The Three States and their objects

[Guest guest]

Of all the posts on this thread , this post appealed to me the most -

not only because of the way in which it was penned but also because

i felt in my heart of hearts the presence of 'Self' discussing

the 'Self '- not the 'Non-self' discussing the 'Self' ! There were

no angry words , there were no harsh judgements , there was no

ridicule only Truth asserting itself ! A wake up call , so to speak!

 

Ananda-ji writes :

 

( True knowing is that consciousness which does not change, and never

disappears. It does not change when different objects seem perceived

by waking body or conceived by dreaming mind. Nor does it disappear

when changing objects cease to be perceived by body or conceived by

mind; so that an unconsciousness of objects seems to remain in depth

of sleep or in the timeless interval between successive states of

thought and feeling.

 

If that 'unconsciousness' or 'ignorance' of objects is examined

carefully, it turns out to be nothing else but consciousness itself,

staying always unaffected through all its apparent veiling: by

body's world of objects in the waking state, by dreaming mind's

imaginings, and by the peace and happiness of dreamless sleep.)

 

Wow! Ananda-ji!

 

After reading this i was reminded of the following passage from

Brihadaryanka upanishad

 

salila eko drastadvaito bhavati, esa brahmalokah, samrad iti. hainam

anusasasa yajnavalkyah; esasya parama gatih, esasya parama sampat,

eso'sya paramo lokah, eso'sya parama anandah;

estasyaivanandasyanyani bhutani matram upajivanti.

 

Swami Krishnanda explains this passage thus :

 

 

"But where there is only an ocean of experience in which all the

bubbles of objects have immersed themselves in their unity with the

body of the ocean - salila eko drasta, where it is like a vast

expense of consciousness merely, single in its nature, Seer alone

without a duality, where only the Experiencer exists without an

object that is experienced, there what would one speak about and to

what one would speak and what is there to be seen, what is there to

be touched, what is there to be sensed? Yajnavalkya thus teaches

King Janaka : "Please listen to me. You have reached the state of

the Absolute." If your mind can be fixed in this Awareness, you are

liberated today at this very moment. If you can station your

consciousness in this feeling of unity with things, if you can fix

yourself in this identity and free yourself from the trammels of

desire for external objects you are in Brahmaloka just now.

Brahmaloka is not the distant world of Brahma. It is the world which

itself is Brahman, the Absolute - esa brahmalokah. The two, the

world and Brahman, become one. The universe itself is the Absolute,

and vice versa. Salila eko drastadvaito bhavati, esa brahma-lokah,

samrad iti. hainam anusasdsa yajnavalkyah: "Your Highness, this is

the ultimate teaching for you. What else do you want to learn?

Esasya parama gatih: This is the goal of everyone. Esasya parama

sampat: This is the highest blessing to everyone. Eso'sya paramo

lokah: This is the highest abode which anyone would like to reach.

Eso'sya parama anandah: This is the highest bliss that you can

expect anywhere. Etasyaivanandasyanyani bhutani matram upajivanti:

All the joys of the entire cosmos put together would be only a small

drop of the bliss of this Supreme Being."

 

http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/brdup/brhad_IV-03d.html

 

Is this not a beautiful passage from this great Upanishad ?

 

Anandaji then goes on to say

 

( The veiling is of course affected by duality, and so it can be seen

two ways. At first, it seems an obstacle that somehow needs to be

removed. But later on, as what has been obstructed gets more clearly

understood, the obstructions in themselves are better seen as ways

of showing what they previously appeared to hide.)

 

This dualaity is the result of 'Avarana shakti' ( power of illusion)

and vikshepa shakti ( power of confusion) and how do we cut these two

powerful knots - first by surrendering to 'Ishwari '( shakti) and

cultivate all the sattwa gunas and then She will lead us to

brahmaloka. !! What we need is Her 'anugraham; or grace and Guru's

guidance .

