Waking, dreaming and dreamless sleep

[Guest guest]

As is obvious, per Ramana Maharshi, Advaita, et al, there is no break

in being in all the three states. John Levy states that the state

between two thoughts is the equivalent of the deep, dreamless state,

where there is pure being. It's not the witness nor the witnessed,

not the seer nor the seen. I can't " see " that void between two

thoughts because that would be like the eye trying to see itself.

 

There must be this space or void between two thoughts, otherwise I

can't perceive the thoughts at all in order to distinguish one from

another.

 

The illusion of duality seems to be expressed by this space between

two thoughts. I cannot cognize without the use of duality.

Thought/void seems to be united since neither can be without the

other. So I'm thinking that duality, rather than being a concept to

try to overturn, is a useful, necessary tool for me " in the world " as

long as I don't FORGET that it's an illusion.

 

I can't destroy the illusion. I can only see through it. Thinking of

a mirage. In the desert, I see a huge city with flowing water.

Without prior experience of running toward it to quench thirst, I'll

take it as something real. After I know it's an illusion, I can look

at it, maybe smile at it, let it be and not run after it seeking some

sort of satisfaction.

 

Even now, at this moment, there is the space between two thoughts,

the void and the manifest...deep, dreamless sleep isn't so far away

even when I'm " awake " ...this is new for me. I'd read about it before,

but it clicked into consciousness a little more after reading Mr.

Levy's book. The three states necessarily alternate so none can be

held onto and none of the states can therefore be more desireable

than the others. That's maybe the basis for non attachment...maybe.

Best wishes, Steve.

[Guest guest]

In the language and viewpoint of Siddharameshwar Maharaj it goes like

this:

 

gross body=physical body

subtle body=mental body

causal body=deep sleep body, from which gross & subtle bodies arise

Brahman (Self)=the all-witnessing, the one of the nature of the

knowledge " I am "

 

The above are all states, i.e., states of mind and body. The four

padas (feet).

 

Parabrahman=beyond/prior to all states, steady, unchanging,

attributeless, the root of the transient.

 

This post is a simplification of Siddharameshwar Maharaj's words on

this topic.

 

Richard

[Guest guest]

Shree Richard - PraNAms

 

What Siddharameshwar Maharaj's saying is essentially

what Mandukya Upanishad states.

 

sa aatma chatushpaadas - this aatma has fours

aspects-like four quarters constituting the total.

And then the Upanishad describes the first paada as

the waking sate and second paada as the dream state

and third paada as the deep sleep states. The fourth

one is not really the fourth since it pervades all the

three paadaas yet different from the three - people

call it as fourth - says the Upanishad - caturtham

manyante and that aatma has to be known - sa aatma sa

vijneyaH - which is neither waker, nor dreamer nor

deep sleeper but that pervades all the three yet

different from the three and that

existence-consciousness, that which is non-dual -

advaitam - that which cannot be seen - adRiShTam -

that which cannot be an object of the mind - achintyam

- that which cannot be transacted - avyavahaaryam -

that from which all the three worlds (waking, dream

and deep sleep) arise, sustain and go back into -

prapanchopashamam - that which remains the very source

of all experiences - ekaatma pratyayasaaram - that

which is most auspicious - shivam - that which is the

embodiment of all peace and tranquility - shaantam -

that what people call as the fourth - that self that

'I am' has to be known - says the Upanishad mantra 7.

 

For those who are interested, we took Mandukya

Upanishad aagama prakaraNa as a text during the last

year spiritual camp in Washington and those who are

interested can get a copy of the MP3 CD and can

contact the Chinmya Mission Washington D.C.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

 

--- Richard <richarkar wrote:

 

> In the language and viewpoint of Siddharameshwar

> Maharaj it goes like

> this:

>

> gross body=physical body

> subtle body=mental body

> causal body=deep sleep body, from which gross &

> subtle bodies arise

> Brahman (Self)=the all-witnessing, the one of the

> nature of the

> knowledge " I am "

>

> The above are all states, i.e., states of mind and

> body. The four

> padas (feet).

>

> Parabrahman=beyond/prior to all states, steady,

> unchanging,

> attributeless, the root of the transient.

>

> This post is a simplification of Siddharameshwar

> Maharaj's words on

> this topic.

>

> Richard

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

 

advaitin , " Richard " <richarkar wrote:

 

 

Dear Sri Richard,

Can there be a division like gross, mental and causal body ?

Is there a body at all? Who has seen the three bodies? can the

boundaries be drawn differentiating one body from another? Is it in

anuBava?

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

 

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Richard " <richarkar wrote:

>

> In the language and viewpoint of Siddharameshwar Maharaj it goes

like

> this:

>

> gross body=physical body

> subtle body=mental body

> causal body=deep sleep body, from which gross & subtle bodies arise

> Brahman (Self)=the all-witnessing, the one of the nature of the

> knowledge " I am "

>

>Sir,

How can Brahman be one of the states of body and mind? it never

changes.Body and mind also are not two states.They are seperate

entities.There are 3 states of physical Body only. They are 1)state of

awakening 2)dreamy state 3)Deepsleepy state.subtle body is not the

state of physical body.ur statements are confusing.if u need to stand

on them u explain clearly about this .

HARI OHM

bagawan_sastry

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " bagawan_sastry "

<bagawan_sastry wrote:

>

> advaitin , " Richard " <richarkar@> wrote:

> >

> > In the language and viewpoint of Siddharameshwar Maharaj it goes

> like

> > this:

> >

> > gross body=physical body

> > subtle body=mental body

> > causal body=deep sleep body, from which gross & subtle bodies

arise

> > Brahman (Self)=the all-witnessing, the one of the nature of the

> > knowledge " I am "

> >

> >Sir,

> How can Brahman be one of the states of body and mind? it never

> changes.Body and mind also are not two states.They are seperate

> entities.There are 3 states of physical Body only. They are 1)

state of

> awakening 2)dreamy state 3)Deepsleepy state.subtle body is not the

> state of physical body.ur statements are confusing.if u need to

stand

> on them u explain clearly about this .

> HARI OHM

> bagawan_sastry

 

Hi Sri Sastry,

 

Isn't Brahman pure Consciousness and cannot the mind be in a state

of pure Consciousness? Or am I greatly mistaken, as is frequently

the case?

 

I don't need to stand on these statements as they are not mine. I

have attempted to encapsulate the teaching on this subject by

Siddharameshwar Maharaj. I am not married to any concept, though

think he was a great teacher. He was influenced by the work of

Samartha Ramdas' " Dasbodh " and recommended its reading.

 

 

His concept of Brahman was, I think, that Brahman is the same as

Self, which is pure Knowledge (of " I-am " ) or pure Consciousness. In

the Parabrahman there is neither Knowledge nor ignorance and It is

prior to Consciousness (prior to Sat-Chit-Ananda) and without the

attributes of Sat, Chit, and Ananda, or any attributes whatsoever.

 

As I gather, it is all Oneness in Its various forms and formlessness.

 

Hope I was not confusing again and have enjoyed the various feedback

on my prior post and am happy to be corrected of any faulty

conceptions.

 

Regards,

Richard

[Guest guest]

Om Om Everybody,

 

I think nothing could be imagined without being originated from Brahman, so

where is the question of something being Brahman or not Brahman. Every thing

in this world either gross or living, Jad or chetan has been originated

from Brahman and that is why is Brahman itself.

 

Now it comes to Waking, Dreaming and Deep-sleep, it is simple, this entire

world is the creation of our chitta (Mind).

 

So, Chittakash = Bhootaakaash + Chidaakaash

 

Chittaakaash = this entire creation is collectively called chittaakaash,

which includes dreaming and waking states

Bhootaakaash = exclusively waking state is called bhootaakaash

chidaakaash = only the dreaming state is called chidaakaash

 

and other than these three states, the nirvikalpa samadhi is called the

state of deep sleep.

 

Dhananjaya Agrawal

 

 

On 6/25/07, Richard <richarkar wrote:

>

> advaitin <advaitin%40>,

> " bagawan_sastry "

> <bagawan_sastry wrote:

> >

> > advaitin <advaitin%40>, " Richard "

> <richarkar@> wrote:

> > >

> > > In the language and viewpoint of Siddharameshwar Maharaj it goes

> > like

> > > this:

> > >

> > > gross body=physical body

> > > subtle body=mental body

> > > causal body=deep sleep body, from which gross & subtle bodies

> arise

> > > Brahman (Self)=the all-witnessing, the one of the nature of the

> > > knowledge " I am "

> > >

> > >Sir,

> > How can Brahman be one of the states of body and mind? it never

> > changes.Body and mind also are not two states.They are seperate

> > entities.There are 3 states of physical Body only. They are 1)

> state of

> > awakening 2)dreamy state 3)Deepsleepy state.subtle body is not the

> > state of physical body.ur statements are confusing.if u need to

> stand

> > on them u explain clearly about this .

> > HARI OHM

> > bagawan_sastry

>

> Hi Sri Sastry,

>

> Isn't Brahman pure Consciousness and cannot the mind be in a state

> of pure Consciousness? Or am I greatly mistaken, as is frequently

> the case?

>

> I don't need to stand on these statements as they are not mine. I

> have attempted to encapsulate the teaching on this subject by

> Siddharameshwar Maharaj. I am not married to any concept, though

> think he was a great teacher. He was influenced by the work of

> Samartha Ramdas' " Dasbodh " and recommended its reading.

>

> His concept of Brahman was, I think, that Brahman is the same as

> Self, which is pure Knowledge (of " I-am " ) or pure Consciousness. In

> the Parabrahman there is neither Knowledge nor ignorance and It is

> prior to Consciousness (prior to Sat-Chit-Ananda) and without the

> attributes of Sat, Chit, and Ananda, or any attributes whatsoever.

>

> As I gather, it is all Oneness in Its various forms and formlessness.

>

> Hope I was not confusing again and have enjoyed the various feedback

> on my prior post and am happy to be corrected of any faulty

> conceptions.

>

> Regards,

> Richard

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Richard " <richarkar wrote:

>

> Sir,

What about a Mounten ? what abou a fish in a sea?

What about a big tree? are they all not belong BRAHMAN.

Do they all possess all the 4 states ?

plz explain more clearly

HARIOHM

Sd/bagawan_sastry

[Guest guest]

What about a big tree? are they all not belong BRAHMAN

 

What is a tree? Is there a tree separate and apart?

What is a tree? Does it have existence as a tree? It

started as a seed. The tree I " see " is composed of

non-tree stuff. Thousands of chemicals, complex

processes. Can it exist apart from the soil, sun,

atmosphere? Apart from a process called a " tree " , what

do I name as a tree? The moment I call what I see a

tree, trying to objectify it, I'm wrong. Even in

naming it a tree, I've forgotten the process that

continues even as I name it. The " tree " is dying and

being reborn at the same time. Cells are dying, being

replaced. All may belong to Brahman but I never see

Brahman. Or, alternately, I can say all I ever see is

Brahman. I get in a lot of trouble when I confuse the

relative and the absolute! At the relative level, I

can see the parts, talk about them, act as if there

are parts. At the absolute, everything is everything

else and there is no boundary or seam anywhere to be

found.

 

Apart from being seen, is there a tree to be seen?

Apart from the observer, can there be anything

observed? Brahman may be all there is but, for me at

least, it does no good simply to say that. I have to

realize, make real, that. I'm not satisfied simply to

repeat the words. That is simply to have the knowledge

of others and to say what they say. I want the

knowledge, conviction that all is Brahman apart from

simply saying it. Best wishes, Steve

 

 

______________________________\

____

Luggage? GPS? Comic books?

Check out fitting gifts for grads at Search

http://search./search?fr=oni_on_mail & p=graduation+gifts & cs=bz

[Guest guest]

Om Om

 

When I say everything has emerged from Brahman either living or gross, it

includes all u have written about. This could be understood with a simple

example, you must be aware of earthen toys, there could be numerous earthen

toys. These could be in different shapes as well, some could be in the form

of gross things and some others could be in the form of any animals and rest

could form the shape of human beings, but one thing is for sure that all

these are earthen. So is with this world, there are numerous things, some

are living (includes humans, animals, trees and birds) and some are gross,

but all have emerged from one Brahman.

 

Now it comes to the 4 states, so yes all living things have mind and they do

sleep, but the only difference in between humans and other living beings is

that of discrimination power. One dog, in-spite of having mind can't

discriminate what is wrong and what is right.

 

Dhananjaya Agrawal

Bhagwat Bhakti Ashram <http://anandkebeechmain.com>

 

 

On 6/26/07, bagawan_sastry <bagawan_sastry wrote:

 

> advaitin <advaitin%40>, " Richard "

> <richarkar wrote:

> >

> > Sir,

> What about a Mounten ? what abou a fish in a sea?

> What about a big tree? are they all not belong BRAHMAN.

> Do they all possess all the 4 states ?

> plz explain more clearly

> HARIOHM

> Sd/bagawan_sastry

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

PraNAms to all.

 

When Scripture says you are the truth, since you are a

conscious - existent entity.

 

There can be only one conscious entity - or

consciousness that I am is infinite-existence too.

 

Hence whatever I see apart from my self - including a

tree or a stone - since I see, it appears to exist but

the truth is - it is not separate from me whose nature

is existence itself. Shankara says whatever you see is

mithya - dRishyatvaat - since you see.

 

In the question of what about a tree or stone, I am

already moving from consciousness-existence that I am

to localized body-mind-intellect concept - since 'what

about something other than I' is an intellectual

question. One has to understand the scriptural

statement that you are turiiyam means you encompass

everything that is - as Krishna says - sarva

bhuutastam aatmaanam sarva bhuutani ca aatmani - the

one who sees himself in everything and everything in

himself - he alone sees or understand what that 'I am

' the 4th paada means.

 

It is not that I am Brahman, he is Brahman or it is

Brahman etc

 

Brahman alone is, period. That 'I am' - whose nature

is exisence-consciousness- since it is one without a

second it is also ananda swaruupam, limitless, since

all limitations cause suffering.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

--- Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote:

 

> What about a big tree? are they all not belong

> BRAHMAN

>

> What is a tree? Is there a tree separate and apart?

> What is a tree? Does it have existence as a tree? It

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " bagawan_sastry "

<bagawan_sastry wrote:

>

> advaitin , " Richard " <richarkar@> wrote:

> >

> > Sir,

> What about a Mounten ? what abou a fish in a sea?

> What about a big tree? are they all not belong BRAHMAN.

> Do they all possess all the 4 states ?

> plz explain more clearly

> HARIOHM

> Sd/bagawan_sastry

>

 

Hi Sri Sastry,

 

I think Sri Dhananjaya Agrawal, in his recent post is correct in

saying all is Brahman (paraphrasing here). The " Yoga Vasistha "

says, " Everything that is is consciousness " . I speak of what isn't,

or That which is prior to consciousness.

 

Coincidentally on a t.v. quiz show tonight they showed the Om symbol

and said it represented three states plus the trancendental state.

This would equal 4 states, i.e. awake, deep sleep, dreaming, and the

transcendental states. The Parabrahman is not a state and was

before, during, and after all states.

 

To answer your question: Not being a mountain, fish, or tree, I can

only surmise that they don't possess all the states but are all

composed of the One Essence.

 

Please let me quote from the writing of Siddharameshwar Maharaj

since I do his words injustice:

 

" When the state of forgetfulness (deep sleep state), is dissolved,

the state of Knowledge or the Fourth Body, the Turya State

(consciousness of " Consciousness " ) becomes exposed

automatically...But even this state of Knowledge...also dissolves

eventually...Thus when the Knowledge...dies, Parabrahman, who is

inherent in all of the four bodies, is exposed. "

 

I am answering your questions from my limited knowledge. Every other

member of this group will have a deeper knowledge of the subject

than I. Hope my attempts at least showed how I think Siddharameshwar

Maharaj viewed things.

 

Best wishes,

Richard