Guest guest Posted September 15, 2007 Report Share Posted September 15, 2007 Pranams, I am not sure I understand much of what is being discussed. Trying hard though. What I have gathered till now is .. (corrections are welcome) Prajna or dreamless sleep is associated the causal body (vasanas and the ignorance hence) just like the dream sleep and waking are associated with the subtle (mind) and gross body (senses of perception) The Karana Sharira (Causal Body) because of the vasanas causes birth again and again, every time we wake up n across several births. In that sense I understand that Causal body can be equated somewhat with personality. So I assume that there is ignorance (due to vasanas) in dreamless sleep but at the same time there is bliss due to lack of adjuncts or limitations associated with subtle or gross body (dreaming n waking states), the limitations due to mind or senses of perception. In Vedantasara http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/vedantasara.htm Quote --- " 43. Consciousness associated with this has limited knowledge and is devoid of the power of lordship; it is called Prajna on account of its being the illuminator of individual ignorance. 44. It is called Prajna as it is deficient in illumination on account of its association with a dull limiting adjunct. 45. The individual ignorance, associated with it is also known as the causal body on account of its being the cause of egoism etc., and as the blissful sheath because it is full of bliss and covers like a sheath; it is further known as dreamless sleep since into it everything is dissolved; and for this reason it is also designated as the state of dissolution of the gross and subtle phenomena. 46. In the state of dreamless sleep both Isvara and Prajna, through a very subtle function of ignorance illumined by Consciousness, enjoy happiness, as in the Sruti passage: " Prajna, the enjoyer of bliss, with Consciousness for its aid (is the third aspect) " (Mand. Up. 5); as also from such experience of a man awaking from dreamless sleep as, " I slept happily, I did not know anything. " " From Panchadasi http://www.sankaracharya.org/panchadasi_trans.php 17. But the other (i.e. the Jiva, which is Brahman reflected in Avidya) is subjected to Avidya (impure sattva). The Jiva is of different grades due to (degrees of) admixture (of rajas and tamas with sattva). The Avidya (nescience) is the causal body. When the Jiva identifies himself with this causal body he is called Prajna. From Panchikaranam http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/panchikaranam.htm 4. Bound up with reflection of Pure-consciousness, the Nescience, which hides the Atman and is the cause of both the gross and the subtle bodies, is called the 'AVYAAKRTA' or undifferentiated. This is the causal body of the Atman. This is neither existent nor non-existent, nor even both existent and non-existent; neither different from, nor identical with, nor both different from and identical with, the Atman. This Nescience is neither composite, nor non-composite, nor both composite and non- composite, but removable by the knowledge of the identity of Brahman and the Atman alone. When all thoughts cease and the determinative intellect, too, lapses into its causal condition, the state of deep-sleep appears. The personality appropriating these two, i.e., the causal-body and the deep- sleep state is described as 'PRAJNA'. These three (the causal-body Nescience, the deep-sleep state and the PRAJNA) are symbolised by the last letter 'M' in 'AUM'. Regards, Ravi - Vinayaka advaitin Saturday, September 15, 2007 9:32 AM Re: The three states advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda " <paramahamsavivekananda wrote: Dear Sri Sampath and other Members, There seems to be no dearth of statements made by AchArya reiterating that there is no ignorance during the deep sleep. It is not a stray quote of sutrabhAshya like 2.2.29, in where AchArya says that the waking state is more real than dream etc. In the post script I have given the selected passages culled from Sri Shastri- ji's website for the careful study by one and all. The question remains unanswered, why in so many places AchArya is making such statements? He makes an important statement in the following bhAshya: Br.up.4.3.32.S.B.-yatra punaH saa avidyaa------ s'rutivachanametat. When, however, that ignorance which projects things other than the self is **at rest, in the state of deep sleep**, what can one see, smell, or know and through what? Then, being fully embraced by the self-luminous supreme Self, the jiiva becomes infinite, perfectly serene, with all his desires attained. Then there is no second entity different from the self to be seen. **In deep sleep the self, freed of its limiting adjuncts, remains in its own supreme light, free from all relationships.** May I request one and all not to bring the quotations of sages like Sri Ramana/ Swami Vivekananda? Because on has to study their statments in the proper light and not as a stray quotes. Out of two statements twenty interpretaions can be done, if one has a limited exposure to their literature! Moreover, there is a great danger of arguements taking emotional turn, forsaking the rational reasoning which is very much stressed by the advaita AchAryAs. It doesn't mean that they are entirely wrong either, I don't dare say so! I am very sorry, if I am hurting the fellings of some here. But this is what I honestly feel. Let us stick to the shankara bhAshya on the prasthAnatraya of bhagavadpada for convenience and clarity! Yours in Sri Ramakrishna, Br. Vinayaka. The self desires to go into the state of deep sleep Br. Up. 4.3.19.S.B. - tadyathaa asmin aakaas'e ---svamaatmaanam pravis'ati. As a hawk or a falcon, flying in the sky, becomes exhausted, and stretching its wings, goes towards its nest, where it can have perfect rest, so does this infinite being run for this state, where, falling asleep it craves for nothing and sees no dream. The waking state is also considered by the s'ruti to be only dream. As the bird goes to its nest to recover from fatigue, so also does the jiiva, who is fatigued by the experiences of the waking and dream states, go to his abode, which is his own self, **free from all attributes** and devoid of all exertion caused by action. **In this state he becomes one with the supreme Self**, as the following quotation from Ch.up, shows. Ch.up. 6.8.1.S.B.