 

when i used to visit my grandmother's ancestral home in Erode ,

coimbatore , South india , i and my cousins used to go the Kaveri

River bank and always wonder and say how deep the 'water is' !When i

grew up and visited Benaras and saw the Sacred Ganges River, i could

not even see the 'shore' -------------------Atma jnana is that

oceanic experience of bliss in all three states - for such an atma-

jnani , there are no three states , only one state of perennial

Bliss !

 

Aum Shanti! Shanti! Shantihi!

[Guest guest]

Namaste Peterji,

what Shankara has to say about the dream

in his commentary on the Karika of Gaudapada has to be

balanced with that which is in B.S.B. II.ii.29.

"With regard to this we say, the perceptions of the

waking state cannot be classed with those in a dream.

Why?

Because of difference of characteristics; for waking and

dream states are really different in nature."

 

He then proceeds to delineate just why this is the case.

This is consonant with his usual realistic position. In essence if

you have not a copy of this work, which I would say is

essential for the serious student of Shankara, his chief

point is that the proceedings of the dream are sublated

whilst that of the waking state are not. Sublated that

is by the normal criteria of continuity and integrity.

 

The extreme sceptical position which proposes that

all this might also be a dream has its proponents both

East and West. Generally this springs from an idealist

viewpoint which makes the experience of the individual

the cornerstone. In other words we construct our

conceptual schema on the basis of what we are

directly in contact with namely our own personal

experience. It is an influential doctrine but it is

riddled with paradoxes. Again Shankara specifically

dismisses it in B.S.B.

 

Some have settled on the position of Gaudapada in

the Karika as a point to defend. Others, learned

historians of Indian thought, hold that there

was influence of Madhamika thought in there.

In that case the idealist bias is explained and

Shankara's commentary amounts to 'it says here'.

There would also be the reluctance to directly

contradict his revered grand-guru.

 

Best Wishes,

Michael.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Peterji.

 

Thank you very much for 33740.

 

As kindly suggesged by Professorji, I will be presenting a paper on

this subject by weekend. We will have plenty of opportunity to

discuss the issues threadbare including the reason why I prefer to

call waking waking and not waking state. I had written on that

last point at length some time back. It seems you have not read

those posts.

 

About mind being absent or latent in sleep - I like to handle the

question this way. Mind is defined as a stream of thoughts. Since

thoughts are conspicuously absent in deep sleep, we have to conclude

mind, as defined above, doesn't exist in deep sleep. Now, let us

ask the question "Who slept?". The waker is the one who claims "Ï

slept". So, it was the waker who slept. The Witness cannot sleep.

He/She is an 'insomniac' called Wakefulness! The darkness or

ignorance of sleep belongs to the waker and it is this darkness he

needs to get rid of to realize that he is really the big insomniac.

That seems to happen in NS and that is why I tend to equate NS as a

realized being's deep sleep where there is no more any darkness of

ignorance but only the light of Awareness or Knowledge. Awareness

in Awareness.

 

About dream within dreams - I have also been profoundly influenced

by dreams. One such vivid dream of mine is Jesus on the Cross. I had

written about it here. Can't locate the message. That was

profoundly edifying and I woke up sobbing convulsively. But, I

shouldn't forget the fact that once Madam Mahalakshmi made me Bill

Gates in one of my dreams! Will you consider that profound?

(Smiles). The purpose of my elaborating on this issue was to just

point out to our Subbuji that he was using a two-edged knife. I

didn't mean to underrate dreams. I am a dreamer, have always been

one and would like to remain one forever. Who wants liberation when

dreams are so bewitching!?

 

Thanks once again and praNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote:

> Maybe I am looking absurd. But here is a challenging exercise for

> both Subbuji and Nairji -- if they don't mind my intervention. This

> exercise is mostly for the education of me and similar ones on this

> list who are just confused by this never-ending debate about the

> three states.

>

>

> PraNAms to all advaitins.

> profvk

>

 

Pranams Prof ji,

 

Thanks for those genuinely well-intentioned words. Actually, a few

months ago we (Shri Nair ji and myself) had a one-to-one discussion on

this very same subject. We had ended up knowing each other's position.

This time i responded to some observations of Sri Srinivas Kotekal.

