The three states

September 16, 2007

In his bhAshya on Br. Up. 4.3.21 Sri Sankara says:- tatra arthAnnAnAtvam

viSeshavijnAnahetuh ityuktam bhavati. NAnAtve ca kAraNam—Atmano

vastvantarasya pratyupasthApikA avidyetyuktam. Tatra ca avidyAyA yadA

pravibhakto bhavati, tadA sarveNekatvamevAsya bhavati.

" It has been said that the (perception of) multiplicity of objects is due

to avidyA which brings about (the appearance of) things different from the

Self. When the jIva is freed from avidyA, he attains unity with all " .

*The above passage is in the context of deep sleep and says that the

jIIva is freed from avidyA during deep sleep.*

There is also the following sentence in the bhAshya on the same

mantra:--

yata AtmakAmam------- avidyAyA abhAvAt AtmakAmam.

" But to one who is fast asleep, they become the Self, since there is no

ignorance to project the idea of difference' (Translation of Swami

Madhavananda).

* Here also it is said that there is no avidyA in deep sleep. *

But lest one goes away with the conclusion that there is no avidyA in

deep sleep, *let me point out that in Ch.up. 8.3.2 it is clearly said that

there is avidyA in deep sleep.* It says:-

" All these ignorant creatures, though they go everyday during sleep to the

world that is brahman itself do not have the thought " I have now attained

this state of brahman " because they are carried away by the unreal as

described above, being driven away from their real nature by such evils as

avidyA and the like " .

Moreover, as I have pointed out in a previous post, Sankara says at the end

of his Bhashya on Br, sutra 3.2.9: - " 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 avidyA as the factors making the (individual)

distinction " . .

Thus there is an apparent contradiction between the statements in Br.up.

quoted above and the statements quoted subsequently. If one goes by the mere

wording one will be puzzled. That is why the guidance of a teacher is

necessary to understand the bhAshya. This apparent contradiction has been

reconciled by sarvajnAtma Muni in his famous work samkshepa SArIrakam, in

Slokas 123 to 125 of chapter III. (I am giving below the translation of

these slokas by Dr. N. Veezhinathan, an eminent scholar).

Sl.123—As the state of deep sleep is devoid of the functioning of the

intellect, avidyA is not determinately purceived then. But, having given

rise to the intellect in the waking state, avidyA becomes the onject of

experience such as 'I do not know' and 'I am ignorant'.

Sl.124—By this (namely, in view of the absence of determinate perception of

avidyA in the state of deep sleep) it is said at some places by Sri Sankara

and other preceptors that even avidyA does not exist in your state of deep

sleep. (But they affirm the existence of avidyA in that state at other

places). Hence these two views should be examined and understood by you

after elucidating them..

Sl.125—The two views, namely, 'There is no avidyA in his deep slep state'

and 'The person was under the effect of avidyA when he was asleep' should be

understood by you in a consistent way, by considering them on the basis of

experience and reasoning.

Two more such puzzling statements are pointed out in Sloka 126 which

says:--

As there is no determinate perception of avidyA in the deep sleep state, it

is said that even avidyA does not exist in that state, in different

statements, namely, " The individual soul has become the supreme Self " , and

" The individual soul not being associated with passion, etc., is devoid of

avidyA " .

The statements are in Br. Su. Bhashya 1.4.18. These are----

1, sushuptikale ca parena------

2.yatrAsya jIvasya--- -----

I am pointing out all these only to caution against reading and

trying to understand the bhAshya, even in translation, without the guidance

of a teacher. The meaning of sentences has to be understood taking into

account the context and not just literally.

Shri Sampat's postings on this subject are very illuminating and show

that he has a thorough grounding in the subject. The members can learn a

lot from him.

Please excuse me if what I have written above sounds pedantic.

S.N.Sastri

September 16, 2007

advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

<paramahamsavivekananda wrote:

> 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.

Dear Sri Sampath,

Before deciding on the issue, please consider the following words of

upadEsha sahasri. Some Swamis like Sri SSS, Swami Dayananda

Saraswati opine that it is the only prakaraNa grantha written by

shankara.

(Quote)

100. Disciple: " But, Sir, when this is so, Pure Consciousness Itself

has to be admitted to be adventitious like waking and dream. For it

is not known in deep sleep. Or, (it may be that I have adventitious

consciousness or) am non-conscious by nature " .

101. Teacher: " No. (What you say is not right). Think over it. It is

not reasonable (to say so). You may look upon Pure Consciousness as

adventious (if you are wise enough); but we cannot prove It to be so

by reasoning even in a hundred years, nor (can It be proved to be

so) even by a dull man. As the consciousness (that has for its

adjuncts mental modifications) is a combination, no one can prevent

its existence for the sake of another, its manyness and

destructibility by any reasoning whatever; for we have already said

that whatsoever does not exist for itself is not self-existent. As

Pure Consciousness, the Self, is self-existent. No one can prevent

Its independence of other things inasmuch as It never ceases to

exist " .

102. Disciple: " But I have shown an exception, namely, I have no

consciousness in deep sleep. "

103. Teacher: " No, you contradict yourself " .

Disciple: " How is it a contradiction ? "

Teacher: " You contradict yourself by saying that you are not

conscious when, as a matter of fact, you are so " .

Disciple: " But, Sir, I was never conscious of consciousness or

anything else in deep sleep. "

1.Teacher: " You are then **conscious in deep aleep**. For you deny

the existence of the objects of Knowledge (in that state), **but not

that of Knowledge.** I have told you that what is your consciousness

is nothing but absolute Knowledge. The Consciousness owing to whose

presence you deny (the existence of things in deep sleep) by

saying, `I was conscious of nothing' is the Knowledge, the

Consciousness which is your Self. As It never ceases to exist, Its

eternal immutability is self-evident and does not depend on any

evidence; for an object of Knowledge different from the self-evident

Knower depends on an evidence in order to be known. Other than the

object the eternal Knowledge, that is indispensable in proving non-

conscious things other then Itself, is immutable; for It is always

of a self-evident nature. Just as iron, water, etc., which are not

of the nature of light and heat, depend for them in the sun, fire

and other things other than themselves, but the sun and fire

themselves, always of the nature of light and heat, do not depend

forr them on anything else; so, being of the nature of pure

Knowledge It does not depend on an evidence to prove that It exists

or that It is the Knower. "

104. Disciple: " But it is transitory knowledge only that is the

result of a proof and not eternal Knowledge " .

105. Teacher: " No. There cannot reasonably be a distinction of

perpetuity or otherwise in Knowledge. For it is not known that

transitory Knowledge is the result of a proof and not eternal

Knowledge, as Knowledge Itself is such a result " .

106. Disciple: " But eternal Knowledge does not depend on a Knower

while transitory Knowledge does so as it is produced by an

intervening effort. This is the difference " .

107. Teacher: " The Knower which is the Self is then self-evident as

It does not depend on any evidence (in order to be proved). "

(Unquote)

Hope the quote self explanatory. Please read the paragraph which I

have numbered as " 1 " for convenience. My main contention is that

alone! If we don't accept this view, host of ridiculous questions

will raise their hood! :-))

Please note that there is no mention of avidya here. Logically it

should be there in potential form, but my contention is it is **not

hindering the soul from cognizing brahman fully during the deep

sleep**. It will surely trouble him once he wakes up and force him

to do kama, karma and continue discussion in advaitin etc. etc.!:-))

This is an enlightening thread at least for me.

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

Br. Vinayaka.

September 16, 2007

Sri Sampath Mahasaya:

It appears to me you have indeed made a 'deep' study of the Brahma

Sutra Bhasyas and I also find your interpretation of the sutras very

convincing and appealing.

It is said " A bird with sufficiently long beak can catch a fish just

swimming below the surface of the water but the *same bird* cannot

do harm to a fish in deep ocean. "

You conclude your brilliant post with the following words :

(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. )

Let me ask you this , Sri Sampath Mahasaya ?Are we not able to see

the 'rope ' because of 'avarna' shakti and it is 'vikshepa' shakti

that superimposes the image of Snake on the Rope ?

My question to you Shri Sampath Mahasaya - can the e Avarna shakti

precede the Vikshepa shakti or Vikshepa Shakti Precede the Avarna

Shaktu ? Don't we see the effects of both simeltaneoulsy ? Cn we

conceive the one without the other ? or is it all in the 'mind' ?

Wisdom and knowledge are the ornaments of a spiritual aspirant .

When 'realization' dawns , the spiritual aspirant discovers the GOLD

that go into making those ornaments . :-)

Thanks , once again for enriching the discussions.

___________

September 17, 2007

advaitin , " bhagini_niveditaa "

<bhagini_niveditaa wrote:

>

> Sri Sampath Mahasaya:

>

> It appears to me you have indeed made a 'deep' study of the Brahma

> Sutra Bhasyas and I also find your interpretation of the sutras very

> convincing and appealing.

>

> It is said " A bird with sufficiently long beak can catch a fish just

> swimming below the surface of the water but the *same bird* cannot

> do harm to a fish in deep ocean. "

>

> You conclude your brilliant post with the following words :

>

> (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. )

>

> Let me ask you this , Sri Sampath Mahasaya ?Are we not able to see

> the 'rope ' because of 'avarna' shakti and it is 'vikshepa' shakti

> that superimposes the image of Snake on the Rope ?

