Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

aasiino duuram vrajati

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Dear All,While explaining this Kathopanishad (1.2.21) verse, Sri Shankara says like this:करणानामà¥à¤ªà¤¶à¤®à¤ƒ शयनमॠ। करणजनितसà¥à¤¯à¥ˆà¤•à¤¦à¥‡à¤¶à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¸à¥à¤¯ उपशमः शयानसà¥à¤¯ भवति। यदा चैवं केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¾à¤¤à¥ सरà¥à¤µà¤¤à¥‹ यातीव, यदा विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¸à¥à¤¥à¤ƒ सà¥à¤µà¥‡à¤¨ रूपेण सà¥à¤¥à¤¿à¤¤ à¤à¤µ सनॠमनआदिगतिषॠतदà¥à¤ªà¤¾à¤§à¤¿à¤•à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¤à¥ दूरं वà¥à¤°à¤œà¤¤à¥€à¤µ ।

Corresponding English meaning as per Swami Gambhiranandaji Maharaj (of Ramakrishna Math) Book is:Sleep is the cessation of the activities of the senses. The delimitation of Consciousness, caused by the senses, ceases for a sleeping man. When the Self is in such a state (of sleep), Its consciousness being of general character, It seems to go, (to be present), everywhere. When It is in a state of particularized consciousness, It, though really stationary by Its own nature, seems to travel far, in accordance with the movement of the mind etc., because It is conditioned by those mind etc.

My question in this regard is:Though the meaning seems to be simple, what are these " General Character " and " Particularized " ? (i.e., केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ and विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ ) ?The learned group members can please throw some light on this.

With regards,Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Anupam-ji.

 

Your Sanskrit quotes are garbled and not readable.

 

About the translation, are you sure about the word 'delimitation' in

the second sentence. I think 'limitation' would suit the context. I

am not sure.

 

The following statement looks spatial (and, therefore, temporal too)

to my eyes:

 

" Its consciousness being of " *general character*, It seems to go, (to

be present), everywhere " .

 

The words " go " and " be present everywhere " are only indicative of

spacelessness and, therefore, timelessness. Something cannot be

present everywhere because it is a limited something.

 

" Particularized " would then naturally be the opposite of the above

where a mind working in and bound by space-time has emerged from the

previous absence of space-time.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

___________________________

 

advaitin , " anupam srivatsav " <

> While explaining this Kathopanishad (1.2.21) verse, Sri Shankara

says like

> this:

(Sanskrit garbled)

> Corresponding English meaning as per Swami Gambhiranandaji Maharaj

(of

> Ramakrishna Math) Book is:

>

> Sleep is the cessation of the activities of the senses. The

delimitation of

> Consciousness, caused by the senses, ceases for a sleeping man.

When the

> Self is in such a state (of sleep), Its consciousness being of

*general

> character*, It seems to go, (to be present), everywhere. When It

is in a

> state of *particularized consciousness*, It, though really

stationary by Its

> own nature, seems to travel far, in accordance with the movement of

the mind

> etc., because It is conditioned by those mind etc.

>

> My question in this regard is:

> Though the meaning seems to be simple, what are these " General

Character "

> and " Particularized " ? (i.e., केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿

जà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ and विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ ) ?

>

> The learned group members can please throw some light on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Sri Madathil Nair ji,

Namaste.

 

> Your Sanskrit quotes are garbled and not readable.

 

I do not know why Sanskrit quotes were garbled.

 

> About the translation, are you sure about the word 'delimitation' in

> the second sentence. I think 'limitation' would suit the context. I

> am not sure.

 

I checked with the book again and found the word " delimitation " only.

In my original posting I used " The delimitation of Consciousness,

caused by the senses.... "

In the said book, there is a foot note for the " Consciousness " which runs thus:

 

" Then Consciousness has such limited expressions as, 'I am a man', 'I

see a blue thing', and so on - by Ananda Giri "

 

> " Its consciousness being of " *general character*, It seems to go, (to

> be present), everywhere " .

>

> The words " go " and " be present everywhere " are only indicative of

> spacelessness and, therefore, timelessness. Something cannot be

> present everywhere because it is a limited something.

 

Space and time do not exit in Sushupti state. But, causation exist in

Sushupti too. Assuming that *Consciousness is of general character*

means *being without any upadhis*, we know that causation an upadhi.

Since causation exist in sushupti, so, how a sleeping man's

*Consciousness is of general character* ? I feel some contradiction

here. Presently I am reading Katha and so, I am getting so many

doubts. Please bear with me and explain.

 

> " Particularized " would then naturally be the opposite of the above

> where a mind working in and bound by space-time has emerged from the

> previous absence of space-time.

 

General and particular are opposed to each other. So, when

*particularized*, the consciousness flows through the senses and hence

is limited.

 

With regards,

Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming that *Consciousness is of general character*

means *being without any upadhis*, we know that causation an upadhi.

Since causation exist in sushupti, so, how a sleeping man's

*Consciousness is of general character* ? I feel some contradiction

here.

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

Does shankara bhAshya anywhere says, there exists *upAdhi* in sushupti?? Kindly clarify...On the face reading of the statement : *consciousness is of general character*, I'd like to reckon that pure consciousness itself intuited as unlimited (without any frame of upAdhi) in sleep which is somehow manifests in the other two states as subject (vishayi) and object (vishaya)....

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shree anupam srivatsav - PraNams

 

The sanskrit fonts came fine when I received through on my computer. I am replying back to see if that is preserved in the reply post. Surprised to see Nairji comments. May it depends on the mail/computer etc. I am copying the whole post to see how it returns.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda--- On Tue, 8/12/08, anupam srivatsav <anupam.srivatsav wrote:

anupam srivatsav <anupam.srivatsav aasiino duuram vrajatiadvaitin Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 2:55 AM

 

 

 

Dear All,While explaining this Kathopanishad (1.2.21) verse, Sri Shankara says like this:करणानामà¥à¤ªà¤¶à¤®à¤ƒ शयनमॠ। करणजनितसà¥à¤¯à¥ˆà¤•à¤¦à¥‡à¤¶à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¸à¥à¤¯ उपशमः शयानसà¥à¤¯ भवति। यदा चैवं केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¾à¤¤à¥ सरà¥à¤µà¤¤à¥‹ यातीव, यदा विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¸à¥à¤¥à¤ƒ सà¥à¤µà¥‡à¤¨ रूपेण सà¥à¤¥à¤¿à¤¤ à¤à¤µ सनॠमनआदिगतिषॠतदà¥à¤ªà¤¾à¤§à¤¿à¤•à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¤à¥ दूरं वà¥à¤°à¤œà¤¤à¥€à¤µ ।Corresponding English meaning as per Swami Gambhiranandaji Maharaj (of Ramakrishna Math) Book is:Sleep is the cessation of the activities of the senses. The delimitation of Consciousness, caused by the senses, ceases for a sleeping man. When the Self is in such a state

(of sleep), Its consciousness being of general character, It seems to go, (to be present), everywhere. When It is in a state of particularized consciousness, It, though really stationary by Its own nature, seems to travel far, in accordance with the movement of the mind etc., because It is conditioned by those mind etc.My question in this regard is:Though the meaning seems to be simple, what are these "General Character" and "Particularized"? (i.e., केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ and विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ ) ?The learned group members can please throw some light on this.With regards,Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh Sadaji,

Nairji got it garbled again.

Perhaps, he has ignorant eyes,

Or, to pass the buck on,

His PC has something amiss

In its labyrinthine brain.

 

To make things worse, I noticed an additional problem with your

mail. It has several unncessary 'i's (letter " i " ). Where have they

come from?

 

Best regards.

 

Nair

_____________

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

> Shree anupam srivatsav - PraNams

>  

> The sanskrit fonts came fine when I received through on my

computer.  I am replying back to see if that is preserved in the

reply post. Surprised to see Nairji comments. May it depends on the

mail/computer etc. I am  copying the whole post to see how it

returns.

>  

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anupam-ji.

 

Bhaskar-ji has answered your doubt beautifully.

 

Regards.

 

Madathil Nair

_____________

 

 

> Anupamji's doubt:

 

Assuming that *Consciousness is of general character*

> means *being without any upadhis*, we know that causation an upadhi.

> Since causation exist in sushupti, so, how a sleeping man's

> *Consciousness is of general character* ? I feel some contradiction

> here.

_______________

 

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

 

> Does shankara bhAshya anywhere says, there exists *upAdhi* in

sushupti??

> Kindly clarify...On the face reading of the statement :

*consciousness is

> of general character*, I'd like to reckon that pure consciousness

itself

> intuited as unlimited (without any frame of upAdhi) in sleep which

is

> somehow manifests in the other two states as subject (vishayi) and

object

> (vishaya)....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PraNAms - the fonts came back in tact in my mail on my computer. anupama Srivatsavji may I know what font you have used?

 

Now regarding the question you raised here is my understanding.

 

The all pervasiveness is the general character of the consciousness - more its swaruupa laxaNa.

 

The reflected consciousness in the mind is the particular jiiva - called pratibimba caitanya. The reflection is limited by the reflecting medium. Shankara says although the reflected consciousness - referred to as particular jiiva consciousness, is although limited - it reflects where ever the mind goes. During perception, the traditional explanation is the mind goes out with the senses and grasps the objects of perception. Hence Shankara says - although the conditioned consciousness although conditioned by the upaadhiis and therefore stationary due to the movement of the mind, it appears to move.

 

Deep sleep is the cessesation of all body consciousness - hence karaNajanitasya ekadeshavijnaanasya upashamaH - shayanasya bhavati. Since the mind is now not traveling any where, the conditioned consciousness remains in its place. When one is awake due to movement of the mind the reflected consciousness appears to move also, although pure consciousness being all pervading cannot move any where (achalam).

Hope this helps.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear All,While explaining this Kathopanishad (1.2.21) verse, Sri Shankara says like this:करणानामà¥à¤ªà¤¶à¤®à¤ƒ शयनमॠ। करणजनितसà¥à¤¯à¥ˆà¤•à¤¦à¥‡à¤¶à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¸à¥à¤¯ उपशमः शयानसà¥à¤¯ भवति। यदा चैवं केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¾à¤¤à¥ सरà¥à¤µà¤¤à¥‹ यातीव, यदा विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨à¤¸à¥à¤¥à¤ƒ सà¥à¤µà¥‡à¤¨ रूपेण सà¥à¤¥à¤¿à¤¤ à¤à¤µ सनॠमनआदिगतिषॠतदà¥à¤ªà¤¾à¤§à¤¿à¤•à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¤à¥ दूरं वà¥à¤°à¤œà¤¤à¥€à¤µ ।Corresponding English meaning as per Swami Gambhiranandaji Maharaj (of Ramakrishna Math) Book is:Sleep is the cessation of the activities of the senses. The delimitation of Consciousness, caused by the senses, ceases for a sleeping man. When the Self is in such a state (of

sleep), Its consciousness being of general character, It seems to go, (to be present), everywhere. When It is in a state of particularized consciousness, It, though really stationary by Its own nature, seems to travel far, in accordance with the movement of the mind etc., because It is conditioned by those mind etc.My question in this regard is:Though the meaning seems to be simple, what are these "General Character" and "Particularized" ? (i.e., केवलसामानà¥à¤¯à¤µà¤¿à¤œà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ and विशेषविजà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¨ ) ?The learned group members can please throw some light on this.With regards,Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Nairji - I have enough problems with little little 'i's and computer attributing some more to me. wishful thinking is little i every where may become big I sometime, although time itself is the little i's imagination.

 

I just noticed I have typed plane for plain in one of my posts - this is because I have been trying to get some plane tickets! - I do not know who invented this English!

 

Hari Om!

Sadanadna--- On Tue, 8/12/08, Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair

 

 

To make things worse, I noticed an additional problem with your mail. It has several unncessary 'i's (letter "i"). Where have they come from?_

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Sri Sadanandaji,

 

> The all pervasiveness is the general character of the consciousness - more

its swaruupa laxaNa.

>

> The reflected consciousness in the mind is the particular jiiva - called

pratibimba caitanya. The reflection is

> etc......

 

 

Thanks for the insight. I think, this must be alright for me. Let me

contemplate over this for a while and come back should I have any

other doubts regarding this. My thanks are due to Bhaskar ji and

Madathil Nair ji too who sufficiently shed some light on the subject.

 

>>the fonts came back in tact in my mail on my computer. anupama

Srivatsavji may I know what font you have used?

 

I was using Mangal Fonts. This font many people use in gmail groups.

I am not sure how it works with . Since I am using gmail

ID, I am easily getting the fonts intact. But, when I checked in the

archives, the fonts were missing. If you require, I can send

you the fonts.

 

With regards,

Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Sri Bhaskar ji,

 

> Does shankara bhAshya anywhere says, there exists *upAdhi* in sushupti??

> Kindly clarify...On the face reading of the statement : *consciousness is of

> general character*, I'd like to reckon that pure consciousness itself

> intuited as unlimited (without any frame of upAdhi) in sleep which is

> somehow manifests in the other two states as subject (vishayi) and object

> (vishaya)....

 

I am not sure if Acharya Shankara has anywhere said that *Upadhi*

exist in *sushupti*. But, Sushupti itself is *ajnana upahita

chaitanyam*. Therefore it is conditioned. In other words, Upadhi

exists in Sushupti. My one more doubt which was there for long was:

 

When Jiva is in Sushupti, he experiences joy. But, in sushupti,

ajnana exists. After sleep one says that he *enjoyed* his sleep. How

one can derive joy from ajnana? Given that only in Jnana one can

experience Joy, how in ajnana one experiences Joy? (Though this Joy

expressed in the waking state as sukham aham aswapsam

(सà¥à¤–महमसà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤ªà¥à¤¸à¤®à¥), it was originally experienced

in the sushupti state

only).

 

With regards,

Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

advaitin , " anupam srivatsav "

<anupam.srivatsav wrote:

My one more doubt which was there for long was:

>

> When Jiva is in Sushupti, he experiences joy. But, in sushupti,

> ajnana exists. After sleep one says that he *enjoyed* his sleep.

How

> one can derive joy from ajnana? Given that only in Jnana one can

> experience Joy, how in ajnana one experiences Joy? (Though this Joy

> expressed in the waking state as sukham aham aswapsam

> (सà¥à¤–महमसà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤ªà¥à¤¸à¤®à¥), it was originally

experienced in the sushupti state

> only).

>

 

Namaste Anupam-ji

 

Regarding your doubt about the 'experience' of joy in sleep, please

see Nos.211 to 252 in the dialogue on advaita on the following page:

 

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/advaitadialoguepage2.html

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Prof. Sri VK ji,

 

Thanks a lot for the reply. I have gone through the lines between 211

and 252. There in line 244, the entry goes like this:

 

" 244. G: Scriptures say: The jIva which was one with the BMI,

now goes back to the Self, during the sleep of the BMI. "

 

My question is: When the Jiva goes back to the Self, it realizes its

identity with Brahman. But, in Sushupti, it does not go back to the

Self, I suppose. It goes back only to the Ishwara, where unspecified

ajnana is still present, whereas in the Self, no such ajnana is

present.

 

Can you please clarify this more?

 

Thanks in advance.

Anupam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anupam-ji.

 

I am sure Professor-ji will clarify your doubt.

 

In the meanwhile, let me look at it from a pedestrian angle.

 

What is ajnAna?: That I am limited, I am the BMI etc.

Who has this ajnAna?: That entity which thinks that it is limited, it

is the BMI etc.

Who goes to sleep?: That same entity.

What does it mean?: It means that that entity which had ajnAna has,

at least for the time being, forgotten his nagging feeling that he is

limited and he is the BMI. That entity is no more aware of the BMI

or itself as an entity.

Has the entity now merged with Ishwara or the Self?: It cannot merge

with the Self because the Self cannot brook a merger or addition. The

entity itself is Self in its true nature. In that sense, it would

not need any merger either or it has nothing other than itself to

merge with. Now if a merger with Ishwara is postulated as plausible,

then the entity should be aware of its being with Ishwara – perhaps

on His lap or close to where he is (like Vaikunta). If not, it is as

good as `being with the Self'. None of us are aware of being in the

company of God in deep sleep. So, the question itself is rather

naive.

What happened to the ajnAna?: The answer is another question. Has

it any validity without an entity being there to be aware of it?

 

In conclusion, the entity itself is ajnAna. In the Self, that is

Knowledge, it is and has never been there. Let, us, therefore,

disregard it and turn our eyes towards the Light of Truth that we

are. Somebody said recently in another Group: If you are praying to

attain or achieve something, then better disregard all that you don't

have and know that you have all. We need to similarly disregard this

ajnAna entity and think Brahman.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

___

 

advaitin , " anupam srivatsav "

<anupam.srivatsav wrote:

>

> Dear Prof. Sri VK ji,

>

> Thanks a lot for the reply. I have gone through the lines between

211

> and 252. There in line 244, the entry goes like this:

>

> " 244. G: Scriptures say: The jIva which was one with the BMI,

> now goes back to the Self, during the sleep of the BMI. "

>

> My question is: When the Jiva goes back to the Self, it realizes its

> identity with Brahman. But, in Sushupti, it does not go back to the

> Self, I suppose. It goes back only to the Ishwara, where

unspecified

> ajnana is still present, whereas in the Self, no such ajnana is

> present.

>

> Can you please clarify this more?

>

> Thanks in advance.

> Anupam.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...