-tatra hi aadars'aapanayane--------mana aakhyaam hitvaa. Just as the reflection of a person in a mirror appears to merge back in the person himself when the mirror is removed, so also, in deep sleep, when the mind and organs become dormant, the supreme Being who had entered the mind as a reflection **attains his true nature**, giving up his appearance as an individual soul, which is called the mind. Ch. up. 6.8.1.S.B. yadaa svapiti iti uchyate--------- gamyate iti abhipraayaH. When a person is in deep sleep, he becomes identified with Existence (Brahman). Having discarded his nature as an individual soul he attains his own self, his own nature, which is the ultimate Reality. Br.up.4.3.15.S.B. tatra charitvaa iti----- `Roaming' in that state of dream and becoming fatigued, and thereafter going to the state of deep sleep, he comes back to the dream state and then to the waking state. Br.up.4.3.6.S.B-sushuptaat cha utthaanam--- We awake from deep sleep with the remembrance that we slept happily and knew nothing. Br.up.4.3.21.S.B-sa yadi aatmaa avinashTah------- duHkhii veti veda.- ---- A doubt may arise-If the self remains unaffected and in its own form during deep sleep, **why does it not know itself then** or know all other things, as it does in the waking and dream states? The reason is unity. This is explained by the s'ruti with an illustration. As a man, when fully embraced by his beloved wife, both desiring each other's company, does not know anything at all, either external, such as `This is something other than myself', or internal, such as `I am happy or unhappy', but he knows everything external and internal when he is not embraced by her and is separated, so also, this infinite being, the individual self, who is separated from the supreme Self (in the waking and dream states) because of having entered the body and organs, like the reflection of the moon in water, becomes **unified with the supreme Self in deep sleep** and does not know anything external or internal, such as `I am happy or unhappy'. Br.up.4.3.22.S.B.-atra cha etat prakr.tam-------- " In this state a father is no father, a mother is no mother, worlds are no worlds, the gods are no gods, the Vedas are no Vedas. In this state a thief is no thief, the killer of a noble braahmaNa is no killer, and so on " . **The form of the self that is directly perceived in the state of deep sleep is free from ignorance, desire and action**. The s'ruti says that in this state a father is no father. His fatherhood towards a son is on account of the action of begetting. Since he is dissociated from all action in the state of deep sleep he is not a father then. Similarly, the son ceases to be a son in the state of deep sleep. All other relationships also cease to apply in this state. Br.up.4.3.23.S.B.-striipumsayoriva ekatvaat----drashTr.bhaavinii hi saa.---It was said that the self does not experience anything during deep sleep because of unity and this was illustrated by the example of a couple. It was also said that the self is pure consciousness. Now the doubt arises-if consciousness is the very nature of the self, just as heat is of fire, how can it give up that nature even in sleep and fail to see anything? The answer is - the reason for its not seeing anything in sleep is that there is then no second thing separate from it which it can see. What caused the particular vision in the waking and dream states, namely, the mind, the eyes and forms, were all presented by nescience as something different from the self. They are all unified in the state of deep sleep. The organs and objects are not there as separate entities in sleep. There is therefore no particular experience, for such experience is produced by the organs and objects and not by the self, and only appear as produced by the self. **But the vision of the self can never be lost.** Br.up.4.3.32.S.B.-yatra punaH saa avidyaa------ s'rutivachanametat. When, however, that ignorance which projects things other than the self is **at rest, in the state of deep sleep**, what can one see, smell, or know and through what? Then, being fully embraced by the self-luminous supreme Self, the jiiva becomes infinite, perfectly serene, with all his desires attained. Then there is no second entity different from the self to be seen. **In deep sleep the self, freed of its limiting adjuncts, remains in its own supreme light, free from all relationships.** Br.up.4.3.32.S.B.-etasyaiva aanandasya anyaani------ vibhaavyamaanaam. ---On a particle of this very bliss, projected by ignorance, and perceived only during the contact of the organs with objects, all other beings are sustained. Who are they? Those who have been separated from that bliss by nescience and consider themselves as different from Brahman. Being thus different, they subsist on a fraction of that bliss which is experienced through the contact of the sense-organs with their objects. (It follows from this that when one realizes one's identity with Brahman one enjoys this bliss in its plenitude, nay, one becom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2007 Report Share Posted September 15, 2007 Dear Br. Vinayaka, None of the passages quoted by me on my website says that there is no ignorance in deep sleep. This is a wrong reading. If the jiva merges completely in Brahman in sleep how can it wake up again as a separate entity? Sankara considers this point at the end of his Bhashya on Br, sutra 3.2.9 and says: - " And it was argued that just as a drop of water thrown into a mass of water cannot be singled out, so also a soul merging in Existence cannot spring up again. That is being refuted. In the analogy it is quite in order to say that the (selfsame) drop of water cannot be singled out, since there is nothing to mark out its individuality.* But here we have karma and avidyaa as the factors making the (individual) distinction " .