As Nair ji responded to this post of mine, i continued, giving my

point of view. I think i have said all that i have understood of the

subject. If i am asked to say something more, i would only be putting

the same ideas in different words and causing avoidable drudgery to

the readers. Hence i have decided to keep out of the main discussion

and just watch the proceedings. I welcome others to give their

viewpoints. Shri Nair ji has promised to come out with his

presentation.

 

Through this post i apologise to Shri Nair ji for belying his

expectations. I responded in accordance to my (mis)understanding of

his comments.

 

With warm regards Sir,

subbu

Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskarji.

 

praNAms Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Its been long time since we directly interacted together...is it not:-))

As you mentioned earlier, we have never agreed before on any of the

advaitic topic right from *light in enlightenment* to pUrNamidaM :-))

anyway, I think, now once again, the time has come to cross our swords on

the cybernet :-))

 

MN prabhuji:

 

You know a lot of Sankara vedanta. Accepted.

 

bhaskar :

 

Oh, no prabhuji, still I am a neophyte in shankara's advaita vEdAnta &

still studying prasthAna traya under my guruji..whereas here in this list

other members have already digested shankara's prasthAna traya as well as

prakaraNa grantha-s & even they have finished studying later

vyAkhyAnakAra's commentaries...when compared to them I am still raw &

unripe...

 

MN prabhuji:

 

I also know at least something. I don't have to prove that.

 

bhaskar :

 

prabhuji, as far as I know, nobody asked you to prove your scholarship in

shankarAdvaita...members very well know your indepth knowledge in that...

 

MN prabhuji:

 

Yet, I have to tell you that advaita and bhakti are one and the same. If

you have any doubt,

please ask any advaitin whose capacity you trust. You can consider Subbuji.

 

bhaskar :

 

Nobody (including me) disputed this issue...I dont know why you are telling

this to me... but as you know, there is a drastic difference between

dualistic bhakti & advaita's parAbhakti...anyway, that is irrelevant

here...

 

MN prabhuji:

 

My mail to Subbuji contained only very simple observations. They were what

you call anubhava common to all. I have a feeling he hasn't addressed them

well.

 

bhaskar :

 

prabhuji, whatever Sri subbuji has written is very appropriate with

authentic quotes from scriptures...I am afraid I can not do anything better

than that....But problem is you are not ready to accept scriptural

references to understand this prakriya & you rely only on dry logic which

is obviously has very average importance since mere logic with shAstra is

the product of our conditioned mind...Asking vEdAntin to debate on prakriya

without the support of scriptures is as good as asking a batsman to hit

fours & sixers without a bat :-))

 

MN prabhuji:

 

If you can address them with your immense knowledge, I shall be most

grateful. Kindly give a try.

 

bhaskar :

 

I humbly admit my inability to share my understanding without the support

of scriptures & AcharyOpadEsha.

 

MN prabhuji :

 

And, please make it a point not to include too much Sanskrit and to avoid

asking me to read this and that bhAshya because I can't possibly

understand them like you do.

 

bhasakar :

 

Here comes a shrOtrIya/brahmanishTa guru to our rescue...problem comes when

we try to *do it on our own at home* :-)) shruti ask us to approach a

bonafide guru who knows the traditional way of teaching to understand this

*atyanta guhyatama* shAstra.

 

MN prabhuji:

 

If you do not want to answer my observations, at least explain to us in a

very simple manner how objective evaluation of avastAtraya as a

dispassionate witness is possible from waking which is one of the three

states.

 

bhaskar :

 

I think I have done that exercise earlier in this list itself couple of

years back...In short I can say, while doing the objective analysation of

avasthAtraya prakriya from vEdAntic perspective *the sAkshi view point* is

a must...Unless you hold this view point, it is very difficult to

understand this prakriya in the light of upanishadic teaching...Shankara

beautifully puts it across in sUtra bhAshya "na hi ahaM pratyaya viSaya

kartru vyaterEkENa tat sAkshi sarvabhUtasthaH, samaH, yEkaH, kUtastha

nityaH purushaH vidhikAndE tarka samayE vA kEnachit adhigataH sarvasya AtmA

( shankara on tattu samanvayAt sUtra)....kindly refer any good English

traslation to know the importance of this vAkya & indispensable requirement

of this sAkshi's view point in avasthAtraya prakriya. If you have aversion

towards scriptures & shankara vAkya....I may not be of any help to you

prabhuji...

