PDA

View Full Version : stopping the movement of the chitta: the same as ignorance?



simex
27 October 2008, 09:58 AM
Namaste,

I was reading Swami Vivekananda's translation and commentaries on the Yoga Sutras, and he made a very interesting statement. According to Vivekananda, in the same way that an energy wave which is slower than the visible spectrum is invisible to the eye and a wave which is too fast is also invisible to the eye, the absence of movement in chitta can fall on either side of a spectrum, with thought in the middle. So, while there is samadhi beyond the movement of chitta, on the opposite end of this spectrum is total ignorance, and that both of these things manifest as a lack of movement in the chitta.

This is something I had never thought of before. I always thought of it like a two-pole dichotomy, with movement on one end and stillness on the other.

I'm wondering if anyone could elaborate on this. How would I know if I'm on the wrong end of this spectrum when I meditate? Maybe you disagree with Vivekananda on this issue; i do on some issues.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have to share.

atanu
27 October 2008, 12:15 PM
Namaste,

I was reading Swami Vivekananda's translation and commentaries on the Yoga Sutras, and he made a very interesting statement. According to Vivekananda, in the same way that an energy wave which is slower than the visible spectrum is invisible to the eye and a wave which is too fast is also invisible to the eye, the absence of movement in chitta can fall on either side of a spectrum, with thought in the middle. So, while there is samadhi beyond the movement of chitta, on the opposite end of this spectrum is total ignorance, and that both of these things manifest as a lack of movement in the chitta.

This is something I had never thought of before. I always thought of it like a two-pole dichotomy, with movement on one end and stillness on the other.

I'm wondering if anyone could elaborate on this. How would I know if I'm on the wrong end of this spectrum when I meditate? Maybe you disagree with Vivekananda on this issue; i do on some issues.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have to share.

Namaste Simex,

Yes, this is a point on which many accuse Vedantists of aiming for the inert state. Some do it spitefully and some do it without knowing.

A stone is in an inert state. Similarly deep sleep is nearly an inert state, wherein the mind is almost dead. However, the samadhi is not like that. It is attainable only and only with a one pointed mind which is 100 % awake. If you read Mandukya Karika, you will come acroos a passage where this awake state is equated to omniscience.

Thank you for bringing up a very interesting point.

Om

yajvan
27 October 2008, 12:20 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~~



Namaste,

I was reading Swami Vivekananda's translation and commentaries on the Yoga Sutras, and he made a very interesting statement. According to Vivekananda, in the same way that an energy wave which is slower than the visible spectrum is invisible to the eye and a wave which is too fast is also invisible to the eye, the absence of movement in chitta can fall on either side of a spectrum, with thought in the middle. So, while there is samadhi beyond the movement of chitta, on the opposite end of this spectrum is total ignorance, and that both of these things manifest as a lack of movement in the chitta.

This is something I had never thought of before. I always thought of it like a two-pole dichotomy, with movement on one end and stillness on the other.

I'm wondering if anyone could elaborate on this. How would I know if I'm on the wrong end of this spectrum when I meditate? Maybe you disagree with Vivekananda on this issue; i do on some issues.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have to share.

Namaste simex,
A most excellent question and we can pursue deeper and wider if you like.
This HDF post http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=23547&postcount=14 and the 15th post will assist.


Let me ask this - when you meditate do you find yourself rested, steady? Alert? Is awareness being refreshed during meditation?



But what occurs along the way, when the sādhu is not engrossed in the whole (aṅgī) ? Viśrama is being seated within him/her. What is this viśrama? It is quiet, the silence of Being, it is the sāma ( balance) that is being established - some call this repose. Yet this word also suggests something a bit more profound - it is the absorption into delight. The native gains the silence and quiet, yet with time the infusion of rama comes . For this, it is a worthy of one's time and attention.


After mediation does some of that 'balance' that inward lightness of being come with you into activity? If so then things are going well.

It is just taking the proper angle when meditating to go inward. The mind just needs the right angle - like in diving off a diving board. We take the right angle and let go. Gravity takes over. Like that , same with meditation - we take the right angle , the correct technique and begin. There are multiple posts on this. One post that is comprehensive is http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3312 this is more on framework and the components of meditation. Perhaps you will find it useful.

Another question is your personal expreience with the following regarding samādhi , are you experincing either of the two? It does not hve to be daily, but does this experince come to you on occasion?

There are two flavors:
saṃprajñāta (saṃ+pra+jñāta¹) samādhi - the mind is not fully absorbed ( many like to call this not fully 'arrested')

asaṃprajñāta (a+saṃ+pra+jñāta¹) samādhi - the mind is fully absorbed , and some call objectless samādhi

This is part of the post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=24473&postcount=8


Let's see of some of these posts above help or at least provide context for your experiences and we can continue the conversation if you wish.


pranams

simex
27 October 2008, 02:29 PM
Many thanks.

i found the first thread was beyond my comprehension; the second was more useful. Are turiya and samadhi synonymous? I'm pretty sure I understand what Turiya is, thanks to the Mandukya Upanishad. I will reread the Karika though.

Samadhi is the more exotic term for me, so I'm afraid I'm not sure which flavor my experiences fall under.



Let me ask this - when you meditate do you find yourself rested, steady? Alert? Is awareness being refreshed during meditation?




After mediation does some of that 'balance' that inward lightness of being come with you into activity? If so then things are going well.


My experience in meditation is that of awareness without attachment. I am most certainly awake, and I sometimes practice with my eyes open, or in noisey places. I am able to practice with "distractions" because what is happening is that my mind is not distracted; not by outside phenomenon, and not by it's own internal impressions. If a dog barks, it does not conjure the image of a dog, the word "dog", or any sort of emotion. It just happens. When the meditation is "eyes closed" it's more of an undifferentiated, timeless, boundless stillness, but still, without the clinging to the concept of stillness or the word. It's something that I can really only examine after the fact, when the chitta is moving again.

The analogy of the screen on to which the movie is projected is appropriate, and I think this is what is meant by turiya.

It's not something that I am able to maintain for long periods, but I am always able to guide my noisey mind back to it. One of the reasons I was worried that I was on the ignorance side of the spectrum is that it's not something I feel like I'm "doing", it's more like something that is accomplished by abandoning the need to do anything.

This state does carry over into activity: I find that immediately after meditation my mind does not attach itself to things as easily. I care less about my identity, I do not get emotional, and I am less likely to become bored.

Thanks again for any insights.

Peace.

atanu
28 October 2008, 08:21 AM
Ramana Maharshi

Otherwise how can nirvikalpa samAdhi be of any use in which a man remains as a log of wood?

Namaste Simex,

Some literature on samadhi that may help to understand the concept and the different stages.

Sankara, in BU 4.2.1, glosses samahitatma as samyuktama (similar as Gita), "connected." In BU 4.4.23, he explains the term samahita as "becoming one-pointed (aikagrya) through dissociation from the movements of the sense-organs and the mind." The term occurs again in the Katha Upanishad 1.2.24 in the negative form asamahita, which Sankara glosses as "one whose mind is not one-pointed (anekagra), whose mind is scattered." In introductory Vedanta manuals, samadhana is also explained by the term "one-pointed" (ekagra). The word samadhana can thus be understood as having the meaning of "one-pointed" (ekagra). In the Yogasutra, "one-pointed" (ekagra) is used to define concentration (dharana), which is the sixth of the eight limbs of Yoga and a preliminary discipline to dhyana and Samadhi. Possibly, the Vedantic samadhana means "one-pointedness" and would be equivalent to the yoga dharana, but it is probably not exact equivalent to the yoga Samadhi.


Samadhi itself has two stages, samprajana-samadhi, where there is still object-consciousness, and asamprajata-samadhi or nirbija-samadhi, where there is no longer any object-consciousness (nirvikalpa-samadhi). Duality, such as the fundamental distinction between subject and object, is obliterated in deep sleep and in Samadhi, as well as in other conditions such as fainting, but duality is only temporarily obliterated for it reappears when one awakes from sleep or regains consciousness after fainting, and it also reappears when the yogi arises from Samadhi. The reason why duality persists is because false knowledge (mithyajana) has not been removed.

Baghavan Sri Ramana Maharshi distinguishes Sahaja Samadhi from Nirvikalpa Samadhi by saying: In Sahaja Samadhi the mind is "dead", "resolved into the self, like a river discharged into the ocean and its identity lost."

Ramana also says: "the trance has no good unless vasanas (latent ideas and forms of the mind) are destroyed." But Ramana holds a strong bias to the early Upanishad and Vedanta version Samadhan wherein Yogi is free without any sense of a separate identity. Contemplation on the Self is obviously a part of Sankara's teaching, but his contemplation is directed toward seeing the ever present Self as free from all conditionings rather than toward the attainment of nirvikalpa-samadhi. This is in significant contrast to the understanding of some Advaitins.

As I understand, stopping the chitta is the practice, the grind. But the Sahaja Samadhi, wherein all vasanas are lost because of total annhilation of the Ego due to rise of Jnana, is the fruit – the final freedom.

Sri Ramana Maharshi defines the terms as below:

(1) Holding on to Reality is samAdhi.
(2) Holding on to Reality with effort is savikalpa samAdhi.
(3) Merging in Reality and remaining unaware of the world is nirvikalpa samAdhi.
(4) Merging in Ignorance and remaining unaware of the world is sleep.
(5) Remaining in the primal, pure natural state without effort is sahaja nirvikalpa samAdhi. (from "Talk 391")

He explains what He means by the difference between (3) and (5):

Even if one is immersed in nirvikalpa samAdhi for years together, when he emerges from it he will find himself in the environment which he is bound to have. That is the reason for the AchArya emphasising sahaja samAdhi in preference to nirvikalpa samAdhi in his excellent work vivekachUDAmaNi. One should be in spontaneous samAdhi - that is, in one's pristine state - in the midst of every environment. (Talk 54).

In sleep the mind is alive but merged in oblivion (see (4) above). - In kevala nirvikalpa samAdhi, the mind is alive but merged in light, like a bucket with rope lowered into a well, that can be drawn out again. - In sahaja nirvikalpa samAdhi, the mind is dead , resolved into the Self, like a river discharged into the ocean - its identity lost - and which can never be re-directed from the ocean, once discharged into it (Talk 187).

A similar explanation is given in Talk 465, wherein Sri Bhagavan says:

(1) Meditation should remain unbroken as a current. If unbroken it is called samAdhi or Kundalini shakti.

(2) The mind may be latent and merge in the Self; it must necessarily rise up again; after it rises up one finds oneself only as ever before. For in this state the mental predispositions are present there in latent form to remanifest under favourable conditions.

(3) Again the mind activities can be completely destroyed. This differs from the former mind, for here the attachment is lost, never to reappear. Even though the man sees the world after he has been in the samAdhi state, the world will be taken only at its worth, that is to say it is the phenomenon of the One Reality. The True Being can be realised only in samAdhi; what was then is also now. Otherwise it cannot be Reality or Ever-present Being. What was in samAdhi is here and now too. Hold it and it is your natural condition of Being. Samadhi practice must lead to it. Otherwise how can nirvikalpa samAdhi be of any use in which a man remains as a log of wood? He must necessarily rise up from it sometime or other and face the world. But in sahaja samAdhi he remains unaffected by the world. So many pictures pass over the cinema screen: fire burns away everything; water drenches all; but the screen remains unaffected. The scenes are only phenomena which pass away leaving the screen as it was. Similarly the world phenomena simply pass on before the j~nAnI, leaving him unaffected. You may say that people find pain or pleasure in worldly phenomena. It is owing to superimposition. This must not happen. With this end in view practice is made. Practice lies in one of the two courses: devotion or knowledge. Even these are not the goals. Samadhi must be gained; it must be continuously practised until sahaja samAdhi results. Then there remains nothing more to do (Talk 465).

Loss of body consciousness in samAdhi is not the same as 'dead mind', destruction of ego. Thus when the disciple asks, "Is loss of body-consciousness a pre-requisite to the attainment of sahaja samAdhi?" Sri Ramana replies:

What is body-consciousness? Analyse it. There must be a body and consciousness limited to it which together make up body-consciousness. These must lie in another Consciousness which is absolute and unaffected. Hold it. That is samAdhi. It exists when there is no body-consciousness because it transcends the latter, it also exists when there is the body-consciousness. So it is always there. What does it matter whether body-consciousness is lost or retained? When lost it is internal samAdhi: when retained, it is external samAdhi. That is all. A person must remain in any of the six samAdhi-s so that sahaja samAdhi may be easy for him (Talk 406).

Sri Ramana refers to samAdhi, not as a state to be gained, as in some of the many different types but as our natural state. He also points out the importance of the waking state, which I believe was a query in another thread:

Samadhi is one's natural state. It is the under-current in all the three states. This - that is, 'I' - is not in those states, but these states are in It. If we get samAdhi in our waking state that will persist in deep sleep also. The distinction between consciousness and unconsciousness belongs to the realm of mind, which is transcended by the state of the Real Self (Talk 136).

By shravaNa, Knowledge dawns. That is the flame. By manana, the Knowledge is not allowed to vanish. Just as the flame is protected by a wind-screen, so the other thoughts are not allowed to overwhelm the right knowledge. By nididhyAsana, the flame is kept up to burn bright by trimming the wick. Whenever other thoughts arise, the mind is turned inward to the light of true knowledge. When this becomes natural, it is samAdhi. The enquiry "Who am I?" is the shravaNa. The ascertainment of the true import of 'I' is the manana. The practical application on each occasion is nididhyAsana. Being as 'I' is samAdhi (Talk 647).

Eternal, unbroken, natural state is j~nAna." (Talk 385).


Om

simex
28 October 2008, 11:39 AM
Thank you, Atanu.

I am now fairly certain that i am on the right path.

All this nomenclature is brutal though, it will have to be abandoned before the end.

Om

atanu
28 October 2008, 09:27 PM
Thank you, Atanu.

All this nomenclature is brutal though, it will have to be abandoned before the end.

Om

Namaste Simex,

I also believe that the nomenclature is often brutal and the source of many conflicts. Two people may be meaning the same thing yet arguing over their respective choice of words. Two simple things are:

1. The mind must be placed in 'Me' again and again. Pure 'Me', without any other object association is Pragnya -- the manifest Atman. And staying with full Pragnya is Stithipragnya state. The power of the full 'Me' does the rest. This is often quite boring in the beginning but one has to persevere.

2. The experience of Turya/One Concsiousness/Shiva Atman/Nirbija/Nirvikalpa is essential. And establishment in this one consciousness without break is Samadhi. Being in Samadhi, one must be able to query as to who is in Samadhi? Who is the One Consciousness and who is the Seer of the One Consciousness? In absence of this query sleep will intervene and ego will not die.

Best Wishes. Regards.

Om

simex
03 December 2008, 01:04 PM
1. The mind must be placed in 'Me' again and again. Pure 'Me', without any other object association is Pragnya -- the manifest Atman. And staying with full Pragnya is Stithipragnya state. The power of the full 'Me' does the rest. This is often quite boring in the beginning but one has to persevere.



Namaste, Atanu

This explanation, however brief and simple, proved to be very useful, and resulted in an extremely fruitful and doubt dispelling experience. Thank you very much.

atanu
03 December 2008, 11:00 PM
Namaste, Atanu

This explanation, however brief and simple, proved to be very useful, and resulted in an extremely fruitful and doubt dispelling experience. Thank you very much.

Namaste Simex,

You are always welcome. HDF provides us an avenue for sat sangh -- of being reminded of love again again gently.

Om

Nuno Matos
04 December 2008, 10:32 AM
Namaste all,


I have bin following this tread with entusiasm and it seems to me a very interesting subject to meditate about.
I think the problem is not with chitta in on itself but with its vrittis. I remember reading Sri Nisargadatta on the subject of reason and Sri Ranjit as well and they both stated that in the last level of sahmadi i.e. turya, reason is reaveled as one with reality. Still thought, they say ( do not confuse with stilled thought wich is pratyahara or yama deva, in itself a the big " Vritti " )!
I think this process is well understood for the ones who had some Raja Yoga experience of meditation in a sense that flows from the abstract (kramAnyatvam parinAmAnyatve hetuh) caos into the stilness of the name.
What do you think about that?

atanu
04 December 2008, 11:58 PM
Namaste all,


I have bin following this tread with entusiasm and it seems to me a very interesting subject to meditate about.
I think the problem is not with chitta in on itself but with its vrittis. I remember reading Sri Nisargadatta on the subject of reason and Sri Ranjit as well and they both stated that in the last level of sahmadi i.e. turya, reason is reaveled as one with reality. Still thought, they say ( do not confuse with stilled thought wich is pratyahara or yama deva, in itself a the big " Vritti " )!
I think this process is well understood for the ones who had some Raja Yoga experience of meditation in a sense that flows from the abstract (kramAnyatvam parinAmAnyatve hetuh) caos into the stilness of the name.
What do you think about that?

Namaste and Welcome Nuno,

Yes, it is called chittavritti which is the problem, simply stated it is the tendencies of the mind that pull it here and there. It is said that the mind in itself is Sattwa. You bring out a very fine point, when you say that Pratyahara itself is a thought.

Yes. See man is Manas, a mind. A man can do as far as the mind takes it. A man can try best to do Pratayahara again and again and when the mind goes out then pray to God, "This separation is painful, now do your part Lord".

It is said that the mind should do its part.

Regards

Om

devotee
05 December 2008, 01:18 AM
Namaste Atanu,

Thanks for very valuable information on meditation in this thread. :)

Regards,

OM

MahaHrada
05 December 2008, 05:55 AM
There is a lot of confusion about what the meditative stages of Yoga: Pratyahara, Dharana, Dhyana, and Samadhi mean. I do not want to add to this theoretical discussion, which would mean only adding to this confusion, but i add a practical hint, mentioning the time needed for establishment of the mind in these stages according to Yoga Darshana, thereby providing you with some sort of reality check.

Pratyahara stage is accomplished when the mind is turned inward for 10 minutes.
Dharana stage is 12 Pratyahara units equaling 2 hours uninterrupted focussing of the mind
Dhyana stage is accomplished after 12 Dharana units that adds up to 24 Hours of uninteruppted focussing of the mind on its object.
Samadhi stage is reached, according to the yoga shastras after accomplishing 12 Dhyana time units, that means 12 whole days and nights of uninterrupted flow of mind on one object.

I know nowadays people belive they can reach samadhi or turiya in 10 minutes, and i am happy for them that they reached their goal so easy. But i cannot comment on practices like that, because i dont know much about it and i do not have practical experience with these modern teachings or practices, and don´t know what this instant samadhi is supposed to be.

I am refering here only to the more ancient teachings of the Yoga Shastras, to the Yoga that was taught by Shiva Adinath and was put into practice by Siddhas like shri Matsyendranatha, shri Gorakhanatha and shri Dattatreya the original Gurus of the ancient Yoga sampradaya of the Siddha mata.

Nuno Matos
05 December 2008, 10:49 AM
Namaste Mahahrada,


According to Patanjali the only precondition for meditative acomplishement is that the position should be " steady and confortable " in order to win over the twin game of contrarys.
If you are going to get stuked on time ( Kala & Maya ) probably you are going to do if not already doing some time on a maximum security twilight home ( a patala called prison self ).

yajvan
10 December 2008, 06:04 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namaste



If you are going to get stuked on time ( Kala & Maya ) probably you are going to do if not already doing some time on a maximum security twilight home ( a patala called prison self ).

It is my humble opinion that if one considers the clock then it too becomes a thing the mind goes to and diverts ones dhāraṇā¹.
When in practice of ekāgratā or one-pointedness (with effort) and the clock/time is considered, then the mind will say 'humm- wonder what time it is ' and another distraction is offered. For some new to meditation and dhāraṇā they may think something different : ' ohhh - there is just X more hours left and then samādhi will arrive ' . Both approaches causes mischief.

Yet for the sādhu that may transcend and be emersed in the state of Being (sattā) there is no time… hours feel like minutes. What then will the clock offer for him/her?

So what does one do? A simple matter of intent. The intent to meditate for N minutes ( some use muhūrta¹ timing) and then begin.

pranams

words

dhāraṇā धारणा the act of holding , bearing , wearing , supporting , maintaining, retaining i.e. undistracted practice.
sādhu साधु - leading or going straight to the goal; sādhu can be man of woman.
muhūrta मुहूर्त - is 1/30th of the day or 48 minutes; some may use this in mutiples or as fractions of muhūrta for meditating time periods.

MahaHrada
10 December 2008, 06:45 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namaste



It is my humble opinion that if one considers the clock


These timings are not meant to indicate the time you set apart for meditation, but the time you are in the state of complete one pointed flow of attention towards a choosen object.

That means all that is left in your awareness is the object- no other awareness- not of your body- no awareness of your breath -no input through the senses, nothing- except the object, not even awareness that you are meditating.

That means one can sit 10 hours and yet not arrive at achieving pratyahara because 10 minutes of constant flow toward one object and one object only, without a single distraction, not even awareness of self, not even for a short time like the blink of an eye is quite hard to achieve.

Thats why there are other Angas of Yoga (yama niyama asana and pranayama) that minimise the possibility of distraction, by desires or sensual input or body awareness, before pratyahara is practiced.

In the case of pratyahara the one object of meditation is the act of shutting out all outward sense inputs, i.e. inward turning or reversal of sense activity, causing also a reversal of prana in the nadis that flow towards the sense organs, later one can also reverse the flow of prana to achive sense isolation by the act of will.

Only if this is achieved other objects that are suitable for the stage of dharana are choosen as objects in the inner space.

yajvan
11 December 2008, 01:00 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~





That means one can sit 10 hours and yet not arrive at achieving pratyahara because 10 minutes of constant flow toward one object and one object only, without a single distraction, not even awareness of self, not even for a short time like the blink of an eye is quite hard to achieve.


Namaste,
If you are suggesting or alluding to 'quite hard to achieve' is equal to effort, then I agree. Effort is one more 'event' that stops the native from easily settling into ones routine , into ekāgrata ( one-pointed ness).

It has been my observation that many people stop sādhana due to not knowing how to be effortless ( or at least less intense). We are groomed by society (IMO) to be assertive, forward, achievement based. When it comes to sādhana with meditation, it is the delicate approach that brings fruit.

What one needs comfort with is prayatnaḥ sādhakāḥ as mentioned in the Śiva sūtra-s (chapt 2.2) - pause-less effort that brings one to the level of Being. Holding the beginning point ( some like to call this anusaṁdhitsā) with awareness. This brings about the union of the worshipper (meditator) and the worshipped ( pure consciousness).

pranams

MahaHrada
11 December 2008, 04:05 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~




Namaste,
If you are suggesting or alluding to 'quite hard to achieve' is equal to effort, then I agree. Effort is one more 'event' that stops the native from easily settling into ones routine , into ekāgrata ( one-pointed ness).

It has been my observation that many people stop sādhana due to not knowing how to be effortless ( or at least less intense). We are groomed by society (IMO) to be assertive, forward, achievement based. When it comes to sādhana with meditation, it is the delicate approach that brings fruit.

What one needs comfort with is prayatnaḥ sādhakāḥ as mentioned in the Śiva sūtra-s (chapt 2.2) - pause-less effort that brings one to the level of Being. Holding the beginning point ( some like to call this anusaṁdhitsā) with awareness. This brings about the union of the worshipper (meditator) and the worshipped ( pure consciousness).

pranams

I have not experienced that too much effort is an hindrance in Yoga quite to the contrary. I have only seen lack of effort and endurance as problems. Eventually conscious effort will become natural. Too much theories will only confuse the practice. So whether with or without effort the main thing is to keep up the practice.

Shiva sutras do speak of effort as the best means to achive the goal. My translation donīt say pause less, just effort. This is about a swift effort.

But unrelated to the topic of Hatha Yoga and the anga sequence of sadhana. This is about tantrokta mantra shastra a section concerning the indestructible body.

cittam mantrah

The mind is mantra

1/1

prayatnah sAdhakah

Effort is that which attains the goal

2/2

The topic of these verses is in a nutshell realisation of that subtle body that is consisting of mantra and its identity with Shiva being engaged in inward turning of the mind.
A secret practice i think that cannot be done without guidance and shaktipat -diksha of a guru of a respective sampradaya, very loosely connected with pratyahara i will add some comment elucidating what i think is the right kind of effort:
sritantrasadbhava is quoted in the commentary:
O dear one just like a bird of prey glimpsing in the sky a piece of meat, quickly catches it with the speed natural to it, so should the best of yogis catch hold of the light of consciousness. Just like an arrow fixed to a bow and drawn with great force flies forth, so oh beloved does bindu fly forward by the force of awareness.
Bhaskara adds in his commentary to the siva sutra that effort directed to penetrate into the mind is the most excellent means to realise the cittatva (true principle) of the self and that the required force of effort is generated by repeated meditations. What that means is that effort if repeated will become a part of oneīs nature. This describes the correct kind of effort.

yajvan
11 December 2008, 05:28 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namaste


I have not experienced that too much effort is an hindrance in Yoga quite to the contrary... I. What that means is that effort if repeated will become a part of one´s nature. This describes the correct kind of effort.

Perhaps the opinions are based upon one's point of view.

As I see it, being regular with one's practice is good - this can be called effort ( by me); Yet when effort and trying is introduced into the meditative process , I find this causes strain. What do I mean by this? Let me over-amplify my point - "I must settle down the down the mind - why is it so unruly - I must keep my attention on this bīja..mind stop wondering, body sit straight! "

This is the effort I am alluding to. Effort one associates with lifting a rock , or the rigor of a football player, the effort to hit hard. This I have found and been taught plays no role when looking to settle down the mind.

Perhaps you are aware of techniques where this approach bears fruit? I know of only one called out in Vijñāna Bhairava where the kārikā suggests viewing stillness in an agitated state.
This, I know is not your point on effort, yet I call it out where effort does not bear the desired results, and perhaps one could still take advantage of the agitation to experience madhya¹.

I am not sure if we are in any disagreement - I am just cautious on the wrong effort applied. I have been taught that the Supreme cannot be awakened/experienced/unfolded with force.

It is the 'churning' of ever-fresh awareness - some call fresh sparks of awareness - this is the POV of ajapa meditation the yields results. The spark of awareness fades on its own, and it is refreshed by the sādhu to start the churning again.

Let me end by saying, I am not suggesting or inferring a lack of discipline is in order. If you are equating effort to discipline then I too concur. Discipline gives one continunity of practice, Yet if discipline is applied to whipping the mind, and overt control of it , I do not concur.

pranams
words

Madhya मध्य - standing between two , impartial , neutral; being of a middle kind or size or quality

atanu
11 December 2008, 08:48 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
Let me end by saying, I am not suggesting or inferring a lack of discipline is in order. If you are equating effort to discipline then I too concur. Discipline gives one continunity of practice, Yet if discipline is applied to whipping the mind, and overt control of it , I do not concur.



Namaste Yajvan,

I agree. But possibly none can match the brevity of Nuno Matos.

(No one denies that discipline is the key requirement but it is also true that many varieties of men are taught many varieties of discipline regimes and different people are invariably at different evolutionary levels. For one person Pranayama may be required before any tranquility is attained and for another person a small remembrance of Lord may be sufficient. And there may be others who may be so immature that Pranayama or any other technique will not give them any benefit. Some of those who will hold rigidly that all other ways are inferior to their preferred way may go on to become terrorists).

There is a story in south indian Shiva lore about Sundara and another hard liner Shiva Bhakta, who maintained the notion that Shiva has taught only one way and that his preferred way is that only one way. Finally Shiva gave him a lesson lovingly that all paths are Shiva's paths and He alone is the leader of all paths.


The goal is the "the Lord, who is without parts, without actions, tranquil, blameless, unattached, the supreme bridge to Immortality, and like a fire that has consumed all its fuel".


Svetasvatara Upanishad
When men shall roll up space as if it were a piece of hide, then there will be an end of misery without one’s cultivating the Knowledge of the Lord, who is without parts, without actions, tranquil, blameless, unattached, the supreme bridge to Immortality, and like a fire that has consumed all its fuel.It may occur as dissapointment to some that the goal is the fire that has consumed all its fuel. And it may be impossible also to attain the Lord who is without parts and without actions, by clinging as a part and by holding on to various notions of actions to the point of aversion and derision of paths that are apparently alien to one's preferred path.

Om Namah Shivaya


PS: Even the sleep comes only when the fire that consumes all its fuel

Nuno Matos
11 December 2008, 10:01 PM
"I agree. But possibly none can match the brevity of Nuno Matos."

Dear Atanu,


I dont feell the necessity to write large doses of words. And hanuman is faster than a lightning bolt.
Thank you Atanu for the compliment and remenbrance.

MahaHrada
12 December 2008, 04:24 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namaste



Perhaps the opinions are based upon one's point of view.

As I see it, being regular with one's practice is good - this can be called effort ( by me); Yet when effort and trying is introduced into the meditative process , I find this causes strain. What do I mean by this? Let me over-amplify my point - "I must settle down the down the mind - why is it so unruly - I must keep my attention on this bīja..mind stop wondering, body sit straight! "

This is the effort I am alluding to. Effort one associates with lifting a rock , or the rigor of a football player, the effort to hit hard. This I have found and been taught plays no role when looking to settle down the mind.

Perhaps you are aware of techniques where this approach bears fruit? I know of only one called out in Vijñāna Bhairava where the kārikā suggests viewing stillness in an agitated state.
This, I know is not your point on effort, yet I call it out where effort does not bear the desired results, and perhaps one could still take advantage of the agitation to experience madhya¹.

I am not sure if we are in any disagreement - I am just cautious on the wrong effort applied. I have been taught that the Supreme cannot be awakened/experienced/unfolded with force.

It is the 'churning' of ever-fresh awareness - some call fresh sparks of awareness - this is the POV of ajapa meditation the yields results. The spark of awareness fades on its own, and it is refreshed by the sādhu to start the churning again.

Let me end by saying, I am not suggesting or inferring a lack of discipline is in order. If you are equating effort to discipline then I too concur. Discipline gives one continunity of practice, Yet if discipline is applied to whipping the mind, and overt control of it , I do not concur.

pranams
words
Madhya मध्य - standing between two , impartial , neutral; being of a middle kind or size or quality


I don´t think that the topic whether to apply effort or not is at all important when using practices culled from tantras like Vijnanabhairava.

Kaula marga is a very special path only few persons can tread, and it has its own laws, only people with special characteristics will be confronted with the devi and a guru and get shaktipat this will not be the rigid type of arrogant self controlled, usually succesful business people, that have problems with that kind of effort you describe.
And if there are remnants of ego the devotion to guru will absolve you of your ego based idea of "effort"

What is important in tantrokta marga is the guru parampara and the continous practice of the prescribed upasana that is done for devata anugraha, that is the essence of mantra shastra.

Practices like those in Vijanabhairava only bear fruit when the tantrokta nitya karmas are done, because the exercises depend on the basic upasana, they especially depend on presence of ones own acquired shakti by diksha and one´s own effort in japa and puja.

Usually in the course of tantric upasana the shisya will be presented with the special secret krama, of a tradition, this krama is a consecutive course of deities whose upasana must be done in sequence and whose mantras must be mastered one after the other this is centered usually around one central vidya, in the case of trika this cenntral vidya obviously must have been para shakti. But this is guesswork unless we meet a trika teacher and get the trika set of dikshas. Not only are these deities and their mantras kept secret but the whole tradition is also protected by dangerous spiritual beings fierce yoginis bhairavas and other protectors of the kaula dharma, they are also there to prevent that people unfit for these teachings try to receive them.

What i want to say is, even when you are succesful experimenting with tantric practicies on your own, you run into danger if you do not know how to deal with the dangerous protectors should they appear.

Ripped out of the context of the rest of Kaula Dharma and without the upadesha of the Kaula Guru exercises culled out of the context into the open loose their redeeming properties.
In the beginning when i first posted here on this forum i was commenting on parts of the trika shastras but only reluctantly.
Though i have some expertise in tantra shastra, even if i want i see not how i could contribute in a constructive way because i think technical details have to be learnt from a proper guru and face to face, to bring good fruit and not suffering, and are not communicated on the internet.

Most probably people wills start again pelting mental stones at me for having written that, but i think i will have to live with that or shut up once and for all.

atanu
12 December 2008, 06:47 AM
-Most probably people wills start again pelting mental stones at me for having written that, but i think i will have to live with that or shut up once and for all.

Namaste MahaHrada,

No. You have written this nicely and with care. It is acceptable to me sans your above fear. Stones that we fear are our own. I wish to point out that your statements, such as cited below, helps to add to your fears of stones etc.


I do not want to add to this theoretical discussion, which would mean only adding to this confusion


No grudges. :)

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
12 December 2008, 06:54 AM
"I agree. But possibly none can match the brevity of Nuno Matos."

Dear Atanu,

I dont feell the necessity to write large doses of words. And hanuman is faster than a lightning bolt.
Thank you Atanu for the compliment and remenbrance.

Dear Nuno,

Genuinely, I will try to emulate you in this matter.

Regards.

Om

yajvan
12 December 2008, 03:22 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namaste atanu, MahaHrada, Nuno (et.al)

thank you for your contributions and positions you have offered. As I see it the conversation is to advance one's understanding by comparing and contrasting the knowledge and /or the ideas we hold.
I also find it worthy of merit to offer the experiences one brings to the discussion.

Again my orientation and offer was about 'effort and time commitments' - these have been duly offered from the knowledge, teachings, and experience I have been afforded. If others differ then I am in hopes it too is from these 3 levels or abilities aforementioned.

Regarding dangers. I have not experienced what you have offered , yet do not suggest this may not occur. This conversation of 'danger' also arises when we talk of siddhi's.

Some months back ( Perhaps 6 to 8) when others also participated in the siddhi discussion it was in vogue for all to concur that it is 'dangerous', yet not one person stepped forward to say ' I practice this and speak from experience ' either for-or-against the notion.

I mention this as fact and not to find fault - we are all here to advance our undersanding (I believe) , so open ( civil) conversations are always welcomed. Yet at the time no one asked , yajvan why do you think that siddhi pursuit is reasonable? of merit? It seemed a most obvious question to ask, but it did not arise - only the dogma of 'don't do that'.
My offer and position was due to my instruction, dīksa, teaching, etc. that I spoke, yet it fell on deaf ears, the same ears that perhaps did not pratice siddhi-s or even dhyāna.

So why mention this? I like to pursue and find value in conversations that matter - where it's okay to discuss, probe, look, see, contrast and see how perhaps the cream rises to the top. That the conversations have some basis, experience if possible, and where one may learn a bit, or leave their ego's at the door and say I just do not know. I am not inferring anying here ( my ego can most assurdly be left at the door and try to put this to practice).

On that note MahaHrada your posts are valuable and hope you continue to write, offer insights and take us to new ideas. Nuno your questions are often terse and to the point, and provokes more thinking for us - this is a good thing. And atanu - your breath of knowledge and your patience with all of us is refreshing - we are rewarded with your posts.

That said, I do not take this wisdom lightly and share ( and or probe) to perhaps move the conversation forward or provoke a conversation that may benefit others. Yet the benefits go to both the listener and the offerer - the measurer and the measured. My teacher always told us, 'the teacher gains more then the student' - this I can see work.

There are those that truly have interest and there are those that look to find mischief ( present company excluded). I prefer to offer the knowledge for those that wish to move their knowledge forward. For this, we take care in what we say, and position the knowledge accordingly. If further (deeper interest) is there, I have found people contact the author directly and further discussions are had one-on-one. I have had many conversations via email of this type i.e. further, deeper, etc. Hence, I think people here understand that some things need a more personal touch. I am open to this.

pranams

atanu
13 December 2008, 03:00 AM
hariḥ oṁ
Regarding dangers. I have not experienced what you have offered , yet do not suggest this may not occur. This conversation of 'danger' also arises when we talk of siddhi's.

Some months back ( Perhaps 6 to 8) when others also participated in the siddhi discussion it was in vogue for all to concur that it is 'dangerous', yet not one person stepped forward to say ' I practice this and speak from experience ' either for-or-against the notion.

pranams

Namaste yajvan ji,

I do not exactly remember the discussion on dangers, so I thought why not take a fresh overview?

I do not think that you can expect anyone practising the vidyas to come and precisely explain the dangers since as MahaHrada says that those are guarded secrets for welfare of all.

Possibly, I can offer a general view.

All of us in this world are pursuing Siddhi Sadhana without knowing the strength and power of consciousness. We wish for/desire certain outcome and depending on the strength of the desire, the consciousness helps to fructify the desire sooner or later. In a bull run (lucky phase), the results make us happy, gloated with ego and surprisingly also very fearful. What if tommorrow a Tiger comes and eats up everything? And lo, the negative vibes now begin to fructify.

A knowledgable sadhaka is many times more powerful, yet is just a speck of dust to the dictates of Kala. His consequences are far more dangerous. And Ego here is also likely to be far more stronger (in absence of knowledge of Brahman). In absence of a pure Guru, the sadhana can bring untold misery to self and to others -- especially if the sadhaka is yet to purify his own instincts and has envy and pre-dilection to harm others, dictated by envy and jealousy. Imagine how dangerous a mix malice and Siddhi power together will make.

Some Gurus do not prescribe such sadhana simply because of the following:


Svetasvatara Upanishad
When men shall roll up space as if it were a piece of hide, then there will be an end of misery without one’s cultivating the Knowledge of the Lord, who is without parts, without actions, tranquil, blameless, unattached, the supreme bridge to Immortality, and like a fire that has consumed all its fuel.Lord is the fire that has consumed all its fuel. Whereas desire for siddhi is a big fuel. The goal should be Lord and not the fuel. It is said in Puranas that it is Shiva who only has the power to keep all dangerous siddhis as His consorts, simply because He is Shiva -- the pure one.

I agree with MahaHrada that guidance of a pure Guru is always required. But my Guru simply teaches that leave all desires to God and keep the mind as close to Him as possible and this way all dangers are kept at bay. What harm can come, if the desire is God Himself? Moreover, the practice to keep the mind close to Heart, near God, does protect one from the tendency of mind fancying good or bad fruits.

Hope that this offers some food for consideration.

Om Namah Shivaya

Om

atanu
13 December 2008, 09:57 AM
hariḥ oṁ
On that note MahaHrada your posts are valuable and hope you continue to write, offer insights and take us to new ideas. Nuno your questions are often terse and to the point, and provokes more thinking for us - this is a good thing. And atanu - your breath of knowledge and your patience with all of us is refreshing - we are rewarded with your posts.



Namaste Yajvan Ji,

It would be injustice if I did not speak a few words on this. You are good, so you see Good. The Universe is good for you since you are good, having passed through forms of fire called Rahu Dasha and Jupiter Dasha already (and of course all your past samskaras).

Speaking of dangers, I would like to relate an understanding.

Some time back, a highly respected religious leader of India went through great trouble. He was sent to prison on the allegation of a murder. The great Guru said sadly "I have not commited it but once a thought had arisen in me that this pest should be removed. That was the sin."

This eternal Lord, the fire that has all fuels consumed, is great beauty and purity when it lights up pure sattwa guna and the same Lord is terrific and destructive when it lights up an evil thought.

May we all pray to Him to instigate us all with pure thoughts and pure acts only. May we also pray for enough strength to bear the Prarabdha of the self and all others that the self cognises.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

yajvan
13 December 2008, 12:20 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~


Namaste atanu,
thank you for taking the time to collect your thoughts and express them succinctly. You mention a few things, and if I may let me comment without being too verbose.


I do not think that you can expect anyone practising the vidyas to come and precisely explain the dangers since as MahaHrada says that those are guarded secrets for welfare of all.


Yes, I see your point.
also


Lord is the fire that has consumed all its fuel. Whereas desire for siddhi is a big fuel. The goal should be Lord and not the fuel.
Yes, this is exactly the point to be discussed.
The focus is on the Supreme. Now that said, if one pursues only for siddhi-s then some mischief may occur - with the following taken into consideration and is the crux of my POV:

Siddhi-s can develop quite naturally during ones sādhana as a matter of course. How one handles it is up to them. Yet if one wishes to develop these skills then purification is required .
Though purification one's intent and ultimately desires are modified and changed. The infusion of sattva takes place and one's initial desires that may be only of siddhi-pursuit expands to anuttara ( Supreme) pursuit of ātmavyāpti¹ and śivavyāpti¹ ( accomplishment/unfoldment of ātma and accomplishment/unfoldment of śiva). That is the beauty of the process. A self-correcting model that takes small-small ego based desires and expands them to the greatest good.What am I saying? The process ( listed below) is a filtering/cleansing process to remove tamasic and rajasic tendencies i.e. remove mala-s ( impurities).
What is the purification tools? dhyāna ,prānāyāma, dhāranā, pratyāhāra, samādhi ( I will be happy to define these yet think the reader has seen these words before). I call these out as they are the components of saṁyama¹, needed for siddhi development.

Another point - According to the Yogadarśana of Patañjali these siddhi-s can also be aquired by potions - this I have never seen. Yet if this occurs , then the purification process is usurped and the cleansing does not occur - here is where I see mischief occurring. Patañjali points out that siddhi-s may be impediments, yet also sees them as accomplishment and a milestone of cetana¹-development.

From a kaśmir śaivism point of view it is the concept/practice/progress that āṇavopāya¹ leads to śāktopāya that too beings one to śāmbhavopāya - a progression for the sādhu. Yet one can start the journey from any of these upāya-s mentioned pending one's capacity and capability i.e. are the facilities there to start at that point.

So, siddhi is a tool that in the end is discarded. The beauty is in the 'gates' that must be opened that purify the sādhu. There is a view from Śrī Lakṣmī Kaukārṇava Tantra that svāmī Lakṣman-jū quotes that supports your position atanu, that of focusing on the Supreme - The one who is directed towards these limited yogic powers is carried away from the consciousness of the Lord (śivavyāpti) and is not capable of experiencing His nature.
Yet svāmī Lakṣman-jū reminds the reader that for the yogī who is no longer bonded to mala-s the same yogic exercises i.e. dhyāna ,prānāyāma, dhāranā, pratyāhāra and samādhi, is not gripped by the limited yogic powers i.e. siddhi.

Now the question to our conversation becomes - is this discussion for the rank-&-file, or for the sādhu in search of unfolding the Supreme? For the rank-&-file that may see siddhi-s as a passing fancy there is one conversation. Yet for the sādhu interested in kevala it is quite another. Perhaps my fault is to view those here on HDF as the serious śiṣya? Perhaps this is my blemish.

pranams

words

ātmavyāpti - ātma आत्मन् (ātman) - the SELF, essence (sāram) of Being (sattā) + vyāpti व्याप्ति acquisition , attainment , accomplishment i.e. inseparable presence
śivavyāpti - śiva शिव the Supreme (anuttara) unsurpassable + vyāpti व्याप्ति acquisition , attainment , accomplishment i.e.
cetana¹ - consciousness, understanding, sense, or intelligence
More on anavopaya¹saktopaya & sambhavopaya see HDF post # 2 and #4 at http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2323 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2323)
saṁyama संयम holding together; More on this at HDF post http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=909&highlight=samyama
kevala केवल - not connected with anything else , uncompounded i.e. liberation

atanu
14 December 2008, 09:00 AM
hariḥ oṁ
From a kaśmir śaivism point of view it is the concept/practice/progress that āṇavopāya¹ leads to śāktopāya that too beings one to śāmbhavopāya - a progression for the sādhu. Yet one can start the journey from any of these upāya-s mentioned pending one's capacity and capability i.e. are the facilities there to start at that point.
-
Yet svāmī Lakṣman-jū reminds the reader that for the yogī who is no longer bonded to mala-s the same yogic exercises i.e. dhyāna ,prānāyāma, dhāranā, pratyāhāra and samādhi, is not gripped by the limited yogic powers i.e. siddhi.



Namaste Yajvan Ji,

My understanding is same as yours on this matter. It is a dynamic ladder and not a static ladder. Aspirants are at various accrued levels of maturation gained over many lives. One who has clearly surmised that Lord alone is the Happiness has only Lord as the goal, knowing that Lord has nothing comparable to Him. One who has no doubt on this issue is never in any danger, except occassional hurdles on account of Prarabdha or on account of test of perseverance.

There is clear instruction that one who has for his goal the Self, Lord and only Lord, all procedural dharmas are immaterial.


Sarvadharmaan parityajya maamekam sharanam vraja;
Aham twaa sarvapaapebhyo mokshayishyaami maa shuchah.
There is never any danger to the meditator performing malice free meditation on pure Lord. The above is a guarantee from the Lord.

Om Namah Shivaya