>

> My question to you Shri Sampath Mahasaya - can the e Avarna shakti

> precede the Vikshepa shakti or Vikshepa Shakti Precede the Avarna

> Shaktu ? Don't we see the effects of both simeltaneoulsy ? Cn we

> conceive the one without the other ? or is it all in the 'mind' ?

>

> Wisdom and knowledge are the ornaments of a spiritual aspirant .

> When 'realization' dawns , the spiritual aspirant discovers the GOLD

> that go into making those ornaments . :-)

>

> Thanks , once again for enriching the discussions.

> ___________

SrI Bhagini Nivedita ji, sadar prANAmaH,

These questions you have asked are highly useful to me to " know " where

I stand in the philosophical thesis I am trying to put forward.

IMHO, the Rope-Snake analogy can explain the things only to a certain

extent. It can act like a pointer to make us know that we, through our

perceptual limitations existing a priori, have not only veiled our own

true nature(Brahman) but also have superimposed on it, something else.

Here, the reason for the veiling of rope is, semi-darkness. This

semi-darkness is again a limitation of vision. For example, a Cat as

it can see even in semi-darkness, would not get deluded in the same

situation where the man gets deluded. It is estimated that the cats

can see very clearly in 1/6th of the light man would need.

So, even the so called veiling of the object needs a " Subjective "

contribution. Unless we have any perceptual limitations, we would not

mistake a snake for a rope.

Hence, the whole culprit is Mind alone. SrI Sankara wants to tell us

that there is absolutely no difference between two objects. **Even the

senses should perceive only a single homogeneous substance.** But the

different objects that we see are only a result of the " MEMORIES "

present in the Mind. Now, an objection would be raised as, in the

" first creation " , how did the first formed jIva begun to perceive the

multiplicty?

The answer is,

Such an objection is untenable because, there can never be anything as

" first creation " since Sruti says,

" It thought, " May I be many, may I grow forth " and it projected

fire'(Chandogya Upanishad,VI.ii.2-3).

" It " willed " , 'let me project the worlds' " -- (Aitareya Upanishad,

I.i.1).

How can we attribute thinking and willing to Brahman?

Is there any need for Brahman to think or will?

This is explained by the theory of karma. The collective stimulus of

the karmas done by all the jIvas in previous adhyAsa, incite

ISvara(Brahman + mAyA) to " think " or " will " and " resolve " to project

the worlds.

So, Creation occurs only for the Past karmas of the jIvas to be worked

out.

Hence there is no beginning to samsArA. This is what SrI Sankara meant

when he said avidyA as anAdi(without beginning). But avidyA is

sa-anta(It has an End).

Now, how did we superimpose the snake on the rope? It is because of

the memory of snake in our Mind.

So, let us now assume a situation wherein a person due to some injury

on his head, lost all the memories of objects.(By this I do not mean a

complete destruction of memories from Chitta because that is not

possible by any sort of injury to the gross body; So here I mean that

the person became inaccessible to the memories stored in his chitta).

This person doesn't know what a rope is (or) what a snake is!

Now, he has seen a rope in the semi-darkness. What would he see it as?

No one can answer this question. If you ask a Cat(hypothetically)

standing beside this person, it would express its opinion as, " This

person must be seeing the Rope " because its(cat's) perception is

unobstructed in semi-darkness.

If you ask a normal human being standing beside him, he would say,

" This person must be seeing a snake over there " !

This is surely an example where there is AvaraNa but no vikshEpa.

The semi darkness condition exists. But the person cannot superimpose

a Snake on the rope because he has never seen a snake in his life

time. But we cannot correctly say whether he is seeing the rope itself

because, he doesn't know the rope either! And even the Semi-darkness

condition is not obliterated. But, **Since there is no second thing

known to the person to superimpose on the rope, people say that he

should see the rope itself** !!

This is exactly what happens in Deep Sleep state. There is no second

thing existing separate from Brahman. Since avidyA is not creating

multiplicity, it is said that, the person cannot see the world. And

since there is Brahman itself, **IT IS INFERRED** that he resides in

Brahman alone.

YOU WROTE:--

Let me ask you this , Sri Sampath Mahasaya ?Are we not able to see

> the 'rope ' because of 'avarna' shakti and it is 'vikshepa' shakti

> that superimposes the image of Snake on the Rope ?

SrI Bhagini Nivedita ji,

This question is really beautiful! In my humble opinion, one cannot

really assert boldly that we don't see the rope because of AvaraNa

shakti because, remember, it was not Complete darkness but only a

Semi-darkness. If you don't have any second thing to superimpose on

the rope, you are " BOUND " to cognize the rope alone!!

The AvaraNa shakti doesn't oppose the sa-svarUpa(essential,true

nature) of Brahman. Otherwise how could we superimpose something on an

" UNPERCEIVED " substratum?

Illusions are never formed in complete darkness. They take place only

in semi-darkness.

This is the riddle of Deep Sleep. Hope I have made my stand clear.

!! yatra nAryastu pUjyante ramante tatra devatAH

yatra tAstu na pUjyante sarvAstatrAphalAH kriyAH

Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they

are not honoured, no sacred rite yields rewards. !!

!! SrI Adi SankarArpanamastu !!

September 17, 2007

Namaste Shri Sampat.

Since you dealt with a hypothetical situation replying Bhagini

Nivedita on AvaraNa and vikSepa, here is another one about deep sleep

which I presented here long back.

It concerns a man in outer space with his biological processes like

digestion, hair growth etc. temporarily suspended. There is no

change taking place on/in his body. However, he is aware. The only

exception is that his heart beats and he can hear it thud. The scene

around him remains the same without the stars and planets registering

any relative motion. That means there is absolutely no change taking

place around him. He sees the same scene always. He has no frame of

reference to appreciate the passage of time other than his monotonous

heart beats. (This is a purely hypothetical situation. So, please

don't point out the impossibility of the whole or part(s) of it.)

He dozes off into deep sleep, sleeps for say one hour of our

terrestrial time and wakes up. Before he fell asleep, he heard his

heart thud. After he woke up, he heard it thud again. Since he

slept between the two thuds, they would naturally seem to him to be

consecutive, although during the one hour of sleep the heart would

have beaten several hundred times.

Now the question: Upon waking, will he ever know that he slept at

all? Will he say: " I slept happily " ? I tend to think that the sleep

would fail to register with him even as " an experience of not

experiencing anything " although he existed before it, through it and

after it.

How would you look at this situation? I am sure you will have some

interesting thoughts that confirm the veracity of our upanishad

statements. If I have blundered in conjuring up the above situation,

please be kind enough to point it out to me.

PraNAms.

Madathil Nair

September 17, 2007

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

>

> Namaste Shri Sampat.

>

> Since you dealt with a hypothetical situation replying Bhagini

> Nivedita on AvaraNa and vikSepa, here is another one about deep sleep

> which I presented here long back.

>

> It concerns a man in outer space with his biological processes like

> digestion, hair growth etc. temporarily suspended. There is no

> change taking place on/in his body. However, he is aware. The only

> exception is that his heart beats and he can hear it thud. The scene

> around him remains the same without the stars and planets registering

> any relative motion. That means there is absolutely no change taking

> place around him. He sees the same scene always. He has no frame of

> reference to appreciate the passage of time other than his monotonous

> heart beats. (This is a purely hypothetical situation. So, please

> don't point out the impossibility of the whole or part(s) of it.)

>

> He dozes off into deep sleep, sleeps for say one hour of our

> terrestrial time and wakes up. Before he fell asleep, he heard his

> heart thud. After he woke up, he heard it thud again. Since he

> slept between the two thuds, they would naturally seem to him to be

> consecutive, although during the one hour of sleep the heart would

> have beaten several hundred times.

>

> Now the question: Upon waking, will he ever know that he slept at

> all? Will he say: " I slept happily " ? I tend to think that the sleep

> would fail to register with him even as " an experience of not

> experiencing anything " although he existed before it, through it and

> after it.

>

> How would you look at this situation? I am sure you will have some

> interesting thoughts that confirm the veracity of our upanishad

> statements. If I have blundered in conjuring up the above situation,

> please be kind enough to point it out to me.

>

> PraNAms.

>

> Madathil Nair

>

--------------------------------

Salutations to you mahASaya,

The scenario is wonderful. But in my humble opinion, there cannot be

any deep sleep possible in such a state. Because, a person goes into

deep sleep only on account of his tiresomeness.

And you said that there is absolutely no change taking place in his

body. I need a small confirmation here.

Is there no change even in his cells? don't they become older and near

death?

And one more MOST IMPORTANT thing is,

You said that the person is aware of his surroundings, and there is

absolutely no change in them.

Then, do any vrittis arise in his chitta?

For the vrittis to not arise in his Chitta, I mean, for his Mind to

not assume any mental state, or any " change " of mental states, certain

conditions are indispensable like,

## First condition is, the person must not have any memories of the

things other than the scenario around him in this present situation.

For that to be made possible, he must be born in this scene and grown

up in this scene so that he won't even have any other memories to

recollect about something which he had seen previously on earth.

But this is not possible as he would not grow up in those conditions

as you said, there is no GROWTH!

