PDA

View Full Version : Dream



devotee
15 January 2008, 06:03 AM
Analysing the dreams gives a strong insight into "how ONE becomes MANY".

A dream is like a drama in which several characters take part. Scientific explanation of dream is that the "story" & the "characters" in a dream are creation of mind taking impressions from our expreriences in real life in the past.

Now, let's analyse this "dream" thing.

All dreams are created by "me", within "me", wholly with the materials of "me" ( stimulants may be from outside but they are just stimulants, actual thing has to be created out of "me" only), therefore, the dream cannot be anything other than the "me". So whatever comes in the dream is
just a part of "me"( or say, different manifestations of "me") .... that includes the story, the characters, their specific roles, dialogues etc. So, just one "me" manifests itself into "many" which apparently look completely different.

Now, the greatest surprise is not this. Say, in a dream there are two characters ... one "me" & the other "my friend". The "me" in the dream gives a sense of real "me" in the dream too but not "my friend" in the dream. "My friend" in the dream acts as a separate individual on his own ... in fact, "he" sometimes does things which not expected by "me". How does he do like that ? If he is just a charater of a story written by my mind, his act should be known to "me" ... which is not the case.
So, there must be an "I" in him too, apparently different from my "I", to be able to act in such an indendent manner. If my "I" is not making him "live" & a "separate entity" who/what does it ? Where does this seemingly independent "I" come from ? This must come from "me" as there is no
one else !

There is another surprise too. Though there is already an "I" in the dream, there is another who is watching the whole dream ... as if the "I" has got divided into two. Many a times, the "I" of the dream doesn't exactly behave as the "I" in reality.

.... How can "I" play multiple roles & maintain separate individualities all at the same time. How is it logically explained ? The only logical explanation can be that what appears as "I" is capable of manifesting itself in multitude maintaining separate individualities in its different roles, all at
the same time which we are unable to understand.

Doesn't that gives an insight into the mystery behind this whole "creation" ?

yajvan
15 January 2008, 04:34 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Analysing the dreams gives a strong insight into "how ONE becomes MANY".

.... How can "I" play multiple roles & maintain separate individualities all at the same time. How is it logically explained ? The only logical explanation can be that what appears as "I" is capable of manifesting itself in multitude maintaining separate individualities in its different roles, all at
the same time which we are unable to understand.

Doesn't that gives an insight into the mystery behind this whole "creation" ?

Namaste Devotee,
two different ideas here:

a most interesting post... do you have an opinion on this? While in a dream have you had the ability to 'manage' it?
While the mystery ( for me) of creation is solved just before the dream period. Between wake and dream, or dream and sleep. In that gap period turiya can be found. Found suggests lost, so let me say turiya shines through, or is more available. The foundation for all creation is grounded there.pranams
(nice to see you posting!)

devotee
15 January 2008, 09:19 PM
Two different ideas here:

a most interesting post... do you have an opinion on this? While in a dream have you had the ability to 'manage' it?
While the mystery ( for me) of creation is solved just before the dream period. Between wake and dream, or dream and sleep. In that gap period turiya can be found. Found suggests lost, so let me say turiya shines through, or is more available. The foundation for all creation is grounded there.Namaste yajvan,

I hope you are well ! :)

"While in a dream have you had the ability to 'manage' it?" ====> If I remember correctly, that is what called "Lucid Dreaming" or "Concious Dreaming". The Tibetan Monks are supposed to have done extensive reasearch on this.

I was able to manage my dreams sometimes , as I recall. There were some dreams in which things happened in such a manner which were not at all acceptable to me. So, in dream itself, the "I" took control over the things & changed the events to make them acceptable. You may laugh at this but this is what actually happened ! :lol:

"While the mystery ( for me) of creation is solved just before the dream period. Between wake and dream, or dream and sleep. In that gap period turiya can be found. Found suggests lost, so let me say turiya shines through, or is more available. The foundation for all creation is grounded there."

I think you are talking about the dreamless state. This is also called the "Pure state of being" ... as you name it the "Turiya" or the fourth state. I think what you say is right. Now, that gives me another insight. If "Turiya" shines in dreamless state, that also proves that Turiya gets covered only due to the waking state i.e. the state which differentiates & which shows this world. In the Turiya/Dreamless state, there is no differentiation & no world, yet there is conciousness & the continuity. So, with that it further follows that as the mind takes over, Turiya gets hidden. And as mind gets hidden in the pure state, does it prove that mind & Turiya are same things in different states ? i.e. essentially they are not different ? What do you say ?

yajvan
15 January 2008, 09:45 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Devotee,

Thank you for your post...

Regarding your experience of managing your dream... very interesting.
Another question - ever be in a dream and in that dream you are dreaming? I found this to be a unique experience. It also shows just how flexible the mind can be.

It is suggested that this dream state some call svapna, is closer to samadhi. Swami Laksmanjoo says if in dream state compared to jagrat (or waking state) samadhi is much closer, easier to reach, from this state of consciousness. So , if are able to manage your dreams you may want to consider this opportunity.

It is also interesting to note that some folks report that during their meditations while in waking state ( jagrat) and during the process of transcending, when that transcendence is not held in place, the subtleness of restful alertness, they slip into (or find themselves) in dream state. So goes the march of the mind.

Re: Turiya - a most important matter. We had a most lively discussion on this back in August 2007. http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1822

Lots of knowledge and POV's, let alone information from the Upanishads came out. A rewarding set of posts. If you get a chance take a look.

This turiya is what makes all 'this' possible. It is the foundation for all states of consciousness, yet is behind them all.

pranams,

devotee
16 January 2008, 04:11 AM
Namaste yajvan,

A nice post & a very good link. Thanks ! :)

"Another question - ever be in a dream and in that dream you are dreaming? I found this to be a unique experience. It also shows just how flexible the mind can be."

Dreaming in a dream ? I don't know. Yes, there have been dreams, where I found claiming (in the dream) that it is all dream .... but no-one around (in the dream) listened to me ! :lol:

It is not that I can conciously manage my dreams. I managed it a few times when things were too unacceptable ! How it was done, is not known. Regarding taking that route you suggested, IMO, it needs a proper Guru & sufficient time which unfortunately I don't have.

The link provided in your post was excellent. While reading Mandukya Upanishad, I had to read those verses & explanations again & again & had some idea of my own. Now, that got better by reading the discussion between you & Atanu. That discussion is really good. Thanks to both you & Atanu !! :)

atanu
17 January 2008, 05:42 AM
Analysing the dreams gives a strong insight into "how ONE becomes MANY".
-
Now, let's analyse this "dream" thing.

---There is another surprise too. Though there is already an "I" in the dream, there is another who is watching the whole dream ... as if the "I" has got divided into two. Many a times, the "I" of the dream doesn't exactly behave as the "I" in reality.



Namaste Devotee,

Excellent Vichara.

There is a questioner here (as in every man questioning). As per me, the surprises are to the questioner. In most cases (may be 99.99%), the questioner assumes 'This is me, this body is me, dreams are arising in me and i am seeing the dreams.'

The questioner is Bhandasura (fake demon) who is ignorant of the common truth of all three states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. Most questioners cannot ask questions while in a dream (though you say that it is possible and you have exprienced it, which I believe) or in deep sleep (Nachiketa did it under much more difficult situation).

This questioner is only active in waking state. When his control (ego thoughts) is loosened a bit and the fleshy vision is dimmed, the light bodies (which are always there) become evident. Then the dreaming man takes over yet he is the same Bhandasura but here he does not know the waking or deep sleep. This dreaming Bhandasura also loses control and then the darkness reigns. Yet the pleasant recharging in this dark state remains in memory and is reflected in the waking Bhandasura. In the deep sleep also a trace of this Bhandasura thinking 'I am sleeping' remains.

It is the thinker, whose all thoughts relate to the false (bhanda) ego existence, who is the Bhandasura. It is said that absolute absence of thought can only reveal the true being who sports in all states and remains transcendental to the states. It is also said that through penetrating thoughts (such as you have presented), ego thoughts can come to halt.

It is said that one has to apprehend the questioner first in order to apprehend the Seer.

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

A question which occured to me before (to which Yajvan ji made a reply) is of waking state. If scriptures say that it is one Atman alone who is in waking, dreaming and sleeping states, then why this body of mine does not perceive a pin prick in another body?

Is it because that the body of a particular perceiver alone is satyam in the sense that it alone is the seat of particular cognition (created for fulfilling various needs etc) and other bodies are just attendants for fulfilling those particular needs but are not the seats of cognition?

The questioner is rampant and fervent.

Om

devotee
17 January 2008, 09:41 AM
A question which occured to me before (to which Yajvan ji made a reply) is of waking state. If scriptures say that it is one Atman alone who is in waking, dreaming and sleeping states, then why this body of mine does not perceive a pin prick in another body?

Is it because that the body of a particular perceiver alone is satyam in the sense that it alone is the seat of particular cognition (created for fulfilling various needs etc) and other bodies are just attendants for fulfilling those particular needs but are not the seats of cognition?


Thank you, Atanu, for a lucid explanation. :)

The "Bhandasura" concept helps understand this dilemma in an easier way. Actually, this "Bhandasura" which is born out of "I"-thought is itself fake & is capable of taking many forms. So, when we try to reach the root of the "I"-thought, Bhandasura disappears, because it was never there in reality !

Let me try to solve your puzzle :

"If scriptures say that it is one Atman alone who is in waking, dreaming and sleeping states, then why this body of mine does not perceive a pin prick in another body?"

My explanation to this puzzle is :

That is because the seamless oneness of the conciousness is at the Turiya state & not below that.

In the example of the dream, the Bhandasura concept explains the two "I"s but it doesn't explain the "you", "he", "they" etc. (the other characters who (apparently) are "not-I") which are also there in the dream. I gave the example of "My-friend" in dream. Let's analyse this character a bit more deeply. When "my friend" in the dream gets hurt, the "I" in the dream or even "I" who is watching the dream doesn't feel the pain. Does it mean that "My friend" in the dream is someone else than "I" ? It can't be ... because in reality, there is no-one except me ! So, "My friend" is nothing but another manifestation of "me" only. So, in spite of the fact that "My friend" in the dream is nothing but "me" in a different role, neither "I" of the dream nor "I" who is watching feels the pain when "my friend" gets hurt in the dream.

IMO, the above explains the answer to your question. The source of "I" of the dream, "I"-the watcher & "My friend in the dream" is the same & is capable of playing different roles at the same time with entirely different individuality ( to a level where when one is hurt, other doesn't feel the pain). As long as the individuality / duality remains, there is "my pain" or "other's pain". At the level of seamless oneness ( Turiya state) there is no "I", there is no "You", there is no "other" & also, there is no pain. I, you, he, she, it & they are all one but that oneness is not at the level we can feel pain or say "I", "my", "his" etc. It is at that level where all these words lose their meanings.

saidevo
17 January 2008, 09:45 AM
Namaste everyone.

Thanks to Devotee for initiating a thread with refreshingly different and useful POVs about dreams, the dreaming state and world. May I add my impressions and reasoning about what I have read and experienced on the subject.

As to the dreaming 'person'

Devotee has nicely brought out the truths that a dream is a creation by 'me' where 'I' participate in/as different 'characters' and also watch over the whole thing! This division and multiplication of the 'I' is a good example, says Devotee, of the 'One becoming Many'.

As Yajvan and Atanu has pointed out, it is the Atman that shines through all the four states: waking, dreaming, deep sleep and 'turIya'. It seems to me that Atman in its natural states of 'turIya' and deep sleep is the equivalent of the 'nirguNa brahman' while Atman as reflected in the dreaming state has its equivalent in the 'saguNa brahman' and this is why there is a distinct 'person', the 'dreamer' or 'questioner' or 'Bhandasura' (as Atanu phrases it). In the waking state, Atman is reflected as 'jIvA', and the 'person' becomes the 'personality'.

The case of a novelist comes to mind: To take a popular author I have read, J.K. Rowling in her sequel of the Harry Potter books has created a multitude of characters (personalities, in fact) ranging from the hero Harry Potter, his mentor Dumbledore to the archenemy Voldermat. In one sense, Rowling has 'dreamed up' the whole series of novels. The answer to the question 'Who does she actually represent in her own personality?' is the answer to the ability of the 'I' to create the world and characters of our dreams and participate in them along with a 'me'. There is one significant difference, however. The author of a novel is completely hidden and never directly lives in the created world (even in first person novels) unlike the 'author' of a dream, which is out and out centered around the dreaming personality.

As to the dream world

The consciousness of the 'jIvA' is focussed on its 'sUkSma sharIraM' (subtle body) in dreams and the action takes place on the astral plane, the 'bhuva loka' that interpenetrates our physical world and extends beyond it. Depending on the state of intensity and lucidity of the dream, the action takes place either as a projection or dramatization of 'vAsanAs' (impressions) stored in the 'chitta' (memory) or as an actual astral travel.

Inputs by our sense instruments that relate to the physical world are colored by our emotions. Even thoughts of knowledge are colored by personal propensities and prejudices. In the interplay of good and evil our ego has the desire to express itself in all the shades of good and evil, but we are not able to play out our secret thoughts and desires in the physical world, mainly due to the 'image' we have created to our own self and to the world. These secret, innermost desires of every shade stored in our 'chitta' are projected and dramatized by the 'dreamer' in our dream world. This is perhaps the reason that our dreams are mostly illogical, incoherent and often weird, providing an outlet for our bad karmic seeds to sprout and wither themselves with little repercussions in the corresponding physical world. As an example, suppose a friend plays a practical joke on me and I hate him for his indiscretion. Being unable to express my reaction in the way I would like to in the physical world, I might harass, hurt or even slay the friend in my dream!

When the dreams are clear, cogent and controlled, it might be that our 'jIvA' is travelling in the astral world of dreams. When we slip from the wakeful state to the dream state while sleeping, there is usually a break in consciousness, which also happens when we switch back to the waking from the dreaming state. This is the reason we are not able to remember our dreams in clear detail. By practice we can have a smooth transition in consciousness and thus have lucid dreams and remember them in detail when we switch back to the waking state. Once we remember our dreams more and more clearly and in detail, we can develop the ability to be actually aware and control what we dream about.

As to the dream stuff: the matter of the dream world

The 'saMsAra' or the 'World Process' is a manifestation of the Consciousness in Matter. What is true for the physical world is also true for the dream world, where the astral matter is far more subtle than the tiniest physical particle. The most wonderful feature of this matter is that its living essense readily shapes itself according to our thoughts and emotions. Just think about it and it is there as a shape, a living thought-form, in all its color and contour and feel! When we breathe out, we actually create shapes in the invisible air, which we can perhaps control by thought like the smoke rings blown out by an adept smoker. Yogis materialize stable physical things out of thin air! If gross matter can so lend itself to the power of thoughts, the plasticity of the far subtler astral matter can readily lend itself to the imagi-nations of thoughts.

Methinks that a 'sAdhakA' with knowledge and practice can cultivate dreams into a pathway with milestones to the ultimate Self-Realization. For example, it is said that some spiritual masters use dreams as a way to impress their teachings. A seeker can watch his/her dreams, train himself/herself to be lucid (in consciousness) in them and explore the astral world where things are said to happen first before they actually manifest in the physical world.

saidevo
17 January 2008, 10:19 AM
Lucid Dreaming

A number of Western phychic and clairvoyant researchers have intensively researched into the process and world of dreams and the related areas such as NDE (near death experiences), OBE (out of body experiences) and Remote Sensing.

