Dreaming and Waking

[Guest guest]

K.S. wrote:

About (3)(4): That the waking state is the

> central modality of consciousness which

> asseses the others is Shankara's position

> in B.S.B. II.ii.29:

> "With regard to this we say, the perceptions

> of the waking state cannot be classed with those

> in a dream.

> Why?

> Because of difference of characteristics; for

> waking and dream states are really

> different in nature."

 

Micheal, if you take only B.Suutra as the basis for advaita, then we

will run into lot more problems. B. suutra is only a pourusheya

pramaaNa. It is nyaaya pramaaNa, providing samanvaya for the

 

Vedanta. I

consider Shankara bhaashyaas on Upanishads are more relevant and

 

His

prakaraNa granthaas are even more relevant to understand

 

Shankara's

stand.

 

Waking states and dream states are different in nature - hence

 

Shankara

uses the word - In aatma bodha he says:

"samsaaraH swapnatulyohi

raaga dweshaadi sankulaH

sakaale satyavad bhaati

prabodhe satyasad bhavet"

 

The sufferings in the waking states are similar (not he did say they are

identical) to those in dream - in the sense that they appear to be real

as long as one is dreaming, but when awakened to higher state, what

appeared to be real is recognized as unreal.

 

||||||||||||||||||||

 

Namaste Sadaji,

In relation to the dream and waking state Shakara

is quite consistent. In his commentary on

Brh.Up. IV.iii.10 in answer to an objection

that the dream is experienced in the same way

as the waking state so what can there be to

differentiate them.

 

Reply: Because the phenomena of dreams

are different. In the waking state, the light of the

self is mixed up with the functions of

the organs, intellect, Manas, (external) lights,

etc. But in dream, since the organs do not

function, and since such lights as the sun

that help them are absent, the self becomes

distinct and isolated. Hence the dream state

is different.

 

Objection: The sense objects are perceived in

dreams just the same as in the waking state.

How then do you adduce their difference on the

grounds that the organs do not then function."

 

His reply is by way of the commentary to

the subsequent verse. I think that the

confusion arises out of a lack of

the establishment of the difference between

the analysis of the dream vis a vis the

waking state and the use of the dream as

an analogy. An analogy does not commit

him to a precise and exact view of what

the dream is. The ordinary recieved

everyday view is sufficent to carry the

analogy. 'As when we wake from the

dream we no longer are afraid of that

which has frightened us, in the ultimate

state of awakening etc.'

 

That whole section Brh.Up.IV.iii.1-38

is full of profound reflections on the

modalities of consciousness.

 

Best Wishes,

Michael

[Guest guest]

--- ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote:

 

Michael - Thanks for Br. Up. reference. One of my projects that I

wanted to do is to bring in various aspects of Shankara's discussion on

the waking and dream analagy from all his texts and provide a coherent

picture. I may seek your help at that time to make sure the I am fair to

the orginals.

I have a camp coming this weekend would like to postpone any further

discussion on this.

 

With kind regards.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

 

 

>

> His reply is by way of the commentary to

> the subsequent verse. I think that the

> confusion arises out of a lack of

> the establishment of the difference between

> the analysis of the dream vis a vis the

> waking state and the use of the dream as

> an analogy. An analogy does not commit

> him to a precise and exact view of what

> the dream is. The ordinary recieved

> everyday view is sufficent to carry the

> analogy. 'As when we wake from the

> dream we no longer are afraid of that

> which has frightened us, in the ultimate

> state of awakening etc.'

>

> That whole section Brh.Up.IV.iii.1-38

> is full of profound reflections on the

> modalities of consciousness.

>

> Best Wishes,

> Michael

>

>

> ------------------------ Sponsor

> --------------------~-->

> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and

> healing

> http://us.click./lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/XUWolB/TM

>

--~->

>

>

> 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 Sadaji,

In relation to the dream and waking state Shakara

is quite consistent. In his commentary on

Brh.Up. IV.iii.10 in answer to an objection

that the dream is experienced in the same way

as the waking state so what can there be to

differentiate them.

 

praNAms Sri bhurbhuva prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Yes, bhagavadpAda is very much consistent when describing avasthA-s from

different stand points. But we should not get confused one stand point for

another & conclude that *this is what shankara's ultimatum on waking &

dream states*!!

 

When we see these two states objectively from the witness standpoint

(sAkshi view point) it is really amazing to note the identical nature of

the two conditions. No doubt, as it has been said N no. of times earlier

that from the monobasic view (i.e. identifying ourselves with little ego of

waking state i.e. vishwa) it appears that the waking world is common to a

no. of jIva-s in contrast with dreams which are exclusively designed for

our own...But the moment we incline to the tribasic view of vEdAnta (i.e.

analysing all the three states from sAkshi view point) where we can examine

all the three states without any partiality for either the waking ego

(vishwa) or the dreaming ego (taijasa) the whole scenario will get

changed...It reveals the fact that the dream conditions is nothing but an

exact replica of waking so that we can hardly put any demarkation line

between two states & assert one is superior & more real when compared to

other!!!..

 

For that matter, it is all in our own experience that in dream we are

confronted with all the contexts both subjective (viShayi) and objective

(viShaya) framed in time, space & causation...that is the reason why shruti

(scriptures) describes both states with same attributes...Kindly see the

mAndUkya maNtra which apply the same epithets such as *saptAnga* and

*yEkOnaviMshati mukhaH* to both waking & dreaming states. And also refer

kaTOpanishat maNtra *svapnAntaM jAgaritAMtaM cha ubhau

yEnAnupaSyati..mahAntaM vibhuM AtmAnaM matvA dhIrO na SOchati...(That great

all pervading One through whom one is enabled to see both dream and waking

realizing Him as the Atman the wise man grieves no more)These socalled

waking & dreaming worlds come & go on the screen of Atman he is not at all

connected to one particular state to arbitrarily give verdict in favour of

one particular state as real & another is mere product of that state...

 

The quote you have quoted from sUtra bhAshya 2-2-29 *vaidharmyAchha* is

bhagavadpAda's refutation of bhuddhistic view who does not accept the

existence of Atman in deep sleep..Kindly check the 2-2-31 where is shankara

clarifies his position more clearly by saying *na hi ayaM sarvapramANa

prasiddhO lOka vyavahArO anyat tattvaM anadhigamya shakyatE apahnOtuM

apavAdabhAvE utsargaprasiddhE*...what is the anyat tattvaM here shankara

saying that is sushupti in which bhuddhist does not agree the existence of

Atman...So, kindly note that shankara not advocating here his *siddhAnta

vAkya* but refuting the opponents assertion which is born out of *false

basis*...If you want to see the siddhAnta vAkhya of shankara kindly refer

his mAndUkya bhAshya & kArikA bhAshya.

 

Moreover, it should be noted that Atman is *asaNga* (disassociated with any

of the states) & he is svayaM jyOti ( who illumines both the states) and

when we are asertaining his svarUpa it is mandatory to disassociate him/it

from these states..holding the view that one state (waking) is more real

and another state is dependent reality on that state is *Atma drOha*...In

this context I'd like to quote couple of upanishat maNtra-s * atItya

krAmati viviktEna svEna Atma jyOtiShA svapnAtmakaM dhIvruttiM avabhAsayan

avatiShTatE yasmAt *svayaM jyOtiH svabhAva yEvAsaU....(this is with regard

to *self-luminous* nature of Atman) and *sa vA yEsha yEtasmin saMprasAdE

ratvA charitvA druShtvaiva puNyaM cha pApaM cha! punaH pratinyAyaM

pratiyOnyAdravati svapnAntAyaivA a yatra kiNchit paSyati ananvA gataH tEna

bhavati asaNgO hi ayaM puruShaH* ( this is with regard to Atman's

association with neither of the states)...These maNtra-s are in

brahadAraNyaka and study shankara bhAshya also on these maNtra-s...Kindly

pardon me I am not able to translate these maNtra-s as my English is not

that good...you may refer any translation work & let me know what you think

of these maNtra-s & commentary part of it.

 

Finally, before analysing our states we should always keep in our mind that

our real nature i.e. Atman is *witness* of waking as well as dreaming and

knows no limitation of time, space or causation. The bruhadAraNyaka shruti

gives striking illustration of this when it compares Atman to a mighty fist

which swims from bank to bank of a river unaffected by the gushing stream

which it cuts across. The very important point here to be noted is neither

waking nor dream state can co-exist with the other or continue to keep

company with Atman whereas our Atman can with equal ease manage to be

alongside of either as long as it lasts. But why we say *the appearance of

waking & dreaming world* are unreal when Atman is the sole reason for it??

It is because, we've seen that Atman as the witnessing consciousness

(sAkshi chEtaH) of the two states, but enjoys absolute independence!!

How?? can he cut off all connection related to waking & dream states?? can

he continue to exist by his own right regardless of either manifestation or

the complete effacement of both?? The one & only answer to this question

shruti gives is *deep sleep*..Yes, it is not an ecstatic state of samAdhi &

something else...the anubhava which is universal wherein we *witness* our

state without the dirt of waking & dreaming worlds....

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Yes Bhaskarji. PraNaams.

 

I agree with you. I appreciate your post. I was going to take a look at all

Shankara Bhaashyas pertaing to the analysis of waking and dream states

within their context. I remember the discussion I had on suutra 2-2-28

when Benjamin raised the issue about an year or two back.

 

I am happy to read your post. Can you bring out the analysis from differnt

shankara bhaashyas and prakraNa granthas and put it all together with the

context. I would appreciate it very much. That is what I wanted to do

methodically along with the puurvapaksha, , but if you can do that I would

be indebted.

 

Your comments on the previous posts were well taken.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda.

>bhaskar.yr

>

>Namaste Sadaji,

>In relation to the dream and waking state Shakara

>is quite consistent. In his commentary on

>Brh.Up. IV.iii.10 in answer to an objection

>that the dream is experienced in the same way

>as the waking state so what can there be to

>differentiate them.

 

_______________

Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!

http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

[Guest guest]

praNAms Respected Sri Sadananda prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

KS prabhuji:

 

I agree with you. I appreciate your post. I was going to take a look at all

Shankara Bhaashyas pertaing to the analysis of waking and dream states

within their context. I remember the discussion I had on suutra 2-2-28

when Benjamin raised the issue about an year or two back.

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes prabhuji, I too remember those threads...It would be an interesting

reading if you could summarize this prakriya with appropriate quotes from

bhagavad pAda's commentaries (preferably from prasTAna traya & kArikA

bhAshya)...Since I've dealt wth this subject numerous times earlier in

various mails, if I onceagain start telling them the *old monotonous

story I doubt very much there would be any takers of my mail on this

subject :-)) Hence, I humbly request your goodself to take this task &

enrich our knowledge about most neglected prakriya in shankara vEdAnta.

 

Here are few words of mine with regard to this prakriya. As already said,

shankara comments about avasthA traya (three states) from three different

perspectives i.e vyAvahArik view point, shAstric view point and sAkshi view

point. We can find bhAshya quotes in favour of all the three perspectives

& what needs to be understood in these quotes is *context*. We cannot

determine shankara's stand on avasthAtraya by taking only few references

here & there without considering the context. If we ignore the context

then we are forced to conclude that shankara contradicting himself at

various places in his prasTAna trayi & kArikA bhAshya!!! As we all know,

shankara does equate waking & dream states in kArikA's vaiThatya and alAta

SaaNti prakaraNa-s as against his assertion in favour of waking state in

sUtra bhAshya 2-2-29!!!

 

Principal upanishads such as mAndUkya, praSna, ItarEya, chAndOgya,

bruhadAraNyaka have quotes about avasthA traya under various contexts.

But in maaNdUkya & kArikA (especially vaiThathya & alAta SaaNti

prakaraNa-s) this methodology has been discussed exclusively based on

pure jnAna and teaches us how to analyse these three states from sAkshi

view point.

 

Shankara says while commenting on kArika, *vEdAntArTa sArasaNgrahabhUtaM

idaM prakaraNa chatuShtayam* (these four chapters are the essence of

all

vEdAntic teaching). Shankara's this statement confirms how important it is

for us to examine these three states in detail. If the waking world is

more real & solid & dream is kEvala vAsana (residual memories) of waking

then why shruti treats jAgrat & svapna with equanimity?? It says

saptAnga yEkOnaviMSati mukhaH ( 7 limbs & 19 faces) for both vishwa &

taijasa. Echoing shruti's declaration, Sankara too, in his commentary,

says *samAnam na anyAt* (both are same & not different) about waker &

dreamer. Point to be noted here is the same Sankara who upheld the

superiority of waking state as against dream in sUtra bhAshya here

asserting *samAnaM na anyAt*!!! is this not more than enough to stress for

the role of *context* in determining shankara's siddhAnta vAkya ??

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

>

>

> praNAms Respected Sri Sadananda prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

>

> KS prabhuji:

> Shankara's this statement confirms how important it is

> for us to examine these three states in detail. If the waking

world is

>

 

Namaste,

 

For those who, like myself, find the technical vocabulary

and sanskrit quotations daunting, I would highly recommend Chapter

8, titled 'The Egoless State', of the book Maha Yoga or Upanishadic

Lore, by 'WHO' (Sri Laxman Sharma). Reading the rest of the book of

course would be equally enlightening.

 

The book is on-line at:

 

http://www.ramana-maharshi.org/downloads/maha_yoga.pdf

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sunderji.

 

Very timely. I am much relieved. Thanks.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

_______________

 

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh>

wrote:

> For those who, like myself, find the technical vocabulary

> and sanskrit quotations daunting, I would highly recommend Chapter

> 8, titled 'The Egoless State', of the book Maha Yoga or Upanishadic

> Lore, by 'WHO' (Sri Laxman Sharma). Reading the rest of the book of

> course would be equally enlightening.

>

> The book is on-line at:

>

> http://www.ramana-maharshi.org/downloads/maha_yoga.pdf

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Sunder Hattangadi prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

On 20th Jan'06 you had given a link to the book & commented as below :

 

SH prabhuji:

 

Namaste,

 

For those who, like myself, find the technical vocabulary

and sanskrit quotations daunting, I would highly recommend Chapter

8, titled 'The Egoless State', of the book Maha Yoga or Upanishadic

Lore, by 'WHO' (Sri Laxman Sharma). Reading the rest of the book of

course would be equally enlightening.

 

The book is on-line at:

 

http://www.ramana-maharshi.org/downloads/maha_yoga.pdf

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

bhaskar :

 

I had read few chapters in this book when I had been to Thiruchinapalli

RamaNAshram...I vaguely remember that in this book, author deals

elaborately about concepts of God, world & jIvAtma...and also *nirvikalpa

samAdhi*...I would like to have the feedback on this book from the learned

prabhuji-s of this list.

 

I would like to have this book in PDF format.. is it possible prabhuji?? I

also remember (kindly correct me if I am wrong) that strangely author

prefers RamaNa's words to shruti-s...I think it is purely subjective

opinion of that author who is hard core follower of RamaNa's teaching...If

both (scriptural teaching and RamaNa's teaching) are same, there was no

need for the author to bifurcate them & preferring ramaNa's

teaching....Anyway, this is my opinion...

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

>

> The book is on-line at:

>

> http://www.ramana-maharshi.org/downloads/maha_yoga.pdf

>

> bhaskar :

>

> I had read few chapters in this book when I had been to

Thiruchinapalli

> RamaNAshram...I vaguely remember that in this book, author deals

> elaborately about concepts of God, world & jIvAtma...and also

*nirvikalpa

> samAdhi*...I would like to have the feedback on this book from the

learned

> prabhuji-s of this list.

>

> I would like to have this book in PDF format.. is it possible

prabhuji?? I

> also remember (kindly correct me if I am wrong) that strangely

author

> prefers RamaNa's words to shruti-s...I think it is purely

subjective

> opinion of that author who is hard core follower of RamaNa's

teaching...If

> both (scriptural teaching and RamaNa's teaching) are same, there

was no

> need for the author to bifurcate them & preferring ramaNa's

> teaching....Anyway, this is my opinion...

>

 

 

Namaste Bhaskar-ji,

 

The link given is the pdf format!

 

To the best of my knowledge nobody has found any

disrepancies between Ramana's words and Shruti. If you know of any,

please post them.

 

Shri Lakshman Sharma ('WHO') had the unique distinction

(besides Muruganar) of being in Ramana's presence for the great part

of the years from 1920-1950, had personal instruction in his

methods, had his books Ramana-hRRidayam (Sanskrit rendition of

Ulladu Narpadu or Forty Verses on Reality) and MahaYoga corrected by

him. Not even Ganapati Muni had this privilege.

 

There are enough quotations in the book from the Shruti

that match Ramana's words.

 

It is worth remembering that 'scholars' find Shankara's

writings not going the full extent of Gaudapada's; Sureshvaracharya-

Padmapada-Madhusudana Sarasvati-Vidyaranya differing from Shankara!

 

You may have a chance to correct your personal opinion if

you study the book again, with 'shraddhaa' of course!!

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Sunder prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

 

SH prabhuji:

 

The link given is the pdf format!

 

bhaskar :

 

but prabhuji, I cannot open this link in my PC as I donot have the internet

explorer...could it be possible for you to send this file as an attachment

to my ID prabhuji??

 

SH prabhuji :

 

To the best of my knowledge nobody has found any

disrepancies between Ramana's words and Shruti. If you know of any,

please post them.

 

 

bhaskar :

 

Oh no prabhuji, I dont have an iota of intention to find any discrepancy

between ramaNa's teaching & shruti-s...Just I was quoting from memory that

Sri Lakshmana Sharma prabhuji talking about this topic in his book..

 

SH prabhuji :

 

You may have a chance to correct your personal opinion if

you study the book again, with 'shraddhaa' of course!!

 

bhaskar :

 

Thanks for your suggestion prabhuji...I can assure you that I do have that

shraddha

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Ref. post 30132;

 

Namaste Bhaskar-ji;

 

Pardon me for stepping in the discussion, but i am about to finish reading

this book, and what the author says is not exactly that he would rather

listen to Bhagavan teaching's instead of the upanishads', it's just that

since he was in the presence of the sage for such a long time, he had the

privilege of experiencing the upanishadic truth first hand, in listening to

the sages teachings.

 

The order in which he experienced such truth was inversed, however. He first

witnessed the presence of the sage, whose behaviour and knowledge was then

confirmed by the sacred lore. So it's not that he thought the sage's

teachings were better than the upanishadic truth, instead it is that he

could much more easily relate to a "person" that was a clear indicative of

the same truth, from the same source, and that the only difference was that

in Bhagavan truth had a face, a name, and a body (even though all apparent).

 

My warmest regards...

 

 

 

_____

Acesso Grátis - Internet rápida e grátis. Instale o discador agora!

http://br.acesso.