jnAni and samAdhi

[Guest guest]

Subbji Wrote,

 

"It is inevitable for a Jnani to be amidst objects during his non-

samadhi times."

 

Namaste Subbuji,

 

Is there a time when jnAni is not in samAdhi?

 

Is'nt kAla(time) also a myth? according to English language.

 

mithya according to vedAnta?

 

Is'nt living a meditation for a j~nani?

 

om namo narayanaya

 

Lakshmi Muthuswamy

[Guest guest]

lakmuthu <lakmuthu > wrote: Subbji Wrote,

 

 

 

 

l

"It is inevitable for a Jnani to be amidst objects during his non-

samadhi times."

Namaste Subbuji,

Is there a time when jnAni is not in samAdhi?

Is'nt kAla(time) also a myth? according to English language.

mithya according to vedAnta?

Is'nt living a meditation for a j~nani?

From

The distinction between Samadhi and non-Samadhi, as it were, cannot exist for a jnani. The following replies by Bhaghavan on this subject throw a lot of light on this subject.

A: Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either

savikalpa or nirvikatpa, is sahaja [the natural state]. What is bodyconsciousness?

It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both

of these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and

unaffected and which remains as it always is, with or without the

body-consciousness. What does it then matter whether the bodyconsciousness

is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that

pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the

advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes

no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

Q: Is samadhi the same as turiya, the fourth state?

A: Samadhi, turiya and nirvikalpa all have the same implication,

that is, awareness of the Self. Turiya literally means the fourth

state, the supreme consciousness, as distinct from the other three

states: waking, dreaming and dreamless sleep. The fourth state is

eternal and the other three states come and go in it. In turiya there

is the awareness that the mind has merged in its source, the Heart,

and is quiescent there, although some thoughts still impinge on it

and the senses are still somewhat active. In nirvikalpa the senses

are inactive and thoughts are totally absent. Hence the experience

of pure consciousness in this state is intense and blissful. Turiya is

obtainable in savikalpa samadhi.

Q: What is the difference between the bliss enjoyed in sleep and the

bliss enjoyed in turiya?

A: There are not different blisses. There is only one bliss which

includes the bliss enjoyed in the waking state, the bliss of all kinds

of beings from the lowest animal to the highest Brahma. That bliss

is the bliss of the Self. The bliss which is enjoyed unconsciously in

sleep is enjoyed consciously in turiya, that is the only difference.

The bliss enjoyed in the waking state is second-hand, it is an

adjunct of the real bliss [upadhi ananda].

yours ever in Bhaghavan Ramana

Sankarraman

 

 

 

Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Mail Beta.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "lakmuthu" <lakmuthu wrote:

>

> Subbji Wrote,

>

> "It is inevitable for a Jnani to be amidst objects during his non-

> samadhi times."

>

> Namaste Subbuji,

>

> Is there a time when jnAni is not in samAdhi?

>

> Is'nt kAla(time) also a myth? according to English language.

>

> mithya according to vedAnta?

>

> Is'nt living a meditation for a j~nani?

 

Srigurubhyo NamaH

Namaste Madam,

 

In the Vivekachudamani there is a verse:

 

BrahmAkAratayA sadaa sthitatayaa nirmukta-baHyArtha-dhIH

anyAvedita ......

Aste kaschit ananta punya phala bhug dhanyas sa maanyo bhuvi

 

(There is some fortunate one, the enjoyer of the fruit of limitless

virtue, for whose intellect external objects have completely ceased

owing to its constant abidance in the form of Brahman, who

experiences like one asleep or a child, what is submitted by others

(as, for example, food and water) and who, sometimes, when his mind

emerges from absorption in the Self (samadhi), perceives this world

like a world seen in a dream (that is, as a mere appearance). In

this world, he is worthy of reverence.)

 

Again, when Shankara Bhagavatpada went to the abode of his Guru,

Govinda Bhagavatpada, the latter was in samadhi. Seeing this, the

Acharya waited and only after the Guru emerged from Samadhi, the

question was asked and the Dashashloki was given out in reply by

Shankaracharya.

 

Sage Yajnavalkya was a realized person. Yet, he renounced home and

hearth to go into sannyasa, called vidvat sannyasa, for experiencing

jivanmukti. (Vidvat sannyasa is the renunciation of the knower (who

has had the direct realization of the Truth) while vividishaa sanyasa

is resorted to by one who has the desire to know the Truth.)