Here is an intersting 'Dream FAQ' about Lucid Dreaming, from the knowledge base of the Western research (from an article in the now defunct Website http://www.spiritweb.com):

2. Lucid dreaming
[Section by L.Levitan]

2.1. What is lucid dreaming?

A. The term "lucid dreaming" refers to dreaming while knowing that you are dreaming. The "lucid" part refers to the clarity of consciousness rather than the vividness of the dream. It generally happens when you realize during the course of a dream that you are dreaming, perhaps because something weird occurs. Most people who remember their dreams have experienced this at some time, often waking up immediately after the realization. However, it is possible to continue in the dream while remaining fully aware that you are dreaming.

2.2. If you are lucid, can you control the dream?

A. Usually lucidity brings with it some degree of control over the course of the dream. How much control is possible varies from dream to dream and from dreamer to dreamer. Practice can apparently contribute to the ability to exert control over dream events. At the least, lucid dreamers can choose how they wish to respond to the events of the dream. For example, you can decide to face up to a frightening dream figure, knowing it cannot harm you, rather than to try to avoid the danger as you naturally would if you did not know it was a dream. Even this amount of control can transform the dream experience from one in which you are the helpless victim of frequently terrifying, frustrating, or maddening experiences to one in which you can dismiss for a while the cares and concerns of waking life. On the other hand, some people are able to achieve a level of mastery in their lucid dreaming where they can create any world, live any fantasy, and experience anything they can imagine!

2.3. Does lucid dreaming interfere with the function of "normal" dreaming?

A. According to one way of thinking, lucid dreaming _is_ normal dreaming. The brain and body are in the same physiological state during lucid dreaming as they are in during most ordinary non- lucid dreaming, that is, REM sleep. Dreaming is a result of the brain being active, at the same time as the sense organs of the body are turned off to the outside world. In this condition, typically during REM sleep, the mind creates experiences out of currently active thoughts, concerns, memories and fantasies. Knowing you are dreaming simply allows you to direct the dream along constructive or positive lines, like you direct your thoughts when you are awake. Furthermore, lucid dreams can be even more informative about yourself than non-lucid dreams, because you can observe the development of the dream out of your feelings and tendencies, while being aware that you are dreaming and that the dream is coming from you. The notion that dreams are unconscious processes that should remain so is false. Your waking consciousness is always present in your dreams. If it were not, you would not be able to remember dreams, because you can only remember an event you have consciously experienced. The added "consciousness" of lucid dreaming is nothing more than the awareness of being in the dream state.

2.4. Why would you want to have lucid dreams?

A. The laws of physics and society are repealed in dreams. The only limits are the reaches of your imagination. Much of the potential of dreams is wasted because people do not recognize that they are dreaming. When we are not lucid in a dream, we think and behave as if we are in waking reality. This can lead to pointless frustration, confusion and wasted energy, and in the worst case, terrifying nightmares. It is useless to try as we do to accomplish the tasks of waking life in dreams. Our misguided efforts to do so result in anxiety dreams of malfunctioning machinery, missed deadlines, forgotten exams, losing the way, and so on. Anxiety dreams and nightmares can be overcome through lucid dreaming, because if you know you are dreaming you have nothing to fear. Dream images cannot hurt you. Lucid dreams, in addition to helping you lead your dreams in satisfying directions, enjoy fantastic adventures, and overcome nightmares, can be valuable tools for success in your waking life. Lucid dreamers can deliberately employ the natural creative potential of dreams for problem solving and artistic inspiration. Athletes, performers, or anyone who gives presentations can prepare, practice and polish their performances while they sleep. This is only a taste of the variety of ways people have used lucid dreaming to expand their lives.

2.5. How do you have lucid dreams?

A. There are several methods of inducing lucid dreams. The first step, regardless of method, is to develop your dream recall until you can remember at least one dream per night. Then, if you have a lucid dream you will remember it. You will also become very familiar with your dreams, making it easier learn to recognize them while they are happening. If you recall your dreams you can begin immediately with two simple techniques for stimulating lucid dreams. Lucid dreamers make a habit of "reality testing." This means investigating the environment to decide whether you are dreaming or awake. Ask yourself many times a day, "Could I be dreaming?" Then, test the stability of your current reality by reading some words, looking away and looking back while trying to will them to change. The instability of dreams is the easiest clue to use for distinguishing waking from dreaming. If the words change, you are dreaming. Taking naps is a way to greatly increase your chances of having lucid dreams. You have to sleep long enough in the nap to enter REM sleep. If you take the nap in the morning (after getting up earlier than usual), you are likely to enter REM sleep within a half-hour to an hour after you fall asleep. If you nap for 90 minutes to 2 hours you will have plenty of dreams and a higher probability of becoming lucid than in dreams you have during a normal night's sleep. Focus on your intention to recognize that you are dreaming as you fall asleep within the nap.

External cues to help people attain lucidity in dreams have been the focus of Dr. Stephen LaBerge's research and the Lucidity Institute's development efforts for several years. Using the results of laboratory studies, they have designed a portable device, called the DreamLight, for this purpose. It monitors sleep and when it detects REM sleep gives a cue -- a flashing light -- that enters the dream to remind the dreamer to become lucid. The light comes from a soft mask worn during sleep that also contains the sensing apparatus for determining when the sleeper is in REM sleep. A small custom computer connected to the mask by a cord decides when the wearer is in REM and when to flash the lights.

2.6. Is there a way to prevent yourself from awakening right after becoming lucid?

A. At first, beginners may have difficulty remaining in the dream after they attain lucidity. This obstacle may prevent many people from realizing the value of lucid dreaming, because they have not experienced more than the flash of knowing they are dreaming, followed by immediate awakening. Two simple techniques can help you overcome this problem. The first is to remain calm in the dream. Becoming lucid is exciting, but expressing the excitement can awaken you. Suppress your feeling somewhat and turn your attention to the dream. If the dream shows signs of ending, such as the disappearance, loss of clarity or depth of the imagery, "spinning" can help bring the dream back. As soon as the dream starts to "fade," before you feel your real body in bed, spin your dream body like a top. That is, twirl around like a child trying to get dizzy (you probably will not get dizzy during dream spinning because your physical body is not spinning around). Remind yourself, "The next scene will be a dream." When you stop spinning, if it is not obvious that you are dreaming, do a reality test. Even if you think you are awake, you may be surprised to find that you are still dreaming!

Some links to dream and human consciousness Western research:

http://www.monroeinstitute.com/
http://phoenix.akasha.de/~alfred/dreamindex.htm
http://consciousdreaming.com/conscious-dreaming.swf
http://www.consciousdreaming.com/lucid-dreaming/lucid-dream-and-out-of-body-dreaming-links.htm
http://members.tripod.com/cryskernan/kabbalistic_guide_lucid_dreaming.htm

yajvan
17 January 2008, 10:37 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Methinks that a 'sAdhakA' with knowledge and practice can cultivate dreams into a pathway with milestones to the ultimate Self-Realization. For example, it is said that some spiritual masters use dreams as a way to impress their teachings. A seeker can watch his/her dreams, train himself/herself to be lucid (in consciousness) in them and explore the astral world where things are said to happen first before they actually manifest in the physical world.

Namaste all,

a very interesting post...thank you devotee for starting and contributing to it , and as always atanu and saidevo adds much value to round out the subject.

It is my understanding that since this dream state is another state of consciousness, it too is a spring board to turiya. That was the notion of asking devotee if he ( assuming male, please correct me accordingly) can manage dream state. And as saidevo suggests the sadhaka may have an opportunity to exercise his/her sadhana during this time too.

We also know that those that are grounded in turiya say during sleep, they watch themselves sleep, as they watch themselves dream too. So this level of Being, is ubiquitous as it underlies wake, dream and sleep.

For me, it is just the fun part of the day. Intersting dreams occur for me, some times I can manage them mostly not. But why is that? As I see it , one is caught up in the activity of the dream itself. It seems that when you are a 3rd party to this action, you can direct the actors a bit better.

There is a technique to help one gain the management of their dreams if there is that desire, and it's simple. While dreaming, just see if you can view your hands in the dream. Why so? it is directing ones attention that is the beginning of this management.

...just an idea.

pranams

Rajalakshmi
17 January 2008, 11:32 AM
My personal view is that the waking state is not like dream state, and they are truly unrelated. Infact, srI shankarAchArya has rejected the dream analogy in the interpretation of the sUtra 'vaidharmyAchcha na svapnAdivat.h'.

From the point of ajAti vAda, there has never been any creation/destruction because paramArta satya is akAla where no events or changes happen. Therefore, creation/destruction exist in the paramArta only in the form of knowledge (like pages of a book) without 'timed' information. It is due to this mysterious mAyA that such 'vyavahAra knowledge' appears to be event driven phenomenon to us, and appears real. It is kAlA that tricks us into beleiving that creation and destruction really happen. If you reach to the stage of trikAla abhAdita satyatva, then the world (as it appears to the ajnAni) disappears and only Atma exists.

The actual creation in vyavahAra dasha is not like a dream, but like ripples that appear in the ocean of sacchidAnanda - ripples of thought that create imaginary upAdhis that creates jIvas who feel bounded by these upAdhis. Though these upAdhis are imaginary, it is no joke to overcome them, and that is why shAstras have described elaborate ways starting from righteous living and devout worship to rigorous meditation to achieve enlightenment. Creation happens by mere wish of God - 'ichchAmAtram prabhosshRshTiriti' - the wish here is akin to God creating many imaginary concepts (like complex numbers) and weaving a big plot with all those imaginations...

I dont personally think dreams and sleep can help with enlightenment. Meidtation is always done in the waking state, and if you happen to fall asleep and enter dream state during meditation, no benefit will come about. It is extremely important to retain the waking state ( this is why shAstras make the sitting posture or padmAsana mandatory for doing meditation as it is difficult to involuntarily sleep while sitting) during meditation. It is from the waking state that one can enter turIya after crossing the svarga loka (taijasa or the subtle world) and brahma loka( prAgnya or the causal world).

When we sleep at night, we do enter the world of taijasa, but since we are not awake - we cannot control the dream and dream happens from previous vAsanas. If we can enter this taijasa world from the waking state through meditation, it becomes a world where dream experiences can be controlled by you - this is what that gives Yogis their great powers and siddhis. If we can enter the pragnya world through meditation by crossing the taijasa world - we get the ashTa mahA siddhis, as everything we wish for is instantly materialized in this causal plane. There is also vision of sarveshvara here. If we cross the pragnya world ( which will need burning away of significant karma vAsanas) we enter the turIya state that is beyond description. It is a tough ask...and will remain a mere theory for most sAdhakas for many births to come...:)

atanu
17 January 2008, 11:50 AM
-----
Let me try to solve your puzzle :

"If scriptures say that it is one Atman alone who is in waking, dreaming and sleeping states, then why this body of mine does not perceive a pin prick in another body?"

My explanation to this puzzle is :

That is because the seamless oneness of the conciousness is at the Turiya state & not below that.


Namaste Devotee,

Thank You very much for the questions and also for the explanations, which explain a lot of things. The above explanation however does not fully satisfy me for three reasons.

First. Does it mean that the seamless consciousness of Turya is absent in 3 states? I do not think so. (else constant unchangeabilty of Turya is gone into thin air).

Second. While explaining this phenomenon, in Brihadaraynaka, Yajnvalkya, explains: The being in the right eye (who is the same as being in the sun) roams in three states. So, it indicates the waking seer, dreamer, and sleeper as one full being spanning from this eye to the Sun.

Third. Is there another conscious being second or third to Turya? (if so, then dvaita holds true).

---------------------
I think that the query requires further deliberation. (what seems to be the body seems to be the altar of sacrifice to me).

Om

meez
17 January 2008, 11:54 AM
There is an excellent book about dreams, written by Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche, called Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep. I read it this past summer and it was very good. You can read most of it here (if you don't want to purchase the book).

Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep (http://books.google.com/books?id=fWz55-rCLbsC&dq=tibetan+yogas+of+dream+and+sleep&pg=PP1&ots=w5lBtqSTCJ&sig=zK68_c1vwKfDtZJpaGhRa8kUO3s&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=1nY&q=tibetan+yogas+of+dream+and+sleep&btnG=Search&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPA24,M1)

atanu
17 January 2008, 12:07 PM
----

I dont personally think dreams and sleep can help with enlightenment. Meidtation is always done in the waking state, and if you happen to fall asleep and enter dream state during meditation, no benefit will come about. It is extremely important to retain the waking state ( this is why shAstras make the sitting posture or padmAsana mandatory for doing meditation as it is difficult to involuntarily sleep while sitting) during meditation. It is from the waking state that one can enter turIya after crossing the svarga loka (taijasa or the subtle world) and brahma loka( prAgnya or the causal world).

----:)

Namaste and Regards,

Regards for your clarity of understanding. It is incredible.

Waking, dream, and deep sleep states are states of thought, while Turya is beyond the mind and thoughts return from it. Yet, as Upanishads state that it is with the help of mind alone the Self is attained.

Turya has to be attained in waking state alone with 100% consciousness intact, in the full knowledge of what Pragnya Ghana (not parted by thoughts) means. Turya never slumbers. While all meditators know that crossing the boundary of intervening sleep is the most difficult thing to attain.

(At the same time, RL, you have to give allowance for the fact that the state of a body may not reflect the true state of the being, to the onlooker. It is futile for an ignorant onlooker to try to assert the state of a Yogi by signs of the body.)


Om

yajvan
17 January 2008, 12:32 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


My personal view is that the waking state is not like dream state, and they are truly unrelated. Infact, srI shankarAchArya has rejected the dream analogy in the interpretation of the sUtra 'vaidharmyAchcha na svapnAdivat.h'.

The actual creation in vyavahAra dasha is not like a dream, but like ripples that appear in the ocean of sacchidAnanda - ripples of thought that create imaginary upAdhis that creates jIvas who feel bounded by these upAdhis. Though these upAdhis are imaginary, it is no joke to overcome them, and that is why shAstras have described elaborate ways starting from righteous living and devout worship to rigorous meditation to achieve enlightenment. Creation happens by mere wish of God - 'ichchAmAtram prabhosshRshTiriti' - the wish here is akin to God creating many imaginary concepts (like complex numbers) and weaving a big plot with all those imaginations...

I dont personally think dreams and sleep can help with enlightenment. Meidtation is always done in the waking state, and if you happen to fall asleep and enter dream state during meditation, no benefit will come about. It is extremely important to retain the waking state ( this is why shAstras make the sitting posture or padmAsana mandatory for doing meditation as it is difficult to involuntarily sleep while sitting) during meditation. It is from the waking state that one can enter turIya after crossing the svarga loka (taijasa or the subtle world) and brahma loka( prAgnya or the causal world).

When we sleep at night, we do enter the world of taijasa, but since we are not awake - we cannot control the dream and dream happens from previous vAsanas. If we can enter this taijasa world from the waking state through meditation, it becomes a world where dream experiences can be controlled by you - this is what that gives Yogis their great powers and siddhis. If we can enter the pragnya world through meditation by crossing the taijasa world - we get the ashTa mahA siddhis, as everything we wish for is instantly materialized in this causal plane. There is also vision of sarveshvara here. If we cross the pragnya world ( which will need burning away of significant karma vAsanas) we enter the turIya state that is beyond description. It is a tough ask...and will remain a mere theory for most sAdhakas for many births to come...:)

Namaste Rajalakshmi,
I like your notion
actual creation in vyavahAra dasha is not like a dream, but like ripples that appear in the ocean of sacchidAnanda

You also write,

I dont personally think dreams and sleep can help with enlightenment. Meditation is always done in the waking state, and if you happen to fall asleep and enter dream state during meditation, no benefit will come about.

I respect your opinion here, but allow me to offer another view for the reader to consider.

If one takes the notion that a upaya is or can be a meditation, then meditation is not limited to the waking state, yet agree with you perhaps a lot easier to administer.

