Guest guest Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 Dear Friends, Enjoy if appropriate. Comments welcome. nirvikalpa-samadhi-and-self-knowledge Yours in Bhagavan Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 advaitin , " Harsha " wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > > > Enjoy if appropriate. Comments welcome. > > > > nirvikalpa-samadhi-and-self-knowledge > > > > Yours in Bhagavan > > Harsha Namaste Harsha, I enjoyed that and it much the same as Ramana says..however you still refer to the Self and that is fine for Kevala Nirvikalpa and Savikalpa Samadhi which are merging in the Self, one without effort and the other with effort. These are really samadhis but the mind still has vasanas so it is all within the concept of Saguna Self. Sahaja is the Natural State according to Ramana and remaining in that is Realisation...The only difference is that in the Pure Natural State there is nothing to be the same with as it is NirGuna and therefore not the Saguna/Self. Ramana says remaining permanently in any of these states is Sahaja. I assume he says that for realisation of Saguna results in simultaneous realisation that all is NirGuna......Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Namo namah to all. Dr. Harsh K. Luthar says : " ... it is better to say that in Nirvikalpa the KNOWER and the KNOWN are IDENTICAL. It is only pure consciousness that by which its very nature is self-revealing and self-knowing.... " It is the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi when the KNOWER & the KNOWN become identical. This doesn't happen in a jiffy. It takes considerable amount of time to reach to that stage. The ignorant persons often ask : " Is there any absolute reference which will clearly demarcate the initial stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi & the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi ? " Answering this question will be easy if our consciousness level becomes as high as that of sages like Sankaracharya or RamanMaharshi. advaitin , " Harsha " wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > > > Enjoy if appropriate. Comments welcome. > > > > nirvikalpa-samadhi-and-self-knowledge > > > > Yours in Bhagavan > > Harsha > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 advaitin , " surf2raj " <surf2raj wrote: > > Namo namah to all. > Dr. Harsh K. Luthar says : " ... it is better to say that in Nirvikalpa the KNOWER and the KNOWN are IDENTICAL. It is only pure consciousness that by which its very nature is self-revealing and self-knowing.... " > It is the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi when the KNOWER & the KNOWN become identical. This doesn't happen in a jiffy. It takes considerable amount of time to reach to that stage. The ignorant persons often ask : " Is there any absolute reference which will clearly demarcate the initial stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi & the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi ? " Answering this question will be easy if our consciousness level becomes as high as that of sages like Sankaracharya or RamanMaharshi. > Namaste S,IMO, Nirvi Kalpa is self explanatory...there are no stages otherwise it would be like being only a little bit pregnant. Ramana says there is samadhi with effort and without effort, with vasanas still intact and without. So samadhi is either oneness with the Sakti temporarily or it is not. This is usually called a state of 'Being' and many experience this blissful 'all is one' state. This is often mistaken for realisation, but it is still within the realm of experience and therefore cannot be. True samadhi is beyond sakti/bliss and consciousness and there is no memory or experiencer--for it is Nir Guna....Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 In the context of this discussion, also see the following article on Nirvikalpa Samadhi the-heart-nirvikalpa-samadhi-and-self-realization-by-harsha-ha\ rsh-k-luthar-phd On Enlightenment is-enlightenment-personal These are recurring topics on the list and the archives have much information from the distinguished contributors. Yours in Bhagavan Harsha advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: > > advaitin , " surf2raj " <surf2raj@> wrote: > > > > Namo namah to all. > > Dr. Harsh K. Luthar says : " ... it is better to say that in Nirvikalpa the KNOWER and the KNOWN are IDENTICAL. It is only pure consciousness that by which its very nature is self-revealing and self-knowing.... " > > It is the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi when the KNOWER & the KNOWN become identical. This doesn't happen in a jiffy. It takes considerable amount of time to reach to that stage. The ignorant persons often ask : " Is there any absolute reference which will clearly demarcate the initial stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi & the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi ? " Answering this question will be easy if our consciousness level becomes as high as that of sages like Sankaracharya or RamanMaharshi. > > > > Namaste S,IMO, > > Nirvi Kalpa is self explanatory...there are no stages otherwise it would be like being only a little bit pregnant. Ramana says there is samadhi with effort and without effort, with vasanas still intact and without. So samadhi is either oneness with the Sakti temporarily or it is not. This is usually called a state of 'Being' and many experience this blissful 'all is one' state. This is often mistaken for realisation, but it is still within the realm of experience and therefore cannot be. > > True samadhi is beyond sakti/bliss and consciousness and there is no memory or experiencer--for it is Nir Guna....Cheers Tony. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 PraNAms Not knowing the contextual discussion of the topic by Harshaji here is my understanding of the self-realization. Self-realization is not absence of any vikalpa as in deep sleep state, but absence of the notion of the reality assumed to the apparent duality of knower - known. If one is longing for absence of any thoughts to reach a 'stage', one does not have to do any meditation - all one has to do is go to deep sleep state or some take drugs to get stoned to that state where there is no dviata - knower-known. When Vedanta or Bhagavaan Ramana says - jnaana niShTaa or Braham niShTaa or dRiDaiva niShTaa, it is non-negatable absolute knowledge of oneself that self as I am is the self in all and all in myself – sarvabhuutastam aatmaanam sarva bhuutanica aatmani – says Krishna. The very substantive of both knower-known - duality- It is not absence of duality but understanding the duality perceived is only apparent and not real. Otherwise people will be testing their stages of self-realization by trying to see if they have reached some state or not. It is a state of understanding. Any nirvikalpa state that can be reached will go away once one comes out of that state - it becomes experience involving absence of an experience of duality not understanding the substantive of the duality. Any knowledge takes place only by pramANa or means of knowledge. Knowledge that I am the substantive of both knower-known occurs only by aatma vicaara or to put more correctly aatma viveka that involves sorting out aatma from anaatma- from a mixture of the two –as in ahankaara – which has the mixture of true I and false i. aatma can exist by itself while anaatma needs aatma for its existence. Seeing I in the false i is sat darShaNam. That is the true nirvikalpa samaadhi since there is no vikalpa in the I but all vikalpas exists because of I. I need to see that I in all the vikalpaas and it is not physical elimination of any vikalpa but understanding the underlying substantive I in all the vikalpaas. That is the true nirvilpa samaadhi. It is only a 'state' of clear understanding and abiding in that knowledge. Hari Om! Sadananda --- On Thu, 4/30/09, surf2raj <surf2raj wrote: Namo namah to all. Dr. Harsh K. Luthar says : " ... it is better to say that in Nirvikalpa the KNOWER and the KNOWN are IDENTICAL. It is only pure consciousness that by which its very nature is self-revealing and self-knowing. ... " It is the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi when the KNOWER & the KNOWN become identical. This doesn't happen in a jiffy. It takes considerable amount of time to reach to that stage. The ignorant persons often ask : " Is there any absolute reference which will clearly demarcate the initial stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi & the advanced stage of Nirvikalp Samadhi ? " Answering this question will be easy if our consciousness level becomes as high as that of sages like Sankaracharya or RamanMaharshi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 Namo Namah Tony OClery. " Being a little bit pregnant " is a nice example. By stages of Nirvikalp Samadhi I only meant --- 1. Initial Stage : Most of the Vasanas intact, 2. Intermediate Stage : Some vasanas intact & 3. Advanced Stage : Without any Vasana at all. You may say that theoretically only the advanced stage is called as Nirvikalp Samadhi. SahajYog depends upon the efficiency of a person who goes for Samadhi. (Normal person may have to work hard to achieve a particular goal whereas an efficient person can achieve the same goal effortlessly.) What I wanted to know was : Can there be any specialized entity which will certify whether a particular person has achieved Nirvikalp Samadhi or not ? Is it only the KNOWER himself who can certify that ? advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: > > Namaste S,IMO, > > Nirvi Kalpa is self explanatory...there are no stages otherwise it would be like being only a little bit pregnant. Ramana says there is samadhi with effort and without effort, with vasanas still intact and without. So samadhi is either oneness with the Sakti temporarily or it is not. This is usually called a state of 'Being' and many experience this blissful 'all is one' state. This is often mistaken for realisation, but it is still within the realm of experience and therefore cannot be. > > True samadhi is beyond sakti/bliss and consciousness and there is no memory or experiencer--for it is Nir Guna....Cheers Tony. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 Namo Namah kuntimaddi sadananda. Yes. bhagavadGeeta does say " ... sarvabhuutastam aatmaanam sarva bhuutanica aatmani... " But BhagavadGeeta also tells us that common man is almost always engulfed in a Trigunatmk Maya or illusion. That is why, many a times, we come across a situation when we know that people at large are moving in the wrong direction. Yogi is NOT supposed to follow public opinion all the time. The aim of a Yogi should be to move towards God/Truth. If public opinion happens to be closer to God then Yogi will not have any difference of opinion with people around him. But in case there's a difference of opinion, the following question is bound to arise : Is there any absolute reference to resolve the conflict ? advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > > > PraNAms > > Not knowing the contextual discussion of the topic by Harshaji here is my understanding of the self-realization. > > Self-realization is not absence of any vikalpa as in deep sleep state, but absence of the notion of the reality assumed to the apparent duality of knower - known. If one is longing for absence of any thoughts to reach a 'stage', one does not have to do any meditation - all one has to do is go to deep sleep state or some take drugs to get stoned to that state where there is no dviata - knower-known. > > When Vedanta or Bhagavaan Ramana says - jnaana niShTaa or Braham niShTaa or dRiDaiva niShTaa, it is non-negatable absolute knowledge of oneself that self as I am is the self in all and all in myself †" sarvabhuutastam aatmaanam sarva bhuutanica aatmani †" says Krishna. > > The very substantive of both knower-known - duality- It is not absence of duality but understanding the duality perceived is only apparent and not real. Otherwise people will be testing their stages of self-realization by trying to see if they have reached some state or not. It is a state of understanding. > > Any nirvikalpa state that can be reached will go away once one comes out of that state - it becomes experience involving absence of an experience of duality not understanding the substantive of the duality. Any knowledge takes place only by pramANa or means of knowledge. Knowledge that I am the substantive of both knower-known occurs only by aatma vicaara or to put more correctly aatma viveka that involves sorting out aatma from anaatma- from a mixture of the two †" as in ahankaara †" which has the mixture of true I and false i. aatma can exist by itself while anaatma needs aatma for its existence. Seeing I in the false i is sat darShaNam. That is the true nirvikalpa samaadhi since there is no vikalpa in the I but all vikalpas exists because of I. I need to see that I in all the vikalpaas and it is not physical elimination of any vikalpa but understanding the underlying substantive I in all the vikalpaas. That is the true nirvilpa samaadhi. It is only > a 'state' of clear understanding and abiding in that knowledge. > > > Hari Om! > Sadananda > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 advaitin , " harshaimtm " wrote: > > In the context of this discussion, also see the following article on Nirvikalpa Samadhi > > the-heart-nirvikalpa-samadhi-and-self-realization-by-harsha-ha\ rsh-k-luthar-phd > > On Enlightenment > > is-enlightenment-personal > > These are recurring topics on the list and the archives have much information from the distinguished contributors. > > Yours in Bhagavan > Harsha Harsha, I am pretty well aware of the full spectrum of what Ramana taught as you well know.. This I took from your url there. p. 105: " Samadhi transcends mind and speech, and cannot be described. For example, the state of deep slumber cannot be described; samadhi state can still less be explained…..Consciousness and unconsciousness are only modes of the mind. Samadhi transcends the mind. " Therefore any 'experience' of samadhi cannot be Nir Vikalpa by definition. As true Nirvikalpa is above mind, memory and experience.Many people I fear experience blisses on the way back down so to speak, and many have a sameness or samadhi with the universal energy and remember that feeling of unity and being. That would be a Sa vikalpa samadhi, often apparently mistaken for Nir Vikalpa. For one's ego will remember the last stage prior to Nir Vikalpa but one cannot remember anything above mind. Even this appearance doesn't exist above mind for it needs a mind to project it. So nobody can say they remember Nir ViKalpa, any more than they can say they experienced Nir Guna... There is a problem here with semantics obviously, but essentially there is mind and only mind in illusion. And one can be in it or above it so to speak. So any bliss or experience belongs to the realm of Saguna....even if it is samadhi with the universal energy or sakti. I cannot say I remember or have proof of an experience in true samadhi as there is no mind or memory........ Also all this pertains to a Jnani who has a body, the Sakti uses the vijnanamayakosa as the vehicle so is aware of everything in itself, as one. The body/mind still carries out is inbuilt prarabda karma. The illusion and even appearance drop with the body and that is the final truth.It never ever happened.............Cheers Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2009 Report Share Posted May 1, 2009 The following is a summary of some of Sri Ramana Maharshi's key statements on Samadhi. Bar a few minor alterations this was posted here by me in August 2006. It may be useful to those interested. Regarding the suggestion that nirvikalpa samAdhi and j~nAna are synonyms: Is it possible that different people, texts and sages use terminology in slightly different ways? We might need to be cautious when pitting one view against another. Sri Ramana Maharshi puts it in the following way: (1) Holding on to Reality is samAdhi. (2) Holding on to Reality with effort is savikalpa samAdhi. (3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa samAdhi. (4) Merging in Ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep. (5) Remaining in the primal, pure natural state without effort is sahaja nirvikalpa samAdhi. (from " Talk 391 " ) He further explains what He means by the difference between (3) and (5) in another talk: " Even if one is immersed in nirvikalpa samAdhi for years together, when he emerges from it he will find himself in the environment which he is bound to have. That is the reason for the AchArya emphasising sahaja samAdhi in preference to nirvikalpa samAdhi in his excellent work vivekachUDAmaNi. One should be in spontaneous samAdhi - that is, in one's pristine state - in the midst of every environment. " (Talk 54) In Talk 187, Sri Ramana explains both (3) and (5) above as nirvikalpa samAdhi, but the sahaja type alone is permanent: " In sleep the mind is alive but merged in oblivion [see '4' above]. - In kevala nirvikalpa samAdhi, the mind is alive but merged in light, like a bucket with rope lowered into a well, that can be drawn out again. - In sahaja nirvikalpa samAdhi, the mind is dead , resolved into the Self, like a river discharged into the ocean - its identity lost - and which can never be re-directed from the ocean, once discharged into it. " (Talk 187) A similar explanation is given in Talk 465, wherein Sri Ramana says: (1) Meditation should remain unbroken as a current. If unbroken it is called samAdhi or Kundalini shakti. (2) The mind may be latent and merge in the Self; it must necessarily rise up again; after it rises up one finds oneself only as ever before. For in this state the mental predispositions are present there in latent form to remanifest under favourable conditions. (3) Again the mind activities can be completely destroyed. This differs from the former mind, for here the attachment is lost, never to reappear. Even though the man sees the world after he has been in the samAdhi state, the world will be taken only at its worth, that is to say it is the phenomenon of the One Reality. The True Being can be realised only in samAdhi; what was then is also now. Otherwise it cannot be Reality or Ever-present Being. What was in samAdhi is here and now too. Hold it and it is your natural condition of Being. Samadhi practice must lead to it. Otherwise how can nirvikalpa samAdhi be of any use in which a man remains as a log of wood? He must necessarily rise up from it sometime or other and face the world. But in sahaja samAdhi he remains unaffected by the world. So many pictures pass over the cinema screen: fire burns away everything; water drenches all; but the screen remains unaffected. The scenes are only phenomena which pass away leaving the screen as it was. Similarly the world phenomena simply pass on before the j~nAnI, leaving him unaffected. You may say that people find pain or pleasure in worldly phenomena. It is owing to superimposition. This must not happen. With this end in view practice is made. Practice lies in one of the two courses: devotion or knowledge. Even these are not the goals. Samadhi must be gained; it must be continuously practised until sahaja samAdhi results. Then there remains nothing more to do. (Talk 465) From the previous passages it would seem that " the mind latent and merged in the Self " (see 2) refers to kevala Nirvikalpa Samadhi. The important distinction between this and Sahaja Samadhi (see 3) is that in the latter " the mind is dead " . This is the natural state of the j~nAnI who can move in the world (or, at least appear to us to do so) and remain unaffected by it. Is Kevala Nirvikalpa Samadhi a synonym of j~nAna? It would seem, not quite, if I have understood correctly. Whereas Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi is j~nAna. Loss of body consciousness in samAdhi is not the same as 'dead mind', destruction of ego. Thus when the disciple asks, " Is loss of body-consciousness a perquisite to the attainment of sahaja samAdhi? " Sri Ramana replies: " What is body-consciousness? Analyse it. There must be a body and consciousness limited to it which together make up body-consciousness. These must lie in another Consciousness which is absolute and unaffected. Hold it. That is samAdhi. It exists when there is no body-consciousness because it transcends the latter, it also exists when there is the body-consciousness. So it is always there. What does it matter whether body-consciousness is lost or retained? When lost it is internal samAdhi: when retained, it is external samAdhi. That is all. A person must remain in any of the six samAdhi-s so that sahaja samAdhi may be easy for him. " (Talk 406) Below, Sri Ramana refers to samAdhi, not as a state or an experience to be gained, as in some of the many different types but as our natural state. " Samadhi is one's natural state. It is the under-current in all the three states. This - that is, 'I' - is not in those states, but these states are in It. If we get samAdhi in our waking state that will persist in deep sleep also. The distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness belongs to the realm of mind, which is transcended by the state of the Real Self. " (Talk 136) " By shravaNa, Knowledge dawns. That is the flame. By manana, the Knowledge is not allowed to vanish. Just as the flame is protected by a wind-screen, so the other thoughts are not allowed to overwhelm the right knowledge. By nididhyAsana, the flame is kept up to burn bright by trimming the wick. Whenever other thoughts arise, the mind is turned inward to the light of true knowledge. When this becomes natural, it is samAdhi. The enquiry " Who am I? " is the shravaNa. The ascertainment of the true import of 'I' is the manana. The practical application on each occasion is nididhyAsana. Being as 'I' is samAdhi. " (Talk 647) " Eternal, unbroken, natural state is j~nAna. " (Talk 385) Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 advaitin , " Peter " <not_2 wrote: > > The following is a summary of some of Sri Ramana Maharshi's key statements > on Samadhi. Bar a few minor alterations this was posted here by me in > August 2006. It may be useful to those interested. > > Regarding the suggestion that nirvikalpa samAdhi and j~nAna are synonyms: > > Is it possible that different people, texts and sages use terminology in > slightly different ways? We might need to be cautious when pitting one view > against another. > > Sri Ramana Maharshi puts it in the following way: > > (1) Holding on to Reality is samAdhi. > (2) Holding on to Reality with effort is savikalpa samAdhi. > (3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa > samAdhi. > (4) Merging in Ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep. > (5) Remaining in the primal, pure natural state without effort is sahaja > nirvikalpa samAdhi. > (from " Talk 391 " ) Namaste Peter, I think thereby hangs the tail... Two states.....Ramana talks of 1.'Reality' and 2. 'Natural State'. Saguna and Nirguna!!Reality is Saguna Self...Natural State is the state of Sahaja -Nir Guna beyond it all. One has to really read into what he says and the hints and teachings are all there....Cheers Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Tony OClery, Yes. The problem is with semantics only. The statement " Samadhi transcends the mind " should not be stretched to an extent where the terms " Nir guna " and " non-existent " appear to be one and the same ! Nir guna is NOT something that is non-existent. You say, " ... So any bliss or experience belongs to the realm of Saguna....even if it is samadhi with the universal energy or sakti. " The definition that " True Nirvikalp is above mind, memory & experience " should not suggest that Nirvikalp Samadhi is practically meaningless. <font face = #BB0000)Nirvikalp samadhi enables us to guess or perceive something on Nir guna side without having to move out of Sa guna world. It is obvious that no experience can exist above mind & it needs a mind to project it. But it is an established fact that not everyone is equally capable of grasping an abstract concept (say a feeling of love/romance.) Brains of two persons A & B may have similar neurological structure, but only A can experience something which is abstract in nature while B may simply miss such experience. In that case, what looks like " an experience within the confines of mind " for person A may look like " an experience above mind " for person B. Here comes the definition of consciousness level. <font color = #BB0000)If your consciousness level is sufficiently high, you can actually " experience " something which will appear to be an " abstract " theme for a person with lower consciousness level !!! advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: > > advaitin , " harshaimtm " <harsha@> wrote: > > > > In the context of this discussion, also see the following article on Nirvikalpa Samadhi > > > > the-heart-nirvikalpa-samadhi-and-self-realization-by-harsha-ha\ rsh-k-luthar-phd > > > > On Enlightenment > > > > is-enlightenment-personal > > > > These are recurring topics on the list and the archives have much information from the distinguished contributors. > > > > Yours in Bhagavan > > Harsha > > Harsha, > > I am pretty well aware of the full spectrum of what Ramana taught as you well know.. This I took from your url there. > > p. 105: " Samadhi transcends mind and speech, and cannot be described. For example, the state of deep slumber cannot be described; samadhi state can still less be explained…..Consciousness and unconsciousness are only modes of the mind. Samadhi transcends the mind. " > > Therefore any 'experience' of samadhi cannot be Nir Vikalpa by definition. As true Nirvikalpa is above mind, memory and experience.Many people I fear experience blisses on the way back down so to speak, and many have a sameness or samadhi with the universal energy and remember that feeling of unity and being. That would be a Sa vikalpa samadhi, often apparently mistaken for Nir Vikalpa. > > For one's ego will remember the last stage prior to Nir Vikalpa but one cannot remember anything above mind. Even this appearance doesn't exist above mind for it needs a mind to project it. So nobody can say they remember Nir ViKalpa, any more than they can say they experienced Nir Guna... > > There is a problem here with semantics obviously, but essentially there is mind and only mind in illusion. And one can be in it or above it so to speak. So any bliss or experience belongs to the realm of Saguna....even if it is samadhi with the universal energy or sakti. > > I cannot say I remember or have proof of an experience in true samadhi as there is no mind or memory........ > > Also all this pertains to a Jnani who has a body, the Sakti uses the vijnanamayakosa as the vehicle so is aware of everything in itself, as one. The body/mind still carries out is inbuilt prarabda karma. The illusion and even appearance drop with the body and that is the final truth.It never ever happened.............Cheers > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Peter, (3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa samAdhi. This sounds a logical definition. One can move to a jungle or to a no-man's land & stay unaware of the world. But " merging in reality & still remaining unaware of the world " requires focused efforts. For all practical purposes, " holding on to your opinion in spite of a diametrically opposite public-opinion " can be considered as " remaining unaware of the world " . advaitin , " Peter " <not_2 wrote: > > The following is a summary of some of Sri Ramana Maharshi's key statements > on Samadhi. Bar a few minor alterations this was posted here by me in > August 2006. It may be useful to those interested. > > Regarding the suggestion that nirvikalpa samAdhi and j~nAna are synonyms: > > Is it possible that different people, texts and sages use terminology in > slightly different ways? We might need to be cautious when pitting one view > against another. > > Sri Ramana Maharshi puts it in the following way: > > (1) Holding on to Reality is samAdhi. > (2) Holding on to Reality with effort is savikalpa samAdhi. > (3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa > samAdhi. > (4) Merging in Ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep. > (5) Remaining in the primal, pure natural state without effort is sahaja > nirvikalpa samAdhi. > (from " Talk 391 " ) > > He further explains what He means by the difference between (3) and (5) in > another talk: > > " Even if one is immersed in nirvikalpa samAdhi for years together, when he > emerges from it he will find himself in the environment which he is bound to > have. That is the reason for the AchArya emphasising sahaja samAdhi in > preference to nirvikalpa samAdhi in his excellent work vivekachUDAmaNi. One > should be in spontaneous samAdhi - that is, in one's pristine state - in the > midst of every environment. " (Talk 54) > > In Talk 187, Sri Ramana explains both (3) and (5) above as nirvikalpa > samAdhi, but the sahaja type alone is permanent: > > " In sleep the mind is alive but merged in oblivion [see '4' above]. - In > kevala nirvikalpa samAdhi, the mind is alive but merged in light, like a > bucket with rope lowered into a well, that can be drawn out again. - In > sahaja nirvikalpa samAdhi, the mind is dead , resolved into the Self, like a > river discharged into the ocean - its identity lost - and which can never be > re-directed from the ocean, once discharged into it. " > (Talk 187) > > A similar explanation is given in Talk 465, wherein Sri Ramana says: > > (1) Meditation should remain unbroken as a current. If unbroken it is called > samAdhi or Kundalini shakti. > > (2) The mind may be latent and merge in the Self; it must necessarily rise > up again; after it rises up one finds oneself only as ever before. For in > this state the mental predispositions are present there in latent form to > remanifest under favourable conditions. > > (3) Again the mind activities can be completely destroyed. This differs from > the former mind, for here the attachment is lost, never to reappear. Even > though the man sees the world after he has been in the samAdhi state, the > world will be taken only at its worth, that is to say it is the phenomenon > of the One Reality. The True Being can be realised only in samAdhi; what was > then is also now. Otherwise it cannot be Reality or Ever-present Being. What > was in samAdhi is here and now too. Hold it and it is your natural condition > of Being. Samadhi practice must lead to it. Otherwise how can nirvikalpa > samAdhi be of any use in which a man remains as a log of wood? He must > necessarily rise up from it sometime or other and face the world. But in > sahaja samAdhi he remains unaffected by the world. So many pictures pass > over the cinema screen: fire burns away everything; water drenches all; but > the screen remains unaffected. The scenes are only phenomena which pass away > leaving the screen as it was. Similarly the world phenomena simply pass on > before the j~nAnI, leaving him unaffected. You may say that people find pain > or pleasure in worldly phenomena. It is owing to superimposition. This must > not happen. With this end in view practice is made. Practice lies in one of > the two courses: devotion or knowledge. Even these are not the goals. > Samadhi must be gained; it must be continuously practised until sahaja > samAdhi results. Then there remains nothing more to do. > (Talk 465) > > From the previous passages it would seem that " the mind latent and merged in > the Self " (see 2) refers to kevala Nirvikalpa Samadhi. The important > distinction between this and Sahaja Samadhi (see 3) is that in the latter > " the mind is dead " . This is the natural state of the j~nAnI who can move in > the world (or, at least appear to us to do so) and remain unaffected by it. > > Is Kevala Nirvikalpa Samadhi a synonym of j~nAna? It would seem, not quite, > if I have understood correctly. Whereas Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi is j~nAna. > > Loss of body consciousness in samAdhi is not the same as 'dead mind', > destruction of ego. Thus when the disciple asks, " Is loss of > body-consciousness a perquisite to the attainment of sahaja samAdhi? " Sri > Ramana replies: > > " What is body-consciousness? Analyse it. There must be a body and > consciousness limited to it which together make up body-consciousness. These > must lie in another Consciousness which is absolute and unaffected. Hold it. > That is samAdhi. It exists when there is no body-consciousness because it > transcends the latter, it also exists when there is the body-consciousness. > So it is always there. What does it matter whether body-consciousness is > lost or retained? When lost it is internal samAdhi: when retained, it is > external samAdhi. That is all. A person must remain in any of the six > samAdhi-s so that sahaja samAdhi may be easy for him. " > (Talk 406) > > Below, Sri Ramana refers to samAdhi, not as a state or an experience to be > gained, as in some of the many different types but as our natural state. > > " Samadhi is one's natural state. It is the under-current in all the three > states. This - that is, 'I' - is not in those states, but these states are > in It. If we get samAdhi in our waking state that will persist in deep sleep > also. The distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness belongs to > the realm of mind, which is transcended by the state of the Real Self. " > (Talk 136) > > " By shravaNa, Knowledge dawns. That is the flame. By manana, the Knowledge > is not allowed to vanish. Just as the flame is protected by a wind-screen, > so the other thoughts are not allowed to overwhelm the right knowledge. By > nididhyAsana, the flame is kept up to burn bright by trimming the wick. > Whenever other thoughts arise, the mind is turned inward to the light of > true knowledge. When this becomes natural, it is samAdhi. The enquiry " Who > am I? " is the shravaNa. The ascertainment of the true import of 'I' is the > manana. The practical application on each occasion is nididhyAsana. Being as > 'I' is samAdhi. " > (Talk 647) > > " Eternal, unbroken, natural state is j~nAna. " > (Talk 385) > > > Peter > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy Pranms to members. advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: " One has to really read into what he says and the hints and teachings are all there....Cheers Tony " Dear Sri Tony, Most have read what Bhagavan says, but very very few have cognized what he says. As a Bhagavan's devotee you should say " cognize " and this would be much better, is it not? With warm and respectful regards, Sreenivasa Murthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 advaitin , " surf2raj " <surf2raj wrote: > > Tony OClery, > Yes. The problem is with semantics only. The statement " Samadhi transcends the mind " should not be stretched to an extent where the terms " Nir guna " and " non-existent " appear to be one and the same ! Nir guna is NOT something that is non-existent. > You say, " ... So any bliss or experience belongs to the realm of Saguna....even if it is samadhi with the universal energy or sakti. " Namaste, Nir Guna means exactly that 'non existent'..it is not some finer form of Saguna .......Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Re: Nirvikalpa Samadhi and Self-Knowledge advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: > > Namaste, > > Nir Guna means exactly that 'non existent'..it is not some finer form of Saguna ......Cheers Tony. Namaskar Tonyji, I haven't been following this thread, but as far as I know, nir-guna, means without gunas. Nirguna is what the self is. The self is without gunas, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The self, can be said to be that which exists absolutely. The only 'thing' (but not an object), which can be said to truly exist in and of itself. Everything else comes and goes in that self. Everything has that self for its being. Everything else could be said to 'borrow' its existence from that self, as while objects are coming into and going out of being, being is the one 'thing,' the one constanct which never goes away. We can see this when we point to objects, and we say, " It is, it is, it is.' " Well, what is? Not the object really. If one tries to find an object one really can't, as all objects are subject to infinite division. And yet 'is, is, is' is the constant of every single experience that we have. We cannot get out of 'isness.' And that is because it *is.* This isness is my amness alone. Oh, and its yours too :-) Pranams, Durga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 " The aim of a Yogi should be to move towards God/Truth. " Are there two things, Yogi and God? And are they separate so that one moves towards the other? If God is omnipresent it would not be possible to move toward Him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 > Nir Guna means exactly that 'non existent'..it is not some finer form of Saguna ......Cheers Tony. I thought it meant without gunas or attributes. If nirguna and saguna are not forms of the same, the one and only, then duality reigns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Namaste Nirguna is the true self/Ataman, which is the knower of the saguna [mind]. The saguna[mind/world] is mere mirage on the standpoint of the nirguna ,which is the true self. Thus, saguna[mind/world] is myth on the standpoint of nirguna which is eternal identity /true self. The nirguna can remain with or without the saguna, whereas the saguna is dependent on nirguna for its existence:- as per my conviction derived from deeper inquiry. With respect and regards Santthosh On 5/3/09, Richard <richarkar wrote: >> Nir Guna means exactly that 'non existent'..it is not some finer form of >> Saguna ......Cheers Tony. > > I thought it meant without gunas or attributes. > > If nirguna and saguna are not forms of the same, the one and only, then > duality reigns. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Namo Namh Tony OClery. advaitin , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: > > Namaste, > > Nir Guna means exactly that 'non existent'..it is not some finer form of Saguna ......Cheers Tony. > That is a typical atheist stand. I can give you an example regarding " non-existent " . Will you agree with me if I say I am the smallest entity on this globe and only omnipotent Almighty can assume a form smaller than me ? Does that mean I am non-existent ? Definitely not. But I am so small that I look like a non-entity to everyone. You can find my complete postal address at http://in.geocities.com/surf2raj/contactmain.html You must be extremely careful while solving this riddle. Some of the most creative minds on this earth have worked hard to create this maze around me. If you try to know more about me, the system around me will give you vague information about me. My vicinity is very much convinced that I am a crackpot. Nobody around me really knows anything about me. Unless you are a person with Free Will, it will be a bit tedious for you to communicate face-to-face with me. In that sense, I am completely isolated from the society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Dear Richard, Very good! There is nowhere else to move and nowhere else to look. Exactly where you are, you will find the Self. Indifferent to external perceptions (appearance of outer world, etc.) and indifferent to internal perceptions (dreams, visions, samadhis) and yet engaged in a natural way, one knows the Self as the Self. you-yourself-are-this-moment-by-dr-harsh-k-luthar Namaste and love Yours in Bhagavan Harsha advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of Richard Saturday, May 02, 2009 11:35 PM advaitin Re: Nirvikalpa Samadhi and Self-Knowledge " The aim of a Yogi should be to move towards God/Truth. " Are there two things, Yogi and God? And are they separate so that one moves towards the other? If God is omnipresent it would not be possible to move toward Him. --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.