Or, this can be brought about by some other way as I have assumed that

the person should have some injury to his head :-)) due to which he

should forget everything that he has perceived till today in his life.

And after this injury, when he opens his eyes, he should be present in

this hypothetical scenario.

If this condition is fulfilled,

the Chitta of the person would not form any Vrittis because there will

be no memories. Because Chitta records only a " change " in the

surroundings.

As there is no change in Chitta, it would not get strained(even

" smriti " vritti is not possible and SrI patanjali maharshi's condition

is fulfilled, anubhUta viSayAsampramOshaH smritiH) - Since there are

no experiences, no smriti vritti can be possible!!

And as you have said, even the body has no change and no strain!!

When the hawk is NOT TIRED of roaming in the sky, why would it come

back foolishly to its nest? It would nicely enjoy roaming in the sky

forever without any tiredness. :-))

Hence, Deep Sleep state itself is not possible in such a scenario.

I request you to kindly point out any mistakes I might have done in

the above stuff.

!! hari aum tat Sat !!

September 17, 2007

advaitin , " Vinayaka " <vinayaka_ns wrote:

>

> advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

> <paramahamsavivekananda@> wrote:

>

> > 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.

>

> Dear Sri Sampath,

>

> Before deciding on the issue, please consider the following words of

> upadEsha sahasri. Some Swamis like Sri SSS, Swami Dayananda

> Saraswati opine that it is the only prakaraNa grantha written by

> shankara.

>

> (Quote)

>

> 100. Disciple: " But, Sir, when this is so, Pure Consciousness Itself

> has to be admitted to be adventitious like waking and dream. For it

> is not known in deep sleep. Or, (it may be that I have adventitious

> consciousness or) am non-conscious by nature " .

>

> 101. Teacher: " No. (What you say is not right). Think over it. It is

> not reasonable (to say so). You may look upon Pure Consciousness as

> adventious (if you are wise enough); but we cannot prove It to be so

> by reasoning even in a hundred years, nor (can It be proved to be

> so) even by a dull man. As the consciousness (that has for its

> adjuncts mental modifications) is a combination, no one can prevent

> its existence for the sake of another, its manyness and

> destructibility by any reasoning whatever; for we have already said

> that whatsoever does not exist for itself is not self-existent. As

> Pure Consciousness, the Self, is self-existent. No one can prevent

> Its independence of other things inasmuch as It never ceases to

> exist " .

>

> 102. Disciple: " But I have shown an exception, namely, I have no

> consciousness in deep sleep. "

>

> 103. Teacher: " No, you contradict yourself " .

>

> Disciple: " How is it a contradiction ? "

>

> Teacher: " You contradict yourself by saying that you are not

> conscious when, as a matter of fact, you are so " .

>

> Disciple: " But, Sir, I was never conscious of consciousness or

> anything else in deep sleep. "

>

> 1.Teacher: " You are then **conscious in deep aleep**. For you deny

> the existence of the objects of Knowledge (in that state), **but not

> that of Knowledge.** I have told you that what is your consciousness

> is nothing but absolute Knowledge. The Consciousness owing to whose

> presence you deny (the existence of things in deep sleep) by

> saying, `I was conscious of nothing' is the Knowledge, the

> Consciousness which is your Self. As It never ceases to exist, Its

> eternal immutability is self-evident and does not depend on any

> evidence; for an object of Knowledge different from the self-evident

> Knower depends on an evidence in order to be known. Other than the

> object the eternal Knowledge, that is indispensable in proving non-

> conscious things other than Itself, is immutable; for It is always

> of a self-evident nature. Just as iron, water, etc., which are not

> of the nature of light and heat, depend for them in the sun, fire

> and other things other than themselves, but the sun and fire

> themselves, always of the nature of light and heat, do not depend

> for them on anything else; so, being of the nature of pure

> Knowledge It does not depend on an evidence to prove that It exists

> or that It is the Knower. "

>

> 104. Disciple: " But it is transitory knowledge only that is the

> result of a proof and not eternal Knowledge " .

>

> 105. Teacher: " No. There cannot reasonably be a distinction of

> perpetuity or otherwise in Knowledge. For it is not known that

> transitory Knowledge is the result of a proof and not eternal

> Knowledge, as Knowledge Itself is such a result " .

>

> 106. Disciple: " But eternal Knowledge does not depend on a Knower

> while transitory Knowledge does so as it is produced by an

> intervening effort. This is the difference " .

>

> 107. Teacher: " The Knower which is the Self is then self-evident as

> It does not depend on any evidence (in order to be proved). "

>

> (Unquote)

>

> Hope the quote self explanatory. Please read the paragraph which I

> have numbered as " 1 " for convenience. My main contention is that

> alone! If we don't accept this view, host of ridiculous questions

> will raise their hood! :-))

>

> Please note that there is no mention of avidya here. Logically it

> should be there in potential form, but my contention is it is **not

> hindering the soul from cognizing brahman fully during the deep

> sleep**. It will surely trouble him once he wakes up and force him

> to do kama, karma and continue discussion in advaitin etc. etc.!:-))

>

> This is an enlightening thread at least for me.

>

> Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

>

> Br. Vinayaka.

>

---

namaskAraH SrI vinAyaka mahASaya,

Thanks for bringing the above dialogue into light. It provides some new

insights for our discussion.

In the dialogue between the Guru and SiSya that you have quoted above,

Guru says that the union with Brahman in deep sleep was a Conscious

union. The reason being, the existence of eternal perception cannot be

denied.

I feel I have no authority to decide whether UpadeSa sahasri was written

by SrI Sankara or not. But, I have few contentions regarding the

dialogue you have quoted from the same.

You Quoted:

The Consciousness owing to whose

> presence you deny (the existence of things in deep sleep) by

> saying, `I was conscious of nothing' is the Knowledge, the

> Consciousness which is your Self.

[uNQUOTE]

mahASaya,

I humbly opine that we deny the existence of things in deep sleep only

when compared to the waking state. Just like the example of Rope-Snake I

have written in the post to SrI bhAgini nivedita ji, in deep sleep,

there is no second thing to be superimposed onto the Brahman. It is due

to the " lack " of a second thing that there is no tAdAtmya occurring.

But, even saying that there was a conscious union with Brahman would

also be merely an " INFERENCE " but not a conclusive fact.

Just as we say that the person doesn't know what a snake is, so he

cannot superimpose it on the rope. And we know that the person is

" seeing " " something " in the semi darkness. No one can ever say what the

person has seen. Because the person himself doesn't know what he has

seen, which is evident from his words after waking up like, " I knew

nothing " but his words, " I slept happily " denote that he must have

resided in Brahman because then there was no second thing other than

Brahman.

And there is one more subtlety here. In the Rope-Snake analogy, we speak

of two things, the seer and the rope. But in deep sleep, the Seer

himself becomes the Seen. But still we can without any defect in our

assertion, say that the Seer doesn't know that he sees himself. This can

be proved only on the basis of turIya. A person entering the waking

state after Atma sAkSAtkAra, says that he has experienced his own true

Self(Brahman) during turIya stithi and also that he is Brahman even now

in his present wakefulness.

Nevertheless, one may ask, where is the " knower " in that state to know

something? This is really a valid question !

All that we can say finally is,

Sruti must have reiterated that through apavAda alone, one has to

consciously unite with his own Self but not simply as a result of being

carried away by the avidyA and the like.

As SrI Sastriji mahASaya has quoted in his post,

" All these ignorant creatures, though they go everyday during sleep to

the world that is brahman itself do not have the thought " I have now

attained this state of brahman " because they are carried away by the

unreal as described above, being driven away from their real nature by

such evils as avidyA and the like " .

## The problem we have as stated by SrI Sastriji mahASaya is that the

statements of ChandOgya and BrihadAranyaka are mutually conflicting.

But, with due respect to all advaitins, I shall now attempt to bridge

this gap using the following explanation:

In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 4.3.19.

" As a hawk or a falcon roaming in the sky becomes tired, folds its wings

and makes for its nest, so does this infinite entity (purusha) hasten

for this state, where, falling asleep, he cherishes no more desires and

dreams no more dreams.

** If I am allowed to use a comparision,

In the above verse,

Hawk = jIva;

Fluttering of wings = Activity of vikshEpa shakti;

Sky = Waking and Dreaming states.

Folding of wings = With drawl of vikshEpa shakti;

Nest = The abode of Brahman.

* All the above thus, is a play of avidyA.

The hawk, being " TIRED " of roaming in the sky, " FOLDS its wings " and

thus, comes back to its own nest.

Similarly,

The jIva, being " TIRED " of roaming in the waking and dreaming states,

" stops his jIva Srishti " for time being, and comes back to his own true

Self.

Sri Bhaskarji in his post said that the non cognition of multiplicity is

due to the union with Brahman. This is " NOT FALSE " . In some way, it is

true, but the actual thing must be IMHO,

** The union itself occurs because of the cessation of multiplicity.**

But as we know, that the multiplicity doesn't exist apart from its

perceiver, so it is said that the non cognition of it is due to the

union with Brahman. Because it is Brahman alone, that has to delude

ITSELF to see IN ITSELF, all the multiplicity.

##Hence, as the multiplicity ceases to exist, the jIva unites with

Brahman. Both occur simultaneously but the starting stimulus is given by

the ceasing of multiplicity. Otherwise NO ONE can show any reason for

the jIva(who has not done any apavAda through all his births), to reside

in his true Self.##

So, the jIva loses his jIvahood for time being only because avidyA has

granted him the permission to do so. Again when the time limit is

reached, avidyA comes into action to bring back the jIva from his union

with Brahman.

Therefore, we find absolute harmony between the two verses, one from

BrihadAranyaka and another from ChandOgya and all the conflict ceases to

exist !!

Therefore,

( " All these ignorant creatures, though they go everyday during sleep to

the world that is brahman itself do not have the thought " I have now

attained this state of brahman " because they are carried away by the

unreal as described above, being driven away from their real nature by

such evils as avidyA and the like " .

=

" As a hawk or a falcon roaming in the sky becomes tired, folds its wings

and makes for its nest, so does this infinite entity (purusha) hasten

for this state, where, falling asleep, he cherishes no more desires and

dreams no more dreams. )

** And wherever SrI Sankara or Sruti claims that there is no avidyA in

suSupti, we need to take it in right sense to mean that " there is no

avidyA to hinder the union. "

This statement is idiomatic in English and can be classically

illustrated by the following example.

Person A: Could you give me 100 Rupees please?

Person B: I have no money to waste !

Conclusion: Person B has money with him. But he doesn't want to waste

it. So, he has no money that can be wasted.

Similar sentence,

Person A: Please don't mind for what has happened.

Person B: I have no Mind to mind.

Conclusion: Person B has a Mind[its obvious :-))] but he doesn't want to

mind for what has happened.

Similarly we say,

" There is no avidyA to hinder the union with Brahman "

It means, there is avidyA but that cannot hinder the union with Brahman.

In the post script, I am pasting all that I have written to SrI bhAgini

nivEditaji because my major thesis lies there !

## I request the elders to pardon me if you feel I have exceeded my

limits to (mis)interpret(?) the things.##

!! SrI Adi SankarArpanamastu !!

P.S.

September 17, 2007

advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

<paramahamsavivekananda wrote:

Namaste Sri Sampath,

I shall give you brief reply for the following comments:

> And there is one more subtlety here. In the Rope-Snake analogy, we

speak

> of two things, the seer and the rope. But in deep sleep, the Seer

> himself becomes the Seen. But still we can without any defect in

our

> assertion, say that the Seer doesn't know that he sees himself.

Reply: My contention is that there is absolutely no trace of avidya,

neither avaraNa nor viskshepa **during deep sleep**. If vikshepa was

there, the sleeper should say after getting up, I perceived semi-

darkness etc. It is the state on par with turiya *during deep

sleep*. Remember my contetion is absolute union in the truest sense

of the term NOT inference, since it is reiterated in shruti and I

feel that it goes well with reasoning too.

This can

> be proved only on the basis of turIya. A person entering the waking

> state after Atma sAkSAtkAra, says that he has experienced his own

true

> Self(Brahman) during turIya stithi and also that he is Brahman

even now

> in his present wakefulness.

Reply: This is because he has realized the brahman and avidya is

gone for ever. The avidya do not hinder him at any point of time.

There is no state for him, but he is one with the self, always.

>

> Nevertheless, one may ask, where is the " knower " in that state to

know

> something? This is really a valid question !

>

> All that we can say finally is,

> Sruti must have reiterated that through apavAda alone, one has to

> consciously unite with his own Self but not simply as a result of

being

> carried away by the avidyA and the like.

Reply: I did not say any time that one can have union with brahman

*permanently* using deep sleep, drugs etc. etc. prabhuji. Did I?:-))

Shurti also says that one should consciously get rid of avidya in

the waking state with the help of shruti and AchAryOpadesha.

> ## The problem we have as stated by SrI Sastriji mahASaya is that

the

> statements of ChandOgya and BrihadAranyaka are mutually

conflicting.

> But, with due respect to all advaitins, I shall now attempt to

bridge

> this gap using the following explanation:

Reply: I don't see any contradiction in the first palce. Like other

shruti passages shruti is telling here that, you hugged brahman

itself you don't know after you woke up.:-)) AchArya also says while

commenting on that mantra, " jiva says, I did not know brahman today "

Who says this? Jiva, when he says? After he wokes up. Not during

sleep, Right prabhuji?

Finally, I would like to say that, you have raised some valid

objections by quoting from the bhAshya of AchArya where he says that

there **is avidya** in deep sleep. For this, the vEdAntin whom I am

trying to follow has given poper explanation for this apparant

contradiction. But the problem is it calls for conprehensive study

and this riddle is not solved by selective reading of the bhAshya. I

have to refer to the notes and the bhAshya of all the related

sutras. And hence I am stopping further discussion on this. Thanks

much for your pointers. Its time for me to assimilate slowly and

think on this. :-))

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

Br. Vinayaka.

September 17, 2007

So, the jIva loses his jIvahood for time being only because avidyA has

granted him the permission to do so. Again when the time limit is

reached, avidyA comes into action to bring back the jIva from his union

with Brahman.

praNAms Sri Sampath prabhuji

Hare Krishna

This is, I must admit prabhuji, something strange & interesting

observation which I am hearing first time...I know, you have been quoting

shankara bhAshya for the support of your statements...May I request you to

provide *bhAshya reference* for your above observation also

prabhuji...According to the above para ( and in your latest mail to me

also) you are saying *avidyA*, in sushupti, is granting the permission to

jiVa to unite with brahman!! So, avidyA holds sway even in sushupti & has

the special power to sanction the union to jIva...So, avidyA has the

existence in all the three states, in sushupti with the power of its

AvaraNa shakti it is allowing jIva to embrace the brahman!! right

prabhuji?? if yes, kindly tell me are these avasthA-s not a pariNAma of

this avidyA?? Are these avasthA-s standing apart from this avidyA?? If

this avidyA exists invariably in all the three states, what is wrong in

saying this avidyA is *as real as* brahman?? Is the turIya what you are

referring is something specially designed exalted state like *nirvikalpa

samAdhi*?? Though you have not specifically mentioned *turIya is nirvikalpa

samAdhi*, prabhuji, I think I've valid references from your recent mails to

infer that you are advocating the 4th state called turIya as something

strange state which is exclusive of our normal three avasthA-s...Kindly

bear with my ignorance & clarify these doubts prabhuji.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

September 17, 2007

Shrimaan Sampath Mahasaya:

That was just a small test and you won hands down having quenched

the thirst for knowledge with the blazing fire of Knowledge. The

Advaitin list is very fortunate to have a Young Lion Cub entering

the arena of Brahma Sutra bhasyas with confidence and clarity. Thank

you.

These are days of Gita Satsangh which is going on in full swing in

the group and we should all enjoy the Timeless wisdom of this great

Scriptural text. After reading your informative post , I am tempted

to quote the following verse from Chapter 4, verse 42

tasmad ajnana-sambhutam

hrt-stham jnanasinatmanah

chittvainam samsayam yogam

atisthottistha bharata

Swami Chinmayananda translates this verse thus

Therefore with the sword-of-Knowledge, cut asunder the doubt-of-the-

Self, born of 'ignorance, ' residing in your heart, and take refuge

in " YOGA. " Arise, O Bharata.

So, Shri Sampath-ji , do doubts arise from the intellect or do

doubts reside in the 'heart' ? Good question, is it not ?Knowledge

of the self is the ultimate knowledge and such a knowledge belongs

to the beautiful Realm of heart ( not the physical heart) but

the 'Atma' - in this context , I would encourage all members to go

and read the Verses From Chandogya upanishad quoted by Shri AnaNdaji

in his latest post. (37301)

tad yathApi hiraNya-nidhiM nihitam akShetraj~nA

upary upari sa~Ncaranto na vindeyur

[Those who do not rightly know

a field where golden treasure lies

keep passing over it, but may not find it.]

Yes! This is the hiranya-nidhiM ( Golden Treasure )-

This Golden treasure is nothing but the 'vision of the Soul' --------

------------This is beyond the realms of so called 'dream' states (

physical) It is forever visible to a JNANI IN ALL THE THREE STATES !

This is the Bhuma Vidya . This is what Sanatkumars taught to Narada

in Chandogya upanishads.

IN VEDANTA , ONE MUST NOT LOOK AT THINGS WITH THE HELP OF THE

INTELLECT. THEN WE WILL ALWAYS BE PLAGUED BY DOUBTS. iT IS KNOWLEDGE

OF THE SELF ALONE THAT WILL CUT ASUNDER THE KNOTS OF THE HEART . (

HRIDAYA GRANTHIS)

Yes- it is 'limitation of the vision' that makes us mistake a snake

for a rope and a rope for a snake . That is also the limitation of

such metaphors- Drishtantas. ( snake rope analogy)

The mind is always the culprit says Shri Sampath and we have to go

beyond the mind and instead cultivate the vision of the soul as

emphasised by shri Anandaji over and over again.

Yes! We need to work on the 'anthakarana shuddhi' - many times , we

see advaitins asking for a) Pramana ( right knowledge) b) talking

about Vipraya ( wrong understanding or erroneous perception -

mistaking the rope for a snake etc.) and then raising doubts

(vikalpa) majestic arguments ( more in the realm of vithanda vada

are built on the edifice of doubts)

But , it is time to Listen to shri Krishna bhagwan - we must wake up

from 'Nidra' - not only the physical sleep but the Sleep of

the 'anthakarana' - WHERE WE ARE SUNK IN THE ABYSS OF IGNORANCE .

Swami Vivekanand was fond of repeating this verse from Katha

upanishad

'Uthistha, Jagrata, Prapaya varan nibodhita'…

Arise, Awake and Stop not till the goal is achieved.. "

Thank you , Sampath Mahasaya for all your wondeful observations and

divine interpretations .

i leave you all with this verse from Chandogya upanishad - the

Mother of all upanishads !

" Sa va esa atma hrdi, tasyaitad-eva niruktam hrdy-ayam iti, tasmad-

hrdayam, ahar ahar va evam-vit svargam lokam eti. "

Stop seeing things externally - see things from the Heart !

Aum Shanti! Shanti! Shantihi!

September 18, 2007

Pranams to all.

Namaskarams Shri Sampath-ji, and let me offer you a rather belated

welcome to this e-group. Your presence here is a wonderful blessing to

this forum. This is a very subtle subject and one that is not easy to

explain in one or even two emails and i admire your ability to

concisely and precisely present it the way you have. May I please

request you to participate in the ongoing Gita satsang, and perhaps

also contribute your expertise on many other discussions and topics.

Sashtang namaskarams Shri Shastri-ji - thank you for your references

but more importantly for reminding everyone of the importance of a

Guru in understanding the Shruti and bhaashyas.

I have been following the multitude of messages on this thread with

interest and admiration.

I can add a small portion in terms of the way I understand it.

Now coming to the subject of the three states - I agree with Rishi-ji

and Bhaskar-ji that perhaps some of the apparently contradictory ideas

found in the bashyas as well as the shruti may have to do with

context. And by this I dont mean that they are saying two different

things based on convenience, but they are saying the same thing in two

different ways based on what it is that is being discussed.

The model Shruti uses to analyze the jiva, breaks it down, as is well-

known - into 5 koshas and 3 shareeras - gross,subtleand causal. Of

this the problem-child, the I-sense, the Ego-sense is primarily the

vijanamaya kosha.

It is this vijnanamaya kosha who is the Mr.X, who thinks he is poor,

is in pain, has guilt, is getting old, fears death, dislikes karela,

loves his child etc

Now in the waking state Mr.X is experiencing Ishwara's world. He uses

his sensory apparatus and conceives of a world that is as though " out

there " , but in reality, consists of vrrtis that are " in here "

In the dream state Mr.X is experiencing his own private world - where-

in the primary faculty that is operational is memory and projections

thereof which create a world which is fully " in here "

Now in deep sleep or sushupti, Mr.X is no longer in the picture.

The vijnanamaya kosha and all other so-called " outer " koshas are all

temporarily resolved.

What is left is the karana shareera or the anandamaya kosha. The

anandamaya kosha itself consists of tamas, and reflects the Bliss of

Brahman. So deep sleep is blissful, because the jiva exists in the

very sourcepool of bliss in the vyavaharic level - it is where Maya-

devi allows the weary jiva to suckle the bliss of Brahman as it

were..every other experiential bliss in the world is this bliss alone -

only it needs the external duality-based circumstances to

permit....for that matter - even in a state of self-forgetfulness -

such as when i am listening to a wonderful raaga -and i simply lose my-

" self " in the process - only to come out of that state and realize " i

had a blissful experience " - at those times what is responsible for

that is the anadamayakosha alone.

What is the jiva's experience in this state - one of total

blankness. " Bliss- " ful " ignorance "

Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iii.23 to 30 – " That It does not see,

smell, taste, speak, hear, think. touch, or know is because although

seeing, smelling, tasting, speaking, hearing, thinking, touching and

knowing then it does not see, smell, taste, speak, hear, think, touch

or know (the vijnanamaya kosha is dormant - there is no experience of

an external world of objects or an internal dream world.); for the

vision of the witness can never be lost, because it is imperishable " .

The Kaivalya UP.(13) further clarifies in a similair vein

Sushuptikaale sakale vileene

tamobhibhaati sukharoopameti

In dreamless sleep when everything is absorbed, the

jiva, overpowered by ignorance, attains the state of

happiness.

In other words, the jiva does as though attain kaivalyam but being

overpowered by Maya's avaranashakti ( or the veiling power) is not

conscious of it.

Also Ch. Up 6.8.1 as you would be well familiair with

Uddalaka the son of Aruna said to his son Svetaketu:

" Learn from me, my dear, the true nature of sleep.

When a person has entered into deep sleep, as it is

called, then, my dear, he becomes united with Pure

Being (Sat), he has gone to his own Self. That is why

they say he is in deep sleep (svapiti); it is because

he has gone (apita) to his own (svam).

[While the Sanskrit term used here is Svapnaantam (dream), Shankara

clarifies that it is referring to its core or deep sleep alone.]

This beautiful verse also explains that in deep sleep

there is a reverting back on the part of the jiva or a merging back as

it were into its Source for a temporary blissful

state.

Bhagwan Shankara: " Just as the reflection of a person in a mirror

attains the person himself(!!) when the mirror is removed, in a

similair way indeed, there is in deep sleep, when the mind etc cease

functioning, the Supreme Deity, which, in the form of a conscious

individual soul as Its reflection, had entered into the mind for the

manifestation of name and form, attains its true nature, by giving up

Its appearance as the individual soul, called the mind... ...

In deep sleep a person becomes identified with Existence, i.e. he

becomed united with the Deity under discussion referred to by the

words Existence. Having discarded the nature of the individual soul

which has entered into the mind and which is produced from contact

with the mind etc he attains his own self, his nature as Existence,

which is the Ultimate Reality. "

So in deep sleep, with only the karana shareera being active, there is

no " i " -ego which is there to register anything. The bliss that is

processed at the level of the anandamayakosha is remembered by the

memory function of the sookshma shareera and the vijnanamaya kosha

then remembers " I was in blissful sleep "

But this is from the frame of reference of the waking state ALONE.

If you analyze sushupti purely by itself, then one must remember that

there is no vijnanamayakosha, consequently there is no " i " sense which

is active. So if this state is analyzed from the standpoint of

Brahman - from a paramrthic standpoint - there is only Brahman with

every " other " thing being only in potential form - being temporarily

resolved.

Why is there avidya in deep sleep? Because the ONLY thing opposed to

avidya which is jnanam has not occurred - avidya cannot be knocked off

by temporarily suspending the instruments.

But in the state itself - the entity to which avidya applies -i.e. the

vijnanamaya kosha weary traveller - well - since he is literally at

rest, and so, for that period of time, he does not deal with the

duality; which is nothing but the handiwork of avidya.

Chandog Up VIII

" So it is, Indra, " replied Prajapati. " I shall explain the Self

further to you. Live with me another thirty—two years. " He lived with

Prajapati another thirty—two years. Then Prajapati said to Indra:

1. " When a man is asleep, with senses withdrawn and serene and sees

no dream—that is the Self. This is immortal, fearless. This is

Brahman. " Then Indra went away satisfied in heart. But even before he

had reached the gods, he saw this difficulty: " In truth it (i.e. the

self in dreamless sleep) does not know itself as `I am it,' nor

these other creatures. It has therefore reached in dreamless sleep

utter annihilation, as it were. I do not see any good in this. "

2. He returned with fuel in hand. To him Prajapati said: " Well,

Indra, you went away satisfied in heart; now for what purpose have

you come back? " He (Indra) said: " Venerable Sir, in truth it (i.e.

the self in dreamless sleep) does not know itself as `I am it,' nor

these other creatures. It has therefore reached utter annihilation,

as it were. I do not see any good in this. "

In this context it is important to also recognize and remember that

the jnanam of satyam-jnanam-anantam Brahman is not a janaati but a

jnaaptih - it is not a knower as in an act of knowing, but a knowing

principle which is nothing but awareness - simple awareness,

choiceless, objectless, witnessing, awareness. This knowing is that by

which one sees, hears, tastes,

So what persists in deep sleep, the " who " IS or " what " IS in sushupti,

is the very knowing, which acts as the substratum for all

other " knowing " as in the act of knowing to happen.

I see a flower - the knowing that makes me see this flower, the

knowing that envelops the flower, the antahkaranam that sees it, and

the very act of seeing and allows this entire transaction to take

place - that knowing is Jnanam - and it is this knowing that continues

in deep sleep as well - and it is this basic continuity of knowing

that helps me arrive at the very crux of what the sole objective of

this prakriya is - which is to understand mySelf to be the very

knowing. In that sense really speaking there is no knowing Brahman, or

knowing of Brahman, but a cognitive understanding of the undeniable

fact of my very nature ever-being this very Knowing.

And without there being this knowing - my true self - being both

active and changeless in all three planes or modes of existence, their

existence on a relative plane itself is rendered impossible.

Which then of course is extended to all the planes of existence with

the bold declaration - that in Me alone do these three states Exist,

and unto me alone they all resolve, I am verily susbtratum which lends

support and consciousness to all these three worlds.

And lastly, there is no question of there ever being a union between

the jiva and Brahman. From a paramarthic standpoint of course there is

no other thing but Brahman, and so no Union is possible. From a

vyavaharic standpoint as well, even lending conditional existence to

the jiva there is no question of a merger of a pseudo-entity to a real

entity. The self-ignorance on the part of the jiva can only be

destroyed by self-knowledge.

Humble pranams,

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam

advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

I am pointing out all these only to caution against reading and trying

to understand the bhAshya, even in translation, without the guidance

of a teacher. The meaning of sentences has to be understood taking

into account the context and not just literally. Shri Sampat's

postings on this subject are very illuminating and show

that he has a thorough grounding in the subject. The members can

learn a lot from him.

S.N.Sastri

September 18, 2007

advaitin , " shyam_md " <shyam_md wrote:

>

> Pranams to all.

> Namaskarams Shri Sampath-ji, and let me offer you a rather belated

> welcome to this e-group. Your presence here is a wonderful blessing to

> this forum. This is a very subtle subject and one that is not easy to

> explain in one or even two emails and i admire your ability to

> concisely and precisely present it the way you have. May I please

> request you to participate in the ongoing Gita satsang, and perhaps

> also contribute your expertise on many other discussions and topics.

......................

> And lastly, there is no question of there ever being a union between

> the jiva and Brahman. From a paramarthic standpoint of course there is

> no other thing but Brahman, and so no Union is possible. From a

> vyavaharic standpoint as well, even lending conditional existence to

> the jiva there is no question of a merger of a pseudo-entity to a real

> entity. The self-ignorance on the part of the jiva can only be

> destroyed by self-knowledge.

>

> Humble pranams,

> Hari OM

>

> Shri Gurubhyoh namah

> Shyam

=============================================

SrI Shyam mahASaya,

sa prem namaskAraH !

I am overwhelmed with joy when I read your post. It was such a

beautiful yet lucid explanation ! I have no words to describe it!

I want to clear my stand regarding the UNION with Brahman.

If we consider a closed water contained vessel immersed inside a big

water reservoir, we say that the water is always united. But when a

" phenomenon " like breaking the vessel occurs, another " Phenomenon " of

the " UNION " of the water of vessel with that of reservoir succeeds.

There ends all the phenomena. It is the complete cessation of all

phenomena. What all remains there is the Noumenon, existing in itself,

ever unknown and unknowable. Nevertheless, in reality, there is no

small water vessel and big water reservoir. Brahman alone conditioned

by avidyA behaves as jIva. So when it ceases from the non-self

identification, it should reside in its own true Self. But I feel, the

vessel-reservoir analogy stands well as long as the individual mind

does not identify itself as one with the cosmic Mind.

So, to make it sound logically correct, I shall formulate my question

to SrI Bhaskar mahASaya as, " tell me the reason for such a

merger (or) ceasing from the not-self identification which is said to

occur in the deep sleep. "

Thanks a lot for your outstanding presentation!

And with great pleasure, I shall take part in the Gita Satsang.

!!Krishnam vande jagadgurum!!

September 18, 2007

Namaste Shri Sampat and Shri Vinayaka.

___________

Shri Vinayaka, I can't understand the relevance of Sw. Vidyaranya's

statement to the scenario presented by me (Ref: your post # 37310).

Kindly elaborate, if doing so doesn't disturb your temporary

retirement from the current debate.

_____________

Shri Sampat, you have raised too many questions in your post # 37309

answering which will only complicate the simple scenario presented by

me. Instead, therefore, I would try to explain the raison d'etre for

the scenario, which might perhaps help you understand the doubts I am

expressing better.

A European friend of mine who very much appreciates the way advaita

is explained from the sat, chit and Ananda angles. We two share a

great chemistry here. However, when it comes to the traditional

understanding of avastAtraya, he often warns me that I am

overstepping my logical / rational mandate, although he fully agrees

that the three `states' are interconnected through a single

substratum. For that simple conclusion, he doesn't need any evidence

other than the fact that the three are expressed with an " I " , as " I

am awake " , " I dreamt " and " I slept " . He is not willing to go beyond

that to accept the different sheaths etc. which we traditionally

bring into explain Mandukya (like Dr. Shyamji has excellently done in

his latest presentation).

He attributes the remembrance / happiness of deep sleep purely to

post-waking awareness of the passage of time and the

biological/physical changes that have taken place during rest. The

hypothetical situation that I tried to portray, therefore, was an

attempt to eliminate these temporal, biological and physical frames

of reference. You can do this any way you find fit. We need not

even send the man to space if the temporal frame can be eliminated in

any other manner on our terra firma itself. The choice is left to

you.

Shri Sampat, I would like to refer to your following specific

statement:

QUOTE

" When the hawk is NOT TIRED of roaming in the sky, why would it come

back foolishly to its nest? It would nicely enjoy roaming in the sky

forever without any tiredness. "

UNQUOTE

From the above, my friend would assume that the hawk is the BMI

(which of course includes the ego) and tiredness refers to its

getting physically and mentally fatigued from the preoccupations of

waking and also dreaming.

A cessation of its preoccupations during sleep should therefore rest

the BMI. The rest coupled with awareness of the passage of time

should make the hawk exclaim when it awakes: " Oh, I slept like a hog

happily without knowing anything " .

My friend would also argue that the hawk can be induced to sleep

again and again without it getting tired by administering certain

soporific drugs. So, tiredness ceases to be a criterion when slumber

is externally induced. All that is needed is the BMI and the

soporific that acts on it.

He would also point at the insomniacs, who, inspite of being

extremely tired, cannot entice the " beautiful thing from pole to

pole " to visit them.

For all my knowledge of Advaita, Mandukya and the understanding

gained from the roaring debates on this forum, I don't think I have

any rational argument in my armoury to refute his contentions.

The solid platform on which I stand is the words of our sages in

which I have personal faith – a sort of intuitive conviction born of

my own forays into the depths of my being. I can't say how much of

it I owe to the culture to which I was born and in which I was

brought up. But, I can't induce my friend to share the same

subjective platform with me. I don't think I would be justified in

asking him to do so unless he finds out the veracity of our ancient

treatises on his own.

Any tips how you would handle the situation if you were in my shoes,

Shri Sampat?

I am a heavy snorer and occasionally suffer from sleep apnoea. A

year ago, I went to a renowned pulmonist in South India. He asked me

if I dream a lot and I answered him that I dream so much so that I

don't understand the difference between waking and dreaming. I was

just factual. Advaita has made things unbelievably pleasant for me.

The doc then explained that I was not getting sound sleep because

each time I am at the portals of `bliss', the apnoea is pulling me

back to the realm of dreaming close to the periphery of waking. He

attributed most of my complaints like diabetes mellitus, borderline

hypertension, even mild cataract of the eyes, etc. to faulty

metabolism resulting from lack of good sleep and recommended that I

get immediately admitted at his hospital for a three-night sleep

study in order to determine the seriousness of the disorder and if it

requires surgery or sleep accessories or only just medications.

I haven't followed up with him on his advice because despite all his

authoritative professional pronouncements, I am a happy dreamer,

sleeper and waker, without any fear of death. Above all, I am a

devotee too; therefore a devotee waker, devotee dreamer and devotee

sleeper, and don't bother much about what is in store for me next.

Besides, on a lighter vein, my wife would miss me terribly if I am

cured of snoring and lose her sense of security. She has lived with

it happily for 27 years. That is a different matter.

However, the diagnosis opens up another avenue of thought. A

physical condition can deprive one of deep slumber (union with

Brahman) and it can be corrected by surgery, accessories or

medications. That is like throwing more ammunition into the hands of

my European friend, isn't it?

Appreciate if you kindly avoid quotes in expounding your

understanding at least when you are replying me.

PraNAms.

Madathil Nair

September 18, 2007

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

>

> Namaste Shri Sampat and Shri Vinayaka.

> ___________

>

> Shri Vinayaka, I can't understand the relevance of Sw.

Vidyaranya's

> statement to the scenario presented by me (Ref: your post #

37310).

> Kindly elaborate, if doing so doesn't disturb your temporary

> retirement from the current debate.

> _____________

Dear Nair-ji,

Kindly pardon me for this. The quote was irrelevant indeed. While

posting I was deliberating on some things like vritti, or memory in

deepsleep **et al**, which is not directly concerned with your

specific question in the strict sense.

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

Br. Vinayaka.

September 18, 2007

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

mahASaya, humble praNAmaH !

You wrote:

> My friend would also argue that the hawk can be induced to sleep

> again and again without it getting tired by administering certain

> soporific drugs. So, tiredness ceases to be a criterion when

slumber is externally induced. All that is needed is the BMI and the

> soporific that acts on it.

[uNQUOTE]

mahASaya,

By all means, deep sleep is the reaction of the Subject. As you said,

the scenario becomes more complex if you answer my points.

But without taking into consideration, the conditions I have

specified, there cannot be any deep sleep and therefore we need to

assume a hypothetical deep sleep for our convenience and thus we can

very well expect the hypothetical effects(The person not conscious of

his deep sleep after waking up).

But IMHO, Sruti speaks about a " Natural process " . This is the law of

nature. It cannot be broken down. If really all the conditions are

satisfied and still the person is able to enter the deep sleep and is

unaware of such experiences like, " I was happy " etc., he will no more

be a man. He must be a supernatural being. No human being, who is an

integral part of the nature can undergo such a process.

Even the soporifics cannot act in such a hypothetical scenario.

I humbly opine that, in a curiosity to drive our imagination to the

favorable results, we are overlooking the indispensable conditions.

> He would also point at the insomniacs, who, inspite of being

> extremely tired, cannot entice the " beautiful thing from pole to

> pole " to visit them.

[uNQUOTE]

This is entirely different being a physical or mental abnormality. But

deep sleep is a normal thing.

The bird is tired but could not fold its wings and direct itself

towards the nest because of " some other " problems.(Pardon me for using

the quote again).

September 18, 2007

praNAms Sri Sampath prabhuji

Hare Krishna

I am still studying & digesting your quotes in various mails. What a

treasure house you are prabhuji!!! Kindly accept my heartfelt praNAms to

you prabhuji....

S prabhuji :

## What is the cause for the " UNION with Brahman " to occur in Deep

Sleep? ##

bhaskar :

I think sri bhagavatpAda himself has answered this question in

*tadabhAvAdhikaraNa* of sUtra bhAshya..Shankara here says, there is no time

when jIva become one with brahman, for one's intrinsic nature cannot be

alienated. So, strictly speaking, it is not a special occurence in the

state of deep sleep only...Shankara continues to say that it is only in the

view of the seeming foreign aspect which he assumes in dream & waking owing

to contact of upAdhi-s, it is proposed to say that he attains (or unites)

his own form on the dissolution of that foreign aspect...

For that matter, as you know, the socalled three states are really no

states of consciousness. First, we should identify ourselves with the

body, mind intellect to assert that we have three avasthA-s is it not??

secondly, the witnessing principle (sAkshi) in us which is no other

than pure consciousness (shuddha chaitanya), remains quite unaffected by

the appearance or disappearance of these three states. Thirdly, the three

states admit neither of concurrence in space

nor of succession in time. As it is said, there is no concept of space

& time in sushupti, hence, in my opinion, the question, when or how jIva

attains (unites) with brahman does not arise here at all. Since in the

deep sleep state, there is no external contacts like body, mind, senses,

world, space, time etc. we have to conclude that

sleep is only pure consciousness which has no relation whatever with its

manifestation in shape of pramAtru-pramEya, & this state of ours is neither

waking nor dreaming nor even sleeping at any point of time. (GaudapAda

kArika says this somewhere, but I dont remember) So, as shankara declares

in the above sUtra, jIva is always identical with brahman. But on account

of upAdhi-s such as the mind, body etc. he *appears* to be different from

the Reality. As these upAdhi-s donot exist during deep sleep , it is said

that the soul merges/unites/attains brahman in deep sleep state..that's

it..But in reality there is NO TIME when jIva is NOT ONE with brahman. I

hope, till now, you are with me prabhuji...

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

PS : Prabhuji, instead of addressing your series of mails with various

bhAshya quotes, I am planning to take this subject *sushupti* & its

treatment in shankara's prasthAna trayi bhAshya & surEshwara's vArtika from

two different perspectives, keeping in mind the traditional method of

teaching of brahman i.e. adhyArOpa apavAda. But I am bit busy at office

right now, I need couple of days to do this..But before that I should read

all the posts in this thread...Sri Shyam prabhuji, as usual, penned his

thoughts with a clinical precision without disturbing the main purport of

AtmaikatvavAda of advaita...My praNAms to him ...

September 18, 2007

Dear All Mahasayas :

I am so delighted to be back in Advaitic Wonderland . It is so

wonderful to read and enjoy the posts of all learned Mahasayas

here . Shyamji is to be congratulated on his excellent presentation

of the three deep states! He has explained the XYZ ( or shall we say

ABC ) of the waking , dreaming and deep sleep states VERY WELL.

Now Sampath-ji, you posed this question ( shal we say , Teaser?) at

the end of you post 37318!

You ask, Dear Paramahamsa-ji ( although i like to reserve that name

only for Thakore) ,

" ## What is the cause for the " UNION with Brahman " to occur in Deep

Sleep? ##

Tantalizing question , is it not ? Well, Dear Sampath Mahasaya, as

you know i am familiar with most of the writings of the Swamijis of

the RK mission and many of the examples and parables you and

upanishadic quotes you and vinayakaji mention are in the books of

these swamijis! But , you have done a wonderful job of summarizing

the idealogy of RK MISSION SUCCINTLY IN YOUR MESSAGES . Knowledge

grows by sharing!

Now , in his book Swami NIKHILANANDA-ji says :

" In deep sleep the soul is united with Consciousness, that is,

Brahman. There, there are no longer any contrasting objects; there

is no longer any empirical consciousness, as in dream or

waking. " " That is Its real form, in which It is exalted beyond

desire, free from evil and fearless. For just as a man embraced by a

beloved wife has no consciousness inner or outer, so also the Spirit

embraced by the Self, consisting of Knowledge, has no consciousness

of the outer or the inner. That is Its real form in which desire has

been laid to rest. Then the father is no longer father, mother is no

longer mother, the worlds are no longer worlds, the gods no longer

gods. " All contrasts are lost in the eternal One. " Then the soul is

unaffected by good and unaffected by evil, then It has overcome all

the pangs of Its heart. If It then sees not, yet It is seeing,

though It sees not; for, because It is imperishable, the seeing of

the One is not interrupted. There is, moreover, no second beside It,

nothing distinct from It to be seen. " There is in deep sleep a union

with the eternal Knowing Subject, that is to say, Brahman. " Every

day one attains Brahman (during deep sleep). "

FURTHERMORE , SWAMIJI SAYS

" But this union is only apparent and not like the true union that

follows the knowledge of Brahman. The sleeper, still under the

influence of maya, returns to the consciousness of the waking world,

and again becomes his old self - the thief, a thief; the murderer, a

murderer; the saint, a saint. In dreamless sleep the Atman remains

covered with a thin layer of the veiling power of maya. That is why

It is oblivious of the world. The Consciousness inherent in Atman,

however, is never destroyed; for this Consciousness is immortal. It

appears, therefore, that in the relative world the nearest approach

to the experience of Unitive Knowledge, and to peace, is the

experience of deep sleep, which is called the causal body with which

the sleeper is identified. "

(Man in Search of Immortality : Testimonials from the Hindu

Scriptures Swami Nikhilananda.Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center of New

York.)

SO , Sampath Maharaj , HAVE YOU HERD THE STORY OF THE FARMER LOSING

HIS ONLY SON AND THEN THE DREAM STATE HE , AS AN EMPEROR . LOST ALL

HIS SEVEN SONS ?

WHO SHOULD HE LAMENT FOR ?

THE POINT TO BE MADE IS A SELF-REALIZED JNANI IS AWAKE WHEN HE IS

IN DEEP SLEEP ALSO! HE IS ALSO IN samadhi WHEN HE IS DOING 'LOKA

SANGRAHA' WITH HIS BHAKTAS - though Sri Ramakrishna's eyes were

closed, he was fully awake to 'Reality' all the time!

PL READ THIS VERSE FROM SRIMAD BHAGVAD GITA

na tad bhasayate suryo

na sasanko na pavakah

yad gatva na nivartante

tad dhama paramam mama ?( 15:6)

" This is my Infinite Being; shall the sun lend it any light–or the

moon, or fire? For it shines Self-luminous always. "

Such jnanis are always - self-illumined! They do not worry whether

it is dark outside because they are always illumined by the 'light'

osf awarness that is shining within ! So, sleep, deep sleep, waking

states are only 'states' not statements! The only statement is ' I

AM AWARENESS - Sat chit ananda. '

advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

<paramahamsavivekananda wrote:

>

September 19, 2007

advaitin , bhaskar.yr wrote:

> I think sri bhagavatpAda himself has answered this question in

> *tadabhAvAdhikaraNa* of sUtra bhAshya..Shankara here says, there is

no time

> when jIva become one with brahman, for one's intrinsic nature cannot be

> alienated. So, strictly speaking, it is not a special occurence in the

> state of deep sleep only...Shankara continues to say that it is only

in the

> view of the seeming foreign aspect which he assumes in dream &

waking owing

> to contact of upAdhi-s, it is proposed to say that he attains (or

unites)

> his own form on the dissolution of that foreign aspect...

[uNQUOTE]

masASaya sa-ashTAnga namaskAraH !

I agree with all that you wrote above. In fact I believe, what we were

saying is the same thing but using different words. As you have

rightly pointed out, SrI Sankara says,

Brahma Sutras.3.2.7. SrI Sankara Bhashya:

" For the text says, 'With that which is he becomes united, he is gone

to his Self;' which means that the sleeping person has entered into

his true nature.--It cannot, moreover, be said that the soul is at any

time not united with Brahman--for its true nature can never pass

away--; but considering that in the state of waking and that of

dreaming it passes, owing to the contact with its limiting adjuncts,

into something else, as it were, it may be said that **when those

adjuncts cease in deep sleep it passes back into its true nature.** "

## This is what I wanted to say all the time. *WHEN* those adjuncts

cease(on the dissolution of that foreign aspect...as you have

beautifully written it), it passes back into its true nature. In my

humble opinion, the cause for deep sleep is ceasing of

adjuncts(Withdrawl of vikshepa shakti). Because, we know that these

adjuncts can be obliterated only through apavAda. Without the

subject's conscious involvement(apavAda), the avidyA withdraws itself

due to " tiredness " of waking and dreaming states. Thus, Sruti says,

" **HOWEVER** there is no second thing that it could

see/hear/smell/taste/speak/think/touch.

And of course, once if the union with Brahman is established, it no

more sees any multiplicity *during* deep sleep.

mahASaya,

Still and all, IMHO, we are expressing the same thing in different

ways as can be illustrated by the following example:

# Question: Why the hawk is not in the sky?

Your answer: Because it is in the nest.

My answer: " Because it has folded its wings " and since it has only two

abodes, either the sky or the nest and finding no other abode than

nest, it comes back to its nest.

I just wanted to impress one central idea that the statement, " Because

it has folded its wings " would answer two questions which are as follows:

#1, Why the hawk is in the nest?

#2, Why the hawk is not in the sky?

And further analysis would take us to the conclusion that it has

folded its wings only on account of its tiredness. avidyA ceases to

act on itself.

Whereas, in the Self-Realization(Atma sAkSAtkAra), avidyA is

obliterated by the conscious de-superimposition done by the jIva

wherein all the karmAs are burned to ashes not to leave a single cause

for his re-identification with the not-self.

September 19, 2007

advaitin , " bhagini_niveditaa "

<bhagini_niveditaa wrote:

>

>> SO , Sampath Maharaj , HAVE YOU HERD THE STORY OF THE FARMER LOSING

> HIS ONLY SON AND THEN THE DREAM STATE HE , AS AN EMPEROR . LOST ALL

> HIS SEVEN SONS ?

>

> WHO SHOULD HE LAMENT FOR ?

>

> THE POINT TO BE MADE IS A SELF-REALIZED JNANI IS AWAKE WHEN HE IS

> IN DEEP SLEEP ALSO! HE IS ALSO IN samadhi WHEN HE IS DOING 'LOKA

> SANGRAHA' WITH HIS BHAKTAS - though Sri Ramakrishna's eyes were

> closed, he was fully awake to 'Reality' all the time!

>

> PL READ THIS VERSE FROM SRIMAD BHAGVAD GITA

>

> na tad bhasayate suryo

> na sasanko na pavakah

> yad gatva na nivartante

> tad dhama paramam mama ?( 15:6)

>

> " This is my Infinite Being; shall the sun lend it any light–or the

> moon, or fire? For it shines Self-luminous always. "

>

> Such jnanis are always - self-illumined! They do not worry whether

> it is dark outside because they are always illumined by the 'light'

> osf awarness that is shining within ! So, sleep, deep sleep, waking

> states are only 'states' not statements! The only statement is ' I

> AM AWARENESS - Sat chit ananda. '

## mAta, sAshTAnga namaskAraH !

I am very much delighted to hear these nectarine words from you.

For each and every word you wrote in your post, I couldn't avoid

myself nodding my head in absolute agreement thinking how correct they

are!

I consider it a divine privilege to associate with you all.

I seek nothing but your blessings for my sAdhana to be fruitful!

!! yeshAm vRittiH samaa vRiddhA paripakvA cha sA punaH

te vai sadbrahmatAm praaptaa netare shabdavAdinaH.Tejobindu Upanishad.

Meaning:-- Those who have purified their minds and cultivated the

alertness necessary to comprehend the Self, they alone apprehend the

Pure Brahman - not others who merely prattle the dialects and quote

the letters of the SAstrAs. !!

September 19, 2007

Dear Shri Sampath,

Thank you for your post # 37329.

I am disappointed that you have not addressed the core issue, have

dwelt only on the peripherals and opined that, in a curiosity to

drive our imagination to favorable results, we are overlooking

indispensable conditions.

May I assure you, Sir, there are no favourable results anticipated in

this open-minded discussion. Let me restate my point of view (or

rather my friend's point of view to which I tend to agree without

compromising Advaita), vis a vis the discussion going on here,

without bringing in any more hypothetical situations or conditions

relating thereto.

To my understanding, there were two opinions aired out here (which

now have converged miraculously) as mentioned below:

1. Deep sleep is a complete union with Brahman without any trace

of ignorance.

2. Deep sleep, although it is a union with Brahman, has

ignorance inherent in it, which causes the jIva to rebound to the

planes of dream and waking.

The happiness of deep sleep was attributed to the `bliss' enjoyed in

the union.

My friend's point of view should be considered against the above

background. According to him, the happiness of sleep is purely due

to relaxation and rest (biological and physical). Relaxation, rest

and the awareness of passage of time constitute the sleep

experience. The question is whether this view can be accepted or not.

Well, as I see it, there is no question of any union for the jiVa

with Brahman. It is never other than Brahman whether the state it is

in be waking, dream or sleep. This is the absolute point of view.

The relative (phenomenal) point of view of a jIvA frog-leaping from

one state to another and uniting with Brahman in deep sleep is an

apparence on the absolute and, if ajAtavAda is accepted, it is never

there. AvastAtraya and the koSAs are just models granted to us to

appreciate the Absolute behind the apparence. We seem to be getting

fixated with the detials of the models and institutionalizing them at

the expense of the Ultimate.

An ordinary person has no awareness in waking that he is Brahman. He

is no better in the dream world. In deep sleep, he is totally

knocked out and, therefore, in total ignorance. At least in the

waking, a Swamiji can tell him that he is Brahman and he may just

accept it because an authority has said so. But, in deep sleep, even

Swamijis are denied entry. So, from the relative point of view, an

ordinary BMI emerging out of deep sleep can have no claims to bliss

resulting from union with Brahman. The happiness it experiences is

due to being refreshed through rest and relaxation.

Of course, all happiness derives from Brahman only. The happiness of

sleep also has its roots in Brahman. So, have all the enjoyments in

waking and dreaming. There is therefore no reason to single out

sleep happiness for a special treatment as something especially

coming out of Brahman.

The one who is ignorant of his own nature has to necessarily remove

his ignorance in the waking. Once that begins to happen, the

knowledge gained will slowly percolate into dreaming and eventually

into the darkness of deep sleep. With complete realization, he is

the self-shining Sun of Knowledge always illuminating his own nature

of total wakefulness. Nothing in this understanding has ever united

or merged with anything. Nothing has changed. The Sun has always

been shining and illuminating itself.

This is the way I reconcile with my European friend. I don't find

his views about sleep unacceptable.

PraNAms.

Madathil Nair

September 19, 2007

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

> The happiness of deep sleep was attributed to the `bliss' enjoyed in

> the union.

> My friend's point of view should be considered against the above

> background. According to him, the happiness of sleep is purely due

> to relaxation and rest (biological and physical). Relaxation, rest

> and the awareness of passage of time constitute the sleep

> experience. The question is whether this view can be accepted or not.

SrI Nair mahASaya,

sAshtAnga danDa praNAmaH !

As far as my limited knowledge goes, everything that is grosser is but

a manifestation of the finer and that again is a manifestation of the

finest.

Pardon me for I want to bring the concept of Chakras here to explain

what I meant in saying the above statement.

The Yogi's concept of Chakras, which is said to be expressed

implicitly in Scriptures in the form of sapta-bhUmikAs, is based on

the following points:

Chakras are the spinning wheels of Consciousness NOT PRESENT, but

FORMED in a yogi's body.

These are represented by the Subtle nerve ganglia in the subtle body.

These are again represented by the gross nerve plexuses of the

physical body which regulate most of the functions of the viscera.

Viz.,

1) Sacral plexus - muladhara.

2) Prostatic plexus - svadhishthana.

3) Epigastric plexus - manipura.

4) Cardiac plexus - anahata.

5) Pharyngeal plexus - vishuddha.

6) Pineal ganglion - ajna.

7) Pituitary ganglion - sahasrara.

In the similar way, everything that is causal, is expressed in the

subtle body which is again expressed in the gross body.

So, there is no wrong if we consider deep sleep as pure biological

rest and relaxation. This view can established firmly by a biological

scientist. Can we deny it? No! He is very much justified with his

experiments done on the physical body.

This indeed supports the Sruti statements that the rest and relaxation

are the main criteria on account of which, avidyA is BOUND to withdraw

itself. Since avidyA is withdrawn, Mind is obliterated and and this is

expressed in the gross body as, resting of the cognitive centers of Brain.

In every way, Sruti is proved right because for the one who sees the

phenomena, whole Noumenon vanishes. And for the one who beholds the

Noumenon, all phenomena vanish. Because the truth is, Brahman itself

is seen as the world. So both cannot co-exist. For the one who

experiments on the material things(material scientist), all the

results he would get, are bound to be materialistic.

And for the one who is experimenting on the meta-physical

things(Sage), all the results he would get, are bound to be Spiritual.

This reminds me of the nature of electron of which it is said that it

cannot be firmly established because, what ever the RESULT we expect

from doing an experiment on electron, it would grant us the same result.

If we want to prove the electron as a wave, it will yield the results

to satisfy us. Again if we try to prove it as a particle, it again

yields the results which would make us believe that it is a particle.

## Kindly forgive me if what I wrote above seems to be irrelevant to

the context.

!! vandE bhakta Jana ASrayam cha varadam vande Siva Sankaram !!

The three states

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads