Guest guest Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Ananda Wood <awood (AT) vsnl (DOT) com> wrote: Namaste, Shri Shyam wrote (message no #32713 on 24th Aug 06): "In sushupti there is of course no awareness of the I being in that state - you wake up and conclude that I was in deep sleep. From Sankarraman As Bhaghavan Ramana says, at the time of experiencing there is only the light; it is only subesequently, in time, memory superimposes its conclusions on the pure state. with warm regards Sankarraman __,_._F,___ Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > Srigurubhyo NamaH > There is no dearth of verses in the Vivekachudamani mentioning dhyana > and Nirvikalpa samadhi.: > 361. As gold purified by thorough heating on the fire gives up its > impurities and attains to its own lustre, so the mind, through > meditation, gives up its impurities of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, and > attains to the reality of Brahman. > > 362. When the mind, thus purified by constant practice, is merged in > Brahman, then Samadhi passes on from the Savikalpa to the Nirvikalpa > stage, and leads directly to the realisation of the Bliss of Brahman, > the One without a second. > 364. Reflection should be considered a hundred times superior to > hearing, and meditation a hundred thousand times superior even to > reflection, but the Nirvikalpa Samadhi is infinite in its results. > > 365. By the Nirvikalpa Samadhi the truth of Brahman is clearly and > definitely realised, but not otherwise, for then the mind, being > unstable by nature, is apt to be mixed up with other perceptions. Subbuji, Thank you 1000 times. The purpose of my bringing this issue to the list dedicated to Bhagavadpada is fulfilled.You are very correct when you say, ------------------------ > The above clarification can put at rest the unpleasantness caused by > the term `yoga'. Often it is seen that those who take up cudgels > against yoga are doing it more out of frustration of not being able > to undertake the sadhana demanded by yoga, in my humble, considered, > observed, opinion, and not out of any genuine devotion to Upanishadic > system: Vedanta. Wherever the word `samadhi', `dhyana', `one- > pointedness', ` control of senses and mind', etc. occur in the > Upanishads, the Acharya's bhashyas and other minor texts, that > becomes a source of uncomfortable disposition. Often some other > meaning is sought to be given to these terms, just because the > Acharya happens to use these. Fortunately, the Acharya has given a > clarification in the above sutra bhashya so that at least after > knowing this, such misconceptions can be given up. ---------------------- I have seen vedantic acharyas clearly torturing the texts pertaining to the above mentioned topic both of the upanishads and the bhashya of Shankara. They think they are propogating acharya's message but infact it is greatest injustice to the advaita vedanta propogated by bhagavadpada. By critisizing exalted states like nirvikalpa samadhi, practice of yoga they are actually eliminating the practical aspect of vedanta by which one come to advaitic realisations face to face. Acharya is very catholic and he accepts samkya philosophy as matchless as far as the explanation of prakriti is concerned. But at the same time he has shown the limitations of that system of thought and brought the seekers of liberations to the heights of vedanta step by step. I am fortunate to hear few recorded lectures of a knower of brahman. He was a great scholar in Shankaracharya's advaita vedanta. He was such a fine aspirant that when his guru told and blessed with the mahavakya Tat Twam Asi in the same evening he realised and dwelt in samadhi conteneously for 3 days. He always said i know the brahman, you are all brahman and you too can realise it. One side these mystery mongers with all sorts of kundalini, serpent power, touching magic are misguiding people and on the other hand vedantic scholars. Religion whoose essence is realisation has become philosophy for the enjoyment of the intellect. I know these things very clearly. I wanted to think aloud about these things in the list dedicated to acharya so that we all can pause and think for some time. To day i was just thinking that by discussing on this topic i have unnecessarily parched my throat and i would have spent the same thime in study and contemplantion and just your post dropped in with enlightening explanation with scriptural authority. My joy is beyond measure. JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: > A look into the BrahmaSutra II.i.3 where the Yoga system is refuted, Pranams subbu-ji "3. Thereby the Yoga (Smriti) is refuted. This Sûtra extends the application of the preceding argumentation, and remarks that by the refutation of the Sânkhya-smriti the Yoga-smriti also is to be considered as refuted; for the latter also assumes, in opposition to Scripture, a pradhâna as the independent cause of the world, and the 'great principle,' &c. as its effects, although neither the Veda nor common experience favour these views.--But, if the same reasoning applies to the Yoga also, the latter system is already disposed of by the previous arguments; of what use then is it formally to extend them to the Yoga? (as the Sûtra does.)" This is how the link that you provided start. Are you reading in it something in it I am not? There is nothing here that talks about nirvikalpa samadhi. No one is denying the importance of shama, dama, dharana, dhyana, etc The subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam are synonyms. > The above clarification can put at rest the unpleasantness caused by > the term `yoga'. Often it is seen that those who take up cudgels > against yoga are doing it more out of frustration of not being able > to undertake the sadhana demanded by yoga. Wherever the word >`samadhi', `dhyana', `one- pointedness', ` control of senses and > mind', etc. occur in the Upanishads, the Acharya's bhashyas and > other minor texts, that becomes a source of uncomfortable > disposition. I quote Pujya Guruji His Holiness Swami Dayananda-ji "Yoga is a general term that covers attitudes, values, prayers, as well as postures and breathing techniques and meditation. In Vedanta the goal is not the blissful absorption of nirvikalpa samadhi. Nirvikalpa samadhi is a state of experience in which there is resolution of the thought process. And when thoughts resume, the state of nirvikalpa or thought-free is gone. Such an experience cannot be the ultimate reality because what is real remains as it is. Vedanta leads you to discover that the true self is nirvikalpa....This has to be recognized. You do not need a special experience like samadhi to have an experience of yourself. It is enough to analye your experiences in waking, dream and deep sleep." The point of recounting this is not to "prove" or "disprove" anything. It is just to very humbly but firmly point out that baseless, blanket speculations about what might be the underlying motivations of people with views dissimilair to yours is both uncalled for and nonproductive. It is also highly uncharacteristic of such a master advaitin such as yourself, whom I both respect and admire greatly. Words whether spoken or written, esp in Vedanta, should be carefully measured and needless speculation avoided, in my extremely humble opinion. Also, there should never ever be room for "frustration" for a vedantic seeker - there is plenty of that in the nonspiritual realm of things.:-) As Swami Chinmayananda puts it so beautifully - this is a process of spiritual evolution not revolution. You cannot force open a bud to make it flower. If we ever identify deficiencies in our own sadhana we should very patiently and gently try to supplant them with a lot of selfeffort and with an attitude of bhakti - where is the room for "uncomfortable dispositions"?? Thereby THESE UPASANAS > ARE AIDS TO ADVAITAJNANA. (unquote). > Thus we see that dhyana is not rejected by the Upanishads and the > Acharya merely on grounds of its being `purusha tantra'. Nobody is rejecting dhyana. If you recall in my post I had specifically mentioned "If samadhanam, ekagrata, samahitam or even dharana -all fairly synonymous terms indicated a singlepointedness of mind during nidhidhyasanam, is what is "meant" by samadhi, then I agree that without this there is no selfknowledge." How can any vedanting say dhyana is not important when nidhidhyasanam is the only gateway to jnana nishta??! > > In the Prasthana-traya bhashya of the Acharya, we come across these > terms: > > Bhagavadgita: VI.19: For the word `yunjato yogam AtmanaH' occurring > in the verse: yunjato = yogam anutiShThatataH, AtmanaH = samAdhim anu- > tiShThataH ityarthaH. The words samadhi do occur in the context of the Bhagwad Gita in describing dhyana - "As light in a windless spot stirs not, this is the simile of the yogin whose mind is controlled and who applies himself to yoga" - the words nirvikalpa samadhi do not feature even here. > In the verse XVIII.50, the Lord commences the succinct delineation of > the method of apprehending the Self. > The bhashyam says: With all senses thus quieted, he should always > and devoutly practice dhyana or meditation upon the nature of the > Self, and Yoga or concentration of the mind on the Self. `Always' > implies that he has to do nothing else, no mantrajapa, etc. The bhashyam for this verse is detailed and beautiful. Please read.."However some selfstyled panditahs maintain that the Self being formless is unamenable to intellectual understanding, and so the discipline of knowledge is difficult to acquire!! This is true only of people devoid of the advantages of the right tradition established by a real teacher; who have not been schooled in Upanisadic wisdom; who are in the thralls of the realm of objects, and are untrained in the employment of the means of right intellectual cognition! But those who are of the opposite type(advaitins) would find it very hard to deem as real the objects which lure the wordly minded; they do not cognize anything other than the pure consciousness that is the Self...To none indeed at anytime is the Self an alien, to be attained or rejected or accepted. Were that Self unknown all selfregarding activities would turn out to be pointless. ...so just as there is no need for a pramana to know one's body there is no need for a pramana to know the Self that is far more intimate than the body!! So, to the discriminating, the discipline of knowledge is very well-known indeed!!" I am sorry I do not recognize from which part of this lenghty bhashyam for 18.50 you got the lines you have quoted, but the above lines are crystal clear to an unbiased reader. > > There is no dearth of verses in the Vivekachudamani mentioning dhyana > and Nirvikalpa samadhi.: I would refer you to one of the very opening lines of the teaching in the Vivekachudamani "58.Na yogena na sankhyena...nanyatha" Not by yoga, not by sankhya, not by karma, not by upasana is liberation achieved. It is only by an intellectual understanding of the oneness of Brahman and the atman. NOT OTHERWISE" So a yogic approach of attaining nirvikalpa samadhi as a means to selfknowledge is rejected in the very beginning itself. Please explain to me - if attainment of nirvikalpa samadhi is the sine qua non of vedanta, if it be of such paramount and overwhelming importance - shouldnt there be one - just one tiny reference to it in the entire body of all the Upanishad and the Gita put together. The shrutis and smritis describe so many students approaching a Guru, gaining selfknowledge etc - shouldnt somewhere something be said to indicate that a state of nirvikalpa samadhi has been reached in as many words?? > All the above show beyond doubt that Ananda of Brahman that is > mentioned in the Upanishads is not something to make the attainment > of Brahman a desirable endeavour. It is not eulogy. It is a fact of > experience. In fact the monumental work `Jivanmukti viveka' of Sage > Vidyaranya is all about making the Ananda manifest by increased > adherence to Yoga and other practices. This is a totally different topic worthy of much discussion by itself. In the interest of the length of this post I shall not elaborate on this right now. I will sum up with the basics, and i think in all humility that your esteemed self and me will be in agreement on this - The problem is self-ignorance due to avidya. Only knowledge is opposed to avidya and can help you cognize the error and thereby realize your true nature. The self is already present - you are that already - no karma - whether it be upasana or yoga - is going to "make" you complete - you were never not brahman whether you know it or not. If karma - such as yoga - could itself give you a "brahman experience" then the upanishads, commentaries, bhasyas, adhyarosa, etc etc are all rendered meaningless. "Quieten the mind till it is "comfortably numb" and there the "atman will be found to be shining in its pristine glory" These so called neoadvaitic ideas have no scriptural sanction. A purely yogic exercise of mind control 101 with no intellectual selfenquiry, no bhakti or upasana, no insistence on any ethical conduct, just relentless meditation and "stilling" of the mind culminating in a transcendental state - this will reveal the atma?? Dhyana, bhakti or upasana, ethical living and conduct, Guru, and a prepared intellect equipped with an integrated mind are all ABSOLUTE MUSTS as aids - but let us not confuse these aids with the pramana which is jnana. There is no denying that a state of nirvikalpa samadhi can be attained by strenuous efforts at mind control - the same transcendental state can also be obtained my a bhakta at te height of his devotional state, where he loses any sense of himself or herself - but these states or experiences in these cases are temporally limited as in they have a beginning and an end, and however exalted and worthwhile they may be and howsoever blissful, self knoweldge they do not confer. The yogi stil sees himself as separate from the whole and the bhakta still sees himself as separate from his Lord. Kaivalya is atma-bodha - self-knowledge. The atma or vastu is nirvikalpa - in and through all the vikalpas of the mind - for a jnani who knows the truth about his being Brahman where is the question of savikalpa or nirvikalpa samadhi- these are partially true for him only at a vyavaharic level. My humble pranams to you, Shri Gurubhyo namah Shyam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Namaste, > > Yes indeed - Japa yoga is also the same. Witnessing present is also means > the same. That is Vedantic teaching too. > > Yes living in Present is sajaha samaadhi or true samaadhi. Something makes me comfortable about equating living in the present to Sahaja Samadhi. Yes, living in the present is a characteristic of sahaja samadhi but isn't there more?. Lord Krishna says about Samadhi in Gita 6.22: Obtaining which one does not think of any other acquisition to be superior to that, and being established in which one is not perturbed even by great sorrow I wonder if a person routinely practicing japa yoga or 'witnessing present' can honestly say that. and note 6.22 only talks about a sadhaka's samadhi state not the sahaja state of the jnani. (From what I understand, sahaja samadhi or effortless samadhi as described Sri Ramana, is the state of the Jnani as for example this quote from 'Talks with Sri Ramana': >> In sahaja samadhi the activities, vital and mental, and the three states are destroyed, never to reappear. >>) Sahaja Samadhi not only implies living in the present but also seeing 'vasudeva in all' - the state of a jnani/siddha purusha. Whereas witnessing the present , japa yoga etc are all in the realm of a Sadhaka. regards Sundar Rajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Namaste friends, Re shyam-ji's statement: "the subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam are synonyms." Is it possible that different people, texts and sages use terminology in slightly different ways? So we might be cautious when pitting one view against another. Sri Ramana Maharshi puts it in the following way: (1) Holding on to Reality is samadhi. (2) Holding on to Reality with effort is savikalpa samadhi. (3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa samadhi. (4) Merging in Ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep. (5) Remaining in the primal, pure natural state without effort is sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi. (from "Talk 391") He further explains what He means by the difference between (3) and (5) in another talk: "Even if one is immersed in nirvikalpa samadhi for years together, when he emerges from it he will find himself in the environment which he is bound to have. That is the reason for the Acharya emphasising sahaja samadhi in preference to nirvikalpa samadhi in his excellent work Viveka Chudamani. One should be in spontaneous samadhi - that is, in one's pristine state - in the midst of every environment." (Talk 54) and again in Talk 187, Sri Ramana explains both (3) and (5) as nirvikalpa samadhi, but the sahaja type alone is permanent.... - In sleep the mind is alive but merged in oblivion (see (4) above). - In kevala nirvikalpa samadhi, the mind is alive but merged in light, like a bucket with rope lowered into a well, that can be drawn out again. - In sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi, the mind is dead , resolved into the Self, like a river discharged into the ocean - its identity lost - and which can never be re-directed from the ocean, once discharged into it. (Talk 187) A similar explanation is given in Talk 465, wherein Sri Bhagavan says:- (1) Meditation should remain unbroken as a current. If unbroken it is called samadhi or Kundalini sakti. (2) The mind may be latent and merge in the Self; it must necessarily rise up again; after it rises up one finds oneself only as ever before. For in this state the mental predispositions are present there in latent form to remanifest under favourable conditions. (3) Again the mind activities can be completely destroyed. This differs from the former mind, for here the attachment is lost, never to reappear. Even though the man sees the world after he has been in the samadhi state, the world will be taken only at its worth, that is to say it is the phenomenon of the One Reality. The True Being can be realised only in samadhi; what was then is also now. Otherwise it cannot be Reality or Ever-present Being. What was in samadhi is here and now too. Hold it and it is your natural condition of Being. Samadhi practice must lead to it. Otherwise how can nirvikalpa samadhi be of any use in which a man remains as a log of wood? He must necessarily rise up from it sometime or other and face the world. But in sahaja samadhi he remains unaffected by the world. So many pictures pass over the cinema screen: fire burns away everything; water drenches all; but the screen remains unaffected. The scenes are only phenomena which pass away leaving the screen as it was. Similarly the world phenomena simply pass on before the Jnani, leaving him unaffected. You may say that people find pain or pleasure in worldly phenomena. It is owing to superimposition. This must not happen. With this end in view practice is made. Practice lies in one of the two courses: devotion or knowledge. Even these are not the goals. Samadhi must be gained; it must be continuously practised until sahaja samadhi results. Then there remains nothing more to do. (Talk 465) >From the previous passages it would seem that "2" above (the mind latent and merged in the Self) refers to Kevala Nirvikalpa Samadhi. The important distinction between this and "3", Sahaja Samadhi, is that in the latter "the mind is dead". This is the natural state of the Jnani who can move in the world (or, at least appear to us to do so) and remain unaffected by it. Is Kevala Nirvikalpa Samadhi a synonym of Jnanam? It would seem, yes and no, or not quite, if I have understood correctly. Whereas Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi is Jnanam. Loss of body consciousness in samadhi is not the same as 'dead mind', destruction of ego. Thus when the disciple asks, "Is loss of body-consciousness a perquisite to the attainment of sahaja samadhi?" Sri Ramana replies: "What is body-consciousness? Analyse it. There must be a body and consciousness limited to it which together make up body-consciousness. These must lie in another Consciousness which is absolute and unaffected. Hold it. That is samadhi. It exists when there is no body-consciousness because it transcends the latter, it also exists when there is the body-consciousness. So it is always there. What does it matter whether body-consciousness is lost or retained? When lost it is internal samadhi: when retained, it is external samadhi. That is all. A person must remain in any of the six samadhis so that sahaja samadhi may be easy for him." (Talk 406) Below, Sri Ramana refers to samadhi, not as a state to be gained, as in some of the many different types but as our natural state. He also points out the importance of the waking state, which I believe was a queery in another thead: "Samadhi is one's natural state. It is the under-current in all the three states. This - that is, 'I' - is not in those states, but these states are in It. If we get samadhi in our waking state that will persist in deep sleep also. The distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness belongs to the realm of mind, which is transcended by the state of the Real Self." (Talk 136) "By sravana, Knowledge dawns. That is the flame. By manana, the Knowledge is not allowed to vanish. Just as the flame is protected by a wind-screen, so the other thoughts are not allowed to overwhelm the right knowledge. By nididhyasana, the flame is kept up to burn bright by trimming the wick. Whenever other thoughts arise, the mind is turned inward to the light of true knowledge. When this becomes natural, it is samadhi. The enquiry "Who am I?" is the sravana. The ascertainment of the true import of 'I' is the manana. The practical application on each occasion is nididhyasana. Being as 'I' is samadhi." (Talk 647) "Eternal, unbroken, natural state is jnana." (Talk 385) Kind regards to all, Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 > > advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v@> > wrote: > > > A look into the BrahmaSutra II.i.3 where the Yoga system is refuted, > > Pranams subbu-ji > > "3. Thereby the Yoga (Smriti) is refuted. > > This is how the link that you provided start. Are you reading in it > something in it I am not? > There is nothing here that talks about nirvikalpa samadhi. Srigurubhyo NamaH Namaste Shyam ji, The idea behind quoting only the portion that i did from the bhashya is to point out that yoga is not dismissed in-toto. In the true spirit of a-virodha, the Acharya acknowledges what is not only non- contradictory to the Veda but also that which is positively relevant in that system that is in accordance to the Vedantic teaching is admissible. And he explicitly says that the terms 'sankhya' and 'yoga' are vedic in the quotes provided from the Upanishads themselves by the purva-pakshin. My intention was also to point out that there is a general tendency to consider these terms and all other terms connected with them as not belonging to Vedanta and therefore not of any relevance to Vedanta and therefore to be shunned. That such is not the case, i suppose, is clear from the Acaharya's words in the Bhashyam. That i feel settles that misplaced idea about these terms when used in Vedanta. Here is the relevant portion from this bhashya: (Quote) In the passage quoted ('That cause which is to be apprehended by Sânkhya and Yoga') the terms 'Sânkhya' and 'Yoga' denote Vedic knowledge and meditation, as we infer from proximity . We willingly allow room for those portions of the two systems which do not contradict the Veda. In their description of the soul, for instance, as free from all qualities the Sânkhyas are in harmony with the Veda which teaches that the person (purusha) is essentially pure; cp. Bri. Up. IV, 3, 16. 'For that person is not attached to anything.' The Yoga again in giving rules for the condition of the wandering religious mendicant admits that state of retirement from the concerns of life which is known from scriptural passages such as the following one, 'Then the parivrâgaka with discoloured (yellow) dress, shaven, without any possessions,' &c. (Jâbâla Upan. IV).(unquote) Here is the link to the entire bhashya on this sutra: > The subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam are synonyms. I would request you to wait for a little more time till i post that dialogue that i have promised. That will answer several questions on the subject. .. >It is just to very humbly but firmly point out that baseless, blanket > speculations about what might be the underlying motivations of people with views dissimilair to yours is both uncalled for and > nonproductive. It is also highly uncharacteristic of such a master > advaitin such as yourself, whom I both respect and admire greatly. > Words whether spoken or written, esp in Vedanta, should be carefully > measured and needless speculation avoided, in my extremely humble opinion. Dear Shyam ji, let me first apologise if my remarks have caused pain to anyone. My idea is this: This is a List that has as its main theme the discussion of Advaita as taught by the Upanishads and the Acharya. Let me mention this one point: In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad we have the teaching about the shravana, manana and nididhyasana for realization of Atman. The Acharya comments: Nididhyasana. He writes: nischayena dhyAtavyaH. It has to be intensely meditated upon. Evam hi asau driShTo bhavati = Only thus the Atma becomes realized by the practice of these sadhanas of shravana, manana AND nididhyasana. He continues: When these are done compositely then samyagdarshanam of the Unity of Brahman comes to one's realization, AND NOT OTHERWISE BY RESORTING TO SHRAVANA ALONE. The popular gloss of Anandagiri states: shravana is pradhana, main, as it is an enquiry into the pramana. Manana and nididhyasana, being the removers of the obstacles to jnanam get the status of ancillary. When shravana and the others are repeatedly practiced compositely, then as the means become adequately strengthened, then tattvajnanam that is fruitful arises. (unquote) (There is indeed that rare case where jnana dawns just upon hearing the teaching about the Truth. But that is a very rare case where it is inferred that all the other sadhanas were done in earlier births. This is not the general case, but an exception.) I pointed out this to show that the Upanishad and the Acharya hold that nididhyasanam is a preceding step to jnanam. If it is said that nididhyasanam is for 'jnana-nishtha', it would imply that there is already jnanam through shravana-manana and one is a jnani. What is required is only jnananishtha, to strengthen the knowledge already acquired. This is quite contrary to the teaching of the Acharya. Supposing one concludes that after shravana and manana that one has got jnanam, and what is required is only establishment in jnanam which is achieveable through nididhyasanam, this situation is unavoidable: What is the limit or criterion of jnana nishta. If death precedes a person's completion of nididhyasanam, what is the conclusion? Will he be liberated because he has already got jnanam before nididhyasanam? The answer as per the shastra is no. The avidya-destroying jnanam not having arisen in him through saakshaatkaaram, aparoksha jnanam, this person will be definitely born again. On the contrary, if it is held, as per the shastra, that jnanam has arisen after the composite practice of the triad, whether the person dies the very next moment after this saakshaatkaram or after several years, his freedom from rebirth is guaranteed. Now you can decide whether the view that nididhyasanam is for attaining jnananishtha is in accordance with the Acharya's teaching. It is definitely not my personal views that i want to impose. It is the view of the teaching as i have understood and as I am trying to understand that i share with members. > Also, there should never ever be room for "frustration" for a vedantic > seeker - there is plenty of that in the nonspiritual realm of things.:-) > As Swami Chinmayananda puts it so beautifully - this is a process of > spiritual evolution not revolution. You cannot force open a bud to > make it flower. If we ever identify deficiencies in our own sadhana we > should very patiently and gently try to supplant them with a lot of > selfeffort and with an attitude of bhakti - where is the room for > "uncomfortable dispositions"?? This is very nicely said. > Thereby THESE UPASANAS > > ARE AIDS TO ADVAITAJNANA. (unquote). > > Thus we see that dhyana is not rejected by the Upanishads and the > > Acharya merely on grounds of its being `purusha tantra'. > > Nobody is rejecting dhyana. > If you recall in my post I had specifically mentioned "If samadhanam, > ekagrata, samahitam or even dharana -all fairly synonymous terms > indicated a singlepointedness of mind during nidhidhyasanam, is > what is "meant" by samadhi, then I agree that without this there is no Ø selfknowledge." That clarifies the point very well. > > How can any vedantin say dhyana is not important when nidhidhyasanam > is the only gateway to jnana nishta??! > > In the Prasthana-traya bhashya of the Acharya, we come across these > > terms: > > Bhagavadgita: VI.19: For the word `yunjato yogam AtmanaH' occurring > > in the verse: yunjato = yogam anutiShThatataH, AtmanaH = samAdhim anu- > > tiShThataH ityarthaH. > > The words samadhi do occur in the context of the Bhagwad Gita in > describing dhyana - "As light in a windless spot stirs not, this is > the simile of the yogin whose mind is controlled and who applies > himself to yoga" - the words nirvikalpa samadhi do not feature even here. > > > > In the verse XVIII.50, the Lord commences the succinct delineation of > > the method of apprehending the Self. > > The bhashyam says: With all senses thus quieted, he should always > > and devoutly practice dhyana or meditation upon the nature of the > > Self, and Yoga or concentration of the mind on the Self. `Always' > > implies that he has to do nothing else, no mantrajapa, etc. > > I am sorry I do not recognize from which part of this lenghty bhashyam for 18.50 you got the lines you have quoted, but the above lines are crystal clear to an unbiased reader. I think you missed the line where i had mentioned: in the verse no.18.52...the quote is from the commentary for this verse. Vivekachudamani > > "58.Na yogena na sankhyena...nanyatha" > Not by yoga, not by sankhya, not by karma, not by upasana is > liberation achieved. It is only by an intellectual understanding of > the oneness of Brahman and the atman. NOT OTHERWISE" > So a yogic approach of attaining nirvikalpa samadhi as a means to > selfknowledge is rejected in the very beginning itself. The brahmasutra quote that i have given in the commencement clearly says that these terms are quite agreeable in the vedantic context. The specific shastras of the above seers have been refuted as being not in accordance with Vedanta. If this clarification is not kept in mind while reading the verses of the Vivekachudamani on Nirvikalpasamadhi, one would have to conclude that the Acharya is contradicting himself by saying one thing in verse 58 and quite another later. Trust this point is clear. I wish to draw your attention to verse 268 of the Vivekachudamani. > Please explain to me - if attainment of nirvikalpa samadhi is the sine qua non of vedanta, if it be of such paramount and overwhelming > importance - shouldnt there be one - just one tiny reference to it in the entire body of all the Upanishad and the Gita put together. The shrutis and smritis describe so many students approaching a Guru, > gaining selfknowledge etc - shouldnt somewhere something be said to > indicate that a state of nirvikalpa samadhi has been reached in as many words?? My endeavour is not to say that attainment of nirvikalpa samadhi is the sine qua non of Vedanta. I had earlier mentioned in this list that Atma jnanam can arise from vichara itself. What I wanted to convey is that its importance and relevance is not to be denied either. That was the reason I pointed out the various passages from the Acharya's bhashya. The name Nirvikalpa and savikalpa may not be there in the bhashya. But the sub-commentators point out this. For example, Anandagiri makes a note of the clear distinction between these two samadhis in his gloss to the Acharya's bhashyam on the Gita verse VI.20. He uses the terms samprajnata and asamprajnata samadhis. The bottom line is nididhyasanam is intense dhyanam as per the Acharya's words. If even this is not accepted, there is certainly a deviation from the main core of the Advaitic teaching. Even in the case of those who get Atma Saakshatkaram through vichara, Sri Vidyaranya points out in the Jivanmukti viveka that a `kshaNika savikalpa samadhi' is what brings about the momentous realization. All these can be appreciated only if by realization it is admitted that it is not a gradual happening. As the Brahmasutra bhashya I quoted much earlier says that the `gradual' is prior to the dawn of knowledge. But in saakshaatkaaram no evolution is admitted. That is the reason that a study of various texts is prescribed in Vedanta sadhana. The other texts often serve the purpose of bringing out explicitly what is hinted at implicitly in the Bhashya. There is this reference: The MaitrAyaNi Upanishad mentions about Nirvikalpa samadhi in mantras: IV.4.9: The bliss that is had by the mind that has been cleansed of impurities by samadhi and which is absorbed in the Atman cannot be described in words. It is experienced by the mind itself at that time. The context of the Prashna Upanishad gives us a hint to this. All those who approached the teacher, were great sadhakas having completed saguna brahma upasana. They wanted the liberating wisdom. This shows such a kind of adhikari will be able to fix his mind intensely on the Atman/Brahman taught and attain the goal. Nididhyasanam and the subsequent dawn of realization for them will be comparatively very easy. Again the issue is of much more wider nature. That is why a study of the work 'Jivanmukti viveka' will be of immense use in appreciating these points. However, let me just mention one quote from this work which is of paramount importance to sadhakas: (quote) In the case of the person who has performed meditation to the extent of realizing the prescribed object of meditation (such as a form of God) and thereafter strives for the knowledge of the Truth, by virtue of his firm obliteration of mental tendencies (vasanas) and dissolution of mind (mano-nasha), the renunciation of a knower (vidwat-sannyasa) and jivanmukti occur automatically on the dawn of the realization of the Truth. SUCH INDEED IS THE PERSON WHO IS PRE- EMINENTLY FIT FOR ENIGHTENMENT AND CONSIDERED BY THE SCRIPTURE. Now-a-days men rush in quest of Gnosis, out of sheer curiosity, in most cases even without going through the preliminary stage of devotion, upasana. They even reach the stage of the obliteration of vasana and the dissolution of the mind, and in consequence, study, contemplation and assimilation (of the Vedanta) are also fully accomplished by repeated application to these three; ignorance, doubt and false perception are demolished; and real Gnosis is achieved. In the absence of a more powerful means to counteract it and of any cause which can resuscitate the ignorance dispelled by it, the resultant Gnosis does not fade. But then the obliteration of latent impression, vasanas and the dissolution of the mind are easily extinguished, like a lamp exposed to the breeze, for want of steady application and in consequence of being influenced, from time to time, by the fruit-bearing previous karma......Therefore it is obvious that the obliteration of latent impressions and dissolution of the mind could be brought about only by personal effort. (unquote) What is it that is desired through liberation? Is it mere freedom from re-birth? Is it not supreme peace for the mind? Is it not freedom from the innumerable pulls of the mind that constitutes true freedom? If it is said that `it is all for the mind and not for me', Swami Vidyaranya jests: Then let there be only samsara for you ! > > I will sum up with the basics, and i think in all humility that your > esteemed self and me will be in agreement on this - > > The problem is self-ignorance due to avidya. > Only knowledge is opposed to avidya and can help you cognize the error > and thereby realize your true nature. > The self is already present - you are that already - no karma - > whether it be upasana or yoga - is going to "make" you complete - you were never not brahman whether you know it or not. > If karma - such as yoga - could itself give you a "brahman experience" > then the upanishads, commentaries, bhasyas, adhyarosa, etc etc are all Ø rendered meaningless. The atma or vastu is nirvikalpa - in and through all > the vikalpas of the mind - for a jnani who knows the truth about his > being Brahman where is the question of savikalpa or nirvikalpa Ø samadhi- these are partially true for him only at a vyavaharic level. All this is very well said. All the practices assume importance before such realization arises. A question remains unanswered: what is the samadhi that the Acharya is talking about in the VI chapter of the Gita? Is it dhyana or dharana or samadhanam of the sadhana- chatushtaya that is required before undertaking shravanam? The Acharya could very well have used one of these terms. He was quite aware of them. The importance of these practices were spoken of by the Acharya in the Vivekachudamani and other texts as not in isolation but in the context of the Upanishadic teaching. By themselves they will not confer Self Realization. That is quite known. That is why the Acharya refuted these schools. All the effort of what was said in my earlier post was to say that the practice of yoga has a definite purpose in the Advaitic realization. The Upanishad itself teaches this as the means for saakshaatkaram for example, in the Kathopanishad. My humble pranams to you, Subbu Om Tat Sat > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Shree Sundar Rajanji - PraNams, I am delighted to continue this discussion. There is a psychological time and chronological time. Chronological time is vyAvahArika satyam and has only relative existence and from absolute point has no relevance. Psychological time is figment of imagination. Both have existence with the mind (both subjective world and the objective world - those are the prathama and dvitiiya paadas discussed in the Mandukya) - as concepts in the mind. Hence both disappear temporarily in the deep sleep state where even the awareness of the present is also not there. Jnaani is the one who lives only in the chronological time with deep realization that it has no absolute relevance. Psychological time arises with ego identification with the past and future and bringing that burden to the present. Hence ajnaani lives in the past and the future, only fleetingly in the present, except when he is deeply involved in any action. where he temporarity trascends both times, However he entered into the action with future in mind and dragging the past with him, he soon he gets distracted with the notion of the past and future with expectation of fruits of the action, and sense of accomplishment as 'I have done it or I did not do it,' etc. Aware of the present implies aware of the absence of any time in the absolute sense since what is there is only present - hence one can only act in the present and enjoy in the present and live only in the present and in the present there is no time! What is there is only the living presence - I am -with all that which is - the is-ness of the world or objects with names and forms. But an intense consciousness of the present in japa yoga - is shifting to that which is beyond time - na jaatu mRiyateva kadAchit nAyam bhUtvA nabhavitAva na bhUyaH| ajonityam swAswatoyam purAno, na hanyate hanyamAne sharIre| That is recognizing I am - the existence-awareness that illumines all that is there in the present. -I am that eternal beyond the very time concept. In that understanding a recognition arises that the there is no duality in existence or awareness - not intellectually but factually - since intellect is again a thought identification. In contrast to the deep sleep state - the mind is very present as reflecting pool of the consciousness that you are - sarvam khalu idam brahma and ayam Atma bhrama - becomes a reality not a dictate from the scriptures, not because of what AchAryas said so, not because Vedanta ascertains - it is absolute truth glaring it all its glory - there is no separateness since that is a thoughts. When that shift becomes permanently ascertained (what Bhagavaan Ramana calls as dRiDaiva nishhTaa) - you are in sahaja samaadhi. Mind has understood - it can get in to chronological time but shift in awareness will not cease - that I am that existence-awareness aware of this this this that as part of existence as objects and thoughts of the objects, and existence of the subject who is conscious of the objects. Thus I am aware of the apparent duality in the mind (the subject-object duel existence) but I am undifferentiable existence that supports the apparent. That is the sahaja samaadhi - and that is also nirvikalpa samaadhi. All other apparent states are only apparent evolutionary states for saadhak to arrive at this understanding (I am not using the word 'state' any more). Now japa yoga is A MEANS to arrive at this stage where I am providing for the mind to have an avocation to repeat the same thought and that thought loused on the IShaTadevata so that it done go off tangent to other dissimilar thoughts. Japa becomes yoga when I slowly shift my attention from the thought to the awarer of the thought. That is the witnessing of the thought. That helps to detach oneself with the thought since witness is not involved in what is witnessed. The witness is an awareful being while what is witnessed is jadam or inert. Now the Vedantic teaching helps to ascertain that 'you are that' - that unqualified awareness that is ever existent being. That is the beginning of the samaadhi. Firm abidance in that is the nidhidhyaasanam. That is the nirvikalpa samAdhi or sahaja samaadhi where whatever that I am aware of does not displace my understanding that I am that very awareness because of which only I am aware of this or that. Your question is 'can this happen to the one who routinely practices japa yoga?'. If that routine is mechanical - no it cannot. What is involved is intense awareness that I am that awareful being - the witness that is witnessing. Hence the word I used is vigilance. A firm abidance in that is needed to get out the habitual or mechanical thinking with the notion that what I am is what I think than what I am. Try NOW - that that is all that is truely available. In now only we can transcend both psychological and chronological times while the mind is still there (not in suShupti). In sahaja samaadhi - all activities are present as usual as dynamic present where your presence alone counts. The others are there but they do not count - that is the ADVAITA just one plus many gold ornaments is just one gold - advaita in spite of dvaita - non-duality in spite of duality - one that really counts while the rest are uncountable counts. Japa yoga should lead to this just as other yogas to where the mind gets slowly purified and get firm abidance in that knowledge that I am that I am. Self inquiry that bhagavaan Ramana asks is also the same thing too. In stead of japa one is trying to discard what I am not to establish to what I am. Japa leads to witnessing self to the very awareness because of which I am playing the role of witness. Japa to turn to yoga involves intense awareness rejecting the witnessed (idam) in shifting into aham - the very awareness that I am that is that counts in the PRESENT - my presence. Mandukya brings this out very vividly in the discussion of turiiyam. Hari Om! Sadananda Sundar Rajan <avsundarrajan > Something makes me comfortable about equating living in the present to Sahaja Samadhi. Yes, living in the present is a characteristic of sahaja samadhi but isn't there more?. Lord Krishna says about Samadhi in Gita 6.22: Obtaining which one does not think of any other acquisition to be superior to that, and being established in which one is not perturbed even by great sorrow I wonder if a person routinely practicing japa yoga or 'witnessing present' can honestly say that. and note 6.22 only talks about a sadhaka's samadhi state not the sahaja state of the jnani. (From what I understand, sahaja samadhi or effortless samadhi as described Sri Ramana, is the state of the Jnani as for example this quote from 'Talks with Sri Ramana': >> In sahaja samadhi the activities, vital and mental, and the three states are destroyed, never to reappear. >>) Sahaja Samadhi not only implies living in the present but also seeing 'vasudeva in all' - the state of a jnani/siddha purusha. Whereas witnessing the present , japa yoga etc are all in the realm of a Sadhaka. regards Sundar Rajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 advaitin, "Peter" <not_2 wrote: > > Namaste friends, > > Re shyam-ji's statement: "the subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam > are synonyms." > > Is it possible that different people, texts and sages use terminology in > slightly different ways? So we might be cautious when pitting one view > against another. > > Sri Ramana Maharshi puts it in the following way: > > (1) Holding on to Reality is samadhi. > (2) Holding on to Reality with effort is savikalpa samadhi. > (3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa > samadhi. > (4) Merging in Ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep. > (5) Remaining in the primal, pure natural state without effort is sahaja > nirvikalpa samadhi. > (from "Talk 391") > Namaste Peter-ji Pranams to you. Thank you for the excellent synopsis of Bhagwaan Ramana's teachings. One cannot read them often enough! This particular example was very beautiful, and should lay to rest any confusions in the seekers minds, (and is also similair to Bhagwaan Krishna's example in the Gita). "By sravana, Knowledge dawns. That is the flame. By manana, the Knowledge is not allowed to vanish. Just as the flame is protected by a wind-screen, so the other thoughts are not allowed to overwhelm the right knowledge. By nididhyasana, the flame is kept up to burn bright by trimming the wick. Whenever other thoughts arise, the mind is turned inward to the light of true knowledge. When this becomes natural, it is samadhi." I agree with you that sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi as defined above is a description of a jnani. Perhaps solely due to my temperament and orientation, I still prefer the term jnanam/jnani/atmabodha, etc so as to avoid any confusion when talking about this. In my humble opinion this again underscores how important the shruti-pramana is, as terms not contained in the shruti and clearly defined by the shruti, become anyone's game, in a manner of speaking, to define, modify and classify. My pranams to Subbu-ji as well for his customary excellent clarifications and references. Shri Gurubhyo namah Shyam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Dear Advaitins, A brahmachari was interacting with an elderly respected monk. The monk is a scholar in sanskrit and knows the scriptures thoroughly. When asked about his realisation of the truths in the upanishads he humbly told it seems- I am unable to see the truth face to face. Probably i will go to brahmaloka after death attain illumination there. Is it not simple, nice and a honest reply? We are all progressing towards truth, but why we should torture texts, tell lies to oneself and others to convince that what we know everything under the sun and the beyond? The upanishads and the bhashyas of the acharyas of different philosophical thought is very absturse. Infact Swami Ashokananda who was a monk of Ramakrishna Order once opined it is rather impossible to know the real import of certain passages of the upanishads in modern times. In the scriptures it is said one should approach the teacher who is shrotriayma and brahmanishtam. Scholarship alone is not sufficient realisation is also required. In my humble opinion when we try to understand the upanishads and the bhashyam we should study the recent enlightened masters like Sri Ramana, Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda and tally with their experiecne and their statements. Then only we will be able to catch the spirit behind the upanishads and the bhashyams. One paragraph of sayings of Bhagavan Ramana or Sri Ramakrishna is more valuable than the 1000 hours of lecture by a scholar without spiritual attainment. Let me conclude with a story- Once a king was listening to a religious discourse daily from a pandit. after a long time the king told to his minister it seems. The teachings of the pundit is not causing any effect in me i do not know why. Then the next day the pandit was called to the court and minister tied both the king and the pundit to different pillar and said- Pundit remove the bondage of the king. Then the pundit told itseems, Dear Sir- i myself is bound and how can i remove the bondage of the king? The minister looked at the king and smiled :-) JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Pranams Shyam-ji > > I quote Pujya Guruji His Holiness Swami Dayananda-ji.. > You do not need a special experience like samadhi to > have an experience of yourself. It is enough to analye your > experiences in waking, dream and deep sleep." > Interesting. I don't know the full context in which this has been quoted but statements such as the one above were questioned way back in 2001 in a thread discussing the commentaries on the 6th chapter of Gita. Looks like we are going over the same territory again. Wonder if we have archives of those discussions. I don't want to go over all of it again but here is Sankara's direct statement from the commentary on the Brahma sutra "samadhy- abhavacca ": oupanishad atmapratipattiprayojanaha Samadhi upatishthahah vedantesu In the Upanishads, Samadhi is taught as the means for the (pratipatti) for the realization of the (oupanishada Atma) the atman that is known through the Upanishads alone As has been pointed by Sri Subbu-ji and others, Samadhi is not the only means, Vichara is also a valid means. regards Sundar Rajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Pranams Sri Subrahmanian-ji >> Often it is seen that those who take up cudgels against yoga are doing it more out of frustration of not being able to undertake the sadhana demanded by yoga, in my humble, considered, observed, opinion, and not out of any genuine devotion to Upanishadic system: Vedanta. Wherever the word `samadhi', `dhyana', `one- pointedness', ` control of senses and mind', etc. occur in the Upanishads, the Acharya's bhashyas and other minor texts, that becomes a source of uncomfortable disposition. Often some other meaning is sought to be given to these terms, just because the Acharya happens to use these. >> Brilliantly put. I admire your courage in bringing to light this much needed perspective. Temperamentally one may not be inclined towards the yoga path - that is a contributing reason for not being able to undertake yoga sadhana. // quote 'O Raghava! yoga and Jnana are the two paths leading to the dissolution of the mind: yoga consists in intercepting transformations of the mind, and Jnana in the proper viewing of things. To some yoga is unattainable, while to others is denied the capacity to judge aright;-hence, the Supreme Lord prescribed these two paths. // end quote Yoga Vasistha points this out. However the validity of one path does not invalidate the other path. >> In a subsequent post a presentation of the experience of Atman and various other aspects pertaining to Nirvikalpa Samadhi will be made. >> I am looking forward to this. Keep up the good work. regards Sundar Rajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2006 Report Share Posted August 28, 2006 Sadananda ji - Humble PraNams Please do not say sorry to me, you have every right to rebuke me. I will always take it smilingly. Just to clarify my point - To efface the ego a lot of sadhana is required.. Sadhana cannot be done properly just by reading scriptures, or discussing on a list. A personal guru is inevitable. (Even Adya Shankarachrya had to travel in search for a personal guru). Not everyone is destined to get a guru in present lifetime. One has to just keep doing good karmas, any sadhana (however improper) and keep purifying ones mind. It may take many lifetimes to get a guru and we should be prepared to wait patiently. Once we are ready we will definately get a Guru. Guru will identify the sadhana best suited and he will guide. Regarding Nirvikalpa samadhi, many verses from scriptures (e.g - vivekchudamani) can be quoted. I dont have them available now to quote them. Intellection and tarka do play a decisive role, but they are not the end in itself, I think. Too much of tarka without practicals is like a beautiful dead lady :-) Giving the example of Arjun and Sri Krishna - Listening the divine words of Srikrishna and seeing him through 'divya chakshu' did help Arjun to recover himself from depression and fight like a supre-hero, no doubt. But then he behvaed like a normal worldy man later in his life especially after the death of Sri Krishna. Why was that so? Arjun had the privilage to hear the divine words directly from the lord himself, above that he got the 'divya chakshu' to see the lord. All this had only a temporary effect on him. The reason I can understand is that the knowledge he gained by listening to Bhagvad Gita was not enough to efface out his ego (ahamkar). Please dont think otherwise, I have just clarified my position. I know you may not agree to some of the above points. In that case we will agree to dis-agree as ususal :-) PraNams Om tat-sat - Vishal kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada > wrote: Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 > Vinayaka-ji, It does seem that the study of vedanta is focussed much on shastra and intellect. But the reality is vedanta involves much larger practical side too. It involves tantras (e.g- sri vidya upasana), mantras and yantras. All this culminates in nirvikalpa samadhi. I dont think just by atma vichara one can attain that ultimate state of enlightenment (or moksha or release from birth-death cycle). Nirvikalpa samadhi (or Asamprajnyat samadhi) is absolute must. ----------------- Shree Vishal - PraNAms. I have no intension of getting into any arguments but would like to clarify from my understanding since your last statement is not what the scripture says. Shankara adhyAsa bhAShya is very clear. If ignorance is the root cause for the problem of samsaara, only knowledge is the antidote. Knowledge does not involve any thing other than knowing who I am. Hence it is not nirvikalpa samAdhi but nirvikalpa jnaanam which involves inquiry. Inquiry involves the mind - it is therefore not the absence of mind but mind that reached an understanding that one is beyond the thoughts in spite of thoughts present. Hence the amRita bindu Upanishad says: 'mana yeva manuShyAnAm kAraNam bandha moxayoH' - mind is the cause as well as means for the bondage and liberation. Nirvikalpa jnaana is the requirement and that becomes samaadhi - not thoughtless state- it is a state of understanding where one is beyond the thoughts, even while the thoughts are present. It is like seeing the water in and through the waves and not elimination of the wave to see the water. Vishal: Even Nirvikalpa samadhi is not the end, it is just the begenning. There is lot more ahead of it. One can come back from Nirvikalpa samadhi, get siddhis, live in many different planes of existence etc. But all that is not comprehensible for us lesser mortals. ------ KS: If I may say so - nirvikalpa samaadhi is neither beginning nor end - nor the acquiring the saddhis too. And it is comprehensible either since any comprehension is only conceptualization. It is because of which all comprehensions are possible and also notions that it beyond comprehensions too. It is the ever present existent self that I am. Nothing to do - nothing to gain but ever aware of the existent presence that I am with or without samAdhi or siddhiis. ---------------------- Vishal: Only way to achieve it to find a competent guru. KS: There is nothing to achieve it either - Those who are longing to achieve it will never get it since in the very longing one has missed what one is. Yes Guru is required to understand this correctly not to guide us to samAdhi. ------------------ Vishal: One has to be just patient and wait for the right time. That waiting period can be many years (often many lifetimes). KS: Sorry my friend - The truth of the matter is it is ever present and in the very present tense. Any notions that one has to wait patiently many years are unfortunately a misunderstanding of the very nature of the truth. The problem only is we are not paying attention to the present. We get carried away with the past or future but do not live in the present - the past and future is where Ego has invested and it is not letting us go. Hence all the SAdhana is meant for neutralizing the ego that feeds itself in the notion of past and future. It cannot be done by fighting it since in the very fighting one has given the strength to it. Hence surrenderance is the emphasis. The very notion that I have to wait will only strengthen and confirm the waiting part. What is required is to live with vigilance in the very present. Ego can be eliminated only by being aware of it - vigilantly. It cannot stand awareness. ---------------------------- Vishal: But one thing is sure - once one becomes ready (by good karmas through many lifetimes and ) , the guru himself will come to give diksha. KS: Yes that part is true. One is blessed with right Guru required for ones evolution when one is ready. Hence the message should be, prepare oneself to be ready right now - the teachings will sink in. Guru will come in many ways if one is attentive. Vishal: All these intellection and tarka wont be of much help. KS: The above statement is incorrect. It is the intellect that needs to be convinced before any SAdhana takes deep root. Hence Shankara emphasizes Viveka as the very first requirement for sAdhaka. Lord Krishna spend 700 slokas to teach Arjuna until is completely convinced. He could have just given a magic touch and things could have been solved. No it is the inquiry with the intellect by the intellect for the intellect. There is no other way knowledge will take place. ----------------------- Vishal: Hope I have not discouraged you, but that is the fact. KS: Vishalji - please forgive me if I have come out strong. The teaching of the scripture is beyond the personal opinions. Hence the emphasis on the analysis of the scriptural understanding. ---- Vishal: All the above views are my personal and I don’t intend to challenge, hurt or disapprove other's views. KS: I like your honesty. I agree with you that what I have stated is only my understanding of the scriptures. It is nothing to do with my personal aspect either. I am sure we are blessed with several scholars in this list and they may be able to give us better guidance and correct us if we are wrong. That is the purpose of this list. Hari Om! Sadananda Om Tat Sat - Vishal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2006 Report Share Posted August 28, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > > > > advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v@> > > wrote: > > > > > A look into the BrahmaSutra II.i.3 where the Yoga system is > refuted, > > > > Pranams subbu-ji > > > > "3. Thereby the Yoga (Smriti) is refuted. > > > This is how the link that you provided start. Are you reading in > it > > something in it I am not? > > There is nothing here that talks about nirvikalpa samadhi. > > Srigurubhyo NamaH > Namaste Shyam ji, > > > > The subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam are synonyms. > > I would request you to wait for a little more time till i post that > dialogue that i have promised. That will answer several questions on the subject. Srigurubhyo NamaH Namaste Shyam ji and Sunder Rajan ji, Reverting to the subject of our discussion, here is given the dialogue between Paramapujya Jagadguru Sri Abhinava Vidya Teertha Mahaswamiji, the 35th pontiff of the Sringeri Sharada Peetham and His disciple. This dialogue is especially unique in that the disciple who poses the questions is Himself an accomplished Yogi and Jnani. Normally in dialogues with Mahatmas, the questioner may not be an accomplished person and the replies sought and reported are likely to have an interference of the thinking and understanding of the questioner/reporter. This dialogue is free from such an eventuality. And therefore is immensely authentic and extremely rare of its kind. This has been excerpted from a book titled 'Exalting Elucidations' published by Sri Vidyateertha Foundation, Chennai. It contains several chapters, all in dialogue form, covering a variety of topics important to religion, shastras and sadhana. It is priced at an unbelievably subsidised rate of Rs. 50. With humble pranams at the Holy Feet of The Acharya and the Guru, subbu Om Tat Sat 29. NIRVIKALPA-SAMADHI D: Will one's breathing completely stop when one attains nirvikalpa- samadhi? A: No, breathing persists to a small extent. D: What is the characteristic of nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: The absence of awareness of the distinction of the seer, the seen and act of seeing is indeed its special characteristic. The Atman is clearly perceived. Further, supreme bliss is experienced. D: Will there actually be a positive experience of supreme bliss in nirvikalpa-samadhi or is there merely the absence of sorrow? A: There is not only the absence of sorrow but also the attainment of supreme bliss. Even in jaDa-Samadhi the bliss of the Atman is experienced but to a much lower degree. D: I heard that akhandakara- vrtti is present in nirvikalpa-samadhi. Acharyal said that there is no awareness of the distinctness of the seer, the seen and act of seeing in nirvikalpa-samadhi. If so, will the knowledge of akhandakara-vrtti be there in Samadhi? (Akhandakara-vrtti is a plenary mental activity having the Atman for the object.) A: No. When one is in the state of nirvikalpa-samadhi, one will not be aware of the presence of the akhandakara-vrtti. D: If so, how can it said that the akhandakara-vritti existed during nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: One can know that by means of inference and scriptural statements. If recollection is to arise, there should have been a preceding experience. When the mind comes down from nirvikalpa-samadhi, there is a memory to the effect that supreme bliss was experienced earlier. For the memory to be present there should have been an experience. If there is to be an experience connected with the mind, there should have been a thought. That mental vritti is called akhandakara-vrtti. D: An object is required for a thought to arise in the mind. What is the object of the akhandakara-vrtti? A: The Atman. D: When an object is perceived, the mind assumes its form. Only then does knowledge of the object arise. In dreams too, the mind assumes the form of what is seen, with the difference that the senses do not play a role. So, in both waking and dream states the vritti assumes the form of an object. Acharyal said that Atman alone is grasped by akhandakara-vrtti. How can atman become an object of the vrtti as it does not have a form at all? A: When it is said that the akhandakara-vrtti's object is the Atman, what is implied is that the mind is so extremely pure at that time it just cannot be discerned distinctly from Brahman. The mind is then like a pure crystal. The effulgent Atman manifests in it clearly. Just as a crystal, when placed in the vicinity of a red flower appears red, so also is the nature of the Atman assumed by the mind. This akhandakara-vrtti is the one that destroys ignorance. D: Will a single experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi be sufficient to attain bharma-jnana? A: Normally, it is not sufficient. During nirvikalpa-samadhi the Atman is experienced. After emergence from that state, the experience gradually begins to fade. However, just after coming down from it, everything is perceived as Atman. Nothing distinct from the Atman is discerned. To cite an example, one feels, "I am a big ocean. It is in me that the bubbles constituted by the world are produced." The experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi must be had to be understood. Verbal descriptions are woefully inadequate. If one gets the experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi repeatedly, one's Jnana becomes stable. After the realization becomes stable, the mind is destroyed and one becomes a jivanmukta. D: Why should one descend from nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: If prarabdha is not exhausted one is obliged to emerge even from nirvikalpa-samadhi. We can find different illustrations for this in the Yoga-vaisitha. D: Can one attain jnana without experiencing nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: Jnana is nothing but the knowledge of one's True nature. Technically, it can be obtained even through just Vichara (enquiry). Nirvikalpa-samadhi is a wonderful means but it is improper to say that it is the only means. D: During nirvikalpa-samadhi will there be an awareness of oneself and the surroundings? A: No. D: Can one be awakened from nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: In most cases, it can be done with some difficulty. Sometimes; it becomes almost impossible to wake one up. All this depends on the depth of the Samadhi. D: Can one predetermine the duration of one's stay in nirvikalpa- samadhi? A: Yes, if there is sufficient practice. If a suitable resolve is made, before going into Samadhi, one can descend from the exalted condition at the predetermined time. For example, if one thinks, "I will do puja in an hour", and goes into Samadhi, then one can come down from Samadhi after being in that state for exactly one hour. D: Will Acharyal kindly explain the experiences that precede the onset of nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: It is impossible to give a precise description and the steps preceding nirvikalpa-samadhi are not unique. However, I will give a rough account of what can happen. First, awareness of the body and the surroundings gradually vanishes. Then, only the thoughts of the mind are perceived. As meditation proceeds further, mental activity subsides. One feels, "I have become infinite like the sky." Then comes a great blissful experience. Ater this, there is a sudden change and awareness of the differentiation of the seer, the seen and the act of seeing ceases. That experience is completely beyond words. D: What is the procedure to be adopted to attain nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: Usually, nirvikalpa-samadhi can be attained if one repeatedly gets savikalpa-samadhi. D: Will the awareness of the distinction of the seer, the seen and the act of seeing cease in savikalpa- Samadhi also? A: No. It ceases only in nirvikalpa-samadhi. The term savikalpa- samadhi itself shows that this is a Samadhi with the distinction of the seer, seen and seeing present. D: Will the joy got in savikalpa-samadhi be the same as that in nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: No. the joy of nirvikalpa-samadhi is unparalleled. But it can be said that the happiness obtained in saviklpa-samadhi is very great when compared to the joy derived from sense-objects. D: Can it be said that liberation will definitely be had by one who arranges for his death in nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: It cannot be so. Moksha can be attained when jnana becomes thoroughly unobstructed and fructifies. If prarbdha remains and one arranges to have onself killed in Samadhi, rebirth can occur. D: Can it be said that if one dies while in nirvikalpa-samadhi, one can attain jnana easily in one's next birth? A: Yes. It may be said thus. D: Is there a possibility for one to fall from spiritual life even after attaining nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: Yes, there is the possibility for a fall, until complete, firm realization of the Truth arises. I have come across persons who have slipped after nirvikalpa-samadhi. D: Can nirvikalpa-samadhi be obtained by means of drugs, self- hypnosis, etc.? A: No. D: Is it possible to feel thirst, hunger etc., immediately after the mind comes down from prolonged nirvikalpa-samadhi? A: These are normally not felt. Rarely, a little body ache may be felt because of the body having remained erect and motionless for long. D: Will Acharyal say something about nirvikalpa-samadhi from personal experience? A: (Smiling) Do you think that all the while I was merely repeating like a parrot what is contained in the sastra-s? Incidents from Acharyal's Life Acharyal describes the event that marked his attainment of nirvikalpa-samadhi for the first time:(This event is recorded as the 15th of December 1935, Pournami, Tuesday. Acharyal, by then a Sannyasi for four years, was just 18 years of age on this day.) Before going for meditation, I decided, "I should, during My meditation this evening, prevent Myself from being overwhelmed by this bliss of Savikalpa-samadhi. Then, by impressing upon Myself that I am bliss itself and not one who enjoys it, I should focus My mind more thoroughly on the Atman. Once My mind were to become fully established on the Atman and devoid of every transformation of a form other than that of the Atman, how can any distinction between bliss and the one experiencing bliss or, for that matter, any other subject- object distinction and the sense of individuality show up at all? By establishing the mind on the Atman and remaining without any thought, I would be acting in accordance with the instruction, "One should gradually withdraw with the intellect endued with firmness; making the mind established in the Atman, one should not think of anything". (Bhagavadgita: VI.25) I reached My place of meditation on the hill around one and a half hours before sunset. Sitting in the Siddhasana, I performed two cycles of pranayama together with the jalandhara, uddiyana and mula bandha-s to promote mental tranquility. Then, as usual, I directed My gaze towards the centre of My brows and chanted the pranava. That day, I beheld an unbounded expanse of Blue, resembling the sky. The notion, "I am the non-dual Brahman apart from which nothing whatsoever exists" that was prominent and naturally persistent since the previous evening, had been intensified by My savikalpa-samadhi-s of the morning and by My reading and reflection of the afternoon. So, I did not have to cultivate it. I had barely seen the soothing expanse of blue when it vanished. I felt Myself expanding and becoming like space. The sense of `I' nearly vanished and My mind entered savikalpa-samadhi. The bliss was very great. However, with effort, I restrained Myself from being overwhelmed by it and thought, `I am not the one experiencing bliss but am bliss itself.' In a trice, a sharp change occurred. Awareness of the distinction of the concentrator, concentration and the object of concentration completely disappeared. No more was there any sense of individuality or of space, time and objects. Only Brahman, of the nature of absolute existence, pure consciousness and ultimate bliss, shone bereft of the superimposition of even a trace of duality. After about two hours, the mind descended to the level of savikalpa-samadhi, and mild awareness of the distinction of the concentrator, concentration and the object of concentration reappeared. Though the bliss of savikalpa-samadhi was by far grater than the joy of any worldly enjoyment, it was nothing compared to the absolute, non-dual bliss of nirvikalpa-samadhi. Gradually, I became lightly aware of the body and of the build up of breathing that must have almost totally stopped earlier. Experiences of devotees Acharyal could fathom the innermost recesses of his disciples' hearts and fulfil whatever aspirations the devotees had. For example, years ago, I had a stong desire to behold Acharyal in nirvikalpa-samadhi. I did not express my feelings to him but what can be hidden from the omniscient One? One day, He asked me to accompany Him to the Kalabhairava temple and there, He sat down for meditation. He asked me to sit close to Him and then remarked, "We will meditate". I saw His eyes close partially. Slowly, the heaving of His chest became slower and slower and soon, no trace of breathing was discoverable by me, though I was very close to him. He seemed to radiate peace. Suddenly, I felt a force dragging me into meditation. I too closed my eyes and my mind soared to the heights of concentration. I thought that a moment had elapsed before I was able to regain awareness of the body. I opened my eyes and observed Acharyal. Slowly, His breathing commenced and in a few moments He opened His eyes. Turning to the Kalabhairava idol, He called out the Lord's name and after prostrating, came out of the temple. Actually, over half-an-hour had elapsed. On coming out of the temple, he said, "Nirvikalpa-samadhi is very nice. Is it not?" thus, He had fulfilled my wish to behold him in that sublime state even prior to my expressing the desire. Of course, since then, I have been privileged to see Him on numerous occasions in that acme of medication, nirvikalpa-samadhi and to even photograph Him in Samadhi. {Sri.R.M.Umesh}. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2006 Report Share Posted August 28, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: I have been > privileged to see Him on numerous occasions in that acme of > medication, nirvikalpa-samadhi and to even photograph Him in Samadhi. Namaste, A typographical error went unnoticed by me. The word 'medication' is to be read as 'meditation'. The error is regretted. Subbu Om Tat Sat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2006 Report Share Posted August 28, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" > <subrahmanian_v@> wrote: > > > > > > > > advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" > <subrahmanian_v@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > A look into the BrahmaSutra II.i.3 where the Yoga system is > > refuted, > > > > > > Pranams subbu-ji > > > > > > "3. Thereby the Yoga (Smriti) is refuted. > > > > This is how the link that you provided start. Are you reading > in > > it > > > something in it I am not? > > > There is nothing here that talks about nirvikalpa samadhi. > > > > Srigurubhyo NamaH > > Namaste Shyam ji, > > > > > > > The subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam are synonyms. > > > > I would request you to wait for a little more time till i post that > > dialogue that i have promised. That will answer several questions > on the subject. > > Srigurubhyo NamaH > Namaste Shyam ji and Sunder Rajan ji, > > Reverting to the subject of our discussion, here is given the > dialogue between Paramapujya Jagadguru Sri Abhinava Vidya Teertha > Mahaswamiji, the 35th pontiff of the Sringeri Sharada Peetham and His > disciple. This dialogue is especially unique in that the disciple > who poses the questions is Himself an accomplished Yogi and Jnani. > Normally in dialogues with Mahatmas, the questioner may not be an > accomplished person and the replies sought and reported are likely to > have an interference of the thinking and understanding of the > questioner/reporter. This dialogue is free from such an > eventuality. And therefore is immensely authentic and extremely rare > of its kind. This has been excerpted from a book titled 'Exalting > Elucidations' published by Sri Vidyateertha Foundation, Chennai. It > contains several chapters, all in dialogue form, covering a variety > of topics important to religion, shastras and sadhana. It is priced > at an unbelievably subsidised rate of Rs. 50. > > With humble pranams at the Holy Feet of The Acharya and the Guru, > subbu > Om Tat Sat > > > > 29. NIRVIKALPA-SAMADHI > > D: Will one's breathing completely stop when one attains nirvikalpa- > samadhi? > > A: No, breathing persists to a small extent. > > D: What is the characteristic of nirvikalpa-samadhi? > > A: The absence of awareness of the distinction of the seer, the seen > and act of seeing is indeed its special characteristic. The Atman is > clearly perceived. Further, supreme bliss is experienced. Dear Subbuji, The experiences described by the acharya alomost tallies with the discription given by Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananada and his direct disciples. It is rightly said single experience of nirvikalpa samadhi is not sufficient to establish in brahmajnana. Even Swami Brahmananda a principal disciple of Sri Ramakrishna has also said the same. Being from place just 200 kms from Sringeri I have heard the greatness of earlier acharyas who spoke with the authority of the experience and not scholarship alone. They were great jnanis and yogis too. Its a nice coincidence that the thread is almost coming to conclusion by the comment of the Sringeri Jagadguru, the abbot of the first math established by the bhagavadpada. JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2006 Report Share Posted August 28, 2006 Dear Subbu-ji, Pranams. Thank you for sharing that wondrous account. My sashtang pranams to Paramapujya Jagadguru Sri Abhinava Vidya Teertha Mahaswamiji - what benevolence on His part to articulate for us ajnanis his profound experiences!! The following clearly emerge from the dialogue coming from His Holiness. 1. Nirvikalpa samadhi is not equated with jnanam 2. Nirvikalpa samadhi is a temporally bound state into which one enters and which one comes out of. It is described as supremely blissful no doubt, but a ajnani who enters it comes out a ajnani. 3. The Bliss one experiences in nirvikalpa samadhi while Supreme is still limited - once that experience is over the bliss is gone as well. 4. Jnanam is ever being established in the firm knowledge "aham brahmasmi". It is not to be confused with the bliss of a samadhi experience. 5. Attainment of nirvikalpa samadhi does not prevent rebirths or falling in spiritual progress. (IN fact in my humble opinion there may be a risk of getting attached to that bliss, given how profound it is, and lose sight of the goal or worse, confuse that with the goal itself.) 6. When a jnani like Swami Chinmayananda for example is giving a Gita talk he is not in nirvikalps samadhi, but he is ever established in jnanam. The knowledge that he is the whole is never absent, even though the nirvikalpa samadhi "bliss" may or may not be present. A sentence Sadanandaji used in his previous post to describe a jnanis attitude I found both profound and beautiful - "Thus I am aware of the apparent duality in the mind (the subject-object duel existence) but I am undifferentiable existence that supports the apparent" Any thirst for a blissful experience is a thirst for an experience alone - just because it happens to be for something Divine or Exalted does not change that - atmavichara is not thirsting for any experience - it is an intense longing for realizing my true nature - once and for all, and ending my false sense of separation from the whole. A profound experience in bhakti may perhaps give you less bliss than a savikalpa samadhi which in turn gives you less bliss than nirvikalpa samadhi - anytime there is gradation, where is the Absolute? His Holiness Swami Tapovan-ji, Swami Chinmayananda-jis Guru-Divine, and one of the foremost jnanis of our time has described so many situations of enduring hardships in his books Ishwara Darshan and Kailash Yatra (- 2 books I would highly recommend for all vedantins where we have a accomplished jnani by virtue of extraordinary mercy give us a detailed account of his travels and life experiences). Let us say for example that while walking in the Himalayas a thorn pierces the foot of His Holiness. Does he have an experience of pain? Of course he does. His experience of pain at that moment is nothing related to an experience of nirvikalpa samadhi. But that experiential pain does not for a moment, for a nanosecond, take away from the jnani his fullness, his sense of being complete, his firm knowledge that He is everything and the experiencer of the pain is his body and mind alone, which He himself supports and sustains. He can simply allow that painful experience to come, and then to go, without it disturbing his equipoise or equanimity. The reason I, a humble seeker, am committing the aparadham of belabouring this point is not to establish or prove a position - it is simply to clarify the goal and not confuse the goal with the means or some other destination points which may or may not come about along the way - this in my humble opinion, is very important for a seeker to understand very well. Lord Krishna in the Gita in describing a jnani - he uses ther term gunateetah in Ch 14 has this to say prakasam ca pravrttim ca moham eva ca pandava na dvesti sampravrttani na nivrttani kanksati udasina-vad asino gunair yo na vicalyate guna vartanta ity evam yo 'vatisthati nengate sama-duhkha-sukhah sva-sthah sama-lostasma-kancanah tulya-priyapriyo dhiras tulya-nindatma-samstutih manapamanayos tulyas tulyo mitrari-paksayoh sarvarambha-parityagi gunatitah sa ucyate Let us examine the words - who regards alike "pleasure and pain" - a sweet dish will give him a sukha - good experience and a thorn in his foot will give him dukha - a bad experience - but He realizes these are at the level of the body, not for the Self, the atman, in which he is firmly and permanently established. So the "bliss" of a jnani is not to be mistaken for an experiential bliss in my humble opinion - it is an abiding sense of completeness. This cognition of ones own completeness, of being desireless, of having put to death the wanting ego-sense, is far greater than all the experential blisses put together. Once again my pranams to you for blessing us with the pleasure of reading this intimate dialogue, and for the descriptions of your wonderful interactions with your Guru Divine. Shri Gurubhyo namah Shyam --- subrahmanian_v <subrahmanian_v > wrote: > advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" > <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > > > > > > > advaitin, > "subrahmanian_v" > <subrahmanian_v@> > > > wrote: > > Srigurubhyo NamaH > > Namaste Shyam ji, > > > > > > > The subject is if nirvikalpa samadhi and jnanam > are synonyms. > > > > I would request you to wait for a little more time > till i post that > > dialogue that i have promised. That will answer > several questions > on the subject. > > Srigurubhyo NamaH > Namaste Shyam ji and Sunder Rajan ji, > > Reverting to the subject of our discussion, here is > given the > dialogue between Paramapujya Jagadguru Sri Abhinava > Vidya Teertha > Mahaswamiji, the 35th pontiff of the Sringeri > Sharada Peetham and His > disciple. This dialogue is especially unique in > that the disciple > who poses the questions is Himself an accomplished > Yogi and Jnani. > D: Will a single experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi be > sufficient to > attain bharma-jnana? > > A: Normally, it is not sufficient. During > nirvikalpa-samadhi the > Atman is experienced. After emergence from that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 advaitin, Shyam <shyam_md wrote: > > Dear Subbu-ji, > > Pranams. > Thank you for sharing that wondrous account. > My sashtang pranams to Paramapujya Jagadguru Sri > Abhinava Vidya Teertha Mahaswamiji - what benevolence > on His part to articulate for us ajnanis his profound > experiences!! > > The following clearly emerge from the dialogue coming > from His Holiness. > > 1. Nirvikalpa samadhi is not equated with jnanam > > 2. Nirvikalpa samadhi is a temporally bound state into > which one enters and which one comes out of. It is > described as supremely blissful no doubt, but a ajnani > who enters it comes out a ajnani. Dear Sir, It is really sad thing and due to your intellectual arrogance you are again and again making such statements. Has not subbuji showed sufficient reasons the benifit given by this state? Sri Ramana Maharashi/Sri Ramakrishna has definetly said that nirvikalpa state is certainly inferior to the state of Sahaja samadhi where the mind is destroyed totally and one is firmly established in brahman always which is true state of a jnani not otherwise. Jnanam is not the book knowledge which can be got by reading scriptures say for 3-5 years. Jnani is a siddha a brahmajnani who knows beyond doubt that everything is brahman. State of mind of a person emrging from nirvikapla samdhi is far far better than the normal state of mind of mediocore sadhakas like us. Born siddhas like Ramana Maharshi, Swami Vivekananda had to struggle so much for realising the truth/coming to truth face to face and then what to say about us? Even the acharya has said that nirvikalpa samadhi is not sine qua non for realisation but still why you are decrying such an exalted state i do not understand. Fanaticism without realisation will only degenerate the mind thats all. Swami Vivekananda has rightly said Furthermore, this is a most vital point to understand, that inspiration is as much in every man's nature as it was in that of the ancient prophets. These prophets were not unique; they were men as you or I. They were great Yogis. They had gained this superconsciousness, and you and I can get the same. They were not peculiar people. The very fact that one man ever reached that state, proves that it is possible for every man to do so. Not only is it possible, but every man must, eventually, get to that state, and that is religion. Experience is the only teacher we have. We may talk and reason all our lives, but we shall not understand a word of truth, until we experience it ourselves. You cannot hope to make a man a surgeon by simply giving him a few books. You cannot satisfy my curiosity to see a country by showing me a map; I must have actual experience. Maps can only create curiosity in us to get more perfect knowledge. Beyond that, they have no value whatever. Clinging to books only degenerates the human mind. Was there ever a more horrible blasphemy than the statement that all the knowledge of God is confined to this or that book? How dare men call God infinite, and yet try to compress Him within the covers of a little book! Millions of people have been killed because they did not believe what the books said, because they would not see all the knowledge of God within the covers of a book. Of course this killing and murdering has gone by, but the world is still tremendously bound up in a belief in books. I agree with you so far that faith is a wonderful insight and that it alone can save; but there is the danger in it of breeding fanaticism and barring further progress. Jnana is all right; but there is the danger of its becoming dry intellectualism. ------------ I am really sorry to say about this. JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 Dear Sir, It is really sad thing and due to your intellectual arrogance you are again and again making such statements. Has not subbuji showed sufficient reasons the benifit given by this state? praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji Hare Krishna Kindly pardon me for my intervention...In my humble opinion, what Sri shyam prabhuji observed from Sri Subbu prabhuji's posting is absolutely right....Kindly let us know where he has shown *intellectual arrogance* while describing the role of *nirvikalpa samAdhi* in obtaining Atma jnAna....whatever he said in his mail is just a summary of what HH Sri Abhinava VidhyatIrtha had said to his desciple. In short, Atma jnAna as described by shankara is not the knowledge of *absence* of any vyavahAra & sitting in an exalted state hours together...Atma jnAna is eternal & everlasting for a jnAni & noway it is a *time bound* temporary experience like samAdhi. So, let us not mix patanjala yOga's samAdhi experience with that of shruti pratipAdita brahma jnAna. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar PS: I had written my thoughts about the role of Nirvikalpa samAdhi in advaita vEdAnta sometime back (last year !!?? not sure) , I am searching for the relevant mails in my mail box but could not find it...Since I dont have internet access in PC, I request the members to search for the same in the archieves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote: > > > Dear Sir, > > It is really sad thing and due to your intellectual arrogance you > are again and again making such statements. Has not subbuji showed > sufficient reasons the benifit given by this state? > > praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji > Hare Krishna > > Kindly pardon me for my intervention...In my humble opinion, what Sri shyam > prabhuji observed from Sri Subbu prabhuji's posting is absolutely > right....Kindly let us know where he has shown *intellectual arrogance* > while describing the role of *nirvikalpa samAdhi* in obtaining Atma > jnAna....whatever he said in his mail is just a summary of what HH Sri > Abhinava VidhyatIrtha had said to his desciple. Dear Bhaskarji, Pranams, Acharya has said, D: Will a single experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi be sufficient to attain bharma-jnana? A: Normally, it is not sufficient. During nirvikalpa-samadhi the Atman is experienced. After emergence from that state, the experience gradually begins to fade. However, just after coming down from it, everything is perceived as Atman. Nothing distinct from the Atman is discerned. To cite an example, one feels, "I am a big ocean. It is in me that the bubbles constituted by the world are produced." The experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi must be had to be understood. Verbal descriptions are woefully inadequate. **If one gets the experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi repeatedly, one's Jnana becomes stable. After the realization becomes stable, the mind is destroyed and one becomes a jivanmukta.** Shyamji writes: 2. Nirvikalpa samadhi is a temporally bound state into which one enters and which one comes out of. It is described as supremely blissful no doubt, but a ajnani who enters it comes out a ajnani. --------------- Is it not absurd to the core.Is he not contradicting the mahatma who is speaking out of his EXPERIENCE? Does Shyamji means to say that acharya states that repeated experiecne of ignorence leads to stabalising the jnana and one becomes established in jnana? Acharya has clearly said that single experience of samadhi is not sufficient because of storng influence of samskaras. If by repeated experience of nirvikalpa samadhi samskaras are totally burnt does it not lead to establishment of atman whether he is in nirvikalpa of working? Discussions are welcome. Fanaticism can come where there is an attempt to hide the truth for one reason for the other. JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji Hare Krishna I hope Sri Shyam prabhuji would clear his stand about your observation. In the meanwhile kindly permit me to share my part of thoughts : vinayaka prabhuji: **If one gets the experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi repeatedly, one's Jnana becomes stable. After the realization becomes stable, the mind is destroyed and one becomes a jivanmukta.** Acharya has clearly said that single experience of samadhi is not sufficient because of storng influence of samskaras. If by repeated experience of nirvikalpa samadhi samskaras are totally burnt does it not lead to establishment of atman whether he is in nirvikalpa of working? bhaskar : swAmy vidyAraNya says in his famous work jIvanmuktiviveka that brahmajnAna and jIvanmukti are not synonymous terms, since the latter requires vAsanAkshaya whereas the former does not!! Anyway that is a different issue altogether & let us not discuss it right now. Now, coming back to Atma jnAna & its maintenance, I dont think it is in line with shankara siddhAnta...this repeated sustenance of Atma jnAna is called prasaNkhyAna vAda & does not hold water in case of brahma jnAni. Because shruti says *bhidyatE hrudaya graNthiM chidyaNte sarvasaMshayaH*..after the dawn of knowledge, the jnAni does not have to * sustain* this Atma jnAna through repeated experiences of some *supernatural state* since he is secondless brahman himself & there is not even an iota of doubt in this jnAna...For that matter where is the kartru (doer) bhAva in jnAni who has the willingness to maintain that jnAna?? In kAtaka shruti it is mentioned that * yadA sarvE pramuchyantE kAmA yEsyahyadi shritA:! atha marthyOmrutO bhavatyatra brahmasamaSNutE!! When you get the ultimate liberation from avidyA kAma you will realise brahman here itself. It does not say, you will attain brahman *after the supernatural experience* in samAdhi, tattvamasi has been asserted with regard to our natural state not for some other state which we gained through purusha tantra is it not prabhuji?? *brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati* declares muNdaka shruti but it does not anyway mean that you will become brahman gradually by repeated experience of some supernatural state like nirvikalpa samAdhi!! First of all why the brahma jnAni need a stabilization of his jnAna when he is brahman itself?? Is there any distinction between jnAtru, jnEya & jnAna in a brahma jnAni/brahma?? Infact, bhagavadpAda is the first to argue that nothing needs to be done once jnAna has fully dawned. Indeed, he also says that after mukti, there is no more individual, so there can be nobody who can stabilize anything. After the dawn of kEvala jnAna a jnAni's doership /enjoyership (katrutva/bhOktrutva) will be completely eradicated since this state is sarva pramAtru, pramANAtIta vyavahAra (or we can say sublated duality (bhAdita vyavahAra). This maintenance work will be taken care by itself *automatically* without any sustained effort (injuction/vidhi) from jnAni. Here point to be noted is AtmajnAna is not the result of sitting inert, stilling mind (through deliberate suppression / oppression of thought flow..chitta vrutti nirOdha) & experiencing some *lokAtIta* bliss, it is his own swarUpa realised by apt student through mere shravaNa of shruti vAkyA & in other cases subsequent process of manana & nidhidhyAsana...but this nidhidhyAsana can noway be compared with that of patanjali's ashtAnga yOga's 7th limb *dhyAna* & 8th limb samAdhi...but it is adhyAtma yOga/jnAna born out of *shAstra vichAra* nirNaya which has been beautifully explained in kathOpanishat. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 Namaste Sri Shyam-ji, > Nirvikalpa samadhi is a temporally bound state into > which one enters and which one comes out of. It is > described as supremely blissful no doubt, but a ajnani > who enters it comes out a ajnani. > (1) Shravana, Manana, Nidhidhyasana, Vichara and in fact all Sadhanas are in the realm of time and hence temporary AND a person who enters them as a ajnani comes out as a ajnani. Except for the final awakening and this final awakening can be the result of N.S also. This being the case why single out and downplay N.S? (2) Sadanandji brought out a very good point recently: >> It is the intellect that needs to be >> convinced before any SAdhana takes deep root. Keep this in mind and let us objectively look at Sri Sankara's description of the Highest Samadhi from the Katha Upanishad mantra 'yadaa paJNchaavatishhThante GYaanaani manasaa saha' // quote He indeed (ethasyam) (hyaVasthayamÂ) in this (Avastha) state (Atma) the Atman (Svarupa prathistayam) established in its own nature (Avidyaropavarjita) bereft of the superimposition of Avidya // end quote Here is a simple question. After being 'established in his own nature bereft of the superimposition of Avidya' (Sankara's own words) does a Sadhaka's intellect have (A) less conviction (B) no change in his conviction © more conviction Should be obvious to anyone that N.S. is a supreme help in the Nidhidhyasana process. regards Sundar Rajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 advaitin, Shyam <shyam_md wrote: > > Dear Subbu-ji, > > Pranams. > > The following clearly emerge from the dialogue coming > from His Holiness. > > 1. Nirvikalpa samadhi is not equated with jnanam > > 2. Nirvikalpa samadhi is a temporally bound state into > which one enters and which one comes out of. It is > described as supremely blissful no doubt, but a ajnani > who enters it comes out a ajnani. > > 3. The Bliss one experiences in nirvikalpa samadhi > while Supreme is still limited - once that experience > is over the bliss is gone as well. > > 4. Jnanam is ever being established in the firm > knowledge "aham brahmasmi". It is not to be confused > with the bliss of a samadhi experience. > > 5. Attainment of nirvikalpa samadhi does not prevent > rebirths or falling in spiritual progress. (IN fact in > my humble opinion there may be a risk of getting > attached to that bliss, given how profound it is, and > lose sight of the goal or worse, confuse that with the > goal itself.) Namaste Shyam ji, Thanks for your response. The main purpose of my posting that Dialogue is to clear the misconceptions that were vociferously articulated in this discussion: (a)Atma Jnanam does not require a separate, specific experience. (b)Nirvikalpa Samadhi is experienced in the Anandamaya kosha. ©This is purely yoga shastra (d)This is no different from deep sleep The above dialogue addresses all these abundantly. Again, if what you have observed is the conclusion you have arrived at after perusing the Dialogue, let me beg your permission to convey my point through a joke that Pujya Swami Paramarthananda Saraswati said in one of his classes: Someone said after attending elaborate classes on the Gita that he had understood the gist of the entire Gita teaching. When asked to specify, he said: The Gita teaching is this: Paanchajanyam Hrishikesho devadattam DhananjayaH.. Enough of the joke. The observation of yours bears a very sad commentary to the capability of Bhagavan Sri Krishna as the Adhyaatma Guru. Let me quote from the Gita Chapter 2, verse 53: The second line of the verse is: samaadhau achalaa buddhiH tadA yogam avApsyasi The bhashya in part is: when your buddhi......shall stand firm, without distraction and doubt, in the Self (Samadhi), then you will attain Yoga, samadhi, ie., the knowledge which arises from discrimination. The Acharya's words are: ...nischalaa vikshepachalana-varjitaa satii samaadhau = smaadhiiyate chittam asminniti samaaadhiH Atma tasminnaatmani ityetat. (Oh! what a wonderful Vedantic definition of Samadhi: The resolving of the unidstracted mind in Atma is samadhi) achalaa tatraapi vikalpavarjitaa ityetat. (There also, the mind is free from vikalpa. One commentator states this to be nirvikalpa. tadaa tasmin kaale yogam = vivekaprajnaam samaadhim praapsyasi. Madhusudani writes: then at that time one attains the yoga which is characterised by jiva-paramaatma aikyam born of the mahavakya tat tvam asi through the akhanda saakshaatkaara. The next verse, a question by Arjuna stems from the earlier verse: He asks : sthitaprajnasya kaa bhaashaa, samaadhisthasya keshava. The Acharya writes: samaadhau sthitasya. The one who is established in Atman. In the sixth chapter verse 19,20 the concentrated state of mind of the aspirant is spoken of by Bhagavan. The Acharya used the words samadhi in these verses, as we saw earlier. The Acharya introduces the verse 20 thus: Evam yogaabhyaasa-balaat-ekaagrii- bhuutam..chittam..Thus, in the manner of practices detailed in the several earlier verses, the mind becomes one-pointed. The analogy of a lamp was given in 19. When due to the practice, the mind attains concentration, then the aspirant gets the vision of the Atma. The acharya says: by the mind that has been purified by samadhi. The gita says: tushyati. He sees the atman and derives happiness. In the next verse: sukham aatyantikam vetti. He experiences supreme bliss. Now the question is: If samadhi is a 'loop' into which one goes as an ajnaani and emerges out as an ajnaani, will the Lord teach this purposeless practice to an aspirant? The Lord clearly says that by this practice one attains the direct realization of the Atman. And, the Bliss that he attains is also not something trivial as you have made it out to be. It is not some cheap thing longed for by worldly ignorant people. It is the Supreme Parama Purushartha Ananda that the Lord is promising through this verse. You have said: > Any thirst for a blissful experience is a thirst for > an experience alone - just because it happens to be > for something Divine or Exalted does not change that - > atmavichara is not thirsting for any experience - it > is an intense longing for realizing my true nature - > once and for all, and ending my false sense of > separation from the whole. > > A profound experience in bhakti may perhaps give you > less bliss than a savikalpa samadhi which in turn > gives you less bliss than nirvikalpa samadhi - anytime > there is gradation, where is the Absolute? Reply: The ultimate purpose of any sadhana is, as the shastra says: niratishaya-ananda-prapti. or attainment of unsurpassed, unaalloyed bliss. This is the definition of Moksha. It is because all other joys available through the other three purusharthas are mixed with sorrow. This moksha ananda is what is longed by everyone. This is what the Upanishad enables one to attain. The second chapter of the Taittiriya is called Anandavalli. There a calculus of ananda starting from the sensory to the special-sensory is mentioned. The Ananda of the Parabrahman is beyond this and is infinite. The Taittiriya says: Anandam Brahmano vidwan, na bibheti kutaschaneti. He who contacts this Ananda fears from nothing. It is this Ananda that the Lord says will be attained by the Yogi through Atma Jnana. The Dialogue that we read is a real life example of the teaching of the Gita. > > So the "bliss" of a jnani is not to be mistaken for an > experiential bliss in my humble opinion - it is an > abiding sense of completeness. This cognition of ones > own completeness, of being desireless, of having put > to death the wanting ego-sense, is far greater than > all the experential blisses put together. Reply: I remember a very beautiful observation made by Swami Paramarthananda ji in his Kathopanishad classes: The Guru Yamadharmaraja did not want to give the Atma jnanam teaching to Nachiketas straightaway. He wanted to test the student's capacity to receive it. This is important because, even if the teaching is not understood, there is not much loss. But if the teaching is misunderstood and propagated by that person in society, the pure teaching will be subdued and only the wrong teaching will go round as the teaching. This is a disastrous situation. So, Yamadharmaraja wanted to avoid this. (unquote) In my humble opinion, ironically, this is what exactly has happened. Over several decades teachings like: An experience is not required for Atma jnanam, Nirvikalpa samadhi is not required for Atma jnanam, and several other things connected to this have gone round as Vedanta. To a person who has been exposed to the traditional teaching of the Upanishads with Acharya's bhashyam, this kind of teaching is immediately discernible as something basically incorrect. So, to right something that has been propagated over several decades, on a mass basis, through the medium of some exchanges like what we are having, is an impossible task. I conclude this discussion, at least from my side, by recounting a remark made by a friend. He is a doctorate and a Professor in an Engineering College. He has over two decades of exposure to Vedanta as it is traditionally taught. He remarked: One difficulty with egroup discussions is that you do not know the background of the person to whom you are talking. You do not know what to say, how much to say and how to say. Often such discussions end up with no real learning coming through. > Once again my pranams to you for blessing us with the > pleasure of reading this intimate dialogue, and for > the descriptions of your wonderful interactions with > your Guru Divine. > > > Shri Gurubhyo namah > Shyam > Shyam ji, kindly note that the post concerning the dialogue and experiences do not have me in them. The disciple is not me there. I have just reported these to clarify certain points. Humble pranams and Thanks for engaging in this discussion, subbu Om Tat Sat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 > Here point to be noted is AtmajnAna is not the result of sitting inert, > stilling mind (through deliberate suppression / oppression of thought > flow..chitta vrutti nirOdha) & experiencing some *lokAtIta* bliss, it is > his own swarUpa realised by apt student through mere shravaNa of shruti > vAkyA & in other cases subsequent process of manana & nidhidhyAsana...but > this nidhidhyAsana can noway be compared with that of patanjali's ashtAnga > yOga's 7th limb *dhyAna* & 8th limb samAdhi...but it is adhyAtma yOga/jnAna > born out of *shAstra vichAra* nirNaya which has been beautifully explained > in kathOpanishat. Dear Bhaskarji, Namaskaragalu, During nirvikalpa-samadhi the Atman is experienced. ------------------- Pls note that here the acharya is saying that he perceived the ataman not postulated. Nothing distinct from the Atman is discerned. ------------------------------ After emergence from that state, the experience gradually begins to fade. ***However, just after coming down from it, everything is perceived as Atman. Nothing distinct from the Atman is discerned. To cite an example, one feels, "I am a big ocean. It is in me that the bubbles constituted by the world are produced."***** The experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi must be had to be understood. Verbal descriptions are woefully inadequate. If one gets the experience of nirvikalpa-samadhi repeatedly, one's Jnana becomes stable. After the realization becomes stable, the mind is destroyed and one becomes a jivanmukta. -------------------------- This paragraph shows that there is an experience of oneness. Can u feel that oneness now? This was a matter of experience for the acharya. It is said that by repeated process of N.S. or proper nidhidhyasanam the mind will become so pure that it becomes alomost identical with the self. Susequently when one continues say either in N.S. or in nidhidhyasanam it is destroyed completely. Acharya himself says that the experience starts FADING. Which all the sages who attained nirvikalpa state opined. By repeated practice mind is made so pure and ultimately destoryed and the state of sahaja is obtained. Sri Ramakrishna has said pure buddhi and atman are one and the same. This is how the ancient sages arrived at truth. Not by postulation and eulogy but by FACTUAL EXPERIENCE. Pray do not take samadhi as the samadhi described in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Dont you feel the discription given here tallies with advaitc realisation where one springs into many? Efficacy of patanjala yoga sutras as an independent menas to realisation is an entire different topic altogether in which i have lot of reservations. Let us keep it aside for the time being. JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA, Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 Dear Bhaskarji, Namaskaragalu, Humble praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji Hare Krishna Little bit free time at office...hope you wont mind if I stretch this discussion farther:-)) V prabhuji: During nirvikalpa-samadhi the Atman is experienced. bhaskar : if the Atman is an *experience* in samAdhi, then it is like any subject-ogject experience & more importantly in this experience, a jnAtru who is *experiencing* this, should be somewhere there who is still to be known is it not prabhuji?? Hence knowledge gained through *experience of Atman* in nirvikalpa samAdhi may not be complete in its totality coz. experiencer standing outside & experiencing this experience!!. Otherwise, there is no way a nirvikalpa samAdhi experiencer can come back to this empirical world. I think upanishad ask us to find out about this jnAtru/experience by doing shAstra/brahma jignAsa. If Atman was experienced in samadhi, then that experience is not important, but the experiencer/jnAtru who is experiencing this is!! Because bliss cannot be without the bhOktru. So, knowing the bhOktru & his true nature is the aim of realisation, this is what upanishads are crying at the top of its voice. V prabhuji: This paragraph shows that there is an experience of oneness. Can u feel that oneness now? bhaskar : According to shankara, a jnAni is always intuitively established himself in *oneness* without experiencing the time/space bound restrictions...his jnAna is *dEsha & kAla atIta jnAna*...if the jnAni's *oneness* experience is *time bound* & restricted to one particular state ( in this case samAdhi) then it_is_not advaita paramArtha jnAna. V prabhuji: It is said that by repeated process of N.S. or proper nidhidhyasanam the mind will become so pure that it becomes alomost identical with the self. Susequently when one continues say either in N.S. or in nidhidhyasanam it is destroyed completely. Acharya himself says that the experience starts FADING. Which all the sages who attained nirvikalpa state opined. By repeated practice mind is made so pure and ultimately destoryed and the state of sahaja is obtained. bhaskar : But I am not able to understanding this sustained *effort* to maintain jnAna...As I said in my earlier mail, jnAni is nothing but brahman (brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati) under these circumstances, who will be there to do prasankhyAna or who will be there to put efforts & towards what?? And another question also crops up here "Is any *human effort* (purusha taNtra) required to maintain vastu taNtra Atma jnAna?? If yes, can we modify this *result* by changing our effort?? I dont think there is any modification possible in avicchinna Atma jnAna... So, IMHO, the knowledge (paramArtha jnAna) one has already gained does not call for sustained effort to maintain since after realisation even vedAs are no vedAs then where is the question of injuction to a jnAni?? V prabhuji: Pray do not take samadhi as the samadhi described in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Dont you feel the discription given here tallies with advaitc realisation where one springs into many? bhaskar : Thanks for admitting that Advaita jnAna is not equal to patanjali's asaMprajnathA samAdhi jnAna. Since shankara himself categorically says that yOga shAstra is the dvaita shAstra...According to patanjala's yOga sUtra *asaMprajnAtha samAdhi or nirbIja samAdhi* is equal to absolute realisation or ultimate goal of the yOga aspirant. Though one can say *nirvikalpa* is a doubtless state or represents the equilibrium of mental state, it is not clear that the person who comes out from this state is a saMpUrNa (complete) jnAni (even in Acharya's dialogue it is not evident). Ofcourse, we do know that in deep sleep state also there is no doubts, no mind etc.!! Still it is not considered as paramArtha. First of all, it is not clear either, how a person who was in nirvikalpa samAdhi wherein there is no avidya (if at all we consider nirvikalpa samAdhi as an ultimate state in advaitic realisation & there is no bIja rUpa avidya or kAraNAvidyA ) can come back to this avidyAkruta prapaNcha!! V prabhuji: Efficacy of patanjala yoga sutras as an independent menas to realisation is an entire different topic altogether in which i have lot of reservations. Let us keep it aside for the time being. bhaskar : We can never ever downplay the efficacy of PY, the first five limbs of PY i.e. yama, niyama, Asana, praNAyAma & pratyAhAra have been adopted in advaita sAdhana & recommended by bhagavadpAda himself...but the interpretation of last three limbs that dhAraNa, dhyAna & samAdhi are drastically differs from traditional understanding of PY. If samAdhi is also one of the valid means of knowledge as you said above, then how many valid means are there?? then how can we treat only *shAstra pramANa* as ultimate?? prabhuji, as we know, the root cause of saMsAra is anAdi avidyA to eradicate this avidyA the ONLY potent tool is ShAstra janya jnAna nothing else. I donot think shankara anywhere compromising on this issue & offering substitute & says nirvikalpa samAdhi is also one of the valid means!!. But, yes, as you said, this is not the right time for the discussion of all those things...Let us look into those points at the later stage. Till then.... Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2006 Report Share Posted August 29, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > (a)Atma Jnanam does not require a separate, specific experience. > (b)Nirvikalpa Samadhi is experienced in the Anandamaya kosha. > ©This is purely yoga shastra > (d)This is no different from deep sleep ------------------------- > In my humble opinion, ironically, this is what exactly has happened. > Over several decades teachings like: An experience is not required > for Atma jnanam, Nirvikalpa samadhi is not required for Atma jnanam, > and several other things connected to this have gone round as > Vedanta. To a person who has been exposed to the traditional > teaching of the Upanishads with Acharya's bhashyam, this kind of > teaching is immediately discernible as something basically > incorrect. So, to right something that has been propagated over > several decades, on a mass basis, through the medium of some > exchanges like what we are having, is an impossible task. I conclude > this discussion, at least from my side, by recounting a remark made > by a friend. He is a doctorate and a Professor in an Engineering > College. He has over two decades of exposure to Vedanta as it is > traditionally taught. He remarked: One difficulty with egroup > discussions is that you do not know the background of the person to > whom you are talking. You do not know what to say, how much to say > and how to say. Often such discussions end up with no real learning > coming through. Dear Subbuji, As a serious student of advaita vedanta i have carefully observed the behaviour of the so called modern brahmajnanis. They are propogating the views quoted as above by you. This is being done systematically by torturing texts of the upanishads and the shankara bhashyam. Especially couple of Vedantic Institutions, I do not want to name them. These are done to avoid the questions by the students like: 1. Have you realised the self? 2. Have you dwelt in nirvikalpa or heigher level of existence? 3. What is the practical method of coming to truth face to face? These bookworms are telling all sorts of lies to their students and as said in the upanishads a blind man leading the blind both are falling into the ditch. One hour of lecture every week, reapeating gita and upanishads like parrots and completing the study of prastanatraya in 3-5 years are the means to brahmajnana!! You know these students are trained in such a way that if such things called samadhi or heigher levels of mind are brought to their notice they will outrightly consider them as the hallucinations of mind or some queer things. Well, as you have said this cannot be corrected as it has been propogated in the mass scale. I am also thinking to pause for some time as i have given considerable time/energy to this useful/useless? discussions. My only sincere desire was that to bring these points to limelight so that we can think on it for some time. JAI JAI RAGHUVEER SAMARTHA Yours in the lord, Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.