 

Namaskarams,

subbu

Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

subrahmanian_v <subrahmanian_v > wrote:

advaitin, "lakmuthu" <lakmuthu wrote:

>

> Subbji Wrote,

>

> "It is inevitable for a Jnani to be amidst objects during his non-

> samadhi times."

>

> Namaste Subbuji,

>

> Is there a time when jnAni is not in samAdhi?

>

From

Sankarraman>

Dear Sir,

May I quote the following extracts from the book, "Gospel of Mahrishi," compiled by Maurice Frydman, containing some abstruse aspects on the state of jnani vis-a-vis the ajnanis.

Disciple: Can I not remain in susupti as long as I like and also be in it

at will, just as I am in the waking state? What is the Jnani's experience

of these three states?

Maharshi: Susupti does exist in your waking state also. You are in susupti

even now. That should be consciously entered into and reached in this very

waking state. There is no real going in and coming out of it. To be aware of

susupti in the jagrat state is jagrat-susupti and that is samadhi.

The ajnani cannot remain long in susupti, because he is forced by his nature

to emerge from it. His ego is not dead and it will rise again and again. But

the Jnani crushes the ego at its Source. It may seem to emerge at times in

his case also if impelled by prarabdha. That is, in the case of the Jnani

also, for all outward purposes prarabdha would seem to sustain or keep up

the ego, as in the case of the ajnani; but there is this fundamental

difference, that the ajnani's ego when it rises up (really it has never

subsided except in deep sleep) is quite ignorant of its Source: in other

words, the ajnani is not aware of his susupti in his dream and waking

states. In the case of the Jnani, on the contrary, the rise or existence of

the ego is only apparent, and he enjoys his unbroken, transcendental

Experience in spite of such apparent rise or existence of the ego, keeping

his attention (lakshya) always on the Source. This ego is harmless; it is

merely like the skeleton of a burnt rope - though with a form, it is useless

to tie up anything. By constantly keeping one's attention on the Source, the

ego is dissolved in that Source like a salt-doll in the sea.

It is clear from the above that unless one understands the underlying state of susupti, available in and behind the thought flow of the waking and dream states, one cannot gauge the real state of a jnani. The point is that though the jnani makes use of the thought process in his empirical goings-on, the thoughts are only peripheral to a deeper reality, which Bhaghavan terms as the susupti even in the jagrat and swapna states. It is not as if the jnani is totally oblivious to all sensory phenomena and the cerebral knowledge as is the case with those who enter into the nirvikalpa Samadhi or the deep sleep state, the former according to Ramana being one of merger in the light, and the later, deep sleep. But the jnani’s state is one of savikalpa Samadhi in which he is able to undertake all activities without swerving from the natural state. It is this vital distinction in the light of which only I understand the idea of the jnanis being devoid

of all the movements of thought in their undertakings. It is not perse the absence of thoughts that is meant in the particular verse of Sri Muruganar quoted in the previous post. The underlined portion of Bhaghavan’s reply, I hope, might clarify the position, of course if my understanding were correct, which I am not sure of as this is a transcendental matter. Further, it is a matter of finding out from which level one conceptualizes the state of a jnani to have a clear view whether he has the relative mind still after realization. What you have said in this conext in your rejoinder-your affirming the movement of the mind in the case of the jnani also- is true in the light of the following clarification made in the Tamil text advaita bodh deepika, translated into English by Sri Munagala Venkatramayah, the compiler of the book, "Talks." The following is a small extract.

Experience can be of the mind only. When it is

destroyed, who can have the experience ‘I am Brahman’?

M.: You are right. The destruction of the mind is of two

kinds: (rupa and arupa) i.e., in its form-aspect and in its formless

aspect. All this while I have been speaking of destroying the

former mind. Only when it ceases to be in its formless aspect,

experience will be impossible, as you say.

D.: Please explain those two forms of the mind and their

destruction.

M.: The latent impressions (vasanas) manifesting as modes

(vrittis) constitute the form-aspect of the mind. Their effacement

is the destruction of this aspect of mind. On the other hand, on

the latencies perishing, the supervening state of samadhi in which

96

ADVAITA BODHA DEEPIKA

there is no stupor of sleep, no vision of the world, but only the

Being-Knowledge-Bliss is the formless aspect of mind. The loss

of this amounts to the loss of the formless aspect of mind. Should

this also be lost, there can be no experience — not even of the

realisation of Supreme Bliss.

P.S. If my writings are too meandering, I may be excused.

with kind regards

Sankarraman

 

 

 

Everyone is raving about the all-new Mail Beta.