In the Vijnana Bhairava tantra, dharanas are called nistaraṅga upadeśa or ~ 'undistracted instructions' - this is found in kArikA (verse or sloka) 139.
Then if we look to one of the instructions śiva gives to pārvatī in the Vijnana Bhairava tantra, kArikA 75, it points to that state 'where sleep has not yet come, but wakefulness is over'. It is there He says, one can find para devī.

This Vijnana Bhairava tantra calls out 112 upaya for the sadhu to consider. I found the one mentioned above most interesting.

Thank you again for your well thought out post.

pranams,

Rajalakshmi
17 January 2008, 12:35 PM
Namaste and Regards,

Regards for your clarity of understanding. It is incredible.

Waking, dream, and deep sleep states are states of thought, while Turya is beyond the mind and thoughts return from it. Yet, as Upanishads state that it is with the help of mind alone the Self is attained.

Turya has to be attained in waking state alone with 100% consciousness intact, in the full knowledge of what Pragnya Ghana (not parted by thoughts) means. Turya never slumbers. While all meditators know that crossing the boundary of intervening sleep is the most difficult thing to attain.

(At the same time, RL, you have to give allowance for the fact that the state of a body may not reflect the true state of the being, to the onlooker. It is futile for an ignorant onlooker to try to assert the state of a Yogi by signs of the body.)


Om

Namaste Atanuji,

You have stated it better than I put it. Meditation inevitably induces sleep and it the one who conquers sleep who will go on to the stage of samAdhi.

The external body has nothing to do with the awareness of the Yogi. The Yogi may physically live on earth with consciousness in any or all of taijasa or pragnya spheres, and some special Yogis ( like Ramana Maharishi or Swami Vivekananda) reach turIya too.( and pass beyond turIya too as turIya is also not the ultimate state)

You have stated beautifully that it is in the full knowledge of what Pragnya Ghana (not parted by thoughts) that one attains turIya. Understanding the principles are necessary to make the most of meditation. You should know what to expect in the process of meditation and what stages are traversed, otherwise you can be decieved by hallucinations and 'false samAdhis'. Guru is very essential to supervise the sAdhaka for these reasons. All meditation should be done after doing pUja of Ishvara and dhyAna should always commence after getting his blessings.

~RL

Rajalakshmi
17 January 2008, 01:08 PM
In the Vijnana Bhairava tantra, dharanas are called nistaraṅga upadeśa or ~ 'undistracted instructions' - this is found in karaka (verse or sloka) 139.
Then if we look to one of the instructions śiva gives to pārvatī in the Vijnana Bhairava tantra, karaka 75, it points to that state 'where sleep has not yet come, but wakefulness is over'. It is there He says, one can find para devī.


Is para dEvi supposed to turIya or sarveshvari? If it is turIya, then it is obvious that waking state consciousness is subsumed by the consciousness of turIya and must theoretically come to an end.

When turIya is awake, all states are automatically awake.
From the waking state you can traverse all states.
From the dream state, no other state can be traversed.
From the dreamless sleep also, no other state can be traversed.

Both dream and dreamless sleep must be avoided as both these are states of total ignorance.

yajvan
17 January 2008, 03:27 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Is para dEvi supposed to turIya or sarveshvari? If it is turIya, then it is obvious that waking state consciousness is subsumed by the consciousness of turIya and must theoretically come to an end.

When turIya is awake, all states are automatically awake.
From the waking state you can traverse all states.
From the dream state, no other state can be traversed.
From the dreamless sleep also, no other state can be traversed.

Both dream and dreamless sleep must be avoided as both these are states of total ignorance.

Namaste and hello Rajalakshmi,

As the sutra¹ reads, it is the gap between wake yet sleep has not started and many call this a 'gap'. It is though this gap the turiya can be experinced. I know you know this, yet these gaps can also be considered the consciousness-counterpart of saṁdhyā (junction , juncture) we talk about between day and night ( twilight) and night and day (dawn).

If one wishes to know the defininion of para devī and avoid a debate, please consider sutra 17, where Bhairava Himself offers the definition of that state which is praised in the tantras.

pranams,

1. kArakA or कारिका - the concise statement in verse

atanu
17 January 2008, 07:36 PM
--
When turIya is awake, all states are automatically awake.



Namaste Rajalakshmi,

Is Turya ever asleep? It can be known in momentary gaps (as Yajvan ji points out). Perhaps you wish to mean that 'when one is awake to Turya one is fully awake'?

Regards

Om

devotee
17 January 2008, 07:51 PM
Namaste Atanu, yajvan, Saideo, RL & meez,

Very thoughtful inputs ! Thanks !! :)


The above explanation however does not fully satisfy me for three reasons.

First. Does it mean that the seamless consciousness of Turya is absent in 3 states? I do not think so. (else constant unchangeabilty of Turya is gone into thin air).

Second. While explaining this phenomenon, in Brihadaraynaka, Yajnvalkya, explains: The being in the right eye (who is the same as being in the sun) roams in three states. So, it indicates the waking seer, dreamer, and sleeper as one full being spanning from this eye to the Sun.

Third. Is there another conscious being second or third to Turya? (if so, then dvaita holds true).

---------------------
I think that the query requires further deliberation. (what seems to be the body seems to be the altar of sacrifice to me).

Om

That is a good point to ponder over.

By seamless conciousness, I wanted to describe the state where there is no sense of duality. There is duality in all the three states below Turiya & therefore, the "Oneness" is not seamless.

"The being in the right eye (who is the same as being in the sun) roams in three states. So, it indicates the waking seer, dreamer, and sleeper as one full being spanning from this eye to the Sun."

That is correct. But when all are same, then how one is able to maintain its individuality separately, even in the presence of the other ? If I am pardoned for going back again & again to dream-analysis, how the "dream watcher", the one who poses as "I in the dream" & also the "others" (i.e. "not-I" in the dream) maintain their individualities all at the same time ? My explanation is that in all the three states, it is possible for One I to express itself as many & feel & perceive completely differently.

"Is there another conscious being second or third to Turya?" ====> Will you please explain this question further ? I am not able to get what you want to indicate with this.

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

Let's us go from the other side to attack the dilemma. Let's assume that when there is One Atman in all beings, you & every being must experience pain if I get a pin-prick (in all states). Let's see :

a) For the phenomenon of a pin-prick & pain, there must be differentiation between I, all, the pin, pin-prick & the pain. So, it can't be a state where all differentiation stops.

b) Let's ask this question ? Who experiences the pain ? Will the pain be there if mind is not there (even if there is a pin-prick)? It can't be. The presence of mind is a must for the presence of pain. What I want to indicate is that the "differentiation" must exist for feeling of pain by either me or the other.

c) Let's ask another question. Can one experience pain in Turiya state ? If pain exists, then that is not really a state where all differentiation stops ! There is still duality & so, it can't be Turiya.

I don't know if the above satisfies you. I would like to hear what you, yajvan ji, saideo, Rl & others have to offer on this issue.

Rajalakshmi
17 January 2008, 11:12 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste and hello Rajalakshmi,

As the sutraą reads, it is the gap between wake yet sleep has not started and many call this a 'gap'. It is though this gap the turiya can be experinced. I know you know this, yet these gaps can also be considered the consciousness-counterpart of saṁdhyā (junction , juncture) we talk about between day and night ( twilight) and night and day (dawn).

If one wishes to know the defininion of para devī and avoid a debate, please consider sutra 17, where Bhairava Himself offers the definition of that state which is praised in the tantras.

pranams,

1. kArakA or कारिका - the concise statement in verse

Namaste yajvanji,

The 'gap' is technically called the granti or the knot( a doorway). The gap by itself cannot be used to experience turIya, but is one step leading to it. Only by crossing all the three grantis - turIya is experienced.

The gap between the jAgrat and taijasa is Brahma granti - without 'breaking' this knot, it is not possible to enter taijasa. The gap between taijasa and prAgnya is vishNu granti. The gap between prAgnyA and turIya is called rudra granti.

All these three gaps are also known as sandhyA. prAtaH sandhyA is Brahma granti ( dawn of wisdom), mAdhyAnika sandhyA(noon of wisdom) is Vishnu granti and sAyam sandhyA(dusk of wisdom) is rudra granti. All these are 'daylight' of Sabda Brahman.

turIya is called the midnight of Sabda Brahman.

But just entering into turIya state alone, one does not get liberation. In the high awareness of the turIya state, we must 'destroy' all seeds of vAsanas, without which samAdhi cannot be maintained perpetually. In the turIya samAdhi also there is disturbance of the indiryas brought about by vAsanas, so it takes a while to retain it permanently.

~RL

atanu
18 January 2008, 12:18 AM
Namaste Atanu, yajvan, Saideo, RL & meez,

Very thoughtful inputs ! Thanks !! :)
That is a good point to ponder over.

By seamless conciousness, I wanted to describe the state where there is no sense of duality. There is duality in all the three states below Turiya & therefore, the "Oneness" is not seamless.

"The being in the right eye (who is the same as being in the sun) roams in three states. So, it indicates the waking seer, dreamer, and sleeper as one full being spanning from this eye to the Sun."

That is correct. But when all are same, then how one is able to maintain its individuality separately, even in the presence of the other ? If I am pardoned for going back again & again to dream-analysis, how the "dream watcher", the one who poses as "I in the dream" & also the "others" (i.e. "not-I" in the dream) maintain their individualities all at the same time ? My explanation is that in all the three states, it is possible for One I to express itself as many & feel & perceive completely differently.

"Is there another conscious being second or third to Turya?" ====> Will you please explain this question further ? I am not able to get what you want to indicate with this.



Namaste Devotee,

By asking whether there is a second 'conscious being' or not, I wished to indicate that the pin pricks are known by the Pragnya of Turya alone. Turya (and its Pragnya) being immortal, there will never be an occassion when the pin prick will not be cognised (though on recognising the body, pin, and all other on-lookers as transfiguration of Pragnya alone, the perspective of pain will drastically change. Then no pain will be external to the self). No-pain in Turya is not due to non-cognition but due to absolute lack of Adharma and Avidya.

Attaining Turya does not mean losing Pragnya. If that was so, then one would attain Turya under chloroform. I emphasize that the perceiver is ONE. And when it is said that 'all are same' or 'Brahman is all' -- the primary meaning is that it is NOT TWO.

The point I am trying to make is that the perceiver of the pain is the Purusha (Self) only, which is not the body. Body, gross or subtle, is a special object of the Self for enjoyment. So-called all others are also not-self. (This calls for a 'Net-Neti' or 'Who Am I?').

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
18 January 2008, 12:31 AM
Namaste Atanu, yajvan, Saideo, RL & meez,
--
c) Let's ask another question. Can one experience pain in Turiya state ? If pain exists, then that is not really a state where all differentiation stops ! There is still duality & so, it can't be Turiya.



Namaste Devotee,

Let me put a counter question. How and why Lord comes as Guru and Avatara, if He is not aware of pain and suffering within His being?

Om

atanu
18 January 2008, 02:09 AM
Namaste Atanuji,
-- The Yogi may physically live on earth with consciousness in any or all of taijasa or pragnya spheres, and some special Yogis ( like Ramana Maharishi or Swami Vivekananda) reach turIya too.( and pass beyond turIya too as turIya is also not the ultimate state)
--
~RL

Namaste Rajalakshmi,

Thank you for your nice post.

I request your attention to: "---as turIya is also not the ultimate state". I say that Turya is a state, when viewed as part of four states, but it is not a state, since it is THE SELF.

Agreeing with you on most aspects, I yet wish to clarify a point (or obtain a clarification). Ramana Maharshi himself was ever very emphatic that Turya is the ultimate being -- the immortal Self which is Brahman. If we say that there is something beyond Turya it would amount to saying that there is something beyond Self, which no Upanishad indicates. If some being is superior to Atman, then is that being devoid of a Self? No, it is inconcievable. Nothing goes beyond the Self, since that beyond thing will be devoid of a Self.

A distinction needs to be made (only for the purpose of understanding) between Turya the Self and the conscious subject, who after shedding avidya, remains in Turya alone. Such a Purusha, when well established in the Atman, is called Uttama Purusha (very well described in Chandogya Upanishad) who is in Turiyatita STATE. It is the Sahaja Samadhi state, wherein all desires and all objects of desire are in the Self of Uttama Purusha, who is All and ONE. Yet, Uttama Purusha is not beyond Akshara Brahman, since Uttama Purusha will say: One knows who knows me as unborn Mahesvara.

Turya is ever unborn, neither Sat nor Asat, since it is not an object. Uttama Purusha exists with a volitional form (which exists for a time period) and describes himself as Sat and Asat. Uttama Purusha, who has stabilised in Turya, is in Sahaja Samadhi and for Him there will be no loss of awareness here, unlike a sage who is in Nirvikalpa samadhi. Uttama Purusha is unborn Turya, as life force He is sat but He is animating a Maya body (Asat) for a function.
-----------------------

This is my understanding of teaching of Ramana Maharshi, obtained under his grace. If defects are there it is mine and not Ramana's.

Note: In this forum I have been, impelled by Shri Sarabhanga, using Turya for Self and Turiya for the experience of Turya, to overcome the confusion.

Om

Rajalakshmi
18 January 2008, 03:50 AM
Namaste Rajalakshmi,

Thank you for your nice post.

I request your attention to: "---as turIya is also not the ultimate state". I say that Turya is a state, when viewed as part of four states, but it is not a state, since it is THE SELF.

Agreeing with you on most aspects, I yet wish to clarify a point (or obtain a clarification). Ramana Maharshi himself was ever very emphatic that Turya is the ultimate being -- the immortal Self which is Brahman. If we say that there is something beyond Turya it would amount to saying that there is something beyond Self, which no Upanishad indicates. If some being is superior to Atman, then is that being devoid of a Self? No, it is inconcievable. Nothing goes beyond the Self, since that beyond thing will be devoid of a Self.

A distinction needs to be made (only for the purpose of understanding) between Turya the Self and the conscious subject, who after shedding avidya, remains in Turya alone. Such a Purusha, when well established in the Atman, is called Uttama Purusha (very well described in Chandogya Upanishad) who is in Turiyatita STATE. It is the Sahaja Samadhi state, wherein all desires and all objects of desire are in the Self of Uttama Purusha, who is All and ONE. Yet, Uttama Purusha is not beyond Akshara Brahman, since Uttama Purusha will say: One knows who knows me as unborn Mahesvara.

Turya is ever unborn, neither Sat nor Asat, since it is not an object. Uttama Purusha exists with a volitional form (which exists for a time period) and describes himself as Sat and Asat. Uttama Purusha, who has stabilised in Turya, is in Sahaja Samadhi and for Him there will be no loss of awareness here, unlike a sage who is in Nirvikalpa samadhi. Uttama Purusha is unborn Turya, as life force He is sat but He is animating a Maya body (Asat) for a function.
-----------------------

This is my understanding of teaching of Ramana Maharshi, obtained under his grace. If defects are there it is mine and not Ramana's.

Note: In this forum I have been, impelled by Shri Sarabhanga, using Turya for Self and Turiya for the experience of Turya, to overcome the confusion.

Om

Although not a strict vedantic idea, many sages have indicated of the possibility of the turIyAtIta state, and this is why Brahman is called panchamukha in some traditions. In turIya, there is mind-space awareness as turIya is mentioned to be the sarvadr^ik, sAkshi, prabhu etc. turIyAtIta is attained in a mindless-space in Cosmic Consciousness. Here the Self or the one ceases to function since the ‘mind-space’ transforms itself into mindless-space, that never manifests itself. In this state, there is no question of return to the oneself, since it becomes one with the source. One who goes to turIyAtIta no longer returns to talk of such a state, and hence there cannot even be a description of in the upanishads. This is the Absolute Non dualty without a trace of dualty involved in it. If this is what you mean by tUrya, then we are on the same page.

Rajalakshmi
18 January 2008, 04:01 AM
When the Yogi says 'I am Brahman', or 'I am the witness' - this is turIya. When the "I am" alone is witnessed, it is beyond turIya. (awareness turning upon itself)

atanu
18 January 2008, 08:35 AM
Although not a strict vedantic idea, many sages have indicated of the possibility of the turIyAtIta state, and this is why Brahman is called panchamukha in some traditions. In turIya, there is mind-space awareness as turIya is mentioned to be the sarvadr^ik, sAkshi, prabhu etc. --

Namaste Rajalakshmi,

The fifth is a Vedic knowledge and I can post the verses.

But consider that you can do Agni Dharana by attaining Agni's form. Then you come back and live fearlessly, knowing that Agni will not burn you. Yet, this does make you greater than Agni.

Turya is anadimat (beginningless) Self. You may attain it fully and then fearlessly enjoy the goodies of Brahmaloka (objects and women as Chandogya Upanishad says; women in Brahmloka being speech/poetry). That is Sahaja Samadhi and Turiyatita. Or of Uttama Purusha (as Chandogya describes). A Turiyatita sage does not exceed Turya, which is anadimat Self.

Another example may make it more clear. We, the ignorant ones, go to Shushpti and sleep while a knower of the fourth (Atman) can enjoy the Pragnya Ghana in any fashion -- fearlessly. That is Brahmaloka.

Turya is unchangeable and infinite without any boundaries as it has no internal or external world. Mandukya certainly does not indicate in any fashion that the fourth has mind space awareness. In fact, Mandukya says:


7. The Fourth is thought of as that which is not conscious of the internal world, nor conscious of the external world, nor conscious of both the worlds, nor dense with consciousness, nor simple consciousness, nor unconsciousness, which is unseen, actionless, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, whose proof consists in the identity of the Self (in all states), in which all phenomena come to a cessation, and which is unchanging, auspicious, and non-dual. That is the Self; that is to be known.


It has neither internal awareness nor external awareness. It is not unconsciousness also. By sheer inevitable inference it can be held to be the real Prabhu/Drasta as Turya is the Reality of Reality (reality being Life force). Similarly one abiding in Turya can definitely not say "I am Brahman". Such a person has no inner and outer sense, how can he say I? One can say so, on coming down after knowing the truth.


Regards,


Om

Nothing surpasses the Self. If any one were to surpass Self, then that person would be devoid of a self.

yajvan
18 January 2008, 10:36 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~
Rajalakshmi wrote

Namaste yajvanji,

The 'gap' is technically called the granti or the knot( a doorway). The gap by itself cannot be used to experience turIya, but is one step leading to it. Only by crossing all the three grantis - turIya is experienced.

The gap between the jAgrat and taijasa is Brahma granti - without 'breaking' this knot, it is not possible to enter taijasa. The gap between taijasa and prAgnya is vishNu granti. The gap between prAgnyA and turIya is called rudra granti.

All these three gaps are also known as sandhyA. prAtaH sandhyA is Brahma granti ( dawn of wisdom), mAdhyAnika sandhyA(noon of wisdom) is Vishnu granti and sAyam sandhyA(dusk of wisdom) is rudra granti. All these are 'daylight' of Sabda Brahman.

turIya is called the midnight of Sabda Brahman.

But just entering into turIya state alone, one does not get liberation. In the high awareness of the turIya state, we must 'destroy' all seeds of vAsanas, without which samAdhi cannot be maintained perpetually. In the turIya samAdhi also there is disturbance of the indiryas brought about by vAsanas, so it takes a while to retain it permanently.

~RL

Namaste Rajalakshmi,
A very good point indeed.... yes we have talked often here on saṁdhyā , their timings of the day ( this is in the Meditation & Jyotish folders if there is interest) and how one can use these timings as beneficial to meditation.

I also agree with you that
But just entering into turIya state alone, one does not get liberation The benefit of this, of experiencing this gap this granti ( some write granthi) is to culture the mind that there is something other then wake-dream-sleep. It is an ahhhh-ha! for the mind.

I also agree with your assessment
we must 'destroy' all seeds of vAsanas, without which samAdhi cannot be maintained perpetually. In the turIya samAdhi also there is disturbance of the indiryas brought about by vAsanas, so it takes a while to retain it permanentlyYes, and knowledge is the greatest purifier... pure knowledge ( pure consciousness) is the purest purifier. I find this to be the best 'breaker' or flushing mechanism of these vasanas.

I agree these knots must be broken... this wisdom is not my epiphany, but of the Chandogya Upanishad ( I offer this for the reader as I assume you are well acquainted with these slokas ).
Chapter 7 holds the conversation between Narada and rsi Sanatkumara's teaching. Sanatkumaraji offers bhuma vidya.

When this bhuma becomes firm and constant then the knots are broken ,sarva-granthīnām vipramokṣha. Yet the knot in the heart, this hṛdayagranthi, is broken by the the perception of the Supreme, tasmin dṛṣhṭe parātpare.

But who is there to help? Who is there to assist to break this final knot?
bhagvan sanatkumara the Upanishad says, also known as skanda.

This is the blessing found in this Upanishad.

pranams,

Rajalakshmi
18 January 2008, 11:28 AM
Namaste Rajalakshmi,

The fifth is a Vedic knowledge and I can post the verses.

But consider that you can do Agni Dharana by attaining Agni's form. Then you come back and live fearlessly, knowing that Agni will not burn you. Yet, this does make you greater than Agni.

Turya is anadimat (beginningless) Self. You may attain it fully and then fearlessly enjoy the goodies of Brahmaloka (objects and women as Chandogya Upanishad says; women in Brahmloka being speech/poetry). That is Sahaja Samadhi and Turiyatita. Or of Uttama Purusha (as Chandogya describes). A Turiyatita sage does not exceed Turya, which is anadimat Self.

Another example may make it more clear. We, the ignorant ones, go to Shushpti and sleep while a knower of the fourth (Atman) can enjoy the Pragnya Ghana in any fashion -- fearlessly. That is Brahmaloka.

Turya is unchangeable and infinite without any boundaries as it has no internal or external world. Mandukya certainly does not indicate in any fashion that the fourth has mind space awareness. In fact, Mandukya says:


7. The Fourth is thought of as that which is not conscious of the internal world, nor conscious of the external world, nor conscious of both the worlds, nor dense with consciousness, nor simple consciousness, nor unconsciousness, which is unseen, actionless, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, whose proof consists in the identity of the Self (in all states), in which all phenomena come to a cessation, and which is unchanging, auspicious, and non-dual. That is the Self; that is to be known.


It has neither internal awareness nor external awareness. It is not unconsciousness also. By sheer inevitable inference it can be held to be the real Prabhu/Drasta as Turya is the Reality of Reality (reality being Life force). Similarly one abiding in Turya can definitely not say "I am Brahman". Such a person has no inner and outer sense, how can he say I? One can say so, on coming down after knowing the truth.


Regards,


Om


Nothing surpasses the Self. If any one were to surpass Self, then that person would be devoid of a self.


Namaste Atanu,

So what do you think was the stage of sage vAmadeva when he says

'taddhaitatpashyannR^ishhirvAmadevaH pratipede.ahaM manurabhava{\m+} sUryashcheti | tadidamapyetarhi ya evaM vedAhaM brahmAsmIti iti
sa ida{\m+} sarvaM bhavati'

Translation:

The seer Vamadeva, having realized this self as That, came to know: "I was Manu and the sun." And to this day, whoever in a like manner knows the self as "I am Brahman," becomes all this universe.

How is possible to know this without mind-space awareness? Note that by mind, I am not referring to the manas, but to the 'super mind' also known as pragnya.

Your view regarding enjoying Brahmaloka after attaining turya is actually not agreed upon by Shankara advaita because vedanta sUtras explicitly reject jagat vyApAraM for a liberated soul, which means no one who has once been a jIva and latter attained self realization, never actually becomes an uttama purusha like Krishna.

It should also be noted that even those who go to Brahmaloka get AnandasAmyaM with Brahman, and may choose to be devotees of sarveshvara without ever attaining complete identity- a doctrine that is taught by many shools of vedanta. ( 'bhogamAtrasAmyaliN^gAchcha')


~RL

atanu
18 January 2008, 12:22 PM
Namaste Atanu,

So what do you think was the stage of sage vAmadeva when he says
--
Translation:

The seer Vamadeva, having realized this self as That, came to know: "I was Manu and the sun." And to this day, whoever in a like manner knows the self as "I am Brahman," becomes all this universe.

How is possible to know this without mind-space awareness? Note that by mind, I am not referring to the manas, but to the 'super mind' also known as pragnya.


Namaste Rajalaksmi,

How do you know that you slept well, though in deep sleep you knew nothing? The verse above contains the answer. It says "having realized----". When Vamadeva is speaking, He is using Mind, Aham (I), and speech. These are the first three kids of Brahman. Knower of Turya obviously knows that this kid called 'Aham' is this world.




Your view regarding enjoying Brahmaloka after attaining turya is actually not agreed upon by Shankara advaita because vedanta sUtras explicitly reject jagat vyApAraM for a liberated soul,


Surely. I said enjoyment of objects and women of Brahmaloka. I did not mention Jagat. Chandogya says that the physical body originating from womb of earthly mother is not known to Uttama Purusha.



which means no one who has once been a jIva and latter attained self realization, never actually becomes an uttama purusha like Krishna.


Agreed. Who can ever become another Lord Krishna? But Uttama Purusha one can become and that is as per Chandogya Upanishad.



It should also be noted that even those who go to Brahmaloka get AnandasAmyaM with Brahman, and may choose to be devotees of sarveshvara without ever attaining complete identity- a doctrine that is taught by many shools of vedanta. ( 'bhogamAtrasAmyaliN^gAchcha')


Yes. I agree to this, with a slight difference. One who has attained Brahmaloka, I think, has realised that it is the will of Lord that matters.

Regards,

Om

I remind:

7. The Fourth is thought of as that which is not conscious of the internal world, nor conscious of the external world, nor conscious of both the worlds, nor dense with consciousness, nor simple consciousness, nor unconsciousness, which is unseen, actionless, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, whose proof consists in the identity of the Self (in all states), in which all phenomena come to a cessation, and which is unchanging, auspicious, and non-dual. That is the Self; that is to be known.

Om Namah Shivaya

Rajalakshmi
18 January 2008, 12:34 PM
Namaste vajvanji,


Hari Om
~~~~~

I agree these knots must be broken... this wisdom is not my epiphany, but of the Chandogya Upanishad ( I offer this for the reader as I assume you are well acquainted with these slokas ).
Chapter 7 holds the conversation between Narada and rsi Sanatkumara's teaching. Sanatkumaraji offers bhuma vidya.

When this bhuma becomes firm and constant then the knots are broken ,sarva-granthīnām vipramokṣha. Yet the knot in the heart, this hṛdayagranthi, is broken by the the perception of the Supreme, tasmin dṛṣhṭe parātpare.

But who is there to help? Who is there to assist to break this final knot?
bhagvan sanatkumara the Upanishad says, also known as skanda.

This is the blessing found in this Upanishad.

pranams,

Yes, you have summarized beautifully.

tadeshha shloko na pashyo mR^ityuM pashyati na rogaM nota duHkhataa\m+
sarva\m+ ha pashyaH pashyati sarvamaapnoti sarvasha iti
sa ekadhaa bhavati tridhaa bhavati paJNchadhaa
saptadhaa navadhaa chaiva punashchaikaadashaH smR^itaH
shataM cha dasha chaikashcha sahasraaNi cha
vi\m+shatiraahaarashuddhau sattvashuddhau dhruvaa smR^itiH
smR^itilambhe sarvagranthiinaaM vipramokshastasmai
mR^iditakashhaayaaya tamasaspaaraM darshayati
bhagavaansanatkumaarasta\m+ skanda ityaachakshate
ta\m+ skanda ityaachakshate || chAndogya Up 7.26.2||

When the food is pure, the mind becomes pure. When the mind is pure the memory becomes firm. When the memory is firm all knots are loosened. The venerable Sanatkumara showed Narada, after his blemishes had been wiped out, the other side of darkness. They call Sanatkumara Skanda, yea, Skanda they call him.


By food, all sensory inputs are meant, i.e by pure seeing, pure hearing, pure action etc. By always indulging in pure activities ( such as sat-sangha), the mind becomes pure. When mind becomes pure, memory or chitta becomes steady. When chitta becomes steady, the three knots loosen, and finally 'break'. To such a person who is freed from the three knots, grace of God personified by the son of God (known as Skanda) takes such a person to the father.( i.e Shiva)

The three knots are the knot of ignorance, knot of passion and knot of karma.

When the knot of ignorance is 'broken' it gives the first experience of the divine to the sAdhaka that makes him a true Astika and makes him very committed in his resolve of Atma-sAxAtkAra. Most of us always have the doubt whether there exists a God or anything supernatural - all such doubts are dispelled when the knot of ignorance is opened.

When the knot of passion is crossed over, it gives a permanent higher state of awareness associated with anAhata. Even when these people die and are reborn, they are born with great Yogic insight, knowledge of previous birth etc.

When the knot of karma is crossed, there is no more return to earthly existance - a permanent residence in Ishvara sAyujya is attained.

To such a Yogi the grace of Lord( in the form of skanda) reveals whatever there is to know - the ultimate turIya experience is conferred.

The Skanda concept( son of Shiva) has a close parallel with the Jesus concept of Christianity, where Jesus is also considered the son of God.

Rajalakshmi
18 January 2008, 01:09 PM
Namaste,



Surely. I said enjoyment of objects and women of Brahmaloka. I did not mention Jagat. Chandogya says that the physical body originating from womb of earthly mother is not known to Uttama Purusha.


Actually, Brahmaloka is used in two ways - one as the Brahmaloka equated with Brahman( this is Advaita's Brahmaloka), and another as Brahmaloka of Saguna Brahman. In the former, there isn't any notion of enjoyment of objects or women( which are siddhis) and is a state of positive existance of no activity. The latter Brahmaloka where there is enjoyment of objects is in the dualistic Jagat only.




Agreed. Who can ever become another Lord Krishna? But Uttama Purusha one can become and that is as per Chandogya Upanishad.


I should have said 'axara purusha' who is one and only one anAdimat Ishvara. You are right that the liberated soul does become 'uttama purusha'. But Sri Shankara does not accept this kind of existance as the highest mukti.



Yes. I agree to this, with a slight difference. One who has attained Brahmaloka, I think, has realised that it is the will of Lord that matters.


Yes. Since it is the Lord who has given existance to all these diverse jivas, it is his will that will prevail - whether a soul will stay with him enjoying great Ananda and his jagat-lila, or attain oneness in turIya.

~RL

yajvan
18 January 2008, 01:32 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


I agree these knots must be broken... this wisdom is not my epiphany, but of the Chāndogya Upanishad ( I offer this for the reader as I assume you are well acquainted with these slokas ).
Chapter 7 holds the conversation between Narada and rsi Sanatkumara's teaching. Sanatkumaraji offers bhuma vidya.

When this bhuma becomes firm and constant then the knots are broken ,sarva-granthīnām vipramokṣha. Yet the knot in the heart, this hṛdayagranthi, is broken by the the perception of the Supreme, tasmin dṛṣhṭe parātpare.

But who is there to help? Who is there to assist to break this final knot? bhagvan sanatkumara the Upanishad says, also known as skanda.This is the blessing found in this Upanishad.


Namaste HDF reader,
Rajalakshmi and I have been discussing the Chāndogya Upanishad, Chapter 7. Perhaps you are wondering of this knowledge and would like to read it, with some assistance in its understanding i.e. a good narrator and translator.

Let me offer the following:
Swami Krishnananda does an excellent job of bringing out the knowledge here.

Swami-ji's review of the Chāndayoga Upanisad
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/chhand_0.html (http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/chhand_0.html)

Specifically the Chapter on Bhuma Vidya
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/chhand/ch_3.html (http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/chhand/ch_3.html)


Another translation I owe my debt to is Swami Muni Narayana Prasad; His publication is not on line as far as I can see... his book is published by D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd. The ISBN number is 81-246-0374-X

Are there others? Yes, but I list the ones I find most insightful.
It is my favorite Upanishad.


pranams

devotee
18 January 2008, 07:58 PM
Namaste Atanu,

Thanks to inputs from you, yajvan ji & Rajlakshmi, this discussion is proving to be gold-mine of knowledge ! Thanks. :)

It is a treat to read the inputs which have come & I am in dilemma, if I should interrupt here !

To refresh what we were discussing :


By asking whether there is a second 'conscious being' or not, I wished to indicate that the pin pricks are known by the Pragnya of Turya alone. Turya (and its Pragnya) being immortal, there will never be an occassion when the pin prick will not be cognised (though on recognising the body, pin, and all other on-lookers as transfiguration of Pragnya alone, the perspective of pain will drastically change. Then no pain will be external to the self). No-pain in Turya is not due to non-cognition but due to absolute lack of Adharma and Avidya.

Attaining Turya does not mean losing Pragnya. If that was so, then one would attain Turya under chloroform. I emphasize that the perceiver is ONE. And when it is said that 'all are same' or 'Brahman is all' -- the primary meaning is that it is NOT TWO.

As I see it, we are seeing the things in two different ways. To explain my POV,

i) "pin pricks are known by the Pragnya of Turya" ====> My understanding is that pin-pricks can be known only in Visva, Taijsa & Pragnya. Actually all these three states co-exist in duality but Turiya is absence of all the three. The cognizance, the cognizer, the memory of a phenomenon & births of related phenomena cease to exist in Turiya / the True Being.

ii) "Turya (and its Pragnya) being immortal, there will never be an occassion when the pin prick will not be cognised" ====> The way I understand it, can, perhaps, be understood with questions ---> What is pin prick but not Brahman ? What is cognizance but not Brahman ? For True-being to cognise pin-prick as pin-prick, there must be three different entities -- True-being, pin-prick & cognizance, which violates the Non-duality of the True-being & hence that is not possible.

iii) "No-pain in Turya is not due to non-cognition but due to absolute lack of Adharma and Avidya" ====> Again the question is, " Where do Adharma & Avidya" go in Turiya ? What is "Avidya", if that too is not Brahman ? What is "illusion" if it is not the "reality" seen through mind ? If there exists anything which is "Avidya" or "illusion" which is not Brahman, then Non-duality of Brahman gets violated again & hence that is not again possible.

iv) "Attaining Turya does not mean losing Pragnya. If that was so, then one would attain Turya under chloroform" ===> My understanding is that unless Pragnya dissloves, it is not really Turiya. Pragnya is still identification though of the highest order, all-knowing & all powerful & is within duality.

IMHO, the attaining of Turiya is fallacious understanding. "Who" will attain Turiya ? Turiya is already there, there is no need to attain it, much less by "anyone" ---- the Truth is Not manifested because we are clinging to the falsehood.

devotee
18 January 2008, 08:24 PM
Namaste Atanu,


Let me put a counter question. How and why Lord comes as Guru and Avatara, if He is not aware of pain and suffering within His being?

That has kept me thinking for hours together to understand through your way !

My understanding is simple. This pain, suffering, Lord, Guru & Avatara .... have meaning only within duality i.e. upto the three states of Visva, Taijsa & Pragnya. Within these states, there is differentiation & individuality & hence there is pain & suffering, remedy & help, devotee & Lord. Lord & Guru are the Pragnya state & hence they must know everything. However, there is no such thing in Ultimate Reality/True-being/Turiya. These are all manifestation within the Ultimate Reality ... the phenomenoa of waves on the sea. In reality, there are no waves, there is just Sea manifesting simultaneously as the Sea & the waves,

Regards,

devotee

atanu
18 January 2008, 09:01 PM
Namaskar Devotee,



i) "pin pricks are known by the Pragnya of Turya" ====> My understanding is that pin-pricks can be known only in Visva, Taijsa & Pragnya. Actually all these three states co-exist in duality but Turiya is absence of all the three. The cognizance, the cognizer, the memory of a phenomenon & births of related phenomena cease to exist in Turiya / the True Being.


I agree.



ii) "Turya (and its Pragnya) being immortal, there will never be an occassion when the pin prick will not be cognised" ====> The way I understand it, can, perhaps, be understood with questions ---> What is pin prick but not Brahman ? What is cognizance but not Brahman ? For True-being to cognise pin-prick as pin-prick, there must be three different entities -- True-being, pin-prick & cognizance, which violates the Non-duality of the True-being & hence that is not possible.


I agree with one reservation. The Self as non-dual is 'Satya of Satya' while Self animating three states as life force is Satya. His three states are His alone.

So, deciding to be subjected to pin pricks (along with other pleasures and miseries of flesh) is His will and volition. The view of ego (bhandasura) is defective. But when intellect realises that there is ONE Aham, the Bhandasura drops dead.



ii) "No-pain in Turya is not due to non-cognition but due to absolute lack of Adharma and Avidya" ====> Again the question is, " Where do Adharma & Avidya" go in Turiya ? What is "Avidya", if that too is not Brahman ? What is "illusion" if it is not the "reality" seen through mind ? If there exists anything which is "Avidya" or "illusion" which is not Brahman, then Non-duality of Brahman gets violated again & hence that is not again possible.

I agree. Non-duality of Turya is 'Satya of Satya'. Yet, Turya pervading the three states is Satya. What I mean to say is: Being in Turya or being Visvarupa is His decision and volition and not Ego's.



iv) "Attaining Turya does not mean losing Pragnya. If that was so, then one would attain Turya under chloroform" ===> My understanding is that unless Pragnya dissloves, it is not really Turiya. Pragnya is still identification though of the highest order, all-knowing & all powerful & is within duality.

IMHO, the attaining of Turiya is fallacious understanding. "Who" will attain Turiya ? Turiya is already there, there is no need to attain it, much less by "anyone" ---- the Truth is Not manifested because we are clinging to the falsehood.

Yes. Yet, who are We? -------- (Though Satay has warned me, I could not resist it). There is only the Self. 'We' is His various forms through His volition.




Let me put a counter question. How and why Lord comes as Guru and Avatara, if He is not aware of pain and suffering within His being?

That has kept me thinking for hours together to understand through your way !

My understanding is simple. This pain, suffering, Lord, Guru & Avatara .... have meaning only within duality i.e. upto the three states of Visva, Taijsa & Pragnya. Within these states, there is differentiation & individuality & hence there is pain & suffering, remedy & help, devotee & Lord. Lord & Guru are the Pragnya state & hence they must know everything. However, there is no such thing in Ultimate Reality/True-being/Turiya. These are all manifestation within the Ultimate Reality ... the phenomenoa of waves on the sea. In reality, there are no waves, there is just Sea manifesting simultaneously as the Sea & the waves,

That is why I felt that you, by bringing in questions on dreams, triggered an excellent Vichara. And I thank you again for this.

Your explanation is fine, except for two points. First, again I remind that Self is 'Satya of Satya' of three states, which exist on account of the Self alone. Second, in Pragnya also there is no world, no body, no thoughts and so no pain (whether for the ignorant or for the enlightened). Enlightened in that state are Sthithipragnya yogis.

(The dual Visva and Taijjassa may not be at all painful for the non-ignorant, who is able to see One Visva and One Taijjassa as the two padas of the Advaita Self.)

Regards,

Om

sarabhanga
18 January 2008, 09:54 PM
Namaste,




It is suggested that svapna is closer to samadhi. Swami Laksmanjoo says if in dream state compared to jagrat (or waking state) samadhi is much closer, easier to reach, from this state of consciousness.

Compared with taijasa (dreaming), prAjńa (deep sleep) is even “closer” to samAdhi, but it is not possible to reach samAdhi from unconsciousness.

The teaching of svAmI lakshmanjU is not advaitavAda; rather, his “parAdvaita” is a kind of dvaitAdvaita or vishiSTAdvaita vAda.

Neither jAgrat nor svapna, alone, is any nearer to samAdhi, but the yoga is (of course) found in their twin, the jAgratsvapnau (“wakeful sleep” or “lucid dreaming”). And the parAdevI may be found in this jAgratsvapnau ~ although parAdevI is bhairavI, who is only the mAyA of bhairava. Such shAktopAya occurs in taijasa, and it may lead one to brahmA and brAhmI (i.e. to nArAyaNa), but not to brahma (or nara). shAmbhavopAya, however, may lead one directly to advaitam.

The bhaNDasura is the bandhapAsha and the pashubandha.

atanu
18 January 2008, 10:18 PM
Namaste Atanu, yajvan, Saideo, RL & meez,

Very thoughtful inputs ! Thanks !! :)

By seamless conciousness, I wanted to describe the state where there is no sense of duality. There is duality in all the three states below Turiya & therefore, the "Oneness" is not seamless.

--

Namaste Devotee,

This is the only point of mis-understanding and it is crucial. The Seamless Turya is never missing but is hidden by Adhyasha -- by movement of thoughts starting with "I am Awake", "I am Dreaming", and "I am sleeping blissfully and do not know anything".

This is most crucial, since else Bhandasura gets a credential of reality. Bhandasura is as real as the Turya has seen it to be. Not more not less.

Om

sarabhanga
18 January 2008, 11:25 PM
Namaste,

A vividiSu-saMnyAsin is “desirous of knowing or learning”, and vividiSu-saMnyAsa is “renunciation while living in the world”. And a vidvat-saMnyAsin is “one who knows” (“a wise man, sage, or seer”), and vidvat-saMnyAsa is “renunciation due to paravairAgya”.

The vidvat-saMnyAsin has totally exhausted all desires, including the desire for self-realization, and this is the highest order of saMnyAsa ~ the turIyAtIta.

The turya is neuter ~ brahma (voc.) and brahma (nom.) ~ “beyond the beyond” and beyond all duality ~ known as hara or nara.

The turIya is masculine ~ brahman (voc.) and brahmA (nom.) ~ “the beyond” or macrocosm ~ known as hari or nArAyaNa.

The turIyAtIta is masculine ~ brAhma (voc.) and brAhmaH (nom.) ~ “here and now” or microcosm ~ both nAra and nAri, and known as hAra and hAri. And the turIyAtIta is also explicitly feminine ~ brAhmi (voc.) and brAhmI (nom.).

In the turIya (as masculine brahmA) there is also the implication of a similar feminine form, while the turya brahma is beyond any gender and always neuter.

The turIyAtIta is known as the padam, which is sthA.
The turIya is known as the paraM padam, which is parastAt.
And the turya is known as the paramaM padam, which is paramparastAt.

The turya brahma, as advaitam, eternally resounds only “am”.
The turIya brahmA, together with mAyA, at the moment of creation, says “I am”.
And the turIyAtIta brAhma, in samAdhi, says “I am brahman”.

turya = prajńA = IshAna = sadAshiva
turIya = prAjńA = tatpuruSa = umAvaktra
turIyAtIta = prAjńa = aghora = nandivaktra
taijasa = ajńa = vAmadeva = bhairava
vaishvAnara = AjńA = sadyojAta = mahAdeva

And the mANDukya has compressed turIya (tatpuruSa) and turIyAtIta (aghora) into the one class of prAjńa, which itself has a double meaning, as pra-ajńa (deep sleep or unconsciousness) and pra-Ajńa (great intelligence or mighty power).

suSupti (deep sleep or complete unconsciousness) is the same as prAjńa or pra-ajńa (deep sleep or complete unconsciousness); and this is the appearance of turIyAtIta consciousness. The turIya-atIta has “passed away” into the turIya, as “one who has gone beyond”.

turya = prajńA = sahasrAra
turIya = prAjńA = AjńA
turIyAtIta = prAjńa = vishuddha

The prajńA of turya is the indiscriminate wisdom of sahasrAra, and the prAjńA of turIya is the wisely discriminating intelligence of AjńA. The “thousand rays” remain uncounted and effectively advaita (as absolute illumination), while the two rays of AjńA are decisively dvaitAdvaita. And all sense of dvaitam is extinguished when consciousness is raised beyond the limits of AjńA cakram.

The “great forgetting” occurs in samAdhi, and the turIyAtIta, in samAdhi, knows only “I am brahman”. The forgetting is matured in the turIyAtIta, and realized as wisdom in the turIya consciousness. And one who has tasted the nectar of turya will always be turIyAtIta.

turya brahma = sat
turIya brahmA = cit
turIyAtIta brAhmaNa = Ananda

atanu
19 January 2008, 02:00 AM
Namaste,
Actually, Brahmaloka is used in two ways - one as the Brahmaloka equated with Brahman( this is Advaita's Brahmaloka), and another as Brahmaloka of Saguna Brahman. In the former, there isn't any notion of enjoyment of objects or women( which are siddhis) and is a state of positive existance of no activity. The latter Brahmaloka where there is enjoyment of objects is in the dualistic Jagat only.


Namaste Rajalakshmi,

I repeat that the Women are the verses.

I have talked of Brahmloka of Brahma Sutras, Chandogya Upanishad, and Brihadarayanaka. From that loka one does not return, but is taken by a special Purusha (no doubt Ishwara) to Brahman. This Brahmloka cannot be the dualistic jagat of ignorance. On the other hand, Advaitic Brahman is Net-Neti and Brahmaloka of Brahma Sutras can only be a stop to that Brahman.



And the mANDukya has compressed turIya (tatpuruSa) and turIyAtIta (aghora) into the one class of prAjńa, which itself has a double meaning, as pra-ajńa (deep sleep or unconsciousness) and pra-Ajńa (great intelligence or mighty power).

suSupti (deep sleep or complete unconsciousness) is the same as prAjńa or pra-ajńa (deep sleep or complete unconsciousness); and this is the appearance of turIyAtIta consciousness.
--------
And one who has tasted the nectar of turya will always be turIyAtIta


I have quoted (from Shri Sarabhanga) the most relevant portion that pertains to the relation between Turya (the anadimat Self) and Turiyatita experiencer. I have tried to convey both these points. Shushupti is two fold (as is all states) and that crossing the ignorance of Shushupti and tasting Turya, losing the baggage of karma and ignorance, settled in the knowledge of the Self, a Brahmana becomes Turiyatita, also called Uttama Purusha. (I cannot even imagine that Uttama Purusha Shri Krishna is not a knower of Turya. At the same time, I cannot imagine that Shri Krishna is beyond Brahman-Self.)

Such a realizer of one's own nature, is inseparable from the Self but is free to animate any body anywhere. He is not entitled to world maintenace powers since those are delegated powers to Prajapati Kala and beings under Him, from the beginning of a kalpa. However the great Self being the self everywhere, He is still the master controller. And since a desire for power (like of Ishwara etc.) is likely to be the hurdle that will never allow a sadhaka to attain Turya, the question of attaining world administrative powers do not arise.

YMMV.:) Regards,

Om

Rajalakshmi
19 January 2008, 02:35 AM
Namaste,


Compared with taijasa (dreaming), prAjńa (deep sleep) is even “closer” to samAdhi, but it is not possible to reach samAdhi from unconsciousness.

The teaching of svAmI lakshmanjU is not advaitavAda; rather, his “parAdvaita” is a kind of dvaitAdvaita or vishiSTAdvaita vAda.

Neither jAgrat nor svapna, alone, is any nearer to samAdhi, but the yoga is (of course) found in their twin, the jAgratsvapnau (“wakeful sleep” or “lucid dreaming”). And the parAdevI may be found in this jAgratsvapnau ~ although parAdevI is bhairavI, who is only the mAyA of bhairava. Such shAktopAya occurs in taijasa, and it may lead one to brahmA and brAhmI (i.e. to nArAyaNa), but not to brahma (or nara). shAmbhavopAya, however, may lead one directly to advaitam.

The bhaNDasura is the bandhapAsha and the pashubandha.

The idea of 'sleep' and 'deep sleep' being close to samAdhi is neither advaitavAda nor dvaitavAda but plain wrong knowledge. If it were true then we have a chance of getting a samAdhi every night without any conscious effort!

'wakeful sleep' is close to samAdhi and 'wakeful deep sleep' is samprajnata/asamprajnata samAdhi as described by patanjali.

srI vidyAraNya in his pancadashi( 1.60) describes dharma megha samAdhi to be the highest stage reached in Yoga( complete knowledge of prAjna and eradication of all vAsanas) before individual notion is destroyed in the great oneness of turIya.

From panchadasi:

1.54. And, when by shravaNa and manana the mind develops a firm and undoubted conviction, and dwells constantly on the thus ascertained Self alone, it is called unbroken meditation (nididhyAsana).

1.55. When the mind gradually leaves off the ideas of the meditator and the act of meditation and is merged in the sole object of meditation. (viz., the Self), and is steady like the flame of a lamp in a breezeless spot, it is called the super-conscious state (samAdhi).

1.56. Though in samadhi there is no subjective cognition of the mental function having the Self as its object, its continued existence in that state is inferred from the recollection after coming out of samadhi.

1.57. The mind continues to be fixed in paramAtman in the state of samadhi as a result of the effort of will made prior to its achievement and helped by the merits of previous births and the strong impression created through constant efforts.
1.58. The same idea Sri Krishna pointed out to Arjuna in various ways e.g., when he compares the steady mind to the flame of a lamp in a breezeless spot.
1.59. As a result of this (nirvikalpa) samadhi millions of results of actions, accumulated in this beginningless world over past and present births, are destroyed, and pure dharma (helpful to the realisation of Truth) grows.
1.60. The experts in Yoga call this samadhi ‘a rain cloud of dharma’ (dharma megha) because it pours forth countless showers of the bliss of dharma.
1.61. The entire network of desires is fully destroyed and the accumulated actions known as merits and demerits are fully rooted out by this samAdhi.
1.62. Then the great dictum, freed from the obstacles (of doubt and ambiguity), gives rise to a direct realisation of the Truth, as a fruit in one’s palm – Truth which was earlier comprehended indirectly.
1.63. The knowledge of Brahman obtained indirectly from the Guru, teaching the meaning of the great dictum, burns up like fire all sins, committed upto that attainment of knowledge.
1.64. The direct realisation of the knowledge of the Self obtained from the Guru’s teaching of the great dictum, is like the scorching sun, that dispels the very darkness of Avidya, the root of all transmigratory existence.
1.65. Thus a man distinguishes the Self from the five sheaths, concentrates the mind on It according to the scriptural injunctions, becomes free from the bonds of repeated births and deaths and immediately attains the supreme bliss.



~RL

yajvan
19 January 2008, 06:12 AM
There is only the Self. 'We' is His various forms through His volition.



Namaste atanu,

this is the wisdom of the ages... if just to live this every minute, we can take all the books, all the shastras, and put them back on the shelves.

pranams

yajvan
19 January 2008, 06:32 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~




'wakeful sleep' is close to samAdhi and 'wakeful deep sleep' is samprajnata/asamprajnata samAdhi as described by patanjali.

RL


Namaste Rajalakshmi,
I like the notion of wakeful sleep you use... as that is the experience many have during meditation - some call it restful alertness, others have mentioned dynamic calm to try and communicate the experience. For me, restfully alert is simple words that meet my experience.

I have found on many occasions that the transition from wake to sleep, this gap we have discussed previously has yielded turIya. I have also found that if one is mindful of this time period it is good training for the mind.

Also regarding this notion of being closer (or farther away) to samadhi and Swami Laksman joo's POV on this matter. I respect his teachings and offer his words for ones cogitation. As I see it, one needs to look at their experiences and see how this is in sync or not. For some that does not meditate for their sadhana, its all words and may be seen as academic.

Swami Laksman joo's approach and views are that of Kasmir Saivism. This approach is different and spending time studying it brings a wealth of insights ( for me).

For me, learning is comparing and contrasting different views and different schools i.e. the 6 systems of Indian Philosophy. When something new is offered, it is a delight to try and understand it, see what I know about it and how it runs parallel to the information I have... With Kasmir Saivism I have been richly rewarded.

pranams

devotee
19 January 2008, 09:53 AM
Namaste Atanu,


Namaste Devotee,

This is the only point of mis-understanding and it is crucial. The Seamless Turya is never missing but is hidden by Adhyasha -- by movement of thoughts starting with "I am Awake", "I am Dreaming", and "I am sleeping blissfully and do not know anything".

This is most crucial, since else Bhandasura gets a credential of reality. Bhandasura is as real as the Turya has seen it to be. Not more not less.

Om

Thanks for your explanation. I agree with your views, though I have used different words, apparently meaning slightly different. Actually, the Nature of the True Being cannot be expressed except using negation of all that is known or can be known.

By saying that "Seamless Oneness" is at Turiya level, I never meant that Turiya was ever absent. How can it be claimed that the sea is absent when the waves obsure the vision of sea (because the waves are there because of the sea) ? So, I agree with your statement that "Turya is never missing but is hidden".

Regarding pin-prick too, I cannot deny your POV. The True Nature is Just Is, the way it is, whatever it is, being sole cause of its being, there is no other cause.

I have some different views on Pragnya & Turiya ---
"Second, in Pragnya also there is no world, no body, no thoughts and so no pain" ---- IMO, world exists here, otherwise duality won't exist. "Esha sarvesvarah" --- Sarvesvarah == Sarva + Eashwarah ----> If World doesn't exist in Pragnya, "Sarva" will become meaningless. There is Sarva ( which is not-Easvara) & there is Easwara. Similarly, "Esha sarvajnah" also indicates the similar duality & presence of World which is known by the Sarvajna.

Regards.

atanu
19 January 2008, 10:48 AM
Namaste Atanu,


Thanks for your explanation. I agree with your views, though I have used different words, apparently meaning slightly different. Actually, the Nature of the True Being cannot be expressed except using negation of all that is known or can be known.

By saying that "Seamless Oneness" is at Turiya level, I never meant that Turiya was ever absent. How can it be claimed that the sea is absent when the waves obsure the vision of sea (because the waves are there because of the sea) ? So, I agree with your statement that "Turya is never missing but is hidden".

Regarding pin-prick too, I cannot deny your POV. The True Nature is Just Is, the way it is, whatever it is, being sole cause of its being, there is no other cause.

I have some different views on Pragnya & Turiya --- ---- IMO, world exists here, otherwise duality won't exist. "Esha sarvesvarah" --- Sarvesvarah == Sarva + Eashwarah ----> If World doesn't exist in Pragnya, "Sarva" will become meaningless. There is Sarva ( which is not-Easvara) & there is Easwara. Similarly, "Esha sarvajnah" also indicates the similar duality & presence of World which is known by the Sarvajna.

Regards.


Namaste Devotee,

We have reached good and mature agreements, one last difference pending.

WRT the third pada, the description in Mandukya is:

Where the sleeper desires not a thing of enjoyment and sees not any dream, that state is deep sleep. (The Self) seated in the state of deep sleep and called Prajna, in whom everything is unified, who is dense with consciousness, who is full of bliss, who is certainly the enjoyer of bliss, and who is the door to the knowledge (of the preceding two states), is the third quarter.


No doubt Esha Sarvesvara indicates presence of Sarva, yet I think Esha Sarvesvara here is a compound ONE only. Prajna is Prajnaghana, there cannot be a second entity here. The Sarva may be there as seed since it is also called the door to the knowledge of the second (Taijjassa) and the first (Vaisvanaro) states. Karikas say as below:



I-13. The non-cognition of duality is common to both Prajna and Turiya. Prajna is possessed of sleep of the nature of cause, whereas that sleep does not exist in Turiya.


IMO (based on Karikas), this third state is also Non-Dual. The manifold beginning of the world is in Taijjassa (dreams/thoughts). The greatness of the Mandukya is that it dovetails the highest truths with one's everyday confirmable experiences.


Regards,



The True Nature is Just Is, the way it is, whatever it is, being sole cause of its being, there is no other cause.


This is a great way to express it. Shivam Shivam.

Om

yajvan
19 January 2008, 10:58 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


How can it be claimed that the sea is absent when the waves obsure the vision of sea (because the waves are there because of the sea).

A most wonderful view...

sarabhanga
19 January 2008, 05:59 PM
Namaste,

sarva is “whole, wholly, entire, all, of all kinds, altogether, completely, in all parts, every, every one, everything, everywhere, manifold, various, or different”. And sarva indicates “the water”.

And sarveshvara is “the lord of all, the universal monarch, or the supreme being”.

sarveshvara is “the whole lord”, “wholly the lord”, “the lord of the whole”, “the all lord”, “the lord of all”, “the lord of all kinds”, “altogether lord”, “completely lord”, “the lord in all parts”, “in all parts the lord”, “every lord”, “the lord of every one”, “the lord of everything”, “the lord of everywhere”, “everywhere the lord”, “the manifold lord”, “the various lord”, the distinguished lord”, “the lord of distinction”, “the water lord”, or “the lord of the water”.

sarveshvara is nArAyaNa (“the son of man”), and sarveshvara is the tIrthaŃkara (who makes “the crossing”), and sarveshvara is mInanAtha (“the fish lord” and “the lord of fishers”). And sarveshvara is the created brahmabIja in the uncreated brahmayoni (which is “the virgin birth of the lord of all kRSTayas”).

And note that “pragnya” is a rather confusing word, since it does not distinguish between three quite different conceptions ~ prajńA, prAjńA, and prAjńa. So, without further clarification, the term “pragnya” is bound to cause misunderstanding and endless disagreement of opinions.

devotee
19 January 2008, 09:57 PM
Namaste Atanu,

The quote from Karika has put me into thinking mode again ! :D

Can you explain the term, "possessed of sleep of the nature of cause" ?

Regards

Namaste Sarabhanga,


And note that “pragnya” is a rather confusing word, since it does not distinguish between three quite different conceptions ~ prajńA, prAjńA, and prAjńa. So, without further clarification, the term “pragnya” is bound to cause misunderstanding and endless disagreement of opinions.

Thanks for your clarification on Sarveswara. :)

The three Prajnas have bowled me out clean ! Will you please elaborate ?

Regards

sarabhanga
19 January 2008, 10:02 PM
SaTcakramAtRkA.

prajñA = sahasrAra = turya = M
prAjñA = AjñA = shambhu = AUM
prAjña = vishuddha = sadAshiva = haM
ajña = anAhata = IshAna = yaM
AjñA = maNipUra = rudra = raM
ajñA = svAdhiSThAna = viSNu = vaM
jña = mUlAdhAra = brahmA = laM

And in this context, the turya (even more subtle than shambhu) is known as parashiva (parabrahma or brahmapara).



1. The vaishvAnara consciousness ~ A ~ the wisdom of brahmacaryAshrama.


“Of this benevolent one who is the object of our invocation, there is an all-pervading middle brother, and a third brother who is well fed with oblations of ghee. Here I behold the Lord with seven sons.”

I = vaishvAnara = AjñA = sadyojAta = mahAdeva = maNipUra = rudra = aitareya

And yudhiSThira knows this!


2. The taijasa consciousness ~ U ~ the wisdom of gRhasthAshrama


“They yoke the seven to the one-wheeled chariot; and the single courser named Seven draws it. Three-naved is the wheel, sound and undecaying, whereon all these worlds of being are resting.”

II = taijasa = ajña = vAmadeva = bhairava = anAhata = IshAna = bRhadAraNyaka

And bhIma knows this!


3. The prAjña consciousness ~ M ~ the wisdom of vAnaprasthAshrama.


“The seven who are mounted on the seven-wheeled chariot are the seven horses who draw it onward. Seven sisters ride in it together, in whom the names of the seven rays are treasured.”

III = turIyAtIta = prAjña = aghora = nandivaktra = vishuddha = sadAshiva = chAndogya

And arjuna knows this!


4. The turIya consciousness ~ AUM ~ the wisdom of saMnyAsAshrama.


“Who hath beheld him as he sprang to being, seen how the boneless one supports the bony? Where is the blood of earth, the life, the spirit? Who may approach the man who knows to ask it?”

IIII = turIya = prAjñA = tatpuruSa = umAvaktra = AjñA = shambhu = mANDUkya

And nakula knows this!


5. The turya consciousness ~ [M] ~ the perfect wisdom of the avadhUta.


Only silent paÑcAksharamantra.

V = turya = prajñA = IshAna = sadAshiva = sahasrAra = paramashiva = Isha

And sahadeva knows this!




“The seven who are mounted on the seven-wheeled chariot are the seven horses who draw it onward.
And seven sisters ride in it together, in whom the names of the seven rays are treasured.”



turya = prajñA = sahasrAra cakra = brahmaloka = brahma = shAni = kashyapa

turIya = prAjñA = AjñA cakra = taparloka = shambhu = guru = vasiSTha

turIyAtIta = prAjña = vishuddha cakra = janarloka = sadAshiva = soma = gautama

taijasa = ajña = anAhata cakra = maharloka = IshAna = sUrya = atri

vaishvAnara = AjñA = maNipUra cakra = svarloka = rudra = maÑgala = bharadvAja

vishvAnara = ajñA = svAdhiSThAna cakra = bhuvarloka = viSNu = shukra = jamadagni

vishva = jña = mUlAdhAra cakra = bhUloka = brahmA = budha = vishvAmitra


There are seven lights, but only six lights are distinguished and extinguished, with the seventh light of all lights being unborn and eternal. And there is NOTHING beyond satyaloka or brahmaloka (the brahmayoni of nirvRtti), which alone is aja, eka, ananta, advaita, and shiva. And ALL else is the hiraNyagarbha, the brahmabIja of pravRtti, the soma of prakRti, and mAyA.

nara is akala (“not in parts”); and nArAyaNa is his kalam (“seed”), which is kAla (“enumerated”). And in yoga, nara and nArAyaNa are realized as non-different (a perfect twin), and the naranArAyaNau is observed. And naranArAyaNa is another name for kRSNa.

And the curriculum is ancient and unfailing!


“Upon this five-spoked wheel revolving ever, all living creatures rest and are dependent.
Its axle, heavy-laden, is not heated: the nave from ancient time remains unbroken.”

sarabhanga
19 January 2008, 10:45 PM
The teaching of svAmI lakshmanjU is not advaitavAda; rather, his “parAdvaita” is a kind of dvaitAdvaita or vishiSTAdvaita vAda.




Swami Laksman joo's approach and views are that of Kasmir Saivism.

parAdvaita is commonly known as “kAshmIra shaiva”, and we have a special subforum here on HDF for such parAdvaitavAda, but it has (strangely) remained untouched for many months now. :cool1:

sarabhanga
19 January 2008, 11:44 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

There are six granthi in the SaTcakram, and every such saMdhyA is a veritable SaNDhI, but the first five conjunctions are premature sightings of the jyeSTha brahmayoni, whose perfect SaNDhI is the ultimate saMdhyA, which is nirgrantha, providing eternal repose and no return.

“Lucid dreaming” occurs in taijasa, but “restful alertness” occurs in vaishvAnara, perhaps gaining the AjńA of maNipUra cakra, but not yet the prAjńA of AjńA cakra. ;)

Rajalakshmi
20 January 2008, 07:11 AM
Namaste,


Compared with taijasa (dreaming), prAjńa (deep sleep) is even “closer” to samAdhi, but it is not possible to reach samAdhi from unconsciousness.

The teaching of svAmI lakshmanjU is not advaitavAda; rather, his “parAdvaita” is a kind of dvaitAdvaita or vishiSTAdvaita vAda.

Neither jAgrat nor svapna, alone, is any nearer to samAdhi, but the yoga is (of course) found in their twin, the jAgratsvapnau (“wakeful sleep” or “lucid dreaming”). And the parAdevI may be found in this jAgratsvapnau ~ although parAdevI is bhairavI, who is only the mAyA of bhairava. Such shAktopAya occurs in taijasa, and it may lead one to brahmA and brAhmI (i.e. to nArAyaNa), but not to brahma (or nara). shAmbhavopAya, however, may lead one directly to advaitam.

The bhaNDasura is the bandhapAsha and the pashubandha.

Namaste Shri Sarabhanga,

Can you please tell us what is the difference between shAktopAya and shAmbhavopAya in terms of sAdhana? From what you mention I take it that shAktopAya is one of the pravR^itti mArga and shAmbhavopAya to be nivR^itti mArga. How exactly are they different in terms of sAdhana? How they are similar, and how they are different?

~RL

Rajalakshmi
20 January 2008, 07:21 AM
By saying that "Seamless Oneness" is at Turiya level, I never meant that Turiya was ever absent. How can it be claimed that the sea is absent when the waves obsure the vision of sea (because the waves are there because of the sea) ? So, I agree with your statement that "Turya is never missing but is hidden".


While the analogy of sea and waves is very commonly cited by Advaitins to explain how Brahman 'becomes' many - it should be noted that this vAdA is that of bhedAbheda vAdA which has been explicitly refuted by Sri ShankarAchArya in his BSB.

In advaita vedanta, there is only vivarta, and dualty is only an appearance of the one divided Absolute, and no actual transformation of the sea to waves is admissible. Therefore, any transformation must be restricted to the level of a 'thought' or consciousness.( the substance known as Brahman has never undergone any transformation)

Atma has never been different from Brahman, and not even separated like the wave from the sea. It is still used as an example nevertheless, though such an example is more suitable for the dvaitAdvaita vAdA.

~RL

atanu
20 January 2008, 07:26 AM
Namaste,
And note that “pragnya” is a rather confusing word, since it does not distinguish between three quite different conceptions ~ prajñA, prAjñA, and prAjña. So, without further clarification, the term “pragnya” is bound to cause misunderstanding and endless disagreement of opinions.

Namaste Sarabhanga Ji and Others,

The Third Sarvesvara is praGYaanaghana evaanandamayo as per Mandukya. The indescribable Fourth, the Self (called as Samaan as indicatory but really Neti-Neti) is viGYaanaghana as per Brihadaranyaka. Both are ghana (without any parting) and non-dual.

Actually there should not be any confusion in understanding the distinction. The Fourth is the revealer of Consciousness in intellect, whereas the Third is the revealed (pra -- going ahead) consciousness in the intellect.

So, Self is the being whose revelation to us is Ishwara (who is nothing but Self revealed to intellect). Iswara, as if (on account of Avidya), is further differentiator in Hiranyagarbha of subtle forms and names and in AgniVaisvanaro of gross forms and names. Upanishads clarify that knowing the third fully means knowing the Self --- yes. (And Upanishads also teach dancing with women in Brahmaloka, that is in the domain of Hiranyagarbha -- the father of Gross Sun. Upanishads do teach that reaching the domain of Hiranyagarbha ensures a condition of no-return for the Bandha Jiva. From the world of Hiranyagarbha, a special Purusha picks up the jivas and takes them to Param Brahman).

On understanding this, one can make a decision that there is absolutely no creation and that the Self is absolutely not an agent of Work or Creation. All this is simple projection on a cinema screen, as if.

Buddhists, in general, do not make a distinction between the revealer of conciousness (the being-the Self-the immutable) and the revealed consciousness and thus miss out theoretically on the immutable. Buddha had stated a practical difficulty -- relating to strengethening of false identification of sadhaka's ego 'i' with the true I-I, (praGYaanaghana) -- for not bringing in the distinction between the revealer and the revealed.

VA proponents on the other hand say that Consciousness itself is modifiable as opposed to immutabilty in Advaita, which uses a term called as transfiguration rather than saying that "a pot is a modification of consciousness".

After breaking head for many nights, I have now come to a near settled comprehension, that condition of the Self being Samaan, immutable, and free of karma cannot be supported by any other thought system but Ajativada (but of course who can say anything with certainty about Him).


I hope this is helpful for some readers.

Om Namah Shivaya

sarabhanga
20 January 2008, 05:18 PM
Namaste RL,

parAdevI is shaivI mukha, as the means of approaching shiva, and shAktopAya leads one to this parAdevI (bhairavI). So, if that first meeting is not taken further (to perfect unity, without any distinction of devI or deva) then the advaita brahma is not yet attained. shAmbhavopAya, however, leads one directly to bhairava (shiva or brahma). The difference is that of attaining sattvA in relation to guNa as opposed to sattvam beyond any relation, or knowing AUM by all its parts together rather than as a perfect whole without parts. And in effect, it is the subtle difference between attaining nArAyaNa and attaining nara. Indeed, it is the difference of prAjńA and prajńA.

sarabhanga
20 January 2008, 07:27 PM
Namaste Atanu,

The sarveshvara is prajńAghana (“nothing but intelligence”) and the turya is vijńAnaghana (also “nothing but intelligence”), but there is an important difference in the nature of that intelligence.

nara = sharva = sarva = prajńAna
nArAyaNa = bhava = sarveshvara = prAjńA

ghana indicates “a striker, killer, or destroyer” and thus “slaying” or “an iron club, mace, or hammer”. And ghana is “compact, solid, material, hard, firm, dense, coarse, gross, viscid, thick, full, densely filled, dark, deep, complete, all, auspicious, or fortunate”.

ghana refers to any “compact mass” (especially an unborn foetus), or to any “collection, multitude, quantity, or cloud”. And ghanA is “three dimensional”, either as a solid body or a diffusion or extension.

In the case of prajńAghana and vijńAnaghana, the suffix indicates “nothing but”.

The hiraNyagarbha is prajńAghana, but this pure intelligence is dependent on individuality and becoming; while prajńAna itself (which is vijńAnaghana) is the undivided essence of being.

devotee
20 January 2008, 09:26 PM
Namaste Rajlakhsmi,


While the analogy of sea and waves is very commonly cited by Advaitins to explain how Brahman 'becomes' many - it should be noted that this vAdA is that of bhedAbheda vAdA which has been explicitly refuted by Sri ShankarAchArya in his BSB.

In advaita vedanta, there is only vivarta, and dualty is only an appearance of the one divided Absolute, and no actual transformation of the sea to waves is admissible. Therefore, any transformation must be restricted to the level of a 'thought' or consciousness.( the substance known as Brahman has never undergone any transformation)

Atma has never been different from Brahman, and not even separated like the wave from the sea. It is still used as an example nevertheless, though such an example is more suitable for the dvaitAdvaita vAdA.

~RL

That sea-wave example is for visual concept for making one see the essence of a certain logic which is not flawless but good enough. We can't give any correct example of the Absolute which is flawless. All the words we know (or can create) are (or will be) meant to describe things which we can know or can compare with what we know through our senses, intellect & mind. The Absolute is beyond all that & hence It cannot be described in words. But then how to discuss without words ?

Regards

Rajalakshmi
21 January 2008, 12:41 AM
Namaste Rajlakhsmi,



That sea-wave example is for visual concept for making one see the essence of a certain logic which is not flawless but good enough. We can't give any correct example of the Absolute which is flawless. All the words we know (or can create) are (or will be) meant to describe things which we can know or can compare with what we know through our senses, intellect & mind. The Absolute is beyond all that & hence It cannot be described in words. But then how to discuss without words ?

Regards

Yes, this is also the reason why debates regarding the nature of Brahman are rather pointless.

The better analogy used in Advaita is to treat Absolute as an object( just for assumption) and consider dualty as reflection of this object( causeless reflection) in mAyA and avidyA respectively.

atanu
21 January 2008, 01:03 AM
Namaste Atanu,

The sarveshvara is prajńAghana (“nothing but intelligence”) and the turya is vijńAnaghana (also “nothing but intelligence”), but there is an important difference in the nature of that intelligence.
-
The hiraNyagarbha is prajńAghana, but this pure intelligence is dependent on individuality and becoming; while prajńAna itself (which is vijńAnaghana) is the undivided essence of being.

Namaste Sarabhanga Ji,

Yes. Ghana, as most Hindi/Bengali speaking will know is dense, which when prefixed by 'Intelligence', which is spiritual, can only mean partless pure intelligence. It is Shankara himself who distinguishes prajńAghana as REVEALED PURE INTELLIGENCE and vijńAnaghana as the REVEALER OF PURE INTELLIGENCE (or the knower).

Regarding the second point, I think, Advaitins usually equate dense Prajna (microcosm) to Ishwara (macrocosm) and Taijjassa (microcosm) to Hiranyagarbha (macrocosm) -- the the aggregate of all light bodies.

Regards,

Om

Rajalakshmi
21 January 2008, 02:18 AM
Regarding the second point, I think, Advaitins usually equate dense Prajna (microcosm) to Ishwara (macrocosm) and Taijjassa (microcosm) to Hiranyagarbha (macrocosm) -- the the aggregate of all light bodies.

Regards,

Om

Yes.

Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
Ishvara is intelligence with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
Hiranyagarbha is Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat')

atanu
21 January 2008, 03:20 AM
Yes.

Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
Ishvara is intelligence with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
Hiranyagarbha is Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat')

Namaste Rajalakshmi,

Fine. I will make a few alterations that will not change the essential meaning of what you have posted.

Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
Ishvara is Turya Self with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
Hiranyagarbha is Brahman seen under Avidya mode of Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat with rulership and cattles etc.').

Om

sarabhanga
21 January 2008, 03:55 AM
Namaste Atanu,

In saMskRtam ~ ghana is “compact, solid, material, hard, firm, dense, coarse, gross, viscid, thick, full, densely filled, dark, deep, complete, or all”. And ghana refers to any “compact mass” (especially an unborn foetus), or to any “collection, multitude, quantity, or cloud”. BUT NOT NECESSARILY INDICATING “PARTLESS”.

And in saMskRtam ~ prajńAghana and vijńAnaghana both indicate “nothing but intelligence”. BUT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE IN THE NATURE OF THAT INTELLIGENCE.

I have certainly not disagreed with shrI shaŃkarAcArya !


nara = sharva = sarva = nirgarbha = brahmayoni = prajńAna = vijńAnaghana
nArAyaNa = bhava = sarveshvara = hiraNyagarbha = brahmabIja = prAjńA = prajńAghana

prajńAghana is pure intelligence, dependent on individuality and BECOMING (i.e. “revealed intelligence”). And vijńAnaghana is pure intelligence, independent and indiscriminate, untouched by becoming, which requires some relation and thus implies duality, but simply BEING, which alone does not imply any duality (i.e. “revealer of intelligence”).

Rajalakshmi
21 January 2008, 06:13 AM
Namaste Rajalakshmi,

Fine. I will make a few alterations that will not change the essential meaning of what you have posted.

Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
Ishvara is Turya Self with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
Hiranyagarbha is Brahman seen under Avidya mode of Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat with rulership and cattles etc.').

Om

hiraNyagrabha is Jagat - the ruler is sarveshvara. hiraNyagarbha himself undergoes laya in praLaya so how can he be its ruler? Read gita 8.17-8.21. There is no doubt that sarveshvara is the real ruler and hiraNyagarbha only an 'appointment'. Follow up these passages through 8.28 and tell me how it was concluded that devayAna leads to hiraNyagarbha? Certainly you dont think that it is Nirguna Brahman who is doing this sRshTi and laya, do you? So it is Ishvara who is doing all this.

There is oneness in Ishvara, but you cannot say that there is no multiplicity whatsoever in Ishvara, as he is guNa sampanna - so there is some minor difference from turya.

atanu
21 January 2008, 07:48 AM
Namaste Rajalakshmi,


hiraNyagrabha is Jagat - the ruler is sarveshvara. hiraNyagarbha himself undergoes laya in praLaya so how can he be its ruler?


I said: Hiranyagarbha is Brahman seen under Avidya mode. In that mode my office boss also says "I am the controller".




There is oneness in Ishvara, but you cannot say that there is no multiplicity whatsoever in Ishvara, as he is guNa sampanna - so there is some minor difference from turya.

Sarabhaga and myself have discussed this point two or three posts above.

Regards,

Om Namah Shivaya

devotee
23 January 2008, 09:40 PM
Namaste Atanu,


The Third Sarvesvara is praGYaanaghana evaanandamayo as per Mandukya. The indescribable Fourth, the Self (called as Samaan as indicatory but really Neti-Neti) is viGYaanaghana as per Brihadaranyaka. Both are ghana (without any parting) and non-dual.

Actually there should not be any confusion in understanding the distinction. The Fourth is the revealer of Consciousness in intellect, whereas the Third is the revealed (pra -- going ahead) consciousness in the intellect.

Sorry, was too busy in last a few days to post reply earlier ! :)

Here in your explanation, imho, there is a sense of duality & therefore doesn't appear correct.

You say, Pragnya is revealed conciousness & Turiya is the revealer of Conciousness. If that is true, then both Pragnya & Turiya get contaminated with duality. Wherever, there will be "revealed", there must be someone to whom that is revealed .... so there is duality. Similarly, if there is a revealer, there must be something which is revealed & someone to who that is revealed .... & therefore is a case of duality.

I agree that Pragnya too is Non-dual state but not in the way Turiya is. Pragnya to be all-knower & all-powerful must be non-dual ( i.e. presence in all beings even to the tiniest atoms, otherwise knowing all & having power over all is impossible .... I can further elaborate this if you so desire) but there is still the dream left ... the duality attachment of something to perform as the Isvara ( "Yada -Yada hi dharmasya glanirbhavati ..." ) ..... though undoubtedly, is the highest state possible in duality .... but is still in duality. Turiya has no such attachment & has no compulsion to perform & is thus free from the last trace of the dream.

Regards

atanu
23 January 2008, 11:32 PM
Namaste Atanu,
Sorry, was too busy in last a few days to post reply earlier ! :)

Here in your explanation, imho, there is a sense of duality & therefore doesn't appear correct.

You say, Pragnya is revealed conciousness & Turiya is the revealer of Conciousness. If that is true, then both Pragnya & Turiya get contaminated with duality. Wherever, there will be "revealed", there must be someone to whom that is revealed .... so there is duality. Similarly, if there is a revealer, there must be something which is revealed & someone to who that is revealed .... & therefore is a case of duality.


I agree.

Mandukya itself says that one may see OM as AUM, in three padas. But isn't Om single syllabled ONE? Yes. Mandukya says that also.


I agree that Pragnya too is Non-dual state but not in the way Turiya is.

Thank you for the opportunity to explain as to what my understanding is. (And understanding is as good as one's level of comprehension of consciousness, which is invariant).

Only in Samadhi the Self is known.

Usually, it is an act of Maya (ignorance) that we forget that while analysing the Seen/Heard aspect of consciousness, it is the Self that is seeing/hearing/deciding. With what tool? Definitely the tool is not external?

Once this realisation dawns one will not divide the revealer and the revealed. But for analysing Self (which is One Pada reallly) as made of three padas, one has to see that the Self is the immutable Person (the being) and the Prajna is the invariant basis of all understanding. And this pure consciousness is separated out in Mandukya and explained as a stand apart thing.

This stand apart Prajna, cannot know itself and others (as Gaudapada explains). So to know, the Self is required (again I emphasize that this is ONE PADA ony). It is just for understanding purpose that the Self (say Shiva) and its Consciousness (say Girija) are seen as two. How can they be two? Yet, SElf is seen as Atman and Girija as the Prakriti of the Self, so that the 'Na Lipayate' aspect of Self can be comprehended.

Similarly, Mandukya isolates Self and explains it as indescribable and neither consciousness nor not consciousness, neither internal consciousness, neither external consciousness, nor no consciousness etc etc.. But Gaudapada explains Turya as the all Seer, since Self has the pure Consciousness as its non-dual consort. The consort's brilliantly hued thoughts become all. Yet when there are no many hued thoughts, the Self remains Self.

I agree with you fully.

Om

atanu
24 January 2008, 01:04 AM
Namaste Devotee,

Sarabhanga has written an extremely subtle piece elsewhere. I have added a few words and placed it here. You may like to comment whether this is how all views of ours emerge -- whether in waking or in dreaming.


The vishvarUpa of nArAyaNa is expressed in every degree of consciousness (of the conscious subject since consciousness by itself cannot know itself or others, as taught by Gaudapada). When the conscious subject realises itself as pure consciousness, in unity with Shushupti (which is the pure consciousness itself), there the world disappears as the world is from the Consciousness.

And transcending this prAjńa, when the conscious subject knows itself as the arupa, it may view its Prakriti as it wishes.

Regards,

Om
-------------------------
Some say that one can be stithi pragnya but not the master of Prakriti. Some say one can do so.

devotee
26 January 2008, 03:55 AM
Namaste Atanu,

Thanks for the input which is really extremely subtle. :)


The vishvarUpa of nArAyaNa is expressed in every degree of consciousness (of the conscious subject since consciousness by
itself cannot know itself or others, as taught by Gaudapada).

The meaning of words keep changing depending on many things & one of them is the context in which they have been used.

Visvarupa = Visva + Rupa ==> The World Form. Therefore Visvarupa must contain everything in this world. But everything is just One thing & there is nothing which is out of that ONE & that ONE is the Conciousness. So, in that respect, Visvarupa is the ONE/the SELF. However, there must be duality for this vision .... as Atmasakshatkar is not vision of Ataman/SELF but BE-ing SELF ( though it is also not the exact expression, because SELF is always SELF).

IMO, the word "Visvarupa" has been used in Gita to "show" Arjuna the "Ishavariya Shakti" of the Lord & what is actually happening in the world under the command of God, which is not seen by the "prakrit eyes" ... like, the war is just an excuse but all great warriors on Kaurava side are already moving with great speed into the Lord's Mouth to meet their end ... their fate is already decided. This is a show of real thing behind the curtain .... here the world is within Lord & everything going on there is as per His wishes. IMO, here this word has been used for vision ... i.e. for seeing & not being.


When the conscious subject realises itself as pure consciousness, in unity with Shushupti (which is the pure consciousness itself), there the world disappears as the world is from the Consciousness.

I agree.


And transcending this prAjńa, when the conscious subject knows itself as the arupa, it may view its Prakriti as it wishes.

You are linking it with the phrase used by Lord Krishna, " and see everything else whatever you want to see". :)

That is quite possible (everything is possible at that state) but where is the need or to wish anything or view anything after transcending Pragnya ? ... and keeping the full text of Chapter-11 in mind, that doesn't appear to be the case. Therefore, I don't see it that way. It is easier to keep duality & Non-duality separate & understand them separately. A cocktail of duality & Non-duality is a strong mix-up !

IMHO, how it exactly works is beyond our mind (but reality is that It Works) & that is why it can't be expressed exactly by using any combination of words.

Regards

atanu
28 January 2008, 02:55 AM
Namaste Atanu,

Thanks for the input which is really extremely subtle. :)
Visvarupa = Visva + Rupa ==> The World Form. Therefore Visvarupa must contain everything in this world. But everything is just One thing & there is nothing which is out of that ONE & that ONE is the Conciousness. So, in that respect, Visvarupa is the ONE/the SELF. However, there must be duality for this vision .... as Atmasakshatkar is not vision of Ataman/SELF but BE-ing SELF ( though it is also not the exact expression, because SELF is always SELF).

IMO, the word "Visvarupa" has been used in Gita to "show" Arjuna the "Ishavariya Shakti" of the Lord & what is actually happening in the world under the command of God, which is not seen by the "prakrit eyes" ... like, the war is just an excuse but all great warriors on Kaurava side are already moving with great speed into the Lord's Mouth to meet their end ... their fate is already decided. This is a show of real thing behind the curtain .... here the world is within Lord & everything going on there is as per His wishes. IMO, here this word has been used for vision ... i.e. for seeing & not being.


Namaste Devotee,

I agree, with a small observation and caution. The One is not ALL or The ONE has not become All, as is explained in VA. But ONE is transcendentally eternally ONE WITHOUT A SECOND (as pure knowledge is partless). The ALL is the effect (three dream states as Aitereya explains) , seen by the ONE WITHOUT A SECOND. This is Rudra, who saw Hiranyagarbha (Svet. Upanishad).

This is a crucial point. Else Samaan, homogeneous pure intelligence that Atman is, becomes uneven itself -- which is not supported by any Shruti.

I thought of clarifying this here (mainly for the sake of Sarabhanga Ji who probably, based on this subtle point alone, has gathered the impression that my understanding is not of Advaita).



You are linking it with the phrase used by Lord Krishna, " and see everything else whatever you want to see". :)

That is quite possible (everything is possible at that state) but where is the need or to wish anything or view anything after transcending Pragnya ? ... and keeping the full text of Chapter-11 in mind, that doesn't appear to be the case. Therefore, I don't see it that way. It is easier to keep duality & Non-duality separate & understand them separately. A cocktail of duality & Non-duality is a strong mix-up !

IMHO, how it exactly works is beyond our mind (but reality is that It Works) & that is why it can't be expressed exactly by using any combination of words.

Regards

I think you are correct that one should not at all mix up Advaita and Dvaita. Else "One who sees any diffrence here goes from death to death" reigns.

Yet, I have a slightly different opinion, which may or may not be correct. I will try to explain it, though I am a bit wary. Be it so. It is my understanding and I do not say that the idea is the Truth.

The confusion arises because Brahma Sutra, in the final chapter, talks of a Mukta (who is inseparable from Brahman) being able to animate bodies -- obviously in lower states, without getting tainted (because Advaita Atman can never conceptualise that 'me' (say Devadatta), an individual, is creating bodies etc..

IMO, what I say, does not constitute a break in Advaita, since Advaita Atman remains without any taint, but it is absolutely free to enjoy in its lower states, as a pure Seer in Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. Whereas Advaita Atman is beyond Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. It never slumbers. It never has a thought that "I am sleeping" etc. As Brihadaranyaka says :self as if roams in three states seeing only and not partaking any karma of acting.

This is my understanding from Mandukya, Maitrayana Brahmaya, Chandogya, Brihadaraynaka and other Upanishads and reading of Shankara.

Lord also says in Gita that a portion of His energy is eternal in Jivaloka. Mandukya Upanishad states that Atman abiding in three states enjoys.

If it is said that there is a deluded VisvaAtman and there is one undeluded Turya Atman, does Advaita Atman remain valid? However, this is again a tricky point: The One Atman has not become Many. The One impartible Atman ever remains so.

Else the knowledge of Uttama Purusha becomes invalid.

True, the world is Myth (Maya) but it is not Asat. It is an effect of ONE ANADI, INDESCRIBABLE, UNCHANGED, UNTAINTED ADVAITA ATMAN. And in the effect (called Karya or Universe), there is Avidya and pain due to apparent duality, which Lord assuages as Karunavatara. This is Maya (Myth) yet not Asat. Lord Krishna is Sat (being same as unborn Mahesvara) yet He is Asat, since His form (appearance) is a Maya product -- manifested with the help of His own Maya. He is actually the unborn mahesvara.

Dear Devotee, I have tried to write it down. There are very great chances of lapses, since it is human limited understanding (and conveying). Whereas the Lord -- The Self, is unlimited, untainted, indescribable and ever ONE.

I think it is necessary to clarify that I am not supporting the translations of a school that shows Krishna saying (Gita 13th chapter) : Param Brahman, under my control, should be known to attain immortality". This is gross misunderstanding, since Krishna has also said Akshara Param Brahma is the ultimate.

And Aitereya upanishad says that Eko Atma brought up a Purusha from the waters. So, obviously nothing exceeds Self-Brahman.

In Gita verse, the word "Anadimatparam" is parsed as "anadi matparam", deriving "having me as the ultimate" or "under my control". How can Param Brahman have an ultimate when it is same and constant and highest always?

On the other hand, parsing "anadimatparam", as most tranlators have done, as "Anadimat Param", means 'without beginning'. This "Anadimat nirgunatwatt" is also used for Atman in Svet. Upanishad. There the question of 'under my control' does not arise since a sage is writing.

So, I am not supporting any school of Dvaita.


IMHO, how it exactly works is beyond our mind (but reality is that It Works) & that is why it can't be expressed exactly by using any combination of words.

I agree whole heartedly. All true Gurus, including Lord Krishna in Gita, say that the truth is known in Samadhi, which going by experience and teaching of Upanishads is Advaita. "What the knower can know?"

When the knower and the known is ONE, there is nothing different that can be known.

Regards,

Om

devotee
28 January 2008, 09:31 AM
Namaste Atanu,

It is well written post, worth reading. Thanks ! :)

I agree with almost eveything what you say in your post.


IMO, what I say, does not constitute a break in Advaita, since Advaita Atman remains without any taint, but it is absolutely free to enjoy in its lower states, as a pure Seer in Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. Whereas Advaita Atman is beyond Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. It never slumbers. It never has a thought that "I am sleeping" etc. As Brihadaranyaka says :self as if roams in three states seeing only and not partaking any karma of acting.

I think you are correct because it is the closest logical explanation bridging the gap between Advaita philosophy & God (apparently acting) in duality.


I think it is necessary to clarify that I am not supporting the translations of a school that shows Krishna saying (Gita 13th chapter) : Param Brahman, under my control, should be known to attain immortality". This is gross misunderstanding, since Krishna has also said Akshara Param Brahma is the ultimate.

I think you are refering to Chapter 13, sloka -12. There is no word indicating "under my control", in the said verse. If the full verse is read with appropriate context, it is clear that there is no reason to show Krishna himself above Brahman ... in fact, He is just trying to explain the "attributes" of the Brahman to Arjun. If he wanted to say that he was above Brahman, Chapter-10 was the correct place !

For a Non-dualist, all the paths lead to One ... what is the difference between Shiva, Krishna, Vishnu, Ganesha, Shakti ? They are all the same at the "top". When we see them from our lower levels we see the differences !

Regards

SaraGoldstine
09 January 2019, 03:06 AM
I havent had a lucid dream in like a super long time and now im really like weirded out to have one

SuryaVedanta754
29 March 2020, 12:12 PM
there is discussion, in the spiritual literature of dreams.

Generally, it is recommended to do a little meditation before sleep. They should not be power based meditation, as this can interfere with sleep. But gentle meditation is said to help the state of sleeping and is widely recommended by many teachers. Paramahansa Yogananda was one.

Science And Faith - Not A Conflict




Some Links


Summary - Some of the greatest scientists in the history of the world believed in God. The percentage of belief among the professional scientific community is just about the same as the rest of the population. It is pure myth that most scientists do not believe in God. One link for a professional study that proved that prayer works. Another link to the Vatican council on science
which includes a huge list of Noble Prize winning scientists who believe in God.

Benjamin Franklin and Isaac Newton, two of the founders of all modern math and science, both believed in God.


Nikolai Tesla believed in God and was a fan of the Hindu saint Swami Vivekananda.





This article concludes that about 50% of scientists are religious, and, additionally, many more, while not religious, believe in God.


blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/...


from this book:


https://www.amazon.com/Science-vs-Religion-Scientists-Really/dp/0199975000


Quoting from the article: "In the course of her research, Ecklund surveyed nearly 1,700 scientists and interviewed 275 of them. She finds that most of what we believe about the faith lives of elite scientists is wrong. Nearly 50 percent of them are religious. Many others are what she calls “spiritual entrepreneurs,” seeking creative ways to work with the tensions between science and faith outside the constraints of traditional religion…..only a small minority are actively hostile to religion."




+++



And here's A professional scientific study proving that prayer works:


http://www.1stholistic.com/Prayer/hol_prayer_proof.htm


"There is ample proof that prayer works. Many scientific studies have been conducted that validate this observation.


A 1993 Israeli survey following 10,000 civil servants for 26 years found that Orthodox Jews were less likely to die of cardiovascular problems than "nonbelievers." And a 1995 study from Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H., monitoring 250 people after open-heart surgery concluded that those who had religious connections and social support were 12 times less likely to die than those who had none."


+++


the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has a long list of Noble Prize winning scientists who believe in God...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences


+++

zoey
08 April 2020, 06:53 AM
Such an interesting and timeless topic. The discussions have been very interesting. I think only some of us have the understanding to interpret and get more from our dreams. Namaste.

markandeya 108 dasa
13 April 2020, 07:14 AM
Namaste

lucid dreaming is a yoga, I used to do it naturally when I did stricter sadhana and long retreats in meditation and they definitely help with insight, without practice they can also spontaneously arise, with time one can hold these states and move deeper into transcendent realms and receive higher wisdom above the mundane. There are certain yogas especially in the Tibetan tradition but one can also do them by themselves and it’s not that difficult. There are two ways one is natural way via sadhana. The first thing to watch is ones diet, if one eats heavy at night then the dreams maybe disturbed or won’t make sense, one of the reasons for this is that the right amount of blood is not circulating to brain and vital energy is being used to digest food and the food is transforming into mind states so eating light and not going to sleep with a heavy stomach, helps a lot, the second important thing is before sleeping do some formal sadhana, like a puja, chanting a mantra or silent meditation for good lucid states to come when sleeping the mind should be settled and absorbed and concentrated and held within before going to sleep. Another thing that has worked for me is playing some music or bhajan or mantras, vishnusahasranam worked very well for me and just recently I have been listening to sahib when going to sleep and all through the night and I have been having lucid states while sleeping, as yajvan states lucid states come in between waking and sleeping, and there is a a certain type of awareness in this and connects to turiya , when I am in these states I can understand Sanskrit or what I listening to fluently and they sounds transform into consciousness and one then gets esoteric subtle knowledge without effort or formal practices, only experience can really describe this but they are very important and profound and it all happens without effort that’s the beauty of it, sense and mind is already collapsed while sleeping, and one can experience more boundless states free from the mundane

i have these and a few others on loop and they are amazing at the moment

https://youtu.be/mSDBP_Dl8eg


https://youtu.be/YH97pw0DBIQ

By regular practice one can stay longer in these divine supra cosmic statea and receive real wisdom and insights into sacred realms.

There also natural herbs that can be used the one I am looking for at the moment is called tian men dong it was used by Taoist sadhus and was called the flying herb because one could fly in dreams and in sense and mind waking states or so called normal waking state the mind would be in higher state above the normal condition. I tried it before and results were very good and that was only doing it for a month or so when I lived in Taiwan, I picked some up recently in Singapore but not enough,but where I am it’s hard to get and I don’t trust the powdery form but i may give it try and if I do I will post if it works, the herbs should only be used every now again not all the time.


there is an Ayurvedic equivalent call shatavari but it’s slightly different to the Chinese herb and I didn’t find it as effective as tian men dong when I had before but it’s a great health tonic and especially good for women but men can also use for general health. There are others that people may want to research by themselves