* . S.N.Sastri There seems to be no dearth of statements made by AchArya reiterating that there is no ignorance during the deep sleep. It is not a stray quote of sutrabhAshya like 2.2.29, in where AchArya says that the waking state is more real than dream etc. In the post script I have given the selected passages culled from Sri Shastri- ji's website for the careful study by one and all. Br. Vinayaka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2007 Report Share Posted September 15, 2007 Pranams Sastriji: You have brought out nicely the distinction between `realization' and `experience' by your statement. In support of what you have stated, I suggest the readers to refer to Sankara's Atmabodha verses 53 to 57. In verse 53 Sankara provides an analogy to describe what he means by `total absorption' as water into water, space into space and light into light. The example water into water is most significant for the fact when the river merges into the ocean, it can't turn back to the river again. The holy Ganges when it reaches the Bay of Bengal, all its identity is completely gone. Sankara knew still there will be doubts regarding the nature of " realization " and he clears the doubts in verses 54 to 57 of Atmabodha. Those who still have problems in understanding the distinction should check whether conditions stated by Sankara in verses 54 to 57 are met by the experience during deep sleep. The subtle message is – Contemplate on the Brahman and that is the only way to attain Total Absorption. Interestingly all of the verses 54 to 57 end with the slogan – `Tad- Brahmety-avadhayet,' (Realize that to be the Brahman!). With my warmest regards, Ram Chandran Atmabodha Verses 53 to 57 (translation by Swami Chinmayananda). ---- - 53. On the destruction of the Upadhi's, the contemplative one is totally absorbed in `Vishnu', the All-pervading Spirit, like water into water, space into space and light into light. 54. Realize That to be Brahman, the attainment of which leaves nothing more to be attained, the blessedness of which leaves no other blessing to be desired and the knowledge of which leaves nothing more to be known. 55. Realize that to be Brahman which, when seen, leaves nothing more to be seen, which having become one is not born again in this world and which, when knowing leaves nothing else to be known. 56. Realize that to be Brahman which is Existence-Knowledge-Bliss- Absolute, which is Non-dual, Infinite, Eternal and One and which fills all the quarters – above and below and all that exists between. 57. Realize that to be Brahman which is Non-dual, Indivisible, One and Blissful and which is indicated in Vedanta as the Immutable Substratum, realized after the negation of all tangible objects. advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote: > > Dear Br. Vinayaka, > > None of the passages quoted by me on my website says that there is no > ignorance in deep sleep. This is a wrong reading. > > If the jiva merges completely in Brahman in sleep how can it wake up again > as a separate entity? Sankara considers this point at the end of his Bhashya > on Br, sutra 3.2.9 and says: - " And it was argued that just as a drop of > water thrown into a mass of water cannot be singled out, so also a soul > merging in Existence cannot spring up again. That is being refuted. In the > analogy it is quite in order to say that the (selfsame) drop of water cannot > be singled out, since there is nothing to mark out its individuality.* But > here we have karma and avidyaa as the factors making the (individual) > distinction " .* . > > S.N.Sastri > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2007 Report Share Posted September 15, 2007 advaitin , " Vinayaka " <vinayaka_ns wrote: > > advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda " > <paramahamsavivekananda@> wrote: > > Dear Sri Sampath and other Members, > > There seems to be no dearth of statements made by AchArya > reiterating that there is no ignorance during the deep sleep. It is > not a stray quote of sutrabhAshya like 2.2.29, in where AchArya says > that the waking state is more real than dream etc. In the post > script I have given the selected passages culled from Sri Shastri- > ji's website for the careful study by one and all. > > The question remains unanswered, why in so many places AchArya is > making such statements? He makes an important statement in the > following bhAshya: > > Br.up.4.3.32.S.B.—yatra punaH saa avidyaa------ s'rutivachanametat. > When, however, that ignorance which projects things other than the > self is **at rest, in the state of deep sleep**, what can one see, > smell, or know and through what? Then, being fully embraced by the > self-luminous supreme Self, the jiiva becomes infinite, perfectly > serene, with all his desires attained. Then there is no second > entity different from the self to be seen. **In deep sleep the self, > freed of its limiting adjuncts, remains in its own supreme light, > free from all relationships.** > > > Yours in Sri Ramakrishna, > > Br. Vinayaka. > > Firstly, I express my sincere gratitude to Sri kuntimaddi sadananda mahASaya, Sri Ram Chandran mahASaya, Sri V. Krishnamurthy mahASaya, Sri Rishi mahASaya and all others for the warm and cordial welcome which you have given me. praNAmaH Sri VinAyaka mahASaya, You wrote: There seems to be no dearth of statements made by AchArya reiterating that there is no ignorance during the deep sleep. ## Please read the following sutras and SrI Sankara's commentary on them: In Brahma Sutra.2.3.29, " " tat guNasAratvAt tu tatvyapadeshaH prAjnavat " Translation: But the declaration(as to the atomic size of the soul) is on account of its having for its essence the qualities of that(i.e. Buddhi), even as the Intelligent Lord(Brahman, which is all pervading, is declared to be atomic). **My views on SrI Sankara's commentary:- Here, the statement, " This Atman is atomic " (Mundaka Upanishad.3.1.9) is being justified by saying that such a declaration is on account of Atman's preponderating in the qualities of the Buddhi(intellect) so long as it is imagined to be connected with the Buddhi and in bondage. So, *the soul's passing out of the body, going to heaven etc and returning from there* are qualities of the Buddhi and are attributed to the individual soul. And imagining the all pervading Atman as limited is useful for the sake meditation. Now, there is a possibility for an objection to be raised to the above view, says SrI Sankara. It is as follows, " Since the conjuntion of the soul and the intellect, which are different entities, must necessarily come to an end some time, the soul, when so disjoined from the Buddhi, will either cease to exist altogether or at least cease to be in samsAra state. " To answer this objection, the next sutra, 2.3.30 says, " yAvat Atma bhAvitvAt cha na doshaH tat darshanAt. " Translation: " There is no defect in what has been said in the previous sutra, as the Conjunction of the soul with the Buddhi exists so long as the soul in its relative aspect exists, because it is so seen in the scriptures. " **>> Now, a very important objection is raised, ~~In suSupti, there can be no connection with the intellect, for it is said, " He becomes united with the True, he is gone to his own " (Chandogya Upanishad.6.8.1); how then can it be said that this connection lasts so long as the individualized state exists? The next Sutra, 2.3.31. answers this objection and let us see what SrI Sankara has said in this regard in his bhAshya on the same, " pumstvAdivat tu asya sataH abhivyaktiyOgAt. " 2.3.31. Translation: On account of the appropriateness of the manifestation of that (connexion) which exists (potentially in suSupti); like virility etc. Sri Sankara's Bhashya: As in ordinary life virility and so on, existing potentially only in young children, and being then looked upon as non-existing, become manifest at the time of puberty--and do not originate at that time from previous non-existence, because in that case they might originate in eunuchs also; so the connexion of the soul with the buddhi exists potentially merely during deep sleep and the period of general retractation(pralaya), and again becomes manifest at the time of waking and the time of creation.--This explanation is appropriate, because nothing can be assumed to spring up unless from something else; otherwise we should have to suppose that effects spring up without causes. **That the rising from deep sleep is due to the existence of potential avidyA**( " suSuptAt utthAnam avidyAtmaka bIjasadbhAvakAritam " ), scripture also declares, 'Having become merged in the True they *know not* that they are merged in the True. Whatever these creatures are here, whether a lion or a wolf,'. (Kh. Up. VI, 9, 2; 3).--It is therefore a proved matter that the connexion of the soul with the buddhi and the other adjuncts lasts as long as the soul (in its samsâra-state). ~~ mahASaya, I think this evidence outweighs all other contentions that you have quoted from Brihadaranyaka etc because SrI Sankara himself has said that there is avidyA in suSupti and to establish this, he is using the very statement from Chandogya Upanishad. You Wrote: What I am precisely asking is, during deep sleep, the lack of cognition is due to **complete union with Brahman** or **due to ignorance**? mahASaya, I have already written in my very first post that the lack of cognition of multiplicity is due to the union with Brahman. Reference from my first mail: {{My another contention is that, in Deep Sleep we say that the person is not conscious of the external world. And this is because of the unity with the Brahman. But what I want to say here is that, the deep sleep itself is not liberation because, the person(used for the sake of convenience) is NOT CONSCIOUS even of his union with the Brahman. Had he been Conscious of his union, he would have been liberated which is exactly what happens in Realization. Now my question is, what is hindering him from becoming Conscious of his union? It must be the avidya in the seed form bearing the Karmas. And this avidya is again responsible for the " same " jIva to come back to the waking state. So, in Deep Sleep, avidya hinders the jIva from becoming Conscious of his union with Brahman.}} ## This is what exactly SrI Sankara says in 2.3.31 bhashya quoted above. The jIva is not conscious of his union with Brahman because he still has avidyA and he is in connexion with his Buddhi. If the elders consider Paingala Upanishad as an authority, it says, II-8. By God's command (the Self) with the adjunct of Maya together with the Unmanifest, entering the individual causal body became Prajna. The Prajna is undifferentiated, real, `Having conceit-in-deep-sleep' is the name of Prajna. II-9. Texts like Tattvamasi declare the identity with Brahman of the real Jiva concealed by ignorance and part of the unmanifest(My opinion: " To make the jIva conscious of his union with Brahman " ); not of the other two, the empirical and the illusory Jivas (in the waking and dream-state). II-13. The instrument of deep sleep is mind alone. Just as a bird, exhausted by random flights, folds its wings and moves towards its nest, so the Jiva, too, sporting in the spheres of wakefulness and dream and exhausted, plunges into ignorance and enjoys its own bliss. IV-15. As there is non-difference when water is poured in water, milk in milk and ghee in ghee, so is the case with the individual Self and the supreme Self. IV-16. When the body is burned by knowledge and knowledge becomes infinite in form, then the knower consumes the bondage of Karma in the fire of Brahman-Knowledge. IV-17. Thence (follows the state of) the holy non-dual (Reality), named the Supreme Lord, like unto the stainless sky. Self's nature, abiding without adjuncts, is as (that of) water mixed with water. ##### There is some scope for analysis on the same issue in the following sutras, " suSupti utkrAntyOH bhEdEna " , Brahma Sutra.1.3.42. Translation: Because of the supreme Self being shown as different from the individual soul in the states of deep sleep and death. Here, in reply to the question, " Which is that Self " (4.3.7) of Brihadaranyaka upanishad, there is a detailed exposition on the nature of the Self in the 6th chapter of the same. And then, a doubt is raised as whether this Self is the Highest Self or the individual Self. The present Sutra says that it is the Highest Self. Because it is shown to be different from the individual soul in the state of deep sleep and at the time of death. " This person embraced by the Highest intelligent Self knows nothing that is without or within " Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. 4.3.21. This clearly indicates that in deep sleep the 'person' or the individual soul is different from the Highest intelligent Self or Brahman. Here the term " person " is the Jiva or the individual soul, because the absence of the knowledge of what is within and without in deep sleep can be predicated only of the individual soul. The Supreme intelligent Self is Brahman because such intelligence can be predicated of Brahman only. The above was the explanation of SrI Sankara. ##### Again in the Brahma Sutra.1.3.8. SrI Sankara speaks on suSupti: " bhUmA samprasAdAt adhi upaedSAt " The bhUman (is Brahman) because it is taught after the state of deep sleep (i.e. after Prana or the vital air which remains awake even in that state). BhUman denotes Brahman, because it is described in Sruti to be above prAna, which is here represented by the bliss enjoyed during deep sleep. BhUman refers to Brahman as the passage teaches an entity higher than Samprasada i.e. Prana or vital air which is awake and active even in deep sleep. BhUman can mean the highest Self only, not the vital air.--Why?--'On account of information being given about it, subsequent to bliss.' The word 'bliss' (samprasAda) means the state of deep sleep , as may be concluded, firstly, from the etymology of the word ('In it he, i.e. man, is altogether pleased--samprasIdati')--and, secondly, from the fact of samprasAda being mentioned in the BrihadAranyaka together with the state of dream and the waking state. And as in the state of deep sleep the vital air remains awake, the word 'samprasAda' is employed in the SUtra to denote the vital air; so that the SUtra means, 'on account of information being given about the bhUman, subsequently to (the information given about) the vital air.' Now, please tell me your valuable opinion after considering all the above stated points. [sources: I have taken the help of Bharatadesam.com for certain translations.] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2007 Report Share Posted September 15, 2007 > advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda " > <paramahamsavivekananda@> wrote: >>>> " Since the conjuntion of the soul and the intellect, which are different entities, must necessarily come to an end some time, the soul, when so disjoined from the Buddhi, will either cease to exist altogether or at least cease to be in samsAra state. " To answer this objection, the next sutra, 2.3.30 says, " yAvat Atma bhAvitvAt cha na doshaH tat darshanAt. " Translation: " There is no defect in what has been said in the previous sutra, as the Conjunction of the soul with the Buddhi exists so long as the soul in its relative aspect exists, because it is so seen in the scriptures. " **>> Now, a very important objection is raised, ~~In suSupti, there can be no connection with the intellect, for it is said, " He becomes united with the True, he is gone to his own " (Chandogya Upanishad.6.8.1); how then can it be said that this connection lasts so long as the individualized state exists? The next Sutra, 2.3.31. answers this objection and let us see what SrI Sankara has said in this regard in his bhAshya on the same, " pumstvAdivat tu asya sataH abhivyaktiyOgAt. " 2.3.31. Translation: On account of the appropriateness of the manifestation of that (connexion) which exists (potentially in suSupti); like virility etc. Sri Sankara's Bhashya: As in ordinary life virility and so on, existing potentially only in young children, and being then looked upon as non-existing, become manifest at the time of puberty--and do not originate at that time from previous non-existence, because in that case they might originate in eunuchs also; so the connexion of the soul with the buddhi exists potentially merely during deep sleep and the period of general retractation(pralaya), and again becomes manifest at the time of waking and the time of creation.--This explanation is appropriate, because nothing can be assumed to spring up unless from something else; otherwise we should have to suppose that effects spring up without causes. **That the rising from deep sleep is due to the existence of potential avidyA**( " suSuptAt utthAnam avidyAtmaka bIjasadbhAvakAritam " ), scripture also declares, 'Having become merged in the True they *know not* that they are merged in the True. Whatever these creatures are here, whether a lion or a wolf,'. (Kh. Up. VI, 9, 2; 3).--It is therefore a proved matter that the connexion of the soul with the buddhi and the other adjuncts lasts as long as the soul (in its samsâra-state). Dear Sri Sampath, Correct! :-)) The adjuncts do not cease as long as the jiva is in bondage, agreed. But the BrihadAraNyaka shruti says that sushupti is moksha itself! So there is no upadhi ** as long we are in sushupti? ** Let us see what shruti says: " In deep sleep it becomes transparent like water, the witness, one and without a second. This is the World of Brahman, Your Majesty. This is its supreme attainment, this is its supreme glory, this it its highest world, this is its supreme bliss. On a particle of this bliss other creatures live. " Thus did Yajnavalkya teach Janaka. (4.3.32) " In this state a father is no more a father, a mother is no more a mother, the worlds are no more the worlds, the gods are no more the gods, the Vedas are no more the Vedas. In this state a thief is no more a thief, the killer of a noble brahmin is no more a killer, a chandala is no more a chandala, a paulkasa is no more a paulkasa, a monk is no more a monk, an ascetic is no more an ascetic. " This form of his is untouched by good deeds and untouched by evil deeds, for he is then beyond all the woes of his heart. 4.3.22. ===== mahASaya, I have already written in my very first post that the lack of cognition of multiplicity is due to the union with Brahman. Reference from my first mail: {{My another contention is that, in Deep Sleep we say that the person is not conscious of the external world. And this is because of the unity with the Brahman. But what I want to say here is that, the deep sleep itself is not liberation because, the person(used for the sake of convenience) is NOT CONSCIOUS even of his union with the Brahman. Had he been Conscious of his union, he would have been liberated which is exactly what happens in Realization. Now my question is, what is hindering him from becoming Conscious of his union? It must be the avidya in the seed form bearing the Karmas. And this avidya is again responsible for the " same " jIva to come back to the waking state. So, in Deep Sleep, avidya hinders the jIva from becoming Conscious of his union with Brahman.}} Reply: This is no good explanation prabhuji. You say that there is complete union, on the other you say, jiva is not conscious of that union. This is something like telling " I am in water and I am not wet. " Right prabhuji? :-)) This is what shankara is telling: " For apart from its connexion with the limiting adjuncts it is **impossible for the soul**in itself to abide anywhere, because being non-different from Brahman it rests in its own glory. And if we say that, in deep sleep, it abides in Brahman we do not mean thereby that there is a **difference between the abode and that which abides**, but that there is **absolute identity of the two**. Whay he says so? ===== ##### Again in the Brahma Sutra.1.3.8. SrI Sankara speaks on suSupti: " bhUmA samprasAdAt adhi upaedSAt " The bhUman (is Brahman) because it is taught after the state of deep sleep (i.e. after Prana or the vital air which remains awake even in that state). 1.BhUman denotes Brahman, because it is described in Sruti to be above prAna, which is here represented by the bliss enjoyed during deep sleep. BhUman refers to Brahman as the passage teaches an entity higher than Samprasada i.e. Prana or vital air which is awake and active even in deep sleep. 2.BhUman can mean the highest Self only, not the vital air.--Why?-- 'On account of information being given about it, subsequent to bliss.' The word 'bliss' (samprasAda) means the state of deep sleep , as may be concluded, firstly, from the etymology of the word ('In it he, i.e. man, is altogether pleased--samprasIdati')--and, secondly, from the fact of samprasAda being mentioned in the BrihadAranyaka together with the state of dream and the waking state. And as in the state of deep sleep the vital air remains awake, the word 'samprasAda' is employed in the SUtra to denote the vital air; so that the SUtra means, 'on account of information being given about the bhUman, subsequently to (the information given about) the vital air.' Reply: (Hope the above two paragraphs 1 & 2 are your understanding of the sutra. Kindly put the reference of the bhAshya under quotes or mark which are the words of shanakra and your explanation.) Shankara and shruti is repeatedly telling that if there is duality as it were, it cannot go unnoticed by Brahman who is ever awake. If prana is awake why it is not seen prabhuji? This is what shruti says: 4.3.23. " And when it appears that in deep sleep it does not see, yet it is seeing though it does not see; for there is no cessation of the vision of the seer, because the seer is imperishable. There is then, however, no second thing separate from the seer that it could see. Shankara again says: Moreover, even if we admit that there are different places for the soul in deep sleep, still there does not result, from that difference of place, any difference in the quality of deep sleep which is in all cases characterised by the cessation of special cognition; it is, therefore, more appropriate to say that the soul does (in deep sleep) not **cognize on account of its oneness, having become united with Brahman**; according to the Sruti, 'How should he know another?' (Bri. Up. IV, 5, l5).--**If, further, the sleeping soul did rest in the nâdîs and the purîtat, it would be ***impossible to assign any reason for its not cognizing***, because in that case it would continue to have diversity for its object; according to the Sruti, 'When there is, as it were, duality, then one sees the other,' & c.**--But in the case of him also who has diversity for his object, great distance and the like may be reasons for absence of cognition!--What you say might indeed apply to our case if the soul were acknowledged to be limited in itself; then its case would be analogous to that of Vishnumitra, who, when staying in a foreign land, cannot see his home. But, apart from its adjuncts, the soul knows no limitation.--Well, then, great distance, & c., residing in the adjuncts may be the reason of non-cognition!--**Yes, but that leads us to the conclusion already arrived at, viz. that the soul does not cognize when, the limiting adjuncts having ceased, it has become one with Brahman. ** " Needless to say, I am very much enjoying the discussions, trying to look at it from different perspectives. Please don't take it as vitaNda vAda. I do appreciate your posts very much. Yours in Sri Ramakrishna, Br. Vinayaka. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2007 Report Share Posted September 16, 2007 advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote: > > Dear Br. Vinayaka, > > None of the passages quoted by me on my website says that there is no > ignorance in deep sleep. This is a wrong reading. > > If the jiva merges completely in Brahman in sleep how can it wake up again > as a separate entity? Sankara considers this point at the end of his Bhashya > on Br, sutra 3.2.9 and says: - " And it was argued that just as a drop of > water thrown into a mass of water cannot be singled out, so also a soul > merging in Existence cannot spring up again. That is being refuted. In the > analogy it is quite in order to say that the (selfsame) drop of water cannot > be singled out, since there is nothing to mark out its individuality.* But > here we have karma and avidyaa as the factors making the (individual) > distinction " .* . > > S.N.Sastri Respected sir, But there are intervals in the state of self-realisation. for example how does a Jivan mukta like Sri Ramana Maharishi could come back into this world and continue to perform his karmas? yes for them the world looks as one with them. there are no distinctions as you and i or mine and yours. cdr bvn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2007 Report Share Posted September 16, 2007 advaitin , " Vinayaka " <vinayaka_ns wrote: > > Dear Sri Sampath, > > Correct! :-)) The adjuncts do not cease as long as the jiva is in > bondage, agreed. But the BrihadAraNyaka shruti says that sushupti is > moksha itself! So there is no upadhi ** as long we are in sushupti? > ** Let us see what shruti says: > > " In deep sleep it becomes transparent like water, the witness, one > and without a second. This is the World of Brahman, Your Majesty. > This is its supreme attainment, this is its supreme glory, this it > its highest world, this is its supreme bliss. On a particle of this > bliss other creatures live. " Thus did Yajnavalkya teach Janaka. > > (4.3.32) > > " In this state a father is no more a father, a mother is no more a > mother, the worlds are no more the worlds, the gods are no more the > gods, the Vedas are no more the Vedas. In this state a thief is no > more a thief, the killer of a noble brahmin is no more a killer, a > chandala is no more a chandala, a paulkasa is no more a paulkasa, a > monk is no more a monk, an ascetic is no more an ascetic. " This > form of his is untouched by good deeds and untouched by evil deeds, > for he is then beyond all the woes of his heart. > > 4.3.22. > > ===== [uNQUOTE] SAMPATH'S REPLY:-- SrI vinAyaka mahASaya, If we observe the subject matter where the above verses appear in the Upanishad, Janaka asks Yajnavalkya to instruct him regarding the self which ultimately serves as the light that illumines the person when the moon has set and the fire has gone out and speech has stopped. Yajnavalkya goes on describing the identification of the self with the waking, dreaming and deep sleep states. When he says, IV-iii-7: `Which is the self ?' `This infinite entity (Purusha) that is identified with the intellect and is in the midst of the organs, the (self-effulgent) light within the heart (intellect). Assuming the likeness (of the intellect), it moves between the two worlds; it thinks, as it were, and shakes, as it were. Being identified with dream, it transcends this world – the forms of death (ignorance etc.).' IV-iii-8: That man, when he is born, or attains a body, is connected with evils (the body and organs); and when he dies, or leaves the body, he discards those evils. IV-iii-16: After enjoying himself and roaming in the dream state, and merely seeing (the results of) good and evil, he comes back in the inverse order to his former condition, the waking state. **He is untouched by whatever he sees in that state, for this infinite being is unattached.** `It is just so, Yajnavalkya. I give you a thousand (cows), sir. Please instruct me further about liberation itself.' IV-iii-17: After enjoying himself and roaming in the waking state, and merely seeing (the result of) good and evil, he comes back in the inverse order to his former condition, the dream state (or that of profound sleep). IV-iii-18: As a great fish swims alternately to both the banks (of a river), eastern and western, so does this infinite being move to both these states, the dream and waking states. ## These words should incite " viveka " in the listener and therefore lead to vairagya. Next, yajnavalkya instructs about the suSupti and here he seems to stress a lot on the fact that the jIva attains complete union with Brahman. And IMHO, yajnavalkya had to stress so much on this fact only because the jIva is not conscious of this union. This is known by comparing it to the Atma sAkSAtkAra stithi(signiying turIya). When the person has realized his self consciously, after he comes back to the waking state, he is fully conscious that he has experienced the union with Brahman. Whereas the jIva coming back to the waking state from the deep sleep, doesn't know that he had merged into Brahman. Because the jIva is unconscious of his union, Sruti comes to his aid to tell him the truth that he is merging into Brahman everyday. These words of Sruti should generate the akhaNDAkAra vritti in the listener to destroy his mUlAvidya which was hindering him from becoming conscious of his union with Brahman. The basic thing is, why should Sruti reiterate in so many passages that the jIva is merging into Brahman completely if not to give him the AtmasAkSAtkAra(= Deep sleep like state where the union with Brahman is Conscious)? The whole problem stems because we cannot clearly assert whether or not there is Consciousness in deep sleep state. On a deeper analysis it may be concluded that in deep sleep, either the Consciousness must be Void or it must be Negative. To avoid such complexities, SrI Sankara clearly says, **That the rising from deep sleep is due to the existence of potential avidyA**( " suSuptAt utthAnam avidyAtmaka bIjasadbhAvakAritam " ), scripture also declares, 'Having become merged in the True they *know not* that they are merged in the True. The phrase, " Potential avidyA " has to be noted here. Sri vinAyaka ji : But the BrihadAraNyaka shruti says that sushupti is moksha itself! So there is no upadhi ** as long we are in sushupti?** [uNQUOTE] SAMPATH'S REPLY:-- mahASaya, I humbly request you to show where the Upanishad explicitly says that suSupti itself is mOksha. I humbly opine that such a comparison is based only on the amount of bliss experienced but the major criterion to be taken into consideration to define what mOksha is or suSupti is, is " delivery from bondage " . And I feel, if the amount of bliss experienced is taken as the sole criterion, even common drugs like LSD can induce a kind of distorted state of super-consciousness, and who doesn't know the levels of Wisdom, Balance, and Virtue of such Psychedelics? Sri vinAyaka ji : Shankara and shruti is repeatedly telling that if there is duality as it were, it cannot go unnoticed by Brahman who is ever awake. If prana is awake why it is not seen prabhuji? This is what shruti says: 4.3.23. " And when it appears that in deep sleep it does not see, yet it is seeing though it does not see; for there is no cessation of the vision of the seer, because the seer is imperishable. There is then, however, no second thing separate from the seer that it could see. [uNQUOTE] SAMPATH'S REPLY:-- mahASaya, That prANa is awake, can be ascertained only from the relative standpoint. But in suSupti, the duality is vanished because there is nothing unreal for the tAdAtmya(false identification) to take place as the vikshepa shakti is obliterated. But the question is, can the suSupti be called as absoluteness? Isn't suSupti a " phenomenon " ? A phenomenon of obliteration of all multiplicity so that the seer has unobstructed perception! It is said that the Perception is infinite, eternal. And when there is duality, it becomes conditioned. When the jIva wakes up from deep sleep, he neither knows that he experienced Brahman in deep sleep nor that he is experiencing Brahman even in his present waking state. Whereas, when the jnAni wakes up from Atma sAkSAtkAra, he knows that he had experienced Brahman as his true Self in Atma sAkSAtkAra(deep sleep like state conscious of union) and also that he is Brahman even in his present wakeful state. Sri vinAyaka ji : **Yes, but that leads us to the conclusion already arrived at, viz. that the soul does not cognize when, the limiting adjuncts having ceased, it has become one with Brahman. ** " [uNQUOTE] SAMPATH'S REPLY:-- I have quoted another statement from Acharya's bhashya in my very first mail, " ..sa EvAyamupAdhiH svApaprabOdhayOH bIjAnkura nyAyENa.. " ......Each set of adjuncts continues through the states of sleep as well as of waking; in the former it is like a seed, in the latter like the fully developed plant. -- Br. Sutra.3.2.9.Sankara Bhashya. mahASaya, If my memory doesn't fail, the one that I quoted succeeds the one you have quoted, in the Brahma Sutra Bhashya of SrI Sankara. Can't we then conclude that SrI Sankara is declaring his final stand in the succeeding sutra(which I have quoted) to clear the air of all other preceding sutras? [uNQUOTE] Sri vinAyaka ji : This is no good explanation prabhuji. You say that there is complete union, on the other you say, jiva is not conscious of that union. This is something like telling " I am in water and I am not wet. " Right prabhuji? :-)) [uNQUOTE] SAMPATH'S REPLY:-- mahASaya, I must humbly say, this is a misinterpretation of my statements. According to my view, it is impossible to say, " I am in water " (Resided in Brahman) because I really don't know that I am merging into the Brahman. And Sruti comes to my help to teach me this fact. I can realize that I reside in my true Self, Brahman when all avidyA is removed and then, after coming back into the wakefulness, I shall exclaim, " I am in water and so I am wet " . That I am united with Brahman, is never known to me had Sruti not taught me. It teaches me only to make me lose my avidyA(of course only after undergoing the process of nidhidhyAsana). Now, I may accept that I am in water=Brahman(during deep sleep) only because I read it in BrihadAraNyaka Upanishad. But I must admit sincerely that I am really not wet because I have not realized it! Sri vinAyaka ji : If, further, the sleeping soul did rest in the nâdîs and the purîtat, it would be ***impossible to assign any reason for its not cognizing***, because in that case it would continue to have diversity for its object; [uNQUOTE] SAMPATH'S REPLY:-- mahASaya, IMHO, here, AchArya says that the sleeping soul does not cognize the multiplicity on account of its union with Brahman. Otherwise if we say that it rested somewhere else in nAdIs etc, we would be bringing the " second thing " thus there is no chance for the cessation of the cognition of multiplicity. mahASaya, I feel, all the subtlety lies here! Please consider that AchArya says, If the sleeping soul rested in nAdIs etc, it is " IMPOSSIBLE to assign any reason for its non cognition " . Why is it IMPOSSIBLE is the question !! For a jnAni, even if the world exists, he can, at his will, not cognize it. He always finds his union with his true self, Brahman. But, if there is a " second thing " in deep sleep state, that is said to cause the prAjna cognize that second thing leaving aside Brahman!! So, if I keep both world and Brahman before prAjna, he would cognize only the world, not Brahman ! Why? -- Because of the potential form of avidyA. (Since AchArya says, " it would be ***impossible to assign any reason for its not cognizing, {{!!because in that case it would continue to have diversity for its object!!;}} " ) Also because, Sruti says, 4.3.23. " And when it appears that in deep sleep it does not see, yet it is seeing though it does not see; for there is no cessation of the vision of the seer, because the seer is imperishable.*****There is then, however, no second thing separate from the seer that it could see.***** So, in deep sleep, avidya with AvaraNa shakti and without vishEpa shakti exists ! Since the vikshepa shakti is not active, there is no " second thing " thus, the prAjNa, having found nothing else than Brahman to identify himself with, unites with Brahman entirely. Such a union is not obstructed by the mUlAvidya because it itself is not a positive entity and it is truly anirvachanIya. Its existence is inferred only from the distinctiveness of suSupti from turIya. So my conclusion is, It is a natural process that the jIva tired of roaming in the wakeful and dreaming states and because of vishkepa shakti having become obliterated, finding nothing other than Brahman, unites as it were, with Brahman. This natural process is named as suSupti. It has an end when the vikshepa shakti becomes active again by which the jIva enters again the waking or dreaming states. So, the temporary union with Brahman is because of the obliteration of vishepa shakti of avidyA and coming back into the world is because of its avaraNa shakti. !! SrI Adi SankarArpanamastu !! 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.