. The Self to be reached is Omnipotent.

Nothing happens by accident – nature is jada and cannot move unless

it is imparted motion by the sentient Self. According to Samkhya,

prakriti moves in the presence of Purusha, but in Vedanta it is

Purusha who is the motive force for moving prakriti. The Shakti of

the Self is the spanda that is inscrutable to the jiva. It is the

action of the Self that is not acting when It is acting. This self is

a slave of shakti. The Self to be reached is the Lord of Shakti. The

self shall be energised with Shakti by its absolute silence before it

can reach the Self. To remain absolutely silent is the greatest

Shakti. This self that is that Self is separated from IT by its lack

of shakti.

 

 

That Self to be reached is the One without a second and not this jiva

here. That Self is the Self that creates the universe by Its drishti,

and not this jiva here.

 

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

>

> Namaste to all Advaitins,

>

> Some contemplations of an Advaita traveller on drishti-shristi-

> vada....

>

>

 

Namaste, all

 

Chittaranjan, that was an interesting concise presentation of

drishtisrishti vada. I particularly liked the statement:

"This self that is that Self is separated from IT by the boundaries

of its knowledge".

 

 

My father had written 372 verses on drishtisrishti vada. That was

his last work in his life. It was interrupted by his passing away.

225 of them have been translated by me in English. Available at

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/Appa/dRSTisRSTiHpage1.html

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

--- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik

wrote:

> Namaste to all Advaitins,

>

> Some contemplations of an Advaita traveller on

> drishti-shristi-

> vada....

>

> I am extremly thankful to you, Chittaranjanji, for

the wonderful explanations made by you in defense of

the Supreme Self, which alone is not implicated in the

dreadful samsara, as againgst all the other shadowy

beings laboring under this agony. The respondent says

that the Mahavakya,'Tatvam Asi', is not necessary for

the individual self, if it were the supreme Self.

Nodoubt, this is true. It is correct that the

individual self is the supported and the supreme self

is unsupported there being an abyss between the two,

the abyss of fear, the fear of the individual self

coming to an end. But, all this does not mean to

suggest the division of the two selves, a position

clearly pointed out in, 'Mundaka Upanishad', through

the example of the two souls, the individual soul

eating good and bad fruits, getting bewildered, but

the supreme soul remaining as pure witness, ultimately

the position being the sole reality of the Supreme

soul.

 

" The past and the unknown do not meet at

any point; they cannot be brought together by any act

whatsoever; there is no bridge to cross over, nor a

path that leads to it. The twe have never met and will

never meet. The past has to cease for the unknowable,

for the immensity to be". (J.Krishnamurthi)

yours,

ever in Bhgahavan

sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

 

[Guest guest]

Ganesan Sankarraman wrote:

>

> " The past and the unknown do not meet at

> any point; they cannot be brought together by any act

> whatsoever; there is no bridge to cross over, nor a

> path that leads to it. The twe have never met and will

> never meet. The past has to cease for the unknowable,

> for the immensity to be". (J.Krishnamurthi)

> yours,

>

*Both the past (existing in the form of memories and impressions) and

the so called "unknown" are only concepts in the mind. There is no need

to worry about whether they meet or not meet or can co-exist, etc. That

is all play of imagination and fantasy. All such notions arise in the

mind. Sri Ramana has said that the only thing we can be certain of is

that "I Exist". This is the immense clue. The notions of past, the

unknown, etc. are all byproducts of this simple fact of our innate

feeling of being and existence. Meditation on our own being is the key.

Meditation on our own existence makes us see that our existence and the

Universal Existence are identical. This is why the scriptures say, "I am

That" or "That thou are." One of Rum's poems states something

like....and I paraphrase...... "I had been knocking on the door (perhaps

of God's Home), banging on the door desperately to get in, and when it

opened, I saw that I had been knocking from the inside." It means

perhaps that He was already home with his God and had always been inside

God's home but did not realize it.

 

Harsha*

 

 

> ------

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

 

> I am extremly thankful to you, Chittaranjanji, for

> the wonderful explanations made by you in defense of

> the Supreme Self,

 

And I am grateful to you for your opposition to my views. I would say

that the Supreme Self needs no defense.

 

> But, all this does not mean to suggest the division of

> the two selves,

 

Yes, you are right, the Self is akhanda. There are no two selves and

the division between the two is an illusion. But this entire universe

being an illusion, the seeming division between the self and Self

could well entail the traversing of the entire (illusory) universe

from one end to another and we could still say that nothing has

happened because the effort as well as the universe traversed is an

illusion. But to an individual the task may be quite arduous. Or it

is possible that the truth is revealed in the 'blink of an eye'

without any effort. What path, or upaya, is suitable for one

individual may not be suitable for another. We do not know our inner

stations in this journey. It is all a matter of Grace, and all our

efforts to teach one another is not of much use here. He who comes to

teach the individual is unerringly marked and he is called the Guru.

Meanwhile, we can engage ourselves in satsangh, and make ourselves

ready for Grace. Vada, or debate, which is sometimes a part of

satsangh, has its dangers.

 

> a position clearly pointed out in, 'Mundaka Upanishad',

> through the example of the two souls, the individual

> soul eating good and bad fruits, getting bewildered,

> but the supreme soul remaining as pure witness, ultimately

> the position being the sole reality of the Supreme soul.

 

Ultimately, yes...... but as long as we are compelled to use the

word 'ultimately' the truth is eluding us even if we should feel that

we have the grasp of it intellectually.

 

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Namasthey Sri Chitaranajan Ji:

> 'They warp the vision of the self and place

it in the confines of the body. (In Sri Vidya, the

knots of the heart are called the chakras and

Kundalini is the fire of Consciousness. The six

chakras are called the rope of Brahma for they bind a

man to

the body. '

 

How is Kundalini related to understanding of Advaita?

>From my limited understanding Advaita is agnostic to

Kundalini and to that extent that Kundalini can be

considered as convenient assumption or even fiction.

Kindly throw some light.

 

Pranam,

RR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

 

[Guest guest]

Dear harsha Ji,

 

The rumi's poem goes like this.

 

I was knocking on the door of the lord to get in there

came the voice asking who is there I said i am so and

so the door did not open. Again i knocked after some

reflection there came voice who is there? again reply

was given i am so and so. The door did not open. Then

finally the poet goes and knocks at the door again a

voice was heard who is there? I said i said, my

beloved i am thyself please open the door and the door

was opened.

 

HARI OM TAT SAT

 

Yours in the lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

 

--- Harsha wrote:

> Ganesan Sankarraman wrote:

>

> >

> > " The past and the unknown do not meet

> at

> > any point; they cannot be brought together by any

> act

> > whatsoever; there is no bridge to cross over, nor

> a

> > path that leads to it. The twe have never met and

> will

> > never meet. The past has to cease for the

> unknowable,

> > for the immensity to be". (J.Krishnamurthi)

> > yours,

> >

> *Both the past (existing in the form of memories and

> impressions) and

> the so called "unknown" are only concepts in the

> mind. There is no need

> to worry about whether they meet or not meet or can

> co-exist, etc. That

> is all play of imagination and fantasy. All such

> notions arise in the

> mind. Sri Ramana has said that the only thing we can

> be certain of is

> that "I Exist". This is the immense clue. The

> notions of past, the

> unknown, etc. are all byproducts of this simple fact

> of our innate

> feeling of being and existence. Meditation on our

> own being is the key.

> Meditation on our own existence makes us see that

> our existence and the

> Universal Existence are identical. This is why the

> scriptures say, "I am

> That" or "That thou are." One of Rum's poems states

> something

> like....and I paraphrase...... "I had been knocking

> on the door (perhaps

> of God's Home), banging on the door desperately to

> get in, and when it

> opened, I saw that I had been knocking from the

> inside." It means

> perhaps that He was already home with his God and

> had always been inside

> God's home but did not realize it.

>

> Harsha*

>

>

>

> >

>

------

> >

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.

http://farechase.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shri Rajesh-ji !

 

You write

 

( How is Kundalini related to understanding of Advaita?

> From my limited understanding Advaita is agnostic to

> Kundalini and to that extent that Kundalini can be

> considered as convenient assumption or even fiction.)

 

Here is Shri Ramana Maharishi's views on 'Kundalini '

 

Sri Ramana Maharshi: Though the Yogi may have his methods of breath

control for his object, the Jnani's method is only that of enquiry.

When by this method the mind is merged in the Self, the Sakti or

*Kundalini*, which is not apart from the Self, rises automatically.

 

The Yogis attach the highest importance to sending the *Kundalini* up

to the Sahasrara, the brain centre or the thousand petalled lotus.

They point out the scriptural statement that the life current enters

the body through the fontanelle and argue that, Viyoga (separation)

having come about that way, yoga (union) must also be effected in the

reverse way. Therefore, they say, we must, by yoga practice, gather

up the Pranas (vital force) and enter the fontanelle for the

consummation of yoga. The Jnanis on the other hand point out that the

yogi assumes the existence of the body and its separateness from the

Self. Only if this standpoint of separateness is adopted can the yogi

advise effort for reunion by the practice of yoga.

 

In fact the body is in the mind which has the brain for its seat.

That the brain functions by light borrowed from another source is

admitted by the yogis themselves in their fontanelle theory. The

Jnani further argues: if the light is borrowed it must come from its

native source. Go to the source direct and do not depend on borrowed

sources. That source is the Heart, the Self.

 

The Self does not come from anywhere else and enter the body through

the crown of the head. It is as it is, ever sparkling, ever steady,

unmoving and unchanging. The individual confines himself to the

limits of the changeful body or of the mind which derives its

existence from the unchanging Self. All that is necessary is to give

up this mistaken identity, and that done, the ever shining Self will

be seen to be the single non-dual reality.

 

If one concentrates on the Sahasrara there is no doubt that the

ecstasy of Samadhi ensues. The Vasanas, that is the latent mental

tendencies, are not however destroyed. The yogi is therefore bound to

wake up from the Samadhi because release from bondage has not yet

been accomplished. He must still try to eradicate the Vasanas

inherent in him so that they cease to disturb the peace of his

Samadhi. So he passes down from the Sahasrara to the Heart through

what is called the Jivanadi, which is only a continuation of the

Sushumna. The Sushumna is thus a curve. It starts from the lowest

Chakra, rises through the spinal cord to the brain and from there

bends down and ends in the Heart. When the yogi has reached the

Heart, the Samadhi becomes permanent. Thus we see that the Heart is

the final centre.

 

[Note: Commentary by David Godman: Sri Ramana Maharshi never advised

his devotees to parctise Kundalini Yoga since he regarded it as being

both potentially dangerous and unnecessary. He accepted the existence

of the Kundalini power and the Chakras but he said that even if the

Kundalini reached the Sahsrara it would not result in realisation.

For final realisation, he said, the Kundalini must go beyond the

Sahasrara, down another Nadi (psychic nerve) he called Amritanadi

(also called the Paranadi or Jivanadi) and into the Heart-centre on

the right hand side of the chest. Since he maintained that self-

enquiry would automatically send the Kundalini to the Heart-centre,

he taught that separate yoga exercises were unnecessary.

 

The practitioners of Kundalini Yoga concentrate on psychic centres

(Chakras) in the body in order to generate a spiritual power they

call Kundalini. The aim of this practice is to force the Kundalini up

the psychic channel (the Sushumna) which runs from the base of the

spine to the brain. The Kundalini Yogi believes that when this power

reaches the Sahasrara (the highest Chakra located in the brain), Self-

realisation will result.

 

Sri Ramana Maharshi taught that the Self is reached by the search for

the origin of the ego and by diving into the Heart. This is the

direct method of Self-realisation. One who adopts it need not worry

about Nadis, the brain centre (Sahasrara), the Sushumna, the

Paranadi, the Kundalini, Pranayama or the six centres (Chakras).

 

AND interestingly , Shri Ramana also says " Sakti has only one phase.

If it is said to manifest itself in several phases, it is only a way

of speaking. The Sakti is only one. "

 

however , i would kindly request you to consider Adi Shankara 's

beautiful composition 'SOUaundarya Lahari', A BIBLE FOR SRI VIDYA

UPASAKAS/UPASIKAS -

 

The1 slokas are all about Mantra Shastra , Kundalini Yoga etc . It is

also a Bhakti stotra par excellance. It also teaches you how to do

Sri Chakra puja .

 

so , may i ask why would AN ADVAITA-ACHARYA recommend sri chakra

puja which will raise 'kundalini' shakti ? In any case , Kundalini

shakti can be aroused by mere chanting of Sri Lalita sahasaranama

also ! That is why it is highly recommended THAT ONE SHOULD NOT

recite these stotras etc without proper initiation ! A guru should

always be present to ;monitor' the AWAKENING OF 'KUNDALINI' ! i have

heard of instances where people have been admitted to hospital

emergency rooms because of 'bursting cranial nerves' due to premature

Kundalini awakening !

 

here is how the Kundalini shakti is described in ADi Shankara's

beautiful poetic composition

 

Description of Internal Worship of Shakti in Kundalini Meditation

 

"Having penetrated the Prithvi (Earth) element situation in the

Muladhara, the Jala (Water) element in the Manipua, the Agni (Fire)

element in the Svadhishthana, Akasha (Sky) element above the former

in the Visuddhi, and Manas (Mind) in the Ajna between the eyebrows,

Thou, ascending through the Sushumna or the Kulka Path, sportest with

Thy Consort in the solitutde of Sahasrara the Thousand-Petalled

Lotus, above in the head."

 

Adi shankara talks not only about the 'ascent' of Kundalini but its

descent as well!

 

Ramana's only boe of contention with the advocates of 'Kundalini'

yoga is for one thing , it is a 'path' laden with dangers ( without

he direction of a sadguru) and more importantly, the bliss from it is

not everlasting - that is why he advocates the path of awakening

the 'amrita nadi'( not in the physical heart ) !

 

Sri Lalita Sahasaranama describes the Divine Mother as

 

SRI KUNDALINI

 

— She is coiled like a serpent. She is stated to assume 31/2 coils -

the form in which Sri Lalita resides in sacrum bone of every human as

potential state.

 

IT does not matter what faith one belongs to ! ADVAITIN, DWAITIN,

VISHISHTADVAITIN, OR MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN - THE 'KUNDALINI SHAKTI' is

present in all of us ! smile !

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Ramachander-ji,

 

advaitin, Rajesh Ramachander

<rrajeshchander> wrote:

> > 'They warp the vision of the self and place

> it in the confines of the body. (In Sri Vidya, the

> knots of the heart are called the chakras and

> Kundalini is the fire of Consciousness. The six

> chakras are called the rope of Brahma for they bind a

> man to the body. '

>

> How is Kundalini related to understanding of Advaita?

> From my limited understanding Advaita is agnostic to

> Kundalini and to that extent that Kundalini can be

> considered as convenient assumption or even fiction.

> Kindly throw some light.

 

You are right, Kundalini and the chakras are not part of Advaita.

Consciousness and the knots of the heart are part of Advaita. But the

two may be related.

 

Advaita (and Upanishad) speaks of the Self residing in the heart -

particlarly as residing two digits to the right in the heart. It may

be experienced in 'meditation'. When it is experienced the meaning of

the word 'heart' is clearly understood as not relating to the

physical heart but to the very centre of one's existence as the 'I'.

It is not a place, but it has a relationship to the body which is

very difficult to explain in words because it is experienced at once

as a Conscious (and not physical) centre and yet as being the centre

of 'I' in the body. There is thus Consciousness of itself and also of

the body in relation to itself. Consciousness is therefore 'placing'

itself in the body. In Sri Vidya, this power, or energy, of

Consciousness whereby it 'locates' itself in the body is called the

fire of Consciousness. It is the same Consciousness that Advaita

speaks of, but in Sri Vidya it is spoken of as Consciousness being

energised to make the world appear as it does. That is the fire of

Consciousness called 'Kundalini'. In a mortal being, this energy of

consciousness is directed towards lust and the lower passions. Even

in Vedanta, the pleasure of sex is said to reside in the generative

organs. In Kundalini Yoga, this becomes the location where the latent

fire of Consciousness (Kundalini) places itself in a mortal being

(pashu). The bodily locations where the baser tendencies 'reside' are

the two lowermost chakras - muladhara and swadhistana. It is the aim

of Kundalini Yoga to raise the Kundalini (fire of Consciousness) from

these lower chakras to the higher chakras until it is released from

the body altogether through the chakra called Brahmarandhra.

Brahmarandhra is the parting of the skull. (The Upanishads mention

that Brahman entered throught the parting of the skull, though I

don't now remember which Upanishad says this). In Advaitic terms, the

Kundalini going out through the Brahmarandhra chakra would mean

Consciousness becoming free of the latent impressions that it is

bound to the body i.e., Consciusness is then free of all notions that

it is the non-Self.

 

Ramchanadrji, I should caution you that whatever I say regarding

Kundalini Yoga or Sri Vidya may not be very accurate or correct

because I know of these shastras is very remote. These thoughts of

mine are merely my contemplations about Sri Vidya and Kundalini from

a Vedantic perspective (which again should not be taken as final).

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

--- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik

wrote:

> Namaste Sri Sankarraman-ji,

>

> ---

>

>

> Yes, you are right, the Self is akhanda. There are

> no two selves and

> the division between the two is an illusion. But

> this entire universe

> being an illusion, the seeming division between the

> self and Self

> could well entail the traversing of the entire

> (illusory) universe

> from one end to another and we could still say that

> nothing has

> happened because the effort as well as the universe

> traversed is an

> illusion.

 

I fully agree with you that we should

not indulge in debates, which I am also not for. As

you may be aware that different individuals carry

different samskaras; the samskaras of the same

individual may also change. There seems to be only a

verbal distinction between our views, non-verbally a

big task being demanded of us, the transcendence of

the fear-ridden torrent of this samsara,to escape from

the painful clutches of which,the Infinite out of Its

mercy has chalked out infinite paths to infinite

individuals. As Sri Ramakrishna says that there are as

many religions as there are as many individuals, or as

Jiddu Krishnamurthy would prefer to say that truth is

a pathless land. I am reminded of a verse by the

poet-mystic-saint Vallalar, which is to the following

effect: " Would the Benediction of effortless silence

swallowing up the Maya,transcending all the spaces-the

physical, psychical and even the I-

come either to-day or tomorrow or for a long period

to come by, I do not know. In a similar vein sings

saint Thayumanavar: “ The Srutis have been

proclaiming,’Remain still, Remain still’; so has been

saying my Silent Guru. Instead of understanding the

truth of this, all along I have been wandering in the

wilderness of Maya without knowing Thee. What a

sorrow!

Soren Kierkegaard, the great Christian existentialist

says, “ The present condition of the world is

diseased. If I were a doctor and was asked for my

advise, I should answer, Create silence, bring men to

silence-the word of God cannot be heard today. And if

it is blazoned forth with all the panoply of noise so

that it can he heard in the midst of all other noise,

then it is no longer the word of God. Therefore,

create silence”. The underlying truth behind the

mystics all over the world is the same.

With warm regards,

Yours Ever in Bhaghavan

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

 

[Guest guest]

*Dear Vinayakaji: I was referring to this poem by Rumi

*

 

*

*

 

*"I have lived on the lip*

 

*of insanity, wanting to know reasons,*

 

*knocking on a door. It opens.*

 

*I've been knocking from the inside!"

*

 

*Wanting to know God with intensity (as demonstrated by Sri RamaKrishna

and many other sages) is like living on the lip of insanity. When the

door finally opens, we see that we have been knocking from the inside.

We have always been Home.

*

 

*Harsha

*

 

 

 

br_vinayaka wrote:

> Dear harsha Ji,

>

> The rumi's poem goes like this.

>

> I was knocking on the door of the lord to get in there

> came the voice asking who is there I said i am so and

> so the door did not open. Again i knocked after some

> reflection there came voice who is there? again reply

> was given i am so and so. The door did not open. Then

> finally the poet goes and knocks at the door again a

> voice was heard who is there? I said i said, my

> beloved i am thyself please open the door and the door

> was opened.

>

> HARI OM TAT SAT

>

> Yours in the lord,

>

> Br. Vinayaka.

>

> -

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear AdiMa,

 

I didn't see this post of yours, othewise I might not have written my

reply as it is simply superfluos after this post of yours. :-)

 

You mention the Heart-centre on the right hand side of the chest in

relation to this topic, and I did too.... :-)

 

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

 

 

 

advaitin, "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16>

wrote:

>

> Namaste Shri Rajesh-ji !

>

> You write

>

> ( How is Kundalini related to understanding of Advaita?

> > From my limited understanding Advaita is agnostic to

> > Kundalini and to that extent that Kundalini can be

> > considered as convenient assumption or even fiction.)

>

> Here is Shri Ramana Maharishi's views on 'Kundalini '

>

> Sri Ramana Maharshi: Though the Yogi may have his methods of breath

> control for his object, the Jnani's method is only that of enquiry.

> When by this method the mind is merged in the Self, the Sakti or

> *Kundalini*, which is not apart from the Self, rises automatically.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Prof Sri VK-ji,

 

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

> My father had written 372 verses on drishtisrishti vada. That was

> his last work in his life. It was interrupted by his passing away.

> 225 of them have been translated by me in English. Available at

> http://www.geocities.com/profvk/Appa/dRSTisRSTiHpage1.html

 

 

Thank you for the link Prof VK-ji. I have reached upto verse 105 and am

enjoying it, particularly because some verses resonate very strongly

with the 'thoughts' I have had during my 'meditations'.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

> There seems to be only a verbal distinction between our

> views, non-verbally a big task being demanded of us,

 

After all, it is said that speech tries to grasp it but returns....

 

Thank you for your reply.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Chitta ! Greetings !

 

may i please share a poem with you from the Lebanese poet=philosopher

Khalil Gibran from his 'Prophet'

 

 

On Talking

 

And then a scholar said, "Speak of Talking."

 

And he answered, saying:

 

You talk when you cease to be at peace with your thoughts;

 

And when you can no longer dwell in the solitude of your heart you

live in your lips, and sound is a diversion and a pastime.

 

And in much of your talking, thinking is half murdered.

 

For thought is a bird of space, that in a cage of words many indeed

unfold its wings but cannot fly.

 

There are those among you who seek the talkative through fear of

being alone.

 

The silence of aloneness reveals to their eyes their naked selves and

they would escape.

 

And there are those who talk, and without knowledge or forethought

reveal a truth which they themselves do not understand.

 

*And there are those who have the truth within them, but they tell it

not in words. *

 

*In the bosom of such as these the spirit dwells in rhythmic

silence.*

 

When you meet your friend on the roadside or in the market place, let

the spirit in you move your lips and direct your tongue.

 

Let the voice within your voice speak to the ear of his ear;

 

For his soul will keep the truth of your heart as the taste of the

wine is remembered

 

When the colour is forgotten and the vessel is no more.

 

Enjoy!

 

love and blessings

[Guest guest]

Namaste Chittaranjanji.

 

You are humility personified. Kundalini is Consciousness.

Consciousness is advaita. You know this as well as I know. We need

not be apologetic about it. Please don't therefore fight shy of

expressing this sameness (not relationship!)in the assertive.

Delusion ends there.

 

I have been following the dialogue on various threads but was not

interposing due to lack of time.

 

I read your treatise on solipsism (May I call it a treatise?) and

enjoyed it very much. Chittaranjanji, solipsism is ok in my

opinion, provided (and that is a big provided) the solipsist is

prepared to accept a universal vision. Simply saying that I am

everything or asking the question "Who am I?" has misled vedantins

the world over. What we need is not a model (Yes, I am referring to

the mathematical model we are discussing - no doubt about it!) but a

vision - a vision that encompasses the whole of creation as me and

not separate from me,where I am at home with the most 'detestable or

abominable'(sorry for these words which are used by way of

expression) beings. And that can't be achieved without drinking the

vedantic soma of Love,where love is the realization that all are me.

That realization is advaita and one should know that one is

inadvaitic as long as an apparent feeling exists that there is

a 'rest' other than one. My neighbour is not therefore an object to

the subject me but me one hundred percent.

 

A vision helps in this relaization than a model - particularly a

mathematical model - as all mathematical models are condemned only

to serve mithyA and not the Truth. Truth cries out for a vision.

And visions abound in the 'realm' of the Light that shines (bhAti).

Mathematical models only 'anubhati' (shines after) and are limited

exemplifications that are not foolproof.

 

I am not a mathematician and not much for mathematics. As I pointed

out in the pUrNamadah discussion here April 04, mathematics can only

do keep book-keeping for mithyA.

 

Adiji, thanks for your good words. Incidentally, my poem "The

Ascent" in HS Mag was only meant to affirm the truth that Miss

Kundalini is in fact Miss Consciousness. What a coincidence that

you happened to draw the List's attention to it?

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

 

_______________

 

 

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

> Ramchanadrji, I should caution you that whatever I say regarding

> Kundalini Yoga or Sri Vidya may not be very accurate or correct

> because I know of these shastras is very remote. These thoughts of

> mine are merely my contemplations about Sri Vidya and Kundalini

from

> a Vedantic perspective (which again should not be taken as final).

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

>

> Namaste Sri Ramachander-ji,

>

> advaitin, Rajesh Ramachander

> <rrajeshchander> wrote:

>

> > > 'They warp the vision of the self and place

> > it in the confines of the body. (In Sri Vidya, the

> > knots of the heart are called the chakras and

> > Kundalini is the fire of Consciousness. The six

> > chakras are called the rope of Brahma for they bind a

> > man to the body. '

> >

> > How is Kundalini related to understanding of Advaita?

> > From my limited understanding Advaita is agnostic to

> > Kundalini and to that extent that Kundalini can be

> > considered as convenient assumption or even fiction.

> > Kindly throw some light.

>

> You are right, Kundalini and the chakras are not part of Advaita.

> Consciousness and the knots of the heart are part of Advaita. But

the

> two may be related.

>

> >

> Ramchanadrji, I should caution you that whatever I say regarding

> Kundalini Yoga or Sri Vidya may not be very accurate or correct

> because I know of these shastras is very remote. These thoughts of

> mine are merely my contemplations about Sri Vidya and Kundalini

from

> a Vedantic perspective (which again should not be taken as final).

>

> Warm regards,

> Chittaranjan

>

 

 

Namaste

Adi-Shakti-ji has already referred to the Soundaryalahari on this

thread. The discussion about Kundalini with reference to the shlokas

in Soundaryalahari and in the context of advaita can be found from

an authentic source, the Kanchi Mahaswamigal, in the following web

pages. It starts with DPDS-25 in

 

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/DPDS21-25.html

 

and continues in DPDS-26, 27, 28 in

 

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/DPDS26-30.html

 

The same can also be found on the files pages of advaitin in pdf

format;it starts on page 48 of

 

http://www.advaitin.com/Soundaryalahari1.pdf

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

[Guest guest]

--- adi_shakthi16 <adi_shakthi16 wrote:

> Chitta ! Greetings !

>

> may i please share a poem with you from the Lebanese

> poet=philosopher

> Khalil Gibran from his 'Prophet'

>

>

> On Talking

>

> And then a scholar said, "Speak of Talking."

>

> And he answered, saying:

>

> You talk when you cease to be at peace with your

> thoughts;

>

> And when you can no longer dwell in the solitude of

> your heart you

> live in your lips, and sound is a diversion and a

> pastime.

>

> And in much of your talking, thinking is half

> murdered.

>

> For thought is a bird of space, that in a cage of

> words many indeed

> unfold its wings but cannot fly.

>

> There are those among you who seek the talkative

> through fear of

> being alone.

>

> The silence of aloneness reveals to their eyes their

> naked selves and

> they would escape.

>

> And there are those who talk, and without knowledge

> or forethought

> reveal a truth which they themselves do not

> understand.

>

> *And there are those who have the truth within them,

> but they tell it

> not in words. *

>

> *In the bosom of such as these the spirit dwells in

> rhythmic

> silence.*

>

> When you meet your friend on the roadside or in the

> market place, let

> the spirit in you move your lips and direct your

> tongue.

>

> Let the voice within your voice speak to the ear of

> his ear;

>

> For his soul will keep the truth of your heart as

> the taste of the

> wine is remembered

>

>

Dear Adi Shakti Ji,

 

Can you explain the this last line of the peom for me?

 

When the colour is forgotten and the vessel is no

> more.

 

 

HARI OM TAT SAT

 

Yours in the Lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka

>

> Enjoy!

>

> love and blessings

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

 

[Guest guest]

Namasthey Adi ji & Chitaranjan ji:

 

Thanks, that was an excellent view on Kundalini &

Advaita. I cannot claim I understand it completely but

to a considerable extent my doubts on the relation

between Kundalini & Advaita seem to be dispelled now.

 

 

Pranam,

RR

 

 

 

 

 

FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.

http://farechase.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Nair-ji,

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Chittaranjanji.

> I read your treatise on solipsism (May I call it a treatise?) and

> enjoyed it very much. Chittaranjanji, solipsism is ok in my

> opinion, provided (and that is a big provided) the solipsist is

> prepared to accept a universal vision.

 

You have very perceptively converged to the exact problem with

solipsism - its constricted vision. Drishti-shristi-vada is not

really eka-jiva-vada (solipsism) because drishti-shristi is

applicable only to Ishvara and Ishvara is not a jiva - so the

doctrine does not reduce to eka-jiva-vada. The doctrine of drishti-

shristi is true only for the One that is the One without a second -

Ishvara. This One is purna unlike the jiva that is apurna.

 

In Visistadvaita, the consciousness of the soul is said to expand

until it becomes infinite and gains the likeness of Vishnu. In

Advaita, Consciousness is not said to expand because Consciousness is

always the unchanging Infinite, but the window of the upadhis through

which the consciosuness of the jiva beholds the truth clears away

until Consciousness is seen to be as It really is - Unbounded and

Infinite. If Visistadvaita talks of the expansion of consiousness,

Advaita talks about the fullness of Consiousness being revealed in

jnana. While Visistadvaita stops at consciousness taking on the

likeness of Vishnu, Advaita sees Consciuosness to be Brahman Itself.

The key word in both is 'Infinite'. Consciousness is purna. According

to my understanding, Advaita without the vision of Consciousness

being purnam is a kind of nihilism.

 

> Simply saying that I am everything or asking the question "Who

> am I?" has misled vedantins the world over. What we need is...

> a vision that encompasses the whole of creation as me and

> not separate from me, where I am at home with the most

> 'detestable or abominable'(sorry for these words which are

> used by way of expression) beings. And that can't be achieved

> without drinking the vedantic soma of Love, where love is the

> realization that all are me.

 

Beatifully said. I couldn't agree with you more.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

--- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik

wrote:

> Dear Sri Nair-ji,

>

> advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran

> Nair"

> <madathilnair> wrote:

>

> > Namaste Chittaranjanji.

>

> >

> Advaita talks about the fullness of Consiousness

> being revealed in

> jnana. While Visistadvaita stops at consciousness

> taking on the

> likeness of Vishnu, Advaita sees Consciuosness to be

> Brahman Itself.

> The key word in both is 'Infinite'. Consciousness is

> purna. According

> to my understanding, Advaita without the vision of

> Consciousness

> being purnam is a kind of nihilism.

> Sankarraman may be permitted to say the following.

> What Advaita has talked about is only the nature of

the Self being beyond the five kosas. What can be

predicated of that which is outside the kosas, which

swallows all kosas. Drishti-shristi-vada is not

confined to Iswara, but is a sadhana relevant to

certain individuals given to that predeliction. Buddha

has conceived the ultimate as one of Emptiness as

against the Advaitin's idea of the One Purna. Viewing

the ultimate as Empty does not suggest the idea of

nihilism, which is also a concept as against other

empirical concepts. In Mandukya Karika the ultimate

has been declared to be beyond the categories of

existence, non-existence, both existence and

non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, a

position advocated by Nagarjuna. The question, "Who Am

I", does not presuppose the idea of not being one with

everything; but that seems to be the only way to know

that there is only the One, in which there is no scope

for any mischief of the kind pointed out by the

respondent. This position has been consistently

advocated in the Ribu Gita.

> >

> With warm regards,

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

 

[Guest guest]

--- Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran wrote:

 

Buddha

has conceived the ultimate as one of Emptiness as

against the Advaitin's idea of the One Purna.

 

Dear Shankarramanji,

 

Namaste,

 

I do not think all the schools of buddhism preach

ultimate reality as emptiness. Rev. Ranganathanandaji

maharaj who was the President of the Ramakrishna Order

met D.T. Suzuki who was very famous in Zen buddhism

had a discussion on this issue. Ultimately maharaj

said that Dr. Suzuki opined that the zen should be

looked at from vedantic perspective not from

nihillistic ideas. I will try to post some more

details on this matter if i come across the same. He

also mentions about the simhalese buddhistic monk who

also agreed with the same view.

 

HARI OM TAT SAT

 

Yours in the Lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

 

 

 

 

 

>

> Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

> Sankarraman may be permitted to say the following.

> What Advaita has talked about is only the nature of

> the Self being beyond the five kosas. What can be

> predicated of that which is outside the kosas, which

> swallows all kosas...... The question, "Who Am I",

> does not presuppose the idea of not being one with

> everything;

>From your words - 'swallows all koshas' and 'being one with

everything' - it is obvious that you to the purnatva of

Self. My post was really a counter to the alternate view that the

Self is the consciousness 'leftover' after everything else has been

negated.... for that kind of view would really be a kind of duality

since it would mean that something else apart from consciousness was

there to be negated. I would think that when the Self is revealed,

the object is one with the Light of the Self.

 

> Drishti-shristi-vada is not confined to Iswara, but is a

> sadhana relevant to certain individuals given to that

> predeliction.

 

As a sadhana, I try to follow it too..... one may say that it is an

integral part of atma-vichara for revealing the nature of Self. The

full unbroken attentiveness of Self to Self is Ishvara.... the limit

of this attentiveness being, metaphorically speaking, the 'expansion'

of consciousness beyond all limitations to reveal Ishvara as the Self

that is fully aware of Itself through Its reflexive power of Self-

awareness.

 

> but that seems to be the only way to know that there is

> only the One..... This position has been consistently

> advocated in the Ribu Gita.

 

Yes, the path via-negativa - neti, neti - prescribed by the

Upanishads is the only way to the Higher Nature of Brahman

(Kshetrajna) in which everything is rested.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan