NidhidhyAsanam Aham BrahmAsmi

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " void " <rgoteti wrote:

 

 

 

advaitin , " Pravesh " <praveshksingh@> wrote:

>

>

> Hi,

> Regards to All!

> Four kinds or levels of jnAna have been talked of in scriptures -

> shravana, manana, nididhyAsana and anubhava.

>

>Sekhar says

shravana, manana, nididhyAsana and anubhava.are the four stages for acquiring

knowledge.You need not give more significance for these stages.As you know

pretty well that the word is not actual thing.All verbal knowledge can create

only a virtual reality just like our computer world.

Distinction between feeling and experience is to be realized as they are but not

according to a text.

thank you

sekhar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Namaste, all respected members,

I am putting down my understanding with regard to Self Knowledge, i.e. Aham

BrahmAsmi for clarification/ correction by our members.

When one negates or ignores dream he does it in waking state, i.e. experience of

one state is negated in another state. In the same state, i.e. dream state, I

doubt whether one is able to negate the dream experience. Again in the stock

example of rope and snake, the knower of the rope as rope and not as snake is

different from both the snake that got projected due to ignorance, and the rope.

This is not the case with regard to Self Knowledge, as here the Knower itself is

the Known. Again the awakening to Self Knowledge is in Waking state only i.e. it

does not happen in a “different stateâ€.  This knowledge is not affected by

Desha, Kala and other objects, desha, kala, vastu, because as we all know it is

Absolute and Real, and not relative. Other pieces of knowledge are always

relative, depending on desha, kala and vastu,  and not absolute.

NidhidhyAsanam as I understand is remaining in, abiding in, staying in

determined budhi/wisdom or intellect, i.e. the dhi or intellect is determined

and free from all doubts, and one remains in that determined intellect/budhi or

wisdom. Though one is not different from such determined intellect for

clarification it is stated that one remains or has Asanam in that determined

dhi.

Whenever such determined dhi gets disturbed, although such disturbances are just

mithya, one has to remind himself of the Mahavakya, and negate the mithya. This

may happen till the Knowledge gets assimilated, and it reflects spontaneously.

Just knowing Aham BrahmAsmi is not sufficient, but it must get assimilated, as

this knowledge does not involve triputi i.e. knower, known and knowledge. It is

for this assimilation NidhidhyAsanam is suggested.

Further, there is no experiential knowledge or anubhavagnAnam here, as

experiential knowledge requires triputi, and the knower has to be different from

experience. This is not the case in Self Knowledge and one with the wisdom

resulting from Self Knowledge can always recognize that there is no separate

experience other than what one experiences, as in every experience the Self

 alone shines as Awareness/Consciouness.

With regard to one taking up “Sanyasa†or one becoming a Sanyasi, etc., what

difference it makes to such a GnAni whether he is sanyasai or otherwise.

Any amount of meditation on Aham BrahmAsi etc., will not liberate one, as one is

already liberated, and just because of his ignorance of the fact he is already

liberated, this Knowledge alone makes one recognize that he is already

liberated. Liberation does not take place in time, as such liberation taking

place in time is not real being subject to time.

In the case of Self Knowledge there is neither Vastu Tantra nor Purusha Tantra,

as in other cases, because here the Purusha and Vastu are one and the same. This

is not the case with other pieces of knowledge where any vastu appears to be

different from the Purusha. I may be wrong here. Here, I may repeat the knower

itself is known.

Even when there are distractions, it is the Self alone that shines forth on its

own accord. This is recognition of a fact. It is like, when someone tells you so

and so was your great great grandfather, you recognize a fact that you had a

great great grandfather though you may not be sure so and so was that! However,

it is only ignorance that appears to cloud the Self.

With regard to any bhaAvana, I “know†I am a man, and is it required on my

part to have a bhaAvana that I am a man. It is bhAvAteetam. It is a piece of

knowledge and it is so assimilated that it gets reflected in all me not

affected  by desha, kala and vastu. Is “bhaAvana†voluntary or

involuntary?  Actually, here one has to free from all  bhAvanas, including

Aham BrahmAsmi, as one is already that.

This is my understanding only and I may be totally wrong and require to be

clarified.

With kind regards

R.S.Mani

 

 

 

 

 

R. S. Mani

 

 

Try the new India Homepage. http://in./trynew

 

 

[Guest guest]

Pranams Mani-ji

I would like to offer a few perspectives on what you wrote.

*************

" Again in the stock example of rope and snake, the knower of the rope as rope

and not as snake is different from both the snake that got projected due to

ignorance, and the rope. This is not the case with regard to Self Knowledge, as

here the Knower itself is the Known. "

************

My response:

I think this needs to be examined. If the Knower is the Known then what is

Knowledge? Brahman is not the Knower - Brahman is the Knowing that illumines

both ignorance and knowledge. There is a ignorant intellect that is in need of

the illuminating knowledge in order to recognize its mithya nature. This entire

vyavahara is in the realm of mithya. So the rope snake analogy maintains its

relevancy - only thing is the adhyasa or superimposition does not involve an

external object but involves the " internal " subject - the " aham " is superimposed

onto the anatma.

*************

When one negates or ignores dream he does it in waking state, i.e. experience of

one state is negated in another state. In the same state, i.e. dream state, I

doubt whether one is able to negate the dream experience. Again the awakening

to Self Knowledge is in Waking state only i.e. it does not happen in a

“different state.

**************

My response:

This does not mean that there is no " waking up " - when we say the person woke up

from the dream world into the waking world, it means that the dream world got

sublated, and was seen to be mithyA. In the case of samyak jnana also, there is

a sublation involved - where the waking state is ALSO seen to be mithyA - and

thereby is annihilated in toto the ahankara.

If within the dream state, without sublating that state - i.e. without actually

waking up, if someone keeps saying i know this is a dream state, it doesnt alter

his continued involvement in the dream - he simply becomes an informed dream

player - only when the waking up ensures his existential annihilation in toto.

***************

NidhidhyAsanam as I understand is remaining in, abiding in, staying in

determined budhi/wisdom or intellect, i.e. the dhi or intellect is determined

and free from all doubts, and one remains in that determined intellect/budhi or

wisdom. Whenever such determined dhi gets disturbed, although such disturbances

are just mithya, one has to remind himself of the Mahavakya, and negate the

mithya. This may happen till the Knowledge gets assimilated, and it reflects

spontaneously.

***************

My response:

This " remaining in " has to be a continuous unceasing effort on the part of a

mind that has been made extraordinarily singlepointed - where like a flow of

water the content of the thoughts are continually of the conviction of aham

brahamsmi. This can only happen when one gradually frees oneself of all karmas -

sarvakarmasannyasa - because any karma involves a notional do-ership, and any

notional do-ership - even of one's nitya karmas or nishkamya karmas involves

ahankara. And such a ahankara is incompatible with a mind that is persistently

and unremittingly engaged in the aham brahmasmi conviction. These " disturbances "

are a pointer to persisting durvasanas which will keep propping up and leading

one to perfunctory modes of behavior, and at least in the initial stages can

only be kept at bay by building up on vairagya and a gradual and deliberate

turning away from mundane activities, and building up on shatsampatti.

**************

With regard to one taking up Sanyasa or one becoming a Sanyasi, etc., what

difference it makes to such a GnAni whether he is sanyasai or otherwise.

**************

My response:

Again, " becoming " a sannyasi is not an extra action or karma - it is simply a

process of un-becoming - of what? - of a " mundane " existence that consists in

involvement in a neverending sequence of cause and effect - of continuous karmas

and karmaphalas - where every karma reinforces the conviction of dehatmabuddhi.

***************

Any amount of meditation on Aham BrahmAsi etc., will not liberate one, as one is

already liberated, and just because of his ignorance of the fact he is already

liberated, this Knowledge alone makes one recognize that he is already

liberated.

***************

My response:

True - knowledge alone makes one recognize this. However in this context,

meditation is not meant to secure a new liberation but to secure the knowledge

that one is ever-liberated. For that jnana-NISHTA alone needs nidhidhyasanam.

Without jnana-nishta, there is no liberation.

****************

Liberation does not take place in time, as such liberation taking place in time

is not real being subject to time.

*****************

My response:

Liberation is never " real " because bondage itself is unreal. It has nothing to

do with the " in-time " clause.

****************

In the case of Self Knowledge there is neither Vastu Tantra nor Purusha Tantra,

as in other cases, because here the Purusha and Vastu are one and the same.

****************

My response:

Again, the Vastu is not a knower. And purusha is the ahankara that efforts under

the spell of avidya - The Vastu does not partake in this entire vyavahara of

ignorance-bondage-knowledge-liberation - it is an univolved disinterested

witness - sakshi chaitanyam - a " mere " enabler that permits this entire

vyavahara to take place. Any knowledge is vastu tantra alone. It is always the

vastu that enables the knowledge to take place - provided the right means of

knowledge is operational. In the case of atmajnana that pramana is the Shruti

mahavakya.

*****************

With regard to any bhaAvana, I " know " I am a man, and is it required on my part

to have a bhaAvana that I am a man. It is bhAvAteetam. It is a piece of

knowledge and it is so assimilated that it gets reflected in all me not affected

by desha, kala and vastu. Is " bhaAvana " voluntary or involuntary? Actually,

here one has to free from all bhAvanas, including Aham BrahmAsmi, as one is

already that.

*****************

My response:

This bhavana " I am a man " is so ingrained in me because of beginningless avidya

that it is not easy to get rid of. I have complete nishta in this jnana! -

waking, eating, walking, talking, while doing every activity the one doubtless

bhavana I always entertain is " i am this body " - only when this dehatma bhava is

metamorphosed - with the help of knowledge gleaned from the Shruti mahavakya -

into sarvatmabhava. This sarvatmabhava ALONE is kaivalya or mukti. And for this

there has to be unceasing and singlepointed abidance in the conviction aham

brahmasmi and a gradual effacement of all thoughts contrary to that conviction -

vasanakshaya and manonasha.

 

sarvAtmanA bandhavimuktihetuh sarvAtmabhAvAnna paro'sti kascit|

drshyAgrahe satypapadyate'sau sarvAtmabhAvo'sya sadAtmaniSThayA||

There is no means for complete liberation from bondage other than identifying

oneself with the whole universe. This identification arises upon the rejection

of the perceptible world by continuous

contemplation on the atman.

 

How can such a thing be made possible for one immersed in dehatmabhava? katham

nu ghaTase dehAtmanA tiSThato? The answer is provided by Shruti -

sArvAtmyasiddhaye bhikSoh krtashravaNakarmaNah

samAdhim vidadhAtyeSA shAnto dAsta iti shrutih||

meaning-

bhikSoh krta-sravaNakarmaNah: to the Sannyasin who has engaged himself in

listening to the words of the Vedanta-texts and their meanings from the lips of

a guru who is well-established in Brahman

[brahma-nistha]. sarvAtmyasiddhaye: for the perfection of sarvatmabhava of the

form of kaivalya, which is the mark of emancipation. eSa: this sruti beginning

with `santo dantah': tasmadevamvit santo danta uparatah titiksuh samahitah

sraddhavitto bhutva atman yevatmanam pasyet [brh.]: " therefore, one who knows

thus, who has controlled his internal and external organs, who has withdrawn his

mind from objects, who is patient, who has concentration and faith, let him

realise himself in his Atman " .

 

Thank you for your posts - which are always thought-provoking, and provide all

of us an opportunity to dwell on Vedanta.

 

My namaskarams to you.

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam

 

advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote:

>

> Namaste, all respected members,

> I am putting down my understanding with regard to Self Knowledge, i.e. Aham

BrahmAsmi for clarification/ correction by our members.

> With kind regards

> R.S.Mani

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " R.S.MANI " <r_s_mani wrote:

>

>

> With regard to any bhaAvana, I “know†I am a man, and is it required on my

part to have a bhaAvana that I am a man. It is bhAvAteetam. It is a piece of

knowledge and it is so assimilated that it gets reflected in all me not

affected  by desha, kala and vastu. Is “bhaAvana†voluntary or

involuntary?  Actually, here one has to free from all  bhAvanas, including

Aham BrahmAsmi, as one is already that.

> This is my understanding only and I may be totally wrong and require to be

clarified.

> With kind regards

> R.S.Mani

>

> Bhava-Abhava vivarjita is the statement.

Language is full of opposites.Without the opposite it can not function.All human

endeavors are resultant action of these opposites.

Knowledge-known-knower is three dimensional word.When one state is active the

other states are in abeyance that does not mean they are totally

absent.Understanding three states of word is realization.

Without this realization there is no integrity.This integrity alone is enough to

see things or feelings as they are.You are right in your approach.

thank you

sekhar

 

>

>

>