 

Further, with regard to your special importance to waking state, again I

have no choice but to guide you to our tradition's ancient guru,

bhagavadpAda's paramaguru gaudapAdAchArya's kArika to show you the identity

between waking & dreaming states. kArika says *swapanamAye yathAdrushtE

gandharva nagaraM yathA tathA vishvamidaM drushtaM vEdAntEshu

vichakshanaihi...(a rough translation...just like a dream. magic and

celestial city are mere appearances alone, IN THE SAME MANNER those who

know vEdAnta say that this world of duality is a mere appearance. This is

what Sri Subbu prabhuji aptly said *third* dream which we think waking...

 

MN prabhuji:

 

The audience whom I have to address always counter me on this issue by

pointing out that one cannot be dispassionately objective to the other

states from the waking state. I think they are right. I cannot ask them to

read Shankara from this chapter to that chapter. We have to depend on

knowledgeable persons like you.

 

bhaskar :

 

prabhuji, first of all these prakriyas presented by shruti to understand

our own real nature & NOT to pacify the audience with different

capabilities with our intelligence...Moreover as you know we cannot give

any satisfactory answer to any of the question those who want to *enjoy*

their questions forever (you might have had the experience of this while

discussing vEdAnta with tattvavAdins :-))...Hence, it would be a futile

endeavour on our part to satisfy them..Anyway, as said above, if we take

the recourse to our intuition and delve deep into similar or identical

experiences of waking & dreaming, it will not be possible at all to assert

with absolute sense of certainity in the manner "this is what really

waking" and "this is what really dream"...(somebody has posed a question am

I now king or butterfly after experiencing the identical nature of dream &

waking states)...For that matter, between these two states it is not

possible to distinguish any separate features or characterstics whatsoever

so as to enable us to assert that one state is totally different from the

other in such and such a manner. Again to understand this we have to refer

to kArika, it says, svapna jAgratE sthAne hyEkamAhurmanIshiNaH *bhEdAnaM hi

samatvEna* prasiddhEnaiva hEtunA*...in both states of waking & dreaming,

the internal concepts are subjective, the comprehending principle while the

external objects are the comprehended things. (let us not bring in mAyA

satkArya vAda here..that is out of context here) It is established on the

strength of everyone's experience that even if anything to exist in the

same manner alone at the time of the *experience* of the dream. Therefore

both can be regarded as *waking* alone or both can be called as dream!!!

Since both of them appear for a particular period of time and then

disappear. It is proper indeed to call both as *dream* only. That is the

reason why ItarEya shruti says trayaha svapnAH...all the three states are

dream alone.

 

Prabhuji, to know all these subtle method of teaching of scritptures, you

have to ask your audience to study our traditional Acharya's works under

the able guidance of guru if they are *really* serious to know the prakriya

in the vEdAntic perspective...& more importantly, you have to tell your

audience vEdAnta is not like a instant food that you can prepare within

couple of minutes & enjoy its taste :-))

 

I know, you will be once again disappointed to see *unwarranted* quotes

from scriptures...but what to do prabhuji, shAstra & AcharyOpadEsha are the

two eyes for the vaidika dharma followers...without these eyes they cannot

have the vision of Atman...

 

PraNAms and my prayers to the Devi.

Madathil Nair

 

praNAms onceagain,

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Thanks Bhaskarji for the clarifications.

 

Yours 33761.

 

I will have to comment on your post at length. I am committed to

giving a presentation on this subject. I was supposed to make it very

short. I don't think a short post will suffice in view of the

different issues to be addressed. Since Subbuji has withdrawn from

the debate, I would rather submit a comprehensive presentation

encompassing all my doubts and understanding. Needless to say, it

will address your comments too. Kindly, therefore, grant me a little

time to wrap up everything under one single comprehensive paper.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair