PDA

View Full Version : Yoga-vasistha



yajvan
19 October 2006, 05:38 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

In Vasistha's Yoga ( the conversation of Vasistha with Sri Ram) he says to Ram " there are 4 gatekeepers at the entrance to the realm of Moksha (Liberation or enlightenment) that is:
self-control, spirit of enquiry, contentment, and good company ( satsang)"

" He who wears the armor of self control is not harmed by sorrows." Enquiry, the study of the sruti and smurti he says " the intelligence becomes keen and is able to realize the Supreme";

With Contentment - "one does not crave" and one that is not content in the SELF will be subjected to sorrow. Satsang or the company of the wise and enlightened "enlarges ones intelligence" and "is superior to all other forms of religious practice like charity, austerity, pilgrimage, rites, etc". He concludes by saying " if you cannot practice all 4 , practice one."


"when the infinite vibrates, the worlds appear to emerge" - brahmrisi vasistha

atanu
20 October 2006, 10:52 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

In Vasistha's Yoga ( the conversation of Vasistha with Sri Ram) he says to Ram " there are 4 gatekeepers at the entrance to the realm of Moksha (Liberation or enlightenment) that is:
self-control, spirit of enquiry, contentment, and good company ( satsang)"

" He who wears the armor of self control is not harmed by sorrows." Enquiry, the study of the sruti and smurti he says " the intelligence becomes keen and is able to realize the Supreme";

With Contentment - "one does not crave" and one that is not content in the SELF will be subjected to sorrow. Satsang or the company of the wise and enlightened "enlarges ones intelligence" and "is superior to all other forms of religious practice like charity, austerity, pilgrimage, rites, etc". He concludes by saying " if you cannot practice all 4 , practice one."


"when the infinite vibrates, the worlds appear to emerge" - brahmrisi vasistha



Namaskar,

Personally, I have found the enquiry to be natural choice for me and it automatically leads to contentment even under so-called distressful conditions.

During a discourse Shri Ram asks how is it that the Self, which is intangible, able to move lungs and heart etc., since there cannot be any contact between the intangible and the physical? Sage Vashista replied "lungs which you assume to be physical is also intangible, it is consciousness. The mountain that you see in front is also that.


"when the infinite vibrates, the worlds appear to emerge" - brahmrisi Vasistha. This echoes a verse from Rig Veda.


Om Namah Shivayya

yajvan
20 October 2006, 07:38 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaskar,

Personally, I have found the enquiry to be natural choice for me and it automatically leads to contentment even under so-called distressful conditions.

Namaste Atanu Banerjee,
Yes, I find this too, that enquiry is very delightful to pursue...
they say knowledge is the greatest purifier.

Sudarshan
22 October 2006, 03:27 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

In Vasistha's Yoga ( the conversation of Vasistha with Sri Ram) he says to Ram " there are 4 gatekeepers at the entrance to the realm of Moksha (Liberation or enlightenment) that is:
self-control, spirit of enquiry, contentment, and good company ( satsang)"

" He who wears the armor of self control is not harmed by sorrows." Enquiry, the study of the sruti and smurti he says " the intelligence becomes keen and is able to realize the Supreme";

With Contentment - "one does not crave" and one that is not content in the SELF will be subjected to sorrow. Satsang or the company of the wise and enlightened "enlarges ones intelligence" and "is superior to all other forms of religious practice like charity, austerity, pilgrimage, rites, etc". He concludes by saying " if you cannot practice all 4 , practice one."


"when the infinite vibrates, the worlds appear to emerge" - brahmrisi vasistha


Contentment and Good company appear to be the natural choices. There are situations in life where either Self Control and Enquiry are not possible. Let us say you get very sick and cant do meditation, what would you do? Contenment is possible for anybody in any circumstance - it depends only on mind and does not require the support of the body. If your body does not cooperate, it rules out both Self Control and any kinds of meditative practices.

yajvan
22 October 2006, 05:05 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Contentment and Good company appear to be the natural choices. There are situations in life where either Self Control and Enquiry are not possible. Let us say you get very sick and cant do meditation, what would you do? Contenment is possible for anybody in any circumstance - it depends only on mind and does not require the support of the body. If your body does not cooperate, it rules out both Self Control and any kinds of meditative practices.

Namaste sudarshan,
you offer some excellent examples... yet for me, I have found when ill, my contentment ( of being healthy) subsides.
I also find mind-body to be connected. I believe the body does the will/intent of the mind. Yet in many cases where the body physically cannot perform for the mind, then there is issue.

I find that the instuction from Vasisthamuni to be insightful. As the individual chooses one 'gate', over time it grooms him/her for the other gates.

What are your thoughts here on this? if one chooses self control, it leads to discipline - and that can be applied to study, meditation, and the like. It also brings contentment.
I am not inferring one is better then the other... my observation when these 'gates' mature, they bring the others with in time.

thank you for your post.

Sudarshan
22 October 2006, 05:24 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste sudarshan,
you offer some excellent examples... yet for me, I have found when ill, my contentment ( of being healthy) subsides.
I also find mind-body to be connected. I believe the body does the will/intent of the mind. Yet in many cases where the body physically cannot perform for the mind, then there is issue.

I find that the instuction from Vasisthamuni to be insightful. As the individual chooses one 'gate', over time it grooms him/her for the other gates.

What are your thoughts here on this? if one chooses self control, it leads to discipline - and that can be applied to study, meditation, and the like. It also brings contentment.
I am not inferring one is better then the other... my observation when these 'gates' mature, they bring the others with in time.

thank you for your post.

You are right when stating that contenment is challenged when threatened with illness. But self control is possible only in good health - you tend to get frustrated, angry and depressed in ill health. Meditation requires you to assume a good posture and be generally painless and comfortable - not possible for sick people.

Contentment is also difficult, as it is difficult to be content with a sick body that is troublesome. However, you will still find that passage of time strengthens your resolve to be happy with what you have. I had a friend who was bedridden for life in pain but rarely complained of anything ( he died a few months ago), but he cannot be expected to do meditation.

I agree that you can choose to prioritize one gate over the other based on your temperament, and gradually cover all. I believe one should start from "good company" as it is very infectitious( just like bad ones) and that gives the encouragement needed to seriously pursue our disciplines. There are times when we go through lean patches where we suddenly question the existance of God, and spiritual company can bring you back to the path. When people narrate you their own experiences with God, there is nothing better than this to boost your own faith and commitment.

sarabhanga
22 October 2006, 07:11 PM
Namaste Sudarshan,

Anyone who is without self-control and unable or unwilling to enquire (and to learn) would generally not be tolerated by wise company, making satsanga rather problematic!

Physical illness certainly may make some yoga methods impossible, but meditation is a purely mental process; and for the practice of meditation and jnana yoga, the only necessity is an intelligently controlled mind.

And even if one is bedridden for life, the shava asana is quite appropriate for meditation!

Sudarshan
23 October 2006, 03:25 AM
Anyone who is without self-control and unable or unwilling to enquire (and to learn) would generally not be tolerated by wise company, making satsanga rather problematic!


But you must be familiar with Sri Chaitanya's legendary love towards all - even towards the immoral and wicked? Satsanga can bring about self control and desire to enquire in many people.



Physical illness certainly may make some yoga methods impossible, but meditation is a purely mental process; and for the practice of meditation and jnana yoga, the only necessity is an intelligently controlled mind.


No sAdhana is possible when one is in physical pain. Mind gets completely clouded by distress and the only thing you can do is to try to reconcile with your fate and blaming the karma - the only yoga possible is SharNagati in such cases!



And even if one is bedridden for life, the shava asana is quite appropriate for meditation!

A healthy person can do shavAsana easily, but the pained bedridden guy cannot contemplate on anything. Meditating through the physical barriers is possible only for yogis who reach samAdhi quickly. For starters, no progress can be made when one is physically distressed. The body is the temple to God in the path of any sAdhana- unless it cooperates you have no option but to surrender to God in toto.

atanu
23 October 2006, 04:12 AM
---.


Sudarshan follow what suits you best.

sarabhanga
23 October 2006, 05:58 AM
Namaste Sudarshan,

Pain is a very great distraction, but remember that the feeling (despite any physical cause) is only a mental impression, an interpretation of sensorial input that may be subdued or modified by the mind itself.

With sufficient practice of meditation, the mind can be withdrawn from all sensation, but if one’s body is already in the grip of some serious illness or distress before gaining the skill, then it would certainly be difficult to learn.

Sudarshan
23 October 2006, 06:30 AM
Sudarshan follow what suits you best.

Ones prArabdha karma dictates what one can follow:-

If you are born with some superior kind of faith established on more than a blind faith { like having visions etc} you have very little to go in search of a path. Simply surrender to God.

If you are born with higher consciousness or remember past lives, you automatically know where you left off and know where to continue.

If you are born in the family of saints, for eg the son or grandon of a true Yogi, you are blessed and have the route and doubts cleared easily.

If fate brings you onto a direct encounter with God or a true sage, then again, simply surrender to this agent.

In the absence of any of the above, human beings are left in a dark alley, and will tread on a path that matches their guNa or vAsanAs. In such a case, it is better to act on ones instincts but learning to discriminate dharma and adharma. For most such people, simply praying to God earnestly for guidance and leading a dharmic life will open the way in future. Until you have a supernatural encounter in your life due to your past meritorious deeds, one cannot know what is beneficial for ones own progress- the ways of fate are mysterious.

atanu
23 October 2006, 12:22 PM
Ones prArabdha karma dictates what one can follow:-

If you are born with some superior kind of faith established on more than a blind faith { like having visions etc} you have very little to go in search of a path. Simply surrender to God.

If you are born with higher consciousness or remember past lives, you automatically know where you left off and know where to continue.

If you are born in the family of saints, for eg the son or grandon of a true Yogi, you are blessed and have the route and doubts cleared easily.

If fate brings you onto a direct encounter with God or a true sage, then again, simply surrender to this agent.

In the absence of any of the above, human beings are left in a dark alley, and will tread on a path that matches their guNa or vAsanAs. In such a case, it is better to act on ones instincts but learning to discriminate dharma and adharma. For most such people, simply praying to God earnestly for guidance and leading a dharmic life will open the way in future. Until you have a supernatural encounter in your life due to your past meritorious deeds, one cannot know what is beneficial for ones own progress- the ways of fate are mysterious.


Yes, true. But we are concerned here about the paths proposed by Vashista and all of them are good simultaneously or individually. Actually, many people may not have a chance to come in contact with such scripture in life time. Any path followed dilligently brings in the good of other paths also -- that is what the sage promises.

Moreover, I take this opportunity to indicate certain things. Gunas and Vasanas are there but there is Viveka also. Viveka leads us always to correct direction, sometimes inflicting pain.

Self control, contentment, enquiry etc., are really not different things.

Contentment is always out of bhakti (opposite of bibhakti). Bibhakti is a sense of division. Bhakti is truly oneness. Harmonious Yoga. If one is born contented then he is a rishi. When there is discontentment then only there is need to enquire why the discontentment?


Though traditionally satsang is considered association of true sages. But the Sat is the Self. So following Lord Krishna's directive: Abide in me. Always think of me, leads one to true satsang. Brahmacharya is also same. One who can abide in Self (or one one's ishta devata) without break, what is sin for him?


But all these seem to be very far away. So, conscious control of mind is important. But for some even that is not possible. It requires will power and discipline. For them pure and sweet surrender is sufficient. Total surrender will automatically make one contented.

But again this is not so easy. True surrender is like state of deep sleep with consciousness intact.


So, it boils down to finding the Turiya which is always there hidden.


Om Namah Shivayya

Arjuna
08 October 2007, 05:00 AM
Physical illness certainly may make some yoga methods impossible, but meditation is a purely mental process; and for the practice of meditation and jnana yoga, the only necessity is an intelligently controlled mind.
And even if one is bedridden for life, the shava asana is quite appropriate for meditation!

Totally agree. Although it is obviously preferable to be phisically healthy, Self-realisation is not dependant upon body health and abilities, while it is for sure dependant upon buddhi.

yajvan
08 October 2007, 12:40 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Totally agree. Although it is obviously preferable to be phisically healthy, Self-realisation is not dependant upon body health and abilities, while it is for sure dependant upon buddhi.

Arjuna, (et.al)
What are your thoughts then of one that is ill and cannot practice ones sadhana due to their physical discomfort?

And that of meditation is a mental process, yes true. The mind is tightly coupled to the body. Illness in the mind affects the body and vice versa.

Its my opinion that if the body is not fit for sadhana then the mind will have difficultly with is meditations. If we look to the Upanishads we see the invocation for a healthy body. Lets look at first line and last lines of the Chandogya Upanishad 1.1.1 and 8.15.1, as an expample:

Om. May my limbs, speech, prana, eyes, ears and my strength all and their sense organ become full-grown and well -functioning.

Many may view this as a pleasentry, an amenable opening to a Kanda, yet the notion is a healthy body and mind compliments the spiritual pursuit of the sadhaka.

One could say not every Upanishad starts with this salutation. That is correct. There is well-wishing for the guru-sisya, or for the praise to the various devatata to be good to the teacher-student, and for their protection (Taittiriya Upanishad 1.1.1) Most often there santi mantra offered, and we also find the famous purnamadah purnamidam offered e.g. Isavasya Upanishad.

Yet it has been my experience that when physical illness is at hand ( for me and others I associate with), meditation is strained at best and my sadhana is impacted.

If you choose, I would like to hear of your experiences. Perhaps you differ.

pranams,

Arjuna
08 October 2007, 04:00 PM
To Yajvan:

Of course having healthy body is helpful for any sAdhana. Noone denies that i hope :).
The point is that inner practices (such as japa, manana and dhyAna for example) can be done with sick or even paralyzed body, since they aren't dependant on it. In Vedantic and Tantric (non-Kaula) systems highest realisation is achieved by purely mental methods, jnAna-yoga. And there is no reason to say that phisically sick person is incapable of sajjnAna. On the contrary, we know plenty of examples of jnAnins who were bodily sick, both in Hindu myths and actual history.

yajvan
08 October 2007, 05:11 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

quote=Arjuna;16812]To Yajvan:

Of course having healthy body is helpful for any sAdhana. None denies that i hope :).
The point is that inner practices (such as japa, manana and dhyAna for example) can be done with sick or even paralyzed body, since they aren't dependant on it. In Vedantic and Tantric (non-Kaula) systems highest realisation is achieved by purely mental methods, jnAna-yoga. And there is no reason to say that phisically sick person is incapable of sajjnAna. On the contrary, we know plenty of examples of jnAnins who were bodily sick, both in Hindu myths and actual history.


Namaste Arjuna,
Points well made. Yet I feel perhaps you have missed my point and that is okay too.
We both agree health is the preferred state, of that we agree. I also concur that mental techniques can be done in a ill state. Yet it is the fruit of ones actions, the results of ones sadhana.

In my experience and those that I associate with, Illness brings less clarity of mind, and my experience of transcending is curtailed i.e. sluggishness at best and loss of focus.

Does it stop me from sitting upright and proceeding accordingly. Nope, it can be done. Yet the results and experience thereof is impacted due to the ill state of the body affecting the mind. I hope we agree on this body-mind connection.

And note I am not implying or saying "that physically sick person is incapable of sajjnAna" . My post comes from my experience and that of others. Incapable is not the issue... it is the results I am speaking of.

And in terms of intensity of illness e.g. a paralyzed body. This I believe we can look at in two ways:
1. A standing condition of the physiology. I have a colleague that is paralyzed, and does his sadhana daily. Yet when he is ill ( that of the flu, colds, etc) He mentions he is 'fuzzy' and that his meditations are less then desirable, yet marches on. As ones sadhana assists in bringing health.

2. Illnesses and non-standard trauma that causes sadhana issues.
So here is the point were we could diverged in thinking... you mention 'highest realisation is achieved by purely mental methods'.

Purely mental is still dependent on the physical condition of the sadhu.
Is not the nervous system part of ones mental composition? And parts of the brain ( the hypothalamus, sympathetic and parasympathetic systems, etc.). If those parts were in need of repair or damaged then this would affect ones sadhana, of this there is no doubt.

Let me give some examples...

That of memory. One forgets from day to day. Ones sadhana is impacted due to this gross malfunctioning of the memory. How can one move forward without this?

Additional clinical conditions
Stroke victims
Loss of parts of brain functioning, memory, motor skills
Stressful environments
A stressful situation occurs, the body reacts with an outpouring of hormones (adrenaline, norepinephrine, and cortisol) - How does one settle down for sadhana? I can be done, yet the physiology influences the psychology.
Illness, anger-producing situations-
Has markedly damaging effects on the body and the brain. Who says? Stanford University, have investigated stress and health and report that a prolonged flood of stress hormones can actually cause shrinking in certain brain areas, particularly in the hippocampus.A major role of the hippocampus is in memory. It is not unusual for persons with prolonged stress to report forgetfulness and difficulty learning.
Ttraumatic brain injury
Physical force injury to the head can cause nerve cells in the brain to stretch, tear, and pull apart, making them unable to relay messages from one part of the brain to another.
Mild traumatic brain injury
The brain, thinking becomes slow, memory becomes unreliable, and concentration becomes haphazard. The roadblocks of damaged and disconnected neurons mar the processing of electro-chemical messages within the brain. Thinking is subject to errors caused by unfamiliar neural detours. Judgment and decision-making become faulty.
Brain injury causes structural and functional changes. So , when one may get an injury or illness that affects or attacks the brain, then the following areas are at risk:

- Integration of thought and emotion
- Memory & Intellect
- Self Monitoring and self referral
- Judgement, reasoning and abstract thinking
- Initiation i.e. the ability for self startThese areas are in fact conditional for ones sadhana to move forward and progress... So my POV is formed by my personal experience, others that suggest the same, and some science that I have reviewed. If we differ , I respect your position as such and we can still talk of complexity of condition, the type sadhu mental practice that is completely independent of the above, etc. and it will still bear a fruitful conversation.


thank you for the post...
pranams,




Sources:
http://www.brainsource.com/brain%20injury.htm (http://www.brainsource.com/brain%20injury.htm)
http://www.brainsource.com/stress_&_health.htm
http://www.memorybankinc.com/cvhis/brain_map.htm

SHIVAJI
09 October 2007, 12:34 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste Atanu Banerjee,
Yes, I find this too, that enquiry is very delightful to pursue...
they say knowledge is the greatest purifier.

Well said .


Truth is High, yet Higher is Truthful Living.

--- Guru Nanak

sm78
09 October 2007, 02:05 AM
I think Yajvan Ji has presented a complete case on the importance of physical well-being.

All sages and teachers have stressed the need for a perfectly healthy body as "body is the 1st means to liberation". The whole human birth revolves around this body.

There have been cases where ill persons have been able to carry on a portion of the sadhna (as yajvan says the so called "mental" sadhana cannot be carried on properly with an ill body). However these are exceptions and not ideals.

sm78
09 October 2007, 08:35 AM
In Vedantic and Tantric (non-Kaula) systems highest realisation is achieved by purely mental methods, jnAna-yoga.

Ah!, I see that after a year you are saying that there could be Tantric systems which are non-Kaula (and hence non-5M). ;)

Arjuna
09 October 2007, 03:56 PM
Ah!, I see that after a year you are saying that there could be Tantric systems which are non-Kaula (and hence non-5M). ;)

Here i used this term in specific meaning it has in KSh context.
And Ur assumption is incorrect; Tantric systems do have 5 or 3 M (mIna and mudrA are later additions) but their ultimate method is shAmbhavopAya which leads to "recognition" (pratyabhijnA); while Kaula system goes further to jagadAnanda which is solely reached via Kula-yAga or kAmakalA.

Arjuna
09 October 2007, 03:58 PM
All sages and teachers have stressed the need for a perfectly healthy body

Again, this is clearly not the case. Though body is in fact important, never it is stressed that PERFECT body is required for spiritual sadhana.

Atman is not body, remember Upanishads ;).

yudhamanyu
10 October 2007, 12:23 AM
Again, this is clearly not the case. Though body is in fact important, never it is stressed that PERFECT body is required for spiritual sadhana.

Atman is not body, remember Upanishads ;).

A good healthy and strong body is indeed important for sadhana.

There is a verse in the upanishads ...

"The atman is not for the weak ." --- upanishads


Swami Vivekananda, Ramakrishna have also emphasized physical fitness for fast spiritual growth.

" A healthy mind in a healthy body, " as the european proverb goes.

Thus it is only natural that only in a healthy body, can the mind be tamed and controlled with success.

atanu
10 October 2007, 07:22 AM
A good healthy and strong body is indeed important for sadhana.

There is a verse in the upanishads ...

"The atman is not for the weak ." --- upanishads


Swami Vivekananda, Ramakrishna have also emphasized physical fitness for fast spiritual growth.

" A healthy mind in a healthy body, " as the european proverb goes.

Thus it is only natural that only in a healthy body, can the mind be tamed and controlled with success.


Namaskar yudhamanyu,

"The atman is not for the weak ." --- upanishads

Does the above mean only 'weak of body'?

yudhamanyu
10 October 2007, 12:02 PM
Namaskar yudhamanyu,

"The atman is not for the weak ." --- upanishads

Does the above mean only 'weak of body'?


Both a strong body and a strong mind is emphasized here.

atanu
10 October 2007, 12:56 PM
Both a strong body and a strong mind is emphasized here.

Namaste,Yes. Strong mind means a concentrated mind of stable intent with strong will to stay the course. Though an healthy body, definitely adds to the advantage of steady will.Om

yudhamanyu
11 October 2007, 12:20 AM
Namaste,Yes. Strong mind means a concentrated mind of stable intent with strong will to stay the course. Though an healthy body, definitely adds to the advantage of steady will.Om


A healthy mind exists in a healthy body.

The upanishads themselves teach that a healthy body is required for effective mental and spiritual pursuits.



LatestChess:- Do you think daily physical exercise can help a chess player to increase brain's ability to concentrate, remember, focus, visualize, and plan ahead? Could you tell our readers about your views on importance of physical fitness with respect to chess.

Viswanathan Anand:- In chess a small mistake can cost you the game. If you are tired then you make errors in calculations. I go to the gym everyday and it helps me concentrate longer. Especially when you play a tough tournament you need to conserve energy for the last rounds.

( Vishwanathan Anand is the 2000 world chess champion and the current 2007 world champion as well. )

sm78
11 October 2007, 12:37 AM
Here i used this term in specific meaning it has in KSh context.
And Ur assumption is incorrect; Tantric systems do have 5 or 3 M (mIna and mudrA are later additions) but their ultimate method is shAmbhavopAya which leads to "recognition" (pratyabhijnA); while Kaula system goes further to jagadAnanda which is solely reached via Kula-yAga or kAmakalA.

Namaste Arjuna,

What is the philosophical significance of LokAnanda/jagadAnanda, when death is certain and so mahApralaya ... ??

____________________________________________________________



As per tantric systems, there are Daksha, Vama, Kaula and Samaya ... later 2 transcends the first 2. But I know, there is a lot of controversy regarding the last...though I now know practitioners exists of the same, and the path is not a myth.

atanu
11 October 2007, 01:13 AM
A healthy mind exists in a healthy body.
----
Viswanathan Anand:- In chess a small mistake can cost you the game. If you are tired then you make errors in calculations. I go to the gym everyday and it helps me concentrate longer. Especially when you play a tough tournament you need to conserve energy for the last rounds.

( Vishwanathan Anand is the 2000 world chess champion and the current 2007 world champion as well. )

Namaste,

You seem to disregard that from Atma is the mind and from mind is the body.

"When you are tired" again may mean tiredness of mind and body. The wrestlers and the world champion body builders should be the best qualified, it seems, as per you?

Om

yajvan
11 October 2007, 09:28 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Again, this is clearly not the case. Though body is in fact important, never it is stressed that PERFECT body is required for spiritual sadhana.




In fairness to Arjuna, his point is well made... the body does not have to be perfect for sadhana. Yet a healthy body is very desirable and needed for ones spiritual pursuits.

Yet I think Arjuna is also appreciating that the mind alone, completely isolated from the body, does not happen. There is this symbiotic relationship between the two. The wise say, in the end , there is no difference, it is one whole.


pranams,

yudhamanyu
11 October 2007, 12:02 PM
Namaste,

You seem to disregard that from Atma is the mind and from mind is the body.


Dear pal ata . What i said was with regard to the upanishadic verse , "The atman is not for the weak ."

Only those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the Atman .

Is this so hard to understand. Perhaps u should do some martial arts or bodybuilding to understand these subtle concepts .

As I said before , "A healthy mind in a healthy body. "






"When you are tired" again may mean tiredness of mind and body. The wrestlers and the world champion body builders should be the best qualified, it seems, as per you?

Om

Best qualified for what !!!!!!!!!!

For the realisation of the atman .!!

In that case, yes !!!

Those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the atman faster, than those who are weaker.

Swami Vivekananda, Shirdi Sai Baba , Krishna were wrestlers in their youth.

Swami Vivekananda gave a lot of importance to bodybuilding , as he stated that those with a strong body can control the mind easier and faster than those with weak bodies.

Vivekananda himself was a bodybuilder, a champion athlete and wrestler and had studied martial arts as well.

Rama was known for his superb physical fitness.

Swami Sivananda was an expert in martial arts.

Buddha was a martial artist too , and was known for his prowess in archery.

He himself taught that good health is needed for spiritual progress.

Bodhidharma, the Indian buddhist enlightened master and founder of Zen Buddhism, himself taught Kung Fu to the buddhist monks in the Shaolin temple , when he noticed their lethargy and lack of vigour and toughness, which was important for spiritual progress.

RAmana Maharshi too was noted for his physical fitness and strength in his youth.

Meher Baba was a good sportsman in his youth.

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, was into bodybuilding in his teenage years, and used to swim and run a lot , in order to build up his body.

Swami Dayananda Saraswati too was noted for his exceptional physical strength and physical fitness.

Nuno Matos
11 October 2007, 12:23 PM
Namaste yudhamanyu

" Those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the atman faster, than those who are weaker."

How fast?:D

" Only those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the Atman"

This one looks like old Nazi propaganda:eek:.I wonder what does the old slim sadhu ( Shiva ) as to say about all of that.
Dear Yudhamanyu have you ever read a book called Surveillance and Punishment from a famous western author called Michel Faulcout. It is about the body its representations and uses trough history and its relation to the control apparatus.
As far as i know one of the premises of Hinduism is that Mocksha is possible to any human being. And that patience is the mark of the saint.

Om Namah shivaya!

Kaos
11 October 2007, 12:28 PM
Interesting topic.
Allow me to jump in and ask questions and perhaps share my personal thoughts. You decide.


"A healthy mind and a healthy body" is an oft quoted expression.

But really, who's mind are we talking about? Who's body?

Does the body belong to the mind? Who's mind? Where is this "mind" found?

If I am more than this aggregation of flesh and bones, am "i" the "mind"?

If the mind and body act symbiotically, and there is no difference between mind and body, then the body should not decay after death. And yet, one wonders what happens to mind?

Where does/did mind go after the decay of the physical body?

yudhamanyu
11 October 2007, 12:41 PM
Namaste yudhamanyu

" Those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the atman faster, than those who are weaker."

How fast?:D



Faster than those who are weak in terms of health.

I have compassion for the weak, but they should also take it within their stride to strengthen themselves , as it is their duty to do so.

It is the strong who excels , either in the material field or spiritual field.








" Only those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the Atman"

This one looks like old Nazi propaganda:eek:.I wonder what does the old slim sadhu ( Shiva ) as to say about all of that.



I know very well about that idiot Hitler and his pathetic stooges.

The goal of nazism was not at all spiritual development or realisation of the atman.

It was some kind of an extollation of their so -called race and conquest of others , and not themselves.

What a bunch of idiots. This is what happens when u have no wisdom along with knowledge.



Also one more thing, buddy.

Shiva is not a slim old sadhu. He is the Lord of destruction, and wields the trident.

He himself has been known for his martial prowess as well, and not only for his meditation.

He is also known as nataraja, and he is known for his vigorous dances called the shiva tandavam.



Dear Yudhamanyu have you ever read a book called Surveillance and Punishment from a famous western author called Michel Faulcout. It is about the body its representations and uses trough history and its relation to the control apparatus.



No , I have not.




As far as i know one of the premises of Hinduism is that Mocksha is possible to any human being. And that patience is the mark of the saint.

Om Namah shivaya!

Moksha is possible for all, but much more easier for those who are physically and mentally strong.

And patience is also a virtue of the strong.

The weak are usually impatient and gets demoralised easily.

yudhamanyu
11 October 2007, 12:51 PM
Interesting topic.
Allow me to jump in and ask questions and perhaps share my personal thoughts. You decide.



"A healthy mind and a healthy body" is an oft quoted expression.


But really, who's mind are we talking about? Who's body?


Ones own mind, and ones own body.




Does the body belong to the mind? Who's mind? Where is this "mind" found?


The mind and body are temporal , and indeed it is only the Self that is permanent.

But to understand this subtle fact, requires a certain amount of spiritual training and practice and work, and a strong mind and body are the instruments for it.






Where does/did mind go after the decay of the physical body?

The mind is a aggregate of the conscious mind and subconscious and is nothing but a mass of thought waves.

From my understanding , through the reincarnation of the soul in new bodies after death, the subconscious mind too follows and enters the new body.

Get ready for a new thread of mine in this topic called, " REMEMBERING YOUR PAST LIVES" in the meditation section or forum ,which will deal more with this.;)

Nuno Matos
11 October 2007, 12:58 PM
Namaste yudhamanyu


"Shiva is not a slim old Sadhu. He is the Lord of Destruction, and wields the trident"

Check out the old representations of Shiva.

"He himself has been known for his martial prowess as well, and not only for his meditation"

"He is also known as Nataraja, and he is known for his vigorous dances called the Shiva Tandavam."

And for other things as well

A question. Are you on a hurry?

Om namah Shivaya!!

yudhamanyu
11 October 2007, 01:04 PM
Namaste yudhamanyu


"Shiva is not a slim old Sadhu. He is the Lord of Destruction, and wields the trident"

Check out the old representations of Shiva.


Dude , I am a worshipper of Shiva and gone through a lot of religious literature on him . And I have seen many ancient statues and idols and pictures of his.

No need to debate me on this point.








And for other things as well

A question. Are you on a hurry?

Om namah Shivaya!!


Yeah . C u tommorow.

satay
11 October 2007, 02:22 PM
Dear pal ata . What i said was with regard to the upanishadic verse , "The atman is not for the weak ."

Only those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the Atman .


What about those who are physically disabled and mentally retarded?
What should they do? How should they realise the truth?



Is this so hard to understand. Perhaps u should do some martial arts or bodybuilding to understand these subtle concepts .




Again what about those who have no legs and hands, how would you have them learn martial arts and body building so that they understand the subtle concepts?



As I said before , "A healthy mind in a healthy body. "


This quote is a marketing propaganda of health companies.

The correct mantra to realize the atma should be "no mind no body" Don't you think?

yajvan
11 October 2007, 08:16 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,

Regarding weakness…

This notion in the upanishads is not focusing on how much one can lift up in weights, yet the Upanishads offer an invocation for health.

Om. May my limbs, speech, prana, eyes, ears and my strength all and their sense organ become full-grown and well -functioning.
The Chandogya Upanishad starts and finishes with this valli. [1.1.1 and 8.15.1]


If we look to Chapt 6 of the Bhagavad gita, Krsna advises,
Yoga, indeed, is not for him who eats too much nor for him who does not eat at all O Arjuna.
It is not for hiim who is too much given to sleep nor yet for him who is too much given to sleep
nor yet for him who who keeps awake (BG 6.16)

For him who is moderate in for and recreation, moderate of effort
In atctions, moderate in sleep and waking, for him is the Yoga which
destroys much sorrow. (BG6.17)


This weakness referred to is not about 100 kilos being lifted; IMHO it is about the notion of dhirah. This is the notion of fixity of the mind in balance. That is, a steady mind.

dhirah - lets first look at its root meaning: Dhirah comes from dhr or to hold. Note too that dhi is also there, and this is 'luminous' and many apply to dhi shakti or light of intelligence. Also Dhrti is part of this word family. From dhr to hold, yet also suggests steadfast and constant. You can then see weakness in mind is an imbalance, and ones progress can be inhibited.

So we can now have a feel for this notion of steadfast, holding, and luminous , as it relates to the intellect. A very pregnant word.

Is heath important? Absolutely. Yet as we get to finer levels of understanding, there are other things that one must consider.


pranams,

yudhamanyu
12 October 2007, 12:59 AM
Is heath important? Absolutely.

pranams,

Good post, Yajvan.


Health is indeed important as is shown by the teachings of Hinduism and the personal examples of the Hindu masters.

Only with a strong body, can one have a strong mind, and then go for the grappling of the mind and its control and its conquest.

A weak person , will not have the necessary strength required , physically and mentally, for the pursuit of spiritual progress and development.

Bodhidharma , the Indian enlightened Buddhist master and founder of Zen buddhism and teacher of Kung Fu, himself was sickly as a child.

It was his subsequent focus on martial arts and yoga that got rid of his infirmities , and made him a potent figure later on in Buddhism as a great enlightened master, revered by the whole world , as the founder of Zen.




Yet as we get to finer levels of understanding, there are other things that one must consider.

Yes, when we have developed a strong body , and then subsequently a strong mind, and has reached a certain level of spiritual growth and character, we can then easily get down to finer and more subtle levels of understanding .

However first, the foundation of a good , strong mind and body should be created first, and then only will the rest come steadily and easily.

As a wise African proverb states ....

"Only a sound foundation can support a good superstructure."

atanu
12 October 2007, 01:31 AM
Dear pal ata . What i said was with regard to the upanishadic verse , "The atman is not for the weak ."


Dear pal,

Thanks for considering me a pal, though I do not know what is ata? "A healthy mind exists in a healthy body", is what you said.

You should know that the body exists in mind, which exists in Pragnya, which is prakriti of Self (atman), which is Brahman.

OM

atanu
12 October 2007, 02:13 AM
Good post, Yajvan.
-----As a wise African proverb states ....
"Only a sound foundation can support a good superstructure."
Hi pal,

Which is the superstructure and which is the foundation? What is that tree whose roots are in heavens and branches here?

Om

yudhamanyu
12 October 2007, 10:22 AM
Dear pal,

Thanks for considering me a pal, though I do not know what is ata? "A healthy mind exists in a healthy body", is what you said.

Yes that is what I have said.


You should know that the body exists in mind, which exists in Pragnya, which is prakriti of Self (atman), which is Brahman.

OM

Brahman is there in everyone,and all matter, including mind and body are indeed its manifestations.

But how many people have you seen to be like the Rishis or Krishna or Buddha, even though they too possess bodies and minds like Krishna and the rishis and Buddha and the other enlightened masters.

From this you have to understand , atanu dude, that for attaining enlightenment one must have spiritual development and perfection, which is possible only in the foundation of a strong mind and body.

Material progress too depends on a strong mind and body , not at all in weak and malnourished bodies or demoralised , weak minds.

yudhamanyu
12 October 2007, 10:27 AM
Hi pal,

Which is the superstructure and which is the foundation? What is that tree whose roots are in heavens and branches here?

Om

For a human being to attain nirvana , which according to the Dharmic scriptures is the ultimate goal of life, one must first have a strong body and mind.

A strong body and strong mind is the foundation.

As I explained before , a strong mind and body is also vital for material progress and perfection as well.

The goals of life according to the hindu scriptures are artha ( wealth ) , kama ( enjoyment of life ) , dharma ( righteousness ) and moksha ( attainment of enlightenment which is charecterised by infinite knowledge, bliss and joy. )

The attainment of these goals can be seen as the superstructure .

And the foundation and base for attaining all these goals by a human being are indeed a strong mind and a strong body.

atanu
12 October 2007, 11:42 AM
But how many people have you seen to be like the Rishis or Krishna or Buddha, even though they too possess bodies and minds like Krishna and the rishis and Buddha and the other enlightened masters.


Namaste,

The point here referred to your statement "mind is in body".

The first requirement is subechha -- the good intent of the will and all else follows.

And dear pal, I have not seen Krishna or Buddha, so I cannot compare.

Om

yudhamanyu
12 October 2007, 11:47 AM
Namaste,

The point here referred to your statement "mind is in body".


Both mind and body are everchanging and are nothing but matter.





The first requirement is subechha -- the good intent of the will and all else follows.

Good intent of the will , is nothing but strength of mind.



And dear pal, I have not seen Krishna or Buddha, so I cannot compare.

Om

I have seen enlightened masters and have gone through their teachings as well.

So yeah, I believe I have the data to make such a comparison and judgement.

atanu
12 October 2007, 01:11 PM
Both mind and body are everchanging and are nothing but matter.


Try to grasp your mind and find out.



Good intent of the will , is nothing but strength of mind.


Good. Sufficient.

Om

satay
12 October 2007, 03:29 PM
However first, the foundation of a good , strong mind and body should be created first, and then only will the rest come steadily and easily.


What about those who are physically disabled and mentally retarded?
What should they do? How should they realise the truth?

atanu
12 October 2007, 09:47 PM
What about those who are physically disabled and mentally retarded?
What should they do? How should they realise the truth?
Namaste Satay,Of course with Subechha. With auspicious wish. Subechha alone initiates the transformation and brings in God's grace. If God wishes so, then even an invalid or a mad can attain Him. There is a praise to Vishnu about this.It is just puerile to say that a good physical body is the only foundation. It is absurd, when the body itself is a construct, how is it a foundation? Foundation for what?Those who are unclear about the subtle Atman and how it is irresistible, unbeatable and the foundation will only keep on arguing with false bravado that a physical body is the foundation.RegardsOm

yudhamanyu
13 October 2007, 03:30 AM
Try to grasp your mind and find out.



" Grasp your mind " in what sense.


Dude ata . What I meant was that the mind , which is but a mass of thought waves, are nothing but energy ( of which matter is a manifestation of ) and since all thoughts have a beginning and end, the mind too is but a temporary phenomenon and not at all permanent.


Use your discrimination ,aided by strength of mind, and seek the real from the unreal, the permanent from the temporary.




Good. Sufficient.

Om

Good for you.

yudhamanyu
13 October 2007, 03:38 AM
What about those who are physically disabled and mentally retarded?
What should they do? How should they realise the truth?

I answered this in another post with respect to you.

Go through that.


Physical handicaps does not mean that the body can be made healthy and strong.

I know of physically handicapped people who exercise their bodies and have a good diet and enjoy their lives in spite of their handicaps.

In fact, physically handicapped people are found to be more physically and mentally stronger, as they have to overcompensate for their handicaps.

I know because I have a physically handicapped friend, who has no legs, and who is a kind of hero to us through his iron will and successful triumph over his handicap and is a successful man in life.

As for the mentally handicapped people, one must determine the degree of their mental calibre, and based on that teach him accordingly the important concepts of hinduism and spirituality and create an environment for him that will aid him in his spiritual growth.

yajvan
13 October 2007, 07:37 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~~

I answered this in another post with respect to you.

As for the mentally handicapped people, one must determine the degree of their mental calibre, and based on that teach him accordingly the important concepts of hinduism and spirituality and create an environment for him that will aid him in his spiritual growth.

Namaste,

Please take caution in what I say here, as it may seem insensitive. For some, this life cycle may be a respite, a time that past actions accumulate. Those past actions come to fruition and are no longer dormant. The initial result of the body, its current condition, the family one is born to, is the result of the past. Who knows the depth and breath of ones past actions that leads to this current condition, its unfathomable says Krsna.

As in the Mahabharata, King Santanu watched as each of his sons we thrown in the river by Sri Ganga. His was heart broken. How can his wife take his sons and throw them to their demise into the river.

Little did the king know these children were the 8 vasus. Sri Ganga, the kings wife, was in fact fulfilling the agreement made to these vasus before they decended to earth... to spend the least amount of time on earth in a human form. So, as they were born and within the first year they were given to the river.

Yet, when the king married Sri Ganga the stipulation was, you cannot not question my actions, or me, otherwise we will not be wed. And if you do, I will leave you. He agreed.

Yet watching this action of deporting his children to death overcame him. He then gave Sri Ganga his mind and wrath. She then told the King the story of her actions. Only one child remained and that was Dyu vasu. He was Devavrata , or Bishma.

So , this explaination and the kings wrath to Sri Ganga broke the agreement they had ' don't ask , don't tell', and Sri Ganga then left him, taking Dyu with her for the time being. The king meets Dyu later in the story.

That said, we do not know how things all play out. It is our compassion that we want all people to be of perfect health, abundance, and the like. Yet we are not privy to their past which brought them to this present condition.

What are the lessons I have learned from this:

Make the best of the time we have while in this body and in this condition.
We are blessed to know and comprehend that our current actions will yield future results - act wisely.
Have compassion for others that may have a different lot in life. Help when you can, understand their lot in life the best you can.There never was a time when I was not , nor you, nor these rulers among men, nor will there ever be a time when we all cease to be... Bhagavad gita , Chapt 2

pranams,

SHIVAJI
13 October 2007, 07:58 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~~


Namaste,

Please take caution in what I say here, as it may seem insensitive. For some, this life cycle may be a respite, a time that past actions accumulate. Those past actions come to fruition and are no longer dormant. The initial result of the body, its current condition, the family one is born to, is the result of the past. Who knows the depth and breath of ones past actions that leads to this current condition, its unfathomable says Krsna.

As in the Mahabharata, King Santanu watched as each of his sons we thrown in the river by Sri Ganga. He was heart broken. How can his wife take his sons and throw them to their demise into the river.

Little did the king know these children were the 8 vasus. Sri Ganga, the kings wife, was in fact fulfilling the agreement made to these vasus before they decnded to earth... to spend the least amount of time on earth in a human form. So, as they were born and within the first year they were given to the river.

Yet, when the king married Sri Ganga the stipulation was, you cannot not question my actions, or me, otherwise we will not be wed. And if you do, I will leave you. He agreed.

Yet watching this action of deporting his children to death overcame him. He then gave Sri Ganga his mind and wrath. She then told the King the story of her actions. Only one child remained and that was Dyu vasu. He was Devavrata , or Bishma.

So , this explaination and the kings wrath to Sri Ganga broke the agreement they had ' don't ask , don't tell', and Sri Ganga then left him, taking Dyu with her for the time being. The king meets Dyu later in the story.

That said, we do not know how things all play out. It is our compassion that we want all people to be of perfect health, abundance, and the like. Yet we are not privy to their past which brought them to this present condition.

What are the lessons I have learned from this:

Make the best of the time we have while in this body and in this condition.
We are blessed to know and comprehend that our current actions will yield future results - act wisely.
Have compassion for others that may have a different lot in life. Help when you can, understand their lot in life the best you can.There never was a time when I was not , nor you, nor these rulers among men, nor will there ever be a time when we all cease to be... Bhagavad gita , Chapt 2

pranams,

Namaste yajvan,

Well said . We can attribute this phenomenon to karma or 'cause and effect.'

It may sound cruel, but it is the fact.

However, we on the other hand should do our karma or dharma of encouraging and helping these mentally handicapped people become as efficient , productive , strong and pure people as possible and help them to stand on their own feet and forge their path ahead with their own resources.

This is our duty and dharma.

atanu
13 October 2007, 08:30 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~
---Yet I think Arjuna is also appreciating that the mind alone, completely isolated from the body, does not happen. There is this symbiotic relationship between the two. The wise say, in the end , there is no difference, it is one whole.

pranams,

Namaskar Yajvan,

Cannot understand --"mind alone completely isolated from the body does not happen"

Where the mind goes when the body is dropped?

Om

atanu
13 October 2007, 08:56 AM
" Grasp your mind " in what sense.
Dude ata . What I meant was that the mind , which is but a mass of thought waves, are nothing but energy ( of which matter is a manifestation of ) and since all thoughts have a beginning and end, the mind too is but a temporary phenomenon and not at all permanent.

Use your discrimination ,aided by strength of mind, and seek the real from the unreal, the permanent from the temporary.

Good for you.

yudhamanyu,

Is it bad for you then?

I am not ata. I am reminding you.



Both mind and body are everchanging and are nothing but matter.

The above is what you said. Now you say: What I meant was that the mind , which is but a mass of thought waves, are nothing but energy.

First you said "mind is in body". Then later changed the stance. You said many sages were wrestlers (as if Ramakrishna was one). Then you changed your stance to strong mind and body.

"Y" stands for obfuscation.

I request you to be judicious and humble. Has the claimed peek into your past life done to you what it does to the immature?

Om

Note: What is the body? How subtle consciousness is both the mind (non-graspable) and also the body (apparently graspable). How a subtle consciousness, which has no contact point with non-subtle objects, is able to move the so-called non-subtle objects.

How a thought moves an arm? This is a question of Yoga Vashista, the subject of the thread, so I thought to repeat it here to bring back the focus.

And also to remind (the discriminative ones) as to the reality of the body.

Om

yajvan
13 October 2007, 09:21 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaskar Yajvan,

Cannot understand --"mind alone completely isolated from the body does not happen" Where the mind goes when the body is dropped?
Om


Namste atanu,
my post suggested that while alive, the mind is part of the whole.
When one drops the body - whole new conversation i.e. lagna + Sun + Moon.

Lagna is dropped and is burried, burnt, etc...
Atma (sun) + Mindstuff (moon) continue and brings along the impressions or vasanas.
whole new topic. lets hold okay?

http://www.rudraksha-ratna.com/images/mantra_images/M4.gif
Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya



pranams,

yudhamanyu
13 October 2007, 10:58 AM
yudhamanyu,

Is it bad for you then?


Not at all bub . How on earth did you arrive at that inference !!!!!!!!!!!!!





I am not ata. I am reminding you.


No need to get so sensitive over this atanu. Many others have addressed me as Y or yudha, but I never cared a thought for it.


If calling you ata is hurting your tender feelings, then I will indeed call u atanu.





The above is what you said. Now you say: What I meant was that the mind , which is but a mass of thought waves, are nothing but energy.


And what about it dude. Mind is indeed a mass of thought waves,which is nothing but energy and both energy and matter are one and the same.

Matter is just a grosser manifestation of energy,and it has been established by modern science that energy and matter are one and the same.




First you said "mind is in body". Then later changed the stance.



Mind is in body itself . Both mind and body are matter. I never changed the stance dude .



You said many sages were wrestlers (as if Ramakrishna was one). Then you changed your stance to strong mind and body.



I said that Krishna, Vivekananda and Shirdi Sai BAba were wrestlers.

Where on earth did I say that "many sages were wrestlers ." Stop putting words in my mouth , atanu dude.

As for Ramakrishna,he himself stated that good physical health is essential for fast spiritual development many times.

He himself was a healthy man in his youth and had a wiry body.





I request you to be judicious and humble.



This is indeed a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black.

I have noticed an arrogance and condescending attitude in you since the beginning and now you are lecturing me on humility. Great going , atanu.

Perhaps , it may be time for you to follow what you preach.





Note: What is the body? How subtle consciousness is both the mind (non-graspable) and also the body (apparently graspable). How a subtle consciousness, which has no contact point with non-subtle objects, is able to move the so-called non-subtle objects.


How do u interpret 'non-graspable' !!!

And how does consciousness,which is the most subtle element in this universe, becomes its grosser manifestations energy and matter ?

atanu
13 October 2007, 01:21 PM
Namaskar yudhamanyu



Not at all bub . How on earth did you arrive at that inference !!!!!!!!!!!!!


I wonder where you have picked up such good vocabulary.

You said: "Good for You", so the natural inclination was to enquire whether it was not good for you? Why do you react, pal?



No need to get so sensitive over this atanu. Many others have addressed me as Y or yudha, but I never cared a thought for it.

If calling you ata is hurting your tender feelings, then I will indeed call u atanu.


You decide about what suits you. But, there is a decent decorum in this forum. Most of us wish that it should continue. Atleast I wish it.



And what about it dude. Mind is indeed a mass of thought waves,which is nothing but energy and both energy and matter are one and the same.

Matter is just a grosser manifestation of energy,and it has been established by modern science that energy and matter are one and the same.


Someday you will say that since body is a manifest of Atman so the body is Atman. The question for us is which is primary? The Atman or energy or the matter? Vedanta teaches us that Atman alone was there.

We cannot say that the body is Atman, though we can always say that all this is Atman. Are you able to see the point?

Friend, western science did not know about the relationship between Atman, Mind and body. Do not quote those examples. For your information physics has also now learnt that the Universe began from zero mass. Do you know it? If there is no mass, there is no body as well.



Mind is in body itself . Both mind and body are matter. I never changed the stance dude .


yudhamanyu[SIZE=3]]
" A healthy mind in a healthy body, " as the european proverb goes.

A healthy mind exists in a healthy body.

Swami Vivekananda, Shirdi Sai Baba , Krishna were wrestlers in their youth.


Above are a few gems from you.

Never heard sanatana dharma teaching that mind is within the body. That is a western concept of the brain being equated with mind. Mind is conditioned consciousness. Mind is vast (Indra). Body is limited. Body is perishable. Whereas on removal of conditioning mind is pure consciousness.

Kaos has correctly indicated it as shown below.



If the mind and body act symbiotically, and there is no difference between mind and body, then the body should not decay after death.





As for Ramakrishna,he himself stated that good physical health is essential for fast spiritual development many times.


No one has said here that a healthy body was not a plus. But the body itself is a construct of a conditioned mind. We wish to remove the conditioning. There is no point in further strenghtening the conditioning. Ask Shri Shri Ravishankar Ji.




This is indeed a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black.
I have noticed an arrogance and condescending attitude in you since the beginning and now you are lecturing me on humility. Great going , atanu.
Perhaps , it may be time for you to follow what you preach.


Perhaps you are correct but why did you not tell me this thing before? Also tell me about the posts where I have stuck to a wrong statement by using brashness and vocabulary such as yours? And did I have any interaction with you earlier, that you observed my arrogance?

But if I have come off as arrogant, then I will try to mend my ways. And I will accept a wrong, when pointed out, gracefully; at least with your example before me.



How do u interpret 'non-graspable' !!!

And how does consciousness,which is the most subtle element in this universe, becomes its grosser manifestations energy and matter ?

Consciousness is not the most subtle element. It is all and it is ONE.

How it appears to become gross is a question of Rig Veda, which will be more useful than weightlifting.
-------------------------

Forget about all this. I just wanted to point out:


Contrary to what you said Mind (manas) is not limited inside the body. The mind is not the fleshy organ called brain. The mind outlasts the body, which is called perishable. Mind dissolves into Atman and devoid of conditioning it is non-different from Atman.

It was my only intention to point out some statements of yours that are contrary to my understanding of Vedanta. I have no particular relish to share thoughts with you.

Om

Kaos
13 October 2007, 02:39 PM
From my understanding , through the reincarnation of the soul in new bodies after death, the subconscious mind too follows and enters the new body.





Namaste yudhamanyu,

Sorry, but there is a fundamental problem to what you just stated.

If the soul and the subconscious mind both re-incarnate, it means both the soul and the mind are permanent.

However, how come our minds are subject to change???

Do you have the same mind now as when you were 2 yrs. old?

Eastern Mind
13 October 2007, 04:17 PM
Namaste yudhamanyu,

Sorry, but there is a fundamental problem to what you just stated.

If the soul and the subconscious mind both re-incarnate, it means both the soul and the mind are permanent.

However, how come our minds are subject to change???

Do you have the same mind now as when you were 2 yrs. old?
Kaos, Atanu, Yudamanyu: I guess I'll jump in. Actually, I find all this entertaining. I hope I don't get called any names. Well, actually, on the other hand, I hope I do. That would mean its my karma and I would be working it out. Surely in a past life, or in this one, I insulted someone. From my monistic Saiva Siddhanta point of view, the subconscious mind reforms with each new birth. It is like a computer's memory, and can be programmed just like that. All conscious mind experiences we go through in this lifetime each in turn add their little bit. The subconscious then tries to categorize all of these experiences into broader generalizations, so we can see things clearly or rather more concisely. (If you meet 6 people named Alan, and all are carpenters, the subconscious starts a nerve blob thinking all Alans are carpenters, and doesn't shift until your conscious mind meets an Alan who is a barber.) Throwing in many different points of view may send the subconscious crashing. The soul body, on the other hand is not permanent either, for it eventually merges with God, as water in water. What is carried over from life to life are what are termed seed karmas, along with the soul. (Apparently they actually look like seeds to the mystic, and are located around the petals of the sahasranama sp? chakra at the top of the head. When a soul gets to the point when they are ready, out pops a seed karma, and the soul has to work it out. (or not, in which case it will continue onto its next life.) But of course this is just one point of view. Others will undoubtedly differ. Aum Namasivaya

atanu
13 October 2007, 11:49 PM
Thank you EM, Kaos, Yudha, Yajvan.

Only a few points.

If God wishes, a stone can attain God. As Ahalya attained. The body has nothing to do wth it. Body is incidental. It is Prakriti. Atman has nothing to do with it.


Thank You Eastern Mind,

Karma will fructify. For a Shiva lover there is no grudge, there is no anger, there is no jealousy, and there is no sankalpa (desire) for anything. All happen due to play of Prakriti.


Thank You Yajvan Ji,

I think that the discussion on Atman, Body, and Mind is appropriate here, since the thread is Yoga Vasista.
And I wish to clarify that the Sun is not Atman. There are many suns in consciousness. Which is Atman?

Om Namah Shivaya

Regards to all

yudhamanyu
14 October 2007, 04:06 AM
Namaskar yudhamanyu



I wonder where you have picked up such good vocabulary.


Well, I have read a lot and have been around a lot.




You said: "Good for You", so the natural inclination was to enquire whether it was not good for you? Why do you react, pal?

Well, if I stated that it was good for you, then it would also naturally mean that it is good for me as well, isn't it !!!

Why the need for a dumb question like that !!!



You decide about what suits you. But, there is a decent decorum in this forum. Most of us wish that it should continue. Atleast I wish it.



I have been addressed as Y or Yudh in this forum and never cared a thought for it. I thought that was the decorum in this forum and I did not mind it as I was not interested in trivialities or am thin-skinned.

However since you are not so , I will call you as Atanu itself.

Also I rate intellectual honesty and integrity over civility .




Someday you will say that since body is a manifest of Atman so the body is Atman. The question for us is which is primary? The Atman or energy or the matter? Vedanta teaches us that Atman alone was there.


The Atman or consciousness is what is all pervading and the ultimate reality, and energy and matter are but its grosser manifestations.



We cannot say that the body is Atman, though we can always say that all this is Atman. Are you able to see the point?


I see the point clearly.




Friend, western science did not know about the relationship between Atman, Mind and body. Do not quote those examples.


Western psychology is just two centuries old.


They have through Einstein ,has shown that both energy and matter are but one and the same.




For your information physics has also now learnt that the Universe began from zero mass. Do you know it? If there is no mass, there is no body as well.



For your information, I have studied physics at college, and have a certain depth of knowledge in it.


The universe was nothing but the Atman or all pervading consciousness at the beginning, till probably after the Big Bang, it evolved into its grosser manifestations energy and matter.





In the beginning

There was neither existence nor non-existence,

All this world was unmanifest energy...

The One breathed, without breath, by Its own power

Nothing else was there...

--- Hymn of Creation , The Rig Veda





Above are a few gems from you.


Thank you.




Never heard sanatana dharma teaching that mind is within the body.


Well the mind is indeed within the body . It is not in the clouds or lakes or oceans. You don't need sanatana dharma to teach us that.

Only consciousness is all pervading, not the mind , which is but a mass of thought waves and samskaras.




That is a western concept of the brain being equated with mind.


There is indeed . They have not been able to tap into the subtler elements of the mind, the subconscious and the superconscious.




Mind is conditioned consciousness. Mind is vast (Indra). Body is limited. Body is perishable. Whereas on removal of conditioning mind is pure consciousness.


I would say that it is consciousness that is allpervading, not the mind, which is but a bundle of thoughts and samskaras which is the source of thought and ego.

Both mind and body are perishable.

Remove and eleminate the samskaras of the mind through yoga , and the bondage of the mind over consciousness is broken, and there is nothing but pure consciousness.


And this is why the no-mind , the state of consciousness devoid of thoughts or mind is stressed by the enlightened masters.










No one has said here that a healthy body was not a plus. But the body itself is a construct of a conditioned mind.



I gather from this that you are saying that the body is a bondage. Not at all.

It is the psychological clinging to the body or attachment that is the bondage. The body in itself is harmless.

There are enlightened masters who are in their bodies and use it as an instrument , without any attachment or bondage whatsoever.

It is the samskaras that are the cause of the clinging or attachment or bondage .







Also tell me about the posts where I have stuck to a wrong statement by using brashness and vocabulary such as yours?



And where is my wrong statement...

And where is my brashness and voca...



And did I have any interaction with you earlier, that you observed my arrogance?



Well, I did interact with you in this thread, and I did perceive a holier-than-thou attitude in you.




But if I have come off as arrogant, then I will try to mend my ways. And I will accept a wrong, when pointed out, gracefully; at least with your example before me.


Thats the spirit.




Consciousness is not the most subtle element. It is all and it is ONE.


Consciousness is the most subtle element , relatively speaking.

"It is all and it is One ," absolutely speaking.




How it appears to become gross is a question of Rig Veda, which will be more useful than weightlifting.


Weightlifting or physical fitness is indeed important in creating a strong and healthy body and mind, which are the instruments and tools one possess for attaining the truth.

The upanishads themselves state this, by the example of the sage, who tells his son to fast for a few days, and in the process the son finds that he is not able to exercise his faculties properly.




Forget about all this. I just wanted to point out:



You still cling to this.



Contrary to what you said Mind (manas) is not limited inside the body. The mind is not the fleshy organ called brain.


The mind is limited to the body, but the consciousness is not.


The mind outlasts the body, which is called perishable.

The mind is also perishable, and when the samskaras in the subconscious is exhausted through yoga, the mind is annihilated leading to pure consciousness without bondage.




It was my only intention to point out some statements of yours that are contrary to my understanding of Vedanta. I have no particular relish to share thoughts with you.

Om

Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress.

--- Mahatma Gandhi


But they should be honest, and should be embedded in Vaada , as taught by the Rishis and Krishna.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1809

Otherwise , it is just a waste of time.

yudhamanyu
14 October 2007, 04:37 AM
Namaste yudhamanyu,

Sorry, but there is a fundamental problem to what you just stated
If the soul and the subconscious mind both re-incarnate, it means both the soul and the mind are permanent. .

Dude, the soul reincarnates only because of an undissolved subconscious mind.

The soul is permanent , but not the mind.

The mind is but samskaras and vasanas , the subconscious impressions, which are the source of thoughts, desire and ego.

Eleminate the vasanas, and you will eleminate the mind, and the soul will be free of bondage , and will be released from the cycle of birth and rebirth.


However, how come our minds are subject to change????

Because , the mind is made up of thoughts, which has a beginning and an end . Hence the mind is subject to change , due to the temporary nature of thoughts.


Do you have the same mind now as when you were 2 yrs. old?

At two years, most of the vasanas are submerged in the subconscious and does not find expression in the conscious mind.

As one grows older, the vasanas start emerging, resulting in the creation of ego, personality and complexity.

Hope this answers your question.

yudhamanyu
14 October 2007, 04:51 AM
Kaos, Atanu, Yudamanyu: I guess I'll jump in. Actually, I find all this entertaining. I hope I don't get called any names. Well, actually, on the other hand, I hope I do. That would mean its my karma and I would be working it out. Surely in a past life, or in this one, I insulted someone. From my monistic Saiva Siddhanta point of view, the subconscious mind reforms with each new birth. It is like a computer's memory, and can be programmed just like that. All conscious mind experiences we go through in this lifetime each in turn add their little bit. The subconscious then tries to categorize all of these experiences into broader generalizations, so we can see things clearly or rather more concisely. (If you meet 6 people named Alan, and all are carpenters, the subconscious starts a nerve blob thinking all Alans are carpenters, and doesn't shift until your conscious mind meets an Alan who is a barber.) Throwing in many different points of view may send the subconscious crashing. The soul body, on the other hand is not permanent either, for it eventually merges with God, as water in water. What is carried over from life to life are what are termed seed karmas, along with the soul. (Apparently they actually look like seeds to the mystic, and are located around the petals of the sahasranama sp? chakra at the top of the head. When a soul gets to the point when they are ready, out pops a seed karma, and the soul has to work it out. (or not, in which case it will continue onto its next life.) But of course this is just one point of view. Others will undoubtedly differ. Aum Namasivaya

Good post , eastie ( just helping u finish off your bad karma :) ;) )

Kaos
14 October 2007, 07:01 AM
The soul is permanent , but not the mind.





Namaste yudhamanyu and all,

If the soul is permanent, why would it need mind which is impermanent?

yudhamanyu
14 October 2007, 07:09 AM
Namaste yudhamanyu and all,

If the soul is permanent, why would it need mind which is impermanent?

And has anyone stated that it needs a mind!!!

It is the mind or its source , the samskaras and vasanas , that make the soul cling to matter and bondage.

Eleminate the vasanas through yoga , and the mind is annihilated consequently and one perceives everything as pure consciousness , the way it really is.

It is the vasana created ego , that distorts the perception of reality.

Aham Brahmasmi ---- I am He.

Tatvamasi ---- Thou art That.

yajvan
14 October 2007, 09:02 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Thank you EM, Kaos, Yudha, Yajvan.

Only a few points.

Thank You Yajvan Ji,

I think that the discussion on Atman, Body, and Mind is appropriate here, since the thread is Yoga Vasista.
And I wish to clarify that the Sun is not Atman. There are many suns in consciousness. Which is Atman? Om Namah Shivaya
Regards to all

Namte Atanu,
thank you for your post... well balanced. You are correct, Sun is not atman, Sun is Atmakaraka, the indicator of such. When we talk of these finer things, I look to a knowledge that can assist in the concepts and thinking. Just as moon is not mind, but the karaka of such.

Please note, I am not calling out the physical sun, but going one click deeper to the devata that the sun represents - this is the notion. Same with Moon, and all the graha.

What is the foundation for this thinking, who says there are any devata there? Krnsa says, gam avisya ca bhutani dharayamy aham ojasa -I enter into each planet, and by My energy they stay in orbit. ( BG 15.13); He also says , adityanam aham vishnur jyotisam ravir amsuman - Of the adityas I am Visnu, of the lights I am ravi, the Sun (BG 10.21). He also states he is the moon, chandra.

This is the basis of my posting the import of Sun-Moon and lagna.
These are spiritual concepts, yet are the core of ones mind-body for each incarnation.

When these energies/karaka influence and manifest, they act on us. Hence my use of this traditional approach that perhaps I am used to is to the dis-advantage/mis-understanding of others. For future posts I will add the spiritual relevance to them.

Thank you again , as you helped me for future posts.


http://www.rudraksha-ratna.com/images/mantra_images/M4.gif
Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya


pranams,

atanu
14 October 2007, 12:21 PM
Namaste,



Well, I have read a lot and have been around a lot.
Why the need for a dumb question like that !!!
Also I rate intellectual honesty and integrity over civility .


The quality of reading is very evident. I applaud your vast reading.



The Atman or consciousness is what is all pervading and the ultimate reality, and energy and matter are but its grosser manifestations.



So, it is Atman that matters. Rest is ego (which is very clearly evident here and which will be the main obstruction). It is the removal of ego that is required and not accumulation of muscles.

A stone can also attain God if God wishes so, as in Ahalya's case.



They have through Einstein ,has shown that both energy and matter are but one and the same.


Vedas and Upanishads go deeper. Taijjassa, the subtle thought/dream state is the intermediate one before the waking fleshy state. Both are states and not the being, which is real.




Well the mind is indeed within the body . ---


Where is the mind in a dead body? When the life ebbs away, why the body (which contains the mind within as you say) is not able to say "I am alive"?

And then in absence of any body how the samskaras are carried to another body?

And then how within a small body, an elepahant or a city is created in dream?


Om

yudhamanyu
15 October 2007, 01:24 AM
Namaste,



The quality of reading is very evident. I applaud your vast reading.



Thank you . The company of a young enlightened master also greatly helped, along with his grace.




So, it is Atman that matters. Rest is ego (which is very clearly evident here and which will be the main obstruction). It is the removal of ego that is required and not accumulation of muscles.




Try to understand the context , atanu dude. It is the atman that matters, but according to the hindu spiritual masters, a strong mind and body are indeed needed as tools and resources of one as a prequisite for fast spiritual progress.

A surgeon uses a steel scalpel to remove the metal bullet from the patients body.

Similarly, as per Vivekananda's teachings, one with a strong body and mind , can grapple easier with the mind and conquer it , faster and easier than a weak person.

Create a sound foundation first , and the superstructure will be created easily and will be stable.

However with a weak foundation, it is only natural that the structure will succumb to pressure and strain in the long run, thus losing all the merits of its work in the process.






A stone can also attain God if God wishes so, as in Ahalya's case.


Everything is consciousness. And indeed all matter in this universe is evolving as per its natural growth to higher forms of consciousness, till it is free from all bondages of matter , in the human birth, and becomes pure consciousness. --SAT CHIT ANAND

However , in this case your analogy is wrong, as Ahalya was not a stone in the beginning, but became a stone by a curse , and then through Rama's grace , became human once again.




Vedas and Upanishads go deeper. Taijjassa, the subtle thought/dream state is the intermediate one before the waking fleshy state. Both are states and not the being, which is real.



And that is also what I have stated. Western psychology is pretty young and not as old as Indian psychology.

"Waking fleshy state ".

What do you mean by the 'fleshy ' if you would kindly explain.



Where is the mind in a dead body? When the life ebbs away, why the body (which contains the mind within as you say) is not able to say "I am alive"?



The mind is in the body when it is alive. And when it is dead, it follows the soul into a new body.







And then in absence of any body how the samskaras are carried to another body?



The samskaras and vasanas are within the subconscious mind , which is aligned to the soul . The complete dissolution of the vasanas result in the annihilation of the mind, and liberation of the soul from bondage.




And then how within a small body, an elepahant or a city is created in dream?


The 'elephant ' or 'city ' are just previous samskaras in the subconscious mind, which finds expression in dreams during sleep.

atanu
15 October 2007, 07:53 AM
Namaste,


Try to understand the context , atanu dude. It is the atman that matters, ---

Understand the context. When a man comprehends that ‘it is Atman that only matters’, it is true understanding. Rest is avidya.



Create a sound foundation first , and the superstructure will be created easily and will be stable.


Superstructure is the manifested Visva and Atman is the foundation. Your view is upside down and we call it materialism, which has no commonality with spiritualism.

Assuming your perspective that the superstructure is Atman/Brahman, I ask you who are you to build it? Atman exists eternally.

Even assuming you to be correct that you can build a superstructure Atman/Brahman, can you tell me who are you?

Where you are from? Where your intelligence and energy are from? Who you are? If you can answer ‘Who you are’ then you will begin to comprehend. Easy way would be to ask Shri Shri, who teaches “Who Am I?” as the final upadesha.




Everything is consciousness. And indeed all matter in this universe is evolving as per its natural growth to higher forms of consciousness, till it is free from all bondages of matter , in the human birth, and becomes pure consciousness. --SAT CHIT ANAND

However , in this case your analogy is wrong, as Ahalya was not a stone in the beginning, but became a stone by a curse , and then through Rama's grace , became human once again.



Don’t you see how fatal your logic is? If ‘Everything is consciousness’ then what is Ahalya, what is a stone, and what are you? If not consciousness?

Like Ahalaya your next dress may be of a stone. (It is a possibility, since you will be very strong then).



"Waking fleshy state". What do you mean by the 'fleshy ' if you would kindly explain.


Simple. One experiences one self as fleshy in waking state only (which actually is ONE agnivaisnavaro). In dream, one is subtle, made of a luminous body. In deep sleep, one is unlimited, bodiless, pure intelligence, incandescent; but one does not know it.


---The mind is in the body when it is alive. And when it is dead, it follows the soul into a new body---

---The samskaras and vasanas are within the subconscious mind , which is aligned to the soul . The complete dissolution of the vasanas result in the annihilation of the mind, and liberation of the soul from bondage.----

---The 'elephant ' or 'city ' are just previous samskaras in the subconscious mind, which finds expression in dreams during sleep.--



So, the mind is not in the body at all but assumes it to be so, while in the waking state. Else, the body would always be able to say “I live”. Moreover, when elephant is a samskara in the mind, how can the mind be in the body?

I have a next question for you. Who are you and where is your mind (that you say is within you)? Who are You?

Om

sarabhanga
15 October 2007, 04:51 PM
Namaste Yajvan et al.,

The 10 Upanishads of the Rigveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


vāṅme manasi pratiṣṭhitā mano me vāci pratiṣṭhitamāvirāvīrma edhi |
vedasya ma āṇīsthaḥ śrutaṁ me mā prahāsīranenādhītenāhorātrānsaṁdadhāmyṛtaṁ vadiṣyāmi satyaṁ vadiṣyāmi |
tanmāmavatu tadvaktāramavatvavatu māmavatu vaktāramavatu vaktāram ||
om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

The 19 Upanishads of the Shukla Yajurveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om pūrṇamadaḥ pūrṇamidaṁ pūrṇāt pūrṇamudacyate |
pūrṇasya pūrṇamādāya pūrṇamevāvaśiṣyate ||
om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

The 32 Upanishads of the Krishna Yajurveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om saha nāvavatu |
saha nau bhunaktu |
sahavīryaṁ karavāvahai |
tejasvi nāvadhītamastu |
mā vidviṣāvahai ||
om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

The 16 Upanishads of the Samaveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om āpyāyantu mamāṅgāni vākprāṇaścakṣuḥ śrotramatho balamindriyāṇi ca sarvāṇi |
sarvaṁ brahmaupaniṣadaṁ mā'haṁ brahma nirākuryāṁ mā mā brahma nirākārodanirākaraṇamastvanirākaraṇaṁ me'stu |
tadātmani nirate ya upaniṣatsu dharmāste mayi santu te mayi santu ||
om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

And the 31 Upanishads of the Atharvaveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om bhadraṁ karṇebhiḥ śṛṇuyāma devā bhadraṁ paṣyemākṣabhiryajatrāḥ |
sthirairaṅgaistuṣtuvāṁsastanūbhirvyaśema devahitaṁ yadāyuḥ |
svasti na indro vṛddhaśravāḥ svasti naḥ pūṣā viśvavedāḥ |
svasti nastārkṣyo ariṣṭanemiḥ svasti no bṛhaspatirdadhātu ||
om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

yajvan
15 October 2007, 04:57 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan et al.,

The 10 Upanishads of the Rigveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


vāṅme manasi pratiṣṭhitā mano me vāci pratiṣṭhitamāvirāvīrma edhi |


vedasya ma āṇīsthaḥ śrutaṁ me mā prahāsīranenādhītenāhorātrānsaṁdadhāmyṛtaṁ vadiṣyāmi satyaṁ vadiṣyāmi |


tanmāmavatu tadvaktāramavatvavatu māmavatu vaktāramavatu vaktāram ||


om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||
The 19 Upanishads of the Shukla Yajurveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om pūrṇamadaḥ pūrṇamidaṁ pūrṇāt pūrṇamudacyate |


pūrṇasya pūrṇamādāya pūrṇamevāvaśiṣyate ||


om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||
The 32 Upanishads of the Krishna Yajurveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om saha nāvavatu |


saha nau bhunaktu |


sahavīryaṁ karavāvahai |


tejasvi nāvadhītamastu |


mā vidviṣāvahai ||


om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||
The 16 Upanishads of the Samaveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om āpyāyantu mamāṅgāni vākprāṇaścakśuḥ śrotramatho balamindriyāṇi ca sarvāṇi |


sarvaṁ brahmaupaniṣadaṁ mā'haṁ brahma nirākuryāṁ mā mā brahma nirākārodanirākaraṇamastvanirākaraṇaṁ me'stu |


tadātmani nirate ya upaniṣatsu dharmāste mayi santu te mayi santu ||


om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||
And the 31 Upanishads of the Atharvaveda are associated with the Shanti mantra:


om bhadraṁ karṇebhiḥ śṛṇuyāma devā bhadraṁ paṣyemākśabhiryajatrāḥ |


sthirairaṅgaistuṣtuvāṁsastanūbhirvyaśema devahitaṁ yadāyuḥ |


svasti na indro vṛddhaśravāḥ svasti naḥ pūṣā viśvavedāḥ |


svasti nastārkśyo ariṣṭanemiḥ svasti no bṛhaspatirdadhātu ||


om śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

Namaste sarabhanga,

thank you for your post and welcome back... a breath of fresh air has filled HDF.


pranams,

Nuno Matos
15 October 2007, 06:47 PM
Namaste Sarabhanga

Welcome back Sri Sarabhanga Giri !

sarabhanga
16 October 2007, 01:57 AM
Namaste,




Physical illness certainly may make some yoga methods impossible, but meditation is a purely mental process; and for the practice of meditation and jnana yoga, the only necessity is an intelligently controlled mind.

And even if one is bedridden for life, the shava asana is quite appropriate for meditation!




Totally agree. Although it is obviously preferable to be physically healthy, Self-realisation is not dependant upon body health and abilities, while it is for sure dependant upon buddhi.




What are your thoughts then of someone that is ill and cannot practice their sadhana due to their physical discomfort?

And that of meditation is a mental process, yes true. The mind is tightly coupled to the body. Illness in the mind affects the body and vice versa.

It’s my opinion that if the body is not fit for sadhana then the mind will have difficultly with meditations.


In the case of mental illness or damage, where the mind cannot be controlled or is without proper function, jnana yoga is inappropriate; and, of course, physical discomfort is a great distraction to meditation, but a properly controlled mind is quite capable of transcending even physical pain.

A healthy body is conducive to a healthy mind, and vice versa, and the possession of both is the ideal starting condition, with the greatest likelihood of success; although, ultimately, the only requirement for jnana yoga is an intelligently controlled mind.




Of course having healthy body is helpful for any sAdhana. No one denies that i hope.
The point is that inner practices (such as japa, manana and dhyAna for example) can be done with sick or even paralyzed body, since they aren't dependant on it. In Vedantic and Tantric (non-Kaula) systems highest realisation is achieved by purely mental methods, jnAna-yoga. And there is no reason to say that physically sick person is incapable of sajjnAna. On the contrary, we know plenty of examples of jnAnins who were bodily sick, both in Hindu myths and actual history.




Though body is in fact important, never it is stressed that PERFECT body is required for spiritual sadhana.

Atman is not body, remember Upanishads.



The wise man, who knows the Atman as bodiless, changeless among perishable bodies, great and all-pervading, does never grieve.

But he who has not turned away from bad conduct, whose senses are not subdued, whose mind is not concentrated, whose mind is not pacified, can never obtain this Atman by knowledge.

But he who has understanding, who has his mind always under control, and who is pure, reaches that goal whence he is not born again.

He who has known that which is without sound, without touch, without form, without decay, without taste, eternal, without smell, without beginning, without end, beyond the Great, and unchanging, is free from the jaws of death.

What use are strong limbs and keen senses in the quest for such immortal knowledge?


By mind alone could this Brahman be obtained; then there is no difference here at all. He goes from death to death who sees any difference here.

When this Atman who dwells in the body departs from the body, what remains then? This verily is That.

Not by Prana, not by Apana, does any mortal live, but it is by some other, on which these two depend, that men live.

If in this life one is able to comprehend Brahman before the death of the body, he will be liberated from the bondage of the world; if one is not able to comprehend Him, then he must take a body again in the worlds of creation.

A wise man, having understood that the separately produced senses, and also their rising and setting, are distinct from the Atman, grieves no more.

His form is not to be seen. No one beholds Him with the eye. By controlling the mind by the intellect and by incessant meditation He is revealed. Those who know this Brahman become immortal.

When the five organs of knowledge are at rest together with the mind, and when the intellect becomes calm, they call that the highest state.



[from the Kathopanishad, translated by Swami Sivananda]





“The atman is not for the weak” – upanishads

The upanishads themselves teach that a healthy body is required for effective mental and spiritual pursuits.

Only those who are physically and mentally strong can realise the Atman.

Where do the Upanishads say that “the atman is not for the physically weak” or, conversely, that “the atman is only for the physically strong”?




This one looks like old Nazi propaganda.

So it does!




The correct mantra to realize the atma should be “no mind, no body”.

Yes indeed!

sarabhanga
16 October 2007, 05:21 AM
Matter is just a grosser manifestation of energy, and it has been established by modern science that energy and matter are one and the same.

Both mind and body are matter.

The mind is limited to the body, but … the mind outlasts the body.

Matter is only energy, but energy is not itself material; just as jIvAtman is only paramAtman, but paramAtman is not divided jIvAtman.

How is the mind material? The mind, while sustained by the body, is not exactly equivalent with the brain, or any physical organ.

And, if your “material mind” is limited to the body, how can it last any longer than the body? :rolleyes:

sarabhanga
16 October 2007, 05:57 AM
Namaste Yajvan, Nuno, Atanu, et al.

Sorry for my absence from HDF, but I have been without communication on a tiny uninhabited island (Lady Musgrave, on the Great Barrier Reef). Now back on line, but with much unread discussion and many forgotten threads! Thanks for holding the fort. :)

yajvan
16 October 2007, 09:05 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste Yajvan, Nuno, Atanu, et al.

Sorry for my absence from HDF, but I have been without communication on a tiny uninhabited island (Lady Musgrave, on the Great Barrier Reef). Now back on line, but with much unread discussion and many forgotten threads! Thanks for holding the fort. :)

Namaste parivrajaka [one who wanders, a sanyas, for those wondering why I call sarabhanga this]

I am sure it was time well spent.

pranams,

yudhamanyu
16 October 2007, 11:05 AM
Namaste,



Understand the context. When a man comprehends that ‘it is Atman that only matters’, it is true understanding. Rest is avidya.


It is not when a man intellectually comprehends that Atman is all that matters, but when a man realizes the Atman or attains enlightenment that results in true understanding.




Superstructure is the manifested Visva and Atman is the foundation. Your view is upside down and we call it materialism, which has no commonality with spiritualism.


Understand the context again, pal. The strong foundation I talk about is a strong mind and body, and the superstructure that can be raised on it is the enlightened man or brahmajnani.



"First build up your physique. Then only you can get control over the mind. --- nayamatma balheenana labhyah ----"The Atman is not to be attained by the weak."
Once a person gets control over the mind, it matters little whether the body remains strong or becomes emaciated. The gist of the thing is that unless one has a good physique one can never aspire to Self-realization. Sri Ramakrishna used to say, "One fails to attain Realization if there be but a slight defect in the body. " "

-------- SWAMI VIVEKANANDA




Assuming your perspective that the superstructure is Atman/Brahman, I ask you who are you to build it? Atman exists eternally.




Well, in case you forgot, the vast majority of mankind are not enlightened or brahmajnanis.


The superstructure in my perspective and view is the brahmajnani or enlightened man.







Even assuming you to be correct that you can build a superstructure Atman/Brahman, can you tell me who are you?


Relatively speaking,the name of my body is yudhamanyu. And in the absolute sense , I am Brahman.




Where you are from? Where your intelligence and energy are from? Who you are? If you can answer ‘Who you are’ then you will begin to comprehend. Easy way would be to ask Shri Shri, who teaches “Who Am I?” as the final upadesha.


I am the Self or pure all pervading consciousness, in the abolute sense.

Intelligence and energy are manifestations of Shakti , the Personal side of the impersonal Brahman.

I must say that I really admire your holier-than-thou attitude , by attempting to teach me stuff , which has no bearing on the topic which I am going by , that is the importance of physical and mental fitness and strength in the process of sadhana and attempts to realise the atman.

And not only Sri Sri, but Ramana Maharshi too states about the asking of the question , "Who am I ? " .




"If you can answer ‘Who you are’ then you will begin to comprehend. "


And I suppose you have comprehended it , and attained enlightenment .




Don’t you see how fatal your logic is? If ‘Everything is consciousness’ then what is Ahalya, what is a stone, and what are you? If not consciousness?


And how is my logic fatal . I have stated that everything is consciousness.

You on the other hand was saying that Ahalya was a stone, while I was saying that she was a woman who became a stone due to a curse, and became a woman again through Ramas blessing.






Like Ahalaya your next dress may be of a stone. (It is a possibility, since you will be very strong then).


Well, I don't know if Ahalya wore a dress of stone. Perhaps it may be the fashion in those times.

And if wearing a stone dress makes me very strong, according to your 'wisdom', great. Though I don't know how a stone dress can make me physically and mentally strong.

Perhaps bearing the weight of a stone dress can make one tough
physically and mentally.




Simple. One experiences one self as fleshy in waking state only (which actually is ONE agnivaisnavaro). In dream, one is subtle, made of a luminous body. In deep sleep, one is unlimited, bodiless, pure intelligence, incandescent; but one does not know it.


Well, I suppose you are saying that 'fleshy' means body consciousness.

Whether in dream or deep sleep, the soul is indeed subtly bonded to matter and mind, or otherwise we all would be enlightened after deep sleep.




So, the mind is not in the body at all but assumes it to be so, while in the waking state.


The mind is in the body all right. And if you have any doubts on it, check out sankhya philosophy.




Moreover, when elephant is a samskara in the mind, how can the mind be in the body?


And what does the samskara of an elephant or blue whale being in the mind, have a problem with the mind being in the body!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




I have a next question for you. Who are you and where is your mind (that you say is within you)? Who are You?

Om

I am the atman living in a body. The mind is a mass of thought waves arising from samskaras and vasanas stored in the subconscious mind, leading to desires and ego, that binds the atman and distorts the perception of reality.

yudhamanyu
16 October 2007, 11:24 AM
If we believe that the mind is simply a finer part of the body, and that mind acts upon the body , then it stands to reason that the body must react upon the mind. If the body is sick , the mind becomes sick also .If the body is healthy , the mind becomes healthy , the mind remains healthy and strong. When one is angry , the mind becomes disturbed. Similarly , when the mind is disturbed , the body also becomes disturbed.

------ SWAMI VIVEKANANDA


"First build up your physique. Then only you can get control over the mind. --- nayamatma balheenana labhyah ----"The Atman is not to be attained by the weak."
Once a person gets control over the mind, it matters little whether the body remains strong or becomes emaciated. The gist of the thing is that unless one has a good physique one can never aspire to Self-realization. Sri Ramakrishna used to say, "One fails to attain Realization if there be but a slight defect in the body. " "

-------- SWAMI VIVEKANANDA


Then the next thing to do (before commencing spiritual practice ) is to think of your own body, and see that it is strong and healthy; it is the best instrument you have . Think of it as being as strong as adamant , and that with the help of this body you will cross the ocean of life. Freedom is never to be reached by the weak. Throw away all weakness. Tell your body that it is strong, tell your mind it is strong, and have unbounded faith and hope in yourself.

------ SWAMI VIVEKANANDA




One can easily see that the ancient gurukula tradition, where the disciples and students lived with their gurus in the forests , was based on this system of strengthening oneself physically, mentally and character wise.

The disciples spartan and disciplined lifestyle, bathing in cold water early in the morning, cutting of wood , meeting the requirements of the ashram and the consequent strenuous life , helped to toughen the physical and mental strength of the lads , along with the character.

The forest itself was their gymnasium, as they had to be harder than their hard circumstances , in order to survive and keep on going with their studies and spartan lifestyle.

Nowadays , every weak fool, after going through a few books on hindu philosophy, starts thinking that he is a sage, and starts showing off with a holier-than-thou attitude ,without having anything to show for it.

And this is the reason why Hindu society have become decadent.

atanu
16 October 2007, 01:01 PM
Namaste Yudhamanyu,




----I must say that I really admire your holier-than-thou attitude ,

-----Well, I have read a lot and have been around a lot.

----Why the need for a dumb question like that !!!

-----Also I rate intellectual honesty and integrity over civility .



Take this post to Shri Shri.



Relatively speaking,the name of my body is yudhamanyu. And in the absolute sense , I am Brahman.


You say that name of your body is yudhamanyu. Then were are you? You claim that in absolute sense you are Brahman. Where is the mind then?


And how is my logic fatal . I have stated that everything is consciousness. You on the other hand was saying that Ahalya was a stone, while I was saying that she was a woman who became a stone due to a curse, and became a woman again through Ramas blessing.

Yes your logic is fatal. What was apparently a stone became enlightened. Simple. That shows that even a stone can attain God. A stone can also attain God, since stone is only apparently stone. Similarly, an enlightened one (who knows its nature as pure consciousness) may tenant a strong or a weak body. No problems. Building a strong body is not a necessity for God attainment but may be a plus point.

Vivekananda taught certain things, such as consumption of meat and body building, for certain reasons, which were extremely important at his time due to British rule. These specific teachings may be important for us even now but not essential teaching of upanishads as:


The wise man, who knows the Atman as bodiless, changeless among perishable bodies, great and all-pervading, does never grieve.

Atman is all pervading. From Atman rises the mind. Mind is not in the body. Mind is everywhere, sprouting from the Atman, which is everywhere. Mind conjures a body as per samskaras. The body is in the mind.





And what does the samskara of an elephant or blue whale being in the mind, have a problem with the mind being in the body!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


An elephant, which is in the mind cannot be fitted in a human body. Show me the location of your mind inside your body.


And, if your “material mind” is limited to the body, how can it last any longer than the body? :rolleyes:



Om

satay
16 October 2007, 01:58 PM
Admin Note

I noticed here on several threads that forum rules are being broken by a new member. Please be advised that though you may harras me I will not allow the harrasment or personal attacks on any of the members of HDF.

A gentle reminder to please review the rules of the site.

yudhamanyu
17 October 2007, 01:23 AM
Namaste Yudhamanyu,



Take this post to Shri Shri.

For what !!!!

What I have said is logically the truth . If you want to prove otherwise, then refute me logically through Vaada.

I am from Kerala, the land of Shankaracharya, Indias greatest debater and philosopher and enlightened master, and the famous temple where his parents went to worship steadfastly to beget him is next to my house.

My ancestor, Shankaracharya ,with his debating skills defeated the decadent and corrupted Buddhist and Jains through out India and established vedic dharma and the advaita vedanta in India and resurrected the sanatana dharma imbibing the message of Bhagavan Buddha as well.




You say that name of your body is yudhamanyu. Then were are you?



You mean to say "where were you " !!!!! I really did not get it. Please be clear.



You claim that in absolute sense you are Brahman. Where is the mind then?


In the absolute sense, everything is Brahman.






[FONT=Arial]Yes your logic is fatal. What was apparently a stone became enlightened. Simple. That shows that even a stone can attain God. A stone can also attain God, since stone is only apparently stone.



Please stop the lecturing attitude on such trivialities. It is a well known fact that stone or anything material is indeed consciousness in its ultimate reality.

I myself have pointed out this.



Similarly, an enlightened one (who knows its nature as pure consciousness) may tenant a strong or a weak body. No problems. Building a strong body is not a necessity for God attainment but may be a plus point.



So you want to contradict Ramakrishna, Vivekananda and the Upanishads on this.!!!!!!

Vivekananda taught certain things, such as consumption of meat and body building, for certain reasons, which were extremely important at his time due to British rule. These specific teachings may be important for us even now but not essential teaching of upanishads as:

Vivekananda advocated the eating of meat , in order to build up the rajas of the people who were engulfed in tamas and to create the kshatriya.

For purely spiritual reasons , he indeed advocated the eating of vegetarian food.



And he indeed is a master of the Upanishads. While Swami Dayananda Saraswati popularised the Vedas, Swami Vivekananda popularised the Upanishads in the world.



Both these men were part of the Hindu renaissance in the 19 th century, and their teachings had tremondous repurcussions in a decadent hindu society.

Subhash Chandra Bose, Aurobindo, Subrahmanya Bharti, Dr.Hedgewar were influenced by Swami Vivekananda.

And the gurukula traditions indeed did emphasize building of mental and physical strength in a natural way.




Atman is all pervading. From Atman rises the mind. Mind is not in the body. Mind is everywhere, sprouting from the Atman, which is everywhere. Mind conjures a body as per samskaras. The body is in the mind.




The mind which is a mass of thought waves emerging from samskaras and vasanas , is not everywhere, according to the sankhyas.

The Atman is all pervading, but the mind is confined .



An elephant, which is in the mind cannot be fitted in a human body. Show me the location of your mind inside your body.


The elephant , my dear atanu, in the mind is not the real elephant which you see on the jungle. Pleeease spare me this stuff.

Well, when I think , the sensations occur in the head and not outside. It is natural to say that the mind is in the body.

Show me the location of the mind outside the body?

yudhamanyu
17 October 2007, 01:27 AM
Admin Note

I noticed here on several threads that forum rules are being broken by a new member. Please be advised that though you may harras me I will not allow the harrasment or personal attacks on any of the members of HDF.
.

I have no intention of attacking any members, only ignorance and injustice where i see it. And I believe everyone should be the same.

Also it would be great if you can stop your vilification of my guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and apologize for that as well.

Let us see your civility and character in this respect.

atanu
17 October 2007, 03:25 AM
For what !!!!
---
I am from Kerala, the land of Shankaracharya, Indias greatest debater and philosopher and enlightened master, and the famous temple where his parents went to worship steadfastly to beget him is next to my house.


Nice and humoured to hear it. Irrelelevant though.



--In the absolute sense, everything is Brahman.


--The mind which is a mass of thought waves emerging from samskaras and vasanas , is not everywhere, according to the sankhyas.

--- The elephant , my dear atanu, in the mind is not the real elephant which you see on the jungle. Pleeease spare me this stuff.



You said that in the absolute Brahman is real; The jungle elephant and the mind elephant are same. Both are in the mind.

And when a dream elephant is in the mind, how can the mind be as small as your physical body?


Well, when I think , the sensations occur in the head and not outside. It is natural to say that the mind is in the body.


Then how you came to know of your past life? Is your past life in your body?



Show me the location of the mind outside the body?

Yes, it in this post.
--------------------------------

Note: You have not answered how mind takes up another body if it is confined to a body.

Why the body is not able to say "I live" forever, if the mind is property of the body?

Om

satay
17 October 2007, 10:34 AM
Admin Note

namaste Yudhamanyu,


I have no intention of attacking any members, only ignorance and injustice where i see it. And I believe everyone should be the same.


It is nice to know your intentions. However, your actions sing a different song.



Also it would be great if you can stop your vilification of my guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and apologize for that as well.


I have already done that before you asked.

So now, please consider adding value to HDF by following the rules and be civil to other members. I will be monitoring...

atanu
19 October 2007, 02:22 AM
Namaste All,

The outside and inside is a sensual concept, which is only true for the ego-consciousness (mind limited to ego view only) in its waking and dream states. Transcending ego-consciousness, when the mind gets a peek at so-called super-consciousness, the inside-outside vanishes. There is only one Mahat which rests on one Consciousness.

Om

yajvan
19 October 2007, 10:39 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste All,

The outside and inside is a sensual concept, which is only true for the ego-consciousness (mind limited to ego view only) in its waking and dream states. Transcending ego-consciousness, when the mind gets a peek at so-called super-consciousness, the inside-outside vanishes. There is only one Mahat which rests on one Consciousness.

Om

Namate atanu,
it seems perhaps a ripe time to discuss this outside and inside?

Maybe a post and discussion on tattva (that -ness):
Pancha Mahabhutas - the five great elements ( with my favorite, akasha!)
Panca tanmantras - smell, taste, etc.
Panca karmendriyas - 5 organs of action; Hand, foot, speech, etc.
Pancha jnanendriyas -5 organs of cognition ( input devices!)
Antahkaranas - Iinternal componetns - mind, iltellect, etc.
Suhhha tattvas - or Pure elements Siva, sadasiva, isvara, etc.

In terms of schools of thought... Samkaya will give us 25 tattvas. IF we wish to over achieve we can view the 36 tattvas of Saivism.

Hence this was my thought from the other day... as we pursue this conversation, the overlap between a few POV's in the schools need to be called out.

The fundamental tattvas are ~ equal. As we get higher in the list there is a divergance ( not an agumentative difference pray-tell. A different view of subtler essense of the Divine e.g. Siva, Brahman, etc.

And the purpose of the post? to discuss them, recognize them; How the tattvas are in us all, how the unmanifest, maniefests and plays and creates.

pranams,

sarabhanga
21 October 2007, 07:23 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

tattvam (“the being or state of being that”) is “the true state or real nature”, “truth or reality”, “essence or substance” and especially “a true or first principle”.

tattvam (tat tvam) is a mahAvAkya in itself (just as om), implying “that [art] thou” and thus “identity with the one eternal brahman”.

In advaita vedAnta, there is only one tattva ~ i.e. tat (“that”), which is only brahma!

yajvan
22 October 2007, 01:32 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~~
Namaste Yajvan,

tattvam (“the being or state of being that”) is “the true state or real nature”, “truth or reality”, “essence or substance” and especially “a true or first principle”.

tattvam (tat tvam) is a mahAvAkya in itself (just as om), implying “that [art] thou” and thus “identity with the one eternal brahman”.

In advaita vedAnta, there is only one tattva ~ i.e. tat (“that”), which is only brahma!

Namste Sarabhanga,
I see your point and agree oo Tad Ekam. It has been 'convention' to call many of the tanmatras, karmendriyas, jnanendriyas and the like as tattvas; absolutely a 'loose' use of tattva. Even the 5 great tattvas, should more go by real name of Mahabhutas.

So, duly noted on the essential tattvam of Brahman and a fair assessment.

pranams,

sarabhanga
23 October 2007, 08:25 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

Of course, in sAMkhya, there are two fundamental tattvAni ~ puruSa (i.e. nara or brahman) and prakRti (i.e. nArAyaNa or mAyA).

yajvan
23 October 2007, 08:52 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

Of course, in sAMkhya, there are two fundamental tattvAni ~ puruSa (i.e. nara or brahman) and prakRti (i.e. nArAyaNa or mAyA).

Namaste sarabhanga,

that is correct as I see it prakriti and purusha.

Yet I will leave nara as Brahman for another time, as I still scratch my head here and have samshaya (doubts) as I do not comprehend nara as Brahman, and the like, as outlined in this post.
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2182

pranams,

sarabhanga
23 October 2007, 11:19 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

In Sanskrit, puruSa is “a man or person”, and especially “the primeval man or eternal spirit pervading the universe”.

Likewise, nara is “a man or person”, and especially “the primeval man or eternal spirit pervading the universe” (commonly associated with nArAyaNa, “son of the primeval man”).

I cannot fathom your doubts on this matter ~ perhaps you could read the puruSa sUkta. :headscratch:

sarabhanga
24 October 2007, 03:10 AM
In sAMkhya, there are two fundamental tattvAni ~ puruSa (i.e. nara or brahman) and prakRti (i.e. nArAyaNa or mAyA).

And prakRti is tattvatrayamaya, consisting of sattva, rajas, and tamas.

yajvan
24 October 2007, 12:12 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan,

In Sanskrit, puruSa is “a man or person”, and especially “the primeval man or eternal spirit pervading the universe”.

Likewise, nara is “a man or person”, and especially “the primeval man or eternal spirit pervading the universe” (commonly associated with nArAyaNa, “son of the primeval man”).

I cannot fathom your doubts on this matter ~ perhaps you could read the puruSa sUkta. :headscratch:

Namaste sarabhanga,
thank you for your help on this matter. My doubts is not that of the core meanings or of comprehending Purusa Sukta. My concerns have been rooted around the proper understanding on how capital A, and lower case a changes the meaning of the word and its intent. Same for other letters as it changes a to long A, etc . For this , more study is needed on my side and the implications thereof.

Yet rejoicing, understanding and comprehending the following is not an issue, of this there is no doubt:

The Purusha (the Supreme Being) has a thousand heads, a thousand eyes and a thousand feet. He has enveloped this world from all sides and has (even) transcended it by ten angulas or inches

Thank you gain for your kind help and post.

purusha evedagam sarvam


pranams,

sarabhanga
29 October 2007, 05:58 AM
prakRti is tattvatrayamaya, consisting of sattva, rajas, and tamas.

sattvaguNa is pure ćther (AkAsha ~ “without rein”), which exists beyond and implicitly permeates the whole of creation;

rajoguNa is essential fire (agni), the fire of time; and

tamoguNa, the created object, is the three-dimensional world of our perception.

And tamoguNa is also tattvatrayamaya, consisting of vAyu (air), jala (water), and bhU (earth).

Thus, through the tripartition of tamas, the prime trinity of prakRti becomes manifest as the pańcabhUta (five elements).

yajvan
29 October 2007, 01:55 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~~

sattvaguNa is pure ćther (AkAsha ~ “without rein”), which exists beyond and implicitly permeates the whole of creation;

rajoguNa is essential fire (agni), the fire of time; and
tamoguNa, the created object, is the three-dimensional world of our perception.
And tamoguNa is also tattvatrayamaya, consisting of vAyu (air), jala (water), and bhU (earth).

Thus, through the tripartition of tamas, the prime trinity of prakRti becomes manifest as the pańcabhUta (five elements).


namaste sarabhanga,

When you say tamoguna, are you suggesting the world and what we view i.e. creation, or the process of perception?


As I view this in the following manner:

If bhu tattva is there, then by default it contains the other elements e.g. akasha is the subtlest of the mahabhutas [ I am not suggesting anything here that you are not conversant or unaware of; the list is to showe my audit trial and perhaps other in the conversation i.e. I am not lecturing (((http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif)))

Vayu then arises and has 2 properties, itself + akasha.
Agni then arises and it has 3 properties, itself +vaya + akasha.
Apa then arises and it has 4 properties, itself + agni + vayu + akasha
prithvi then arises and it has 5 properties, itself + apa + agni + vayu + akasha.


For us humans, born of food, we then have all the Mahabhutas residing in us. If tamoguana contains bhu, then by default the other bhutas are there; no different then tailam that exists in tileshu ( oil of sesame residing in the seed itself).

And the gunas as I see it is like a 3 strand rope, braded of sattva, rajas and tamas. In this world one can have more one value then the other, i.e. more sattva or rago-guna, yet the 3 strands are there.

In my studies as of late I have read that higher lokas may not contain all 3 strands, that just sattva and rajas reside with no tamas. I will need to find that passage, but thought it was interesting.



pranams,

sarabhanga
30 October 2007, 05:19 AM
Namaste Yajvan,

In advaita vedAnta, there is only one tattva ~ i.e. tat (“that”), which is only brahma!

In sAMkhya, there are two fundamental tattvAni ~ puruSa (i.e. nara or brahman) and prakRti (i.e. nArAyaNa or mAyA).

nirguNa brahma = puruSa = sattva = AkAsha = nara
saguNa brahmA = prakRti = guNatvamAya = bhUtatvamAya = nArAyaNa

prakRti is tattvatrayamaya, consisting of sattva, rajas, and tamas.

sattvaguNa is pure æther (AkAsha), which exists beyond and implicitly permeates the creation.

sattva = AkAsha = prAjña

rajoguNa is essential fire (agni), and the fire of time.

rajas = tejas = taijasa

tamoguNa is the material world of three dimensions and physical substance.

tamas = vishvA = vaishvAnara

And the tamoguNa is also tattvatrayamaya, consisting of vAyu (air or vapor), jala (water or liquid), and bhU (earth or solid).

And thus, through the tripartition of tamoguNa, the prime trinity of prakRti is manifest as the pañcabhUta (five elements).

In other words, tamas is itself qualified by guNa:

sAttvika = jala
rAjasika = vAyu
tAmasika = bhU

AkAsha and sattva (while remaining untouched) are presupposed in every admixture; and the existence of vAyu presumes the existence of all three qualities; while the pure tejas of agni is entirely devoid of tamas.

AkAsha = sattva
agni = rajas
jala = sAttvika tamas
vAyu = rAjasika tamas
bhU = tAmasika tamas

atanu
30 October 2007, 07:48 AM
Tattva Bodha

What is this five-folding?

It is this: taking the spatial parts of the five primitive natures -- one part of each -- these parts are each first divided in two; then one half of each part is left alone, on one side, while the other halves of each are each divided into four. Then to the half of each nature, is joined the fourth of the half [the eighth] of each of the other natures. And thus five-folding is made.

From these five primitive natures, thus five-folded, the physical vesture is formed. Hence the essential unity between the clod and the Evolving Egg.

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

For more info

http://sankaracharya.org/panchikaranam.php
http://sankaracharya.org/tattvabodha.php

yajvan
30 October 2007, 09:09 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan,

In advaita vedAnta, there is only one tattva ~ i.e. tat (“that”), which is only brahma!

In sAMkhya, there are two fundamental tattvAni ~ puruSa (i.e. nara or brahman) and prakRti (i.e. nArAyaNa or mAyA).

nirguNa brahma = puruSa = sattva = AkAsha = nara
saguNa brahmA = prakRti = guNatvamAya = bhUtatvamAya = nArAyaNa

prakRti is tattvatrayamaya, consisting of sattva, rajas, and tamas.

sattvaguNa is pure æther (AkAsha), which exists beyond and implicitly permeates the creation.

sattva = AkAsha = prAjña

rajoguNa is essential fire (agni), and the fire of time.

rajas = tejas = taijasa

tamoguNa is the material world of three dimensions and physical substance.

tamas = vishvA = vaishvAnara

And the tamoguNa is also tattvatrayamaya, consisting of vAyu (air or vapor), jala (water or liquid), and bhU (earth or solid).

And thus, through the tripartition of tamoguNa, the prime trinity of prakRti is manifest as the pañcabhUta (five elements).

In other words, tamas is itself qualified by guNa:

sAttvika = jala
rAjasika = vAyu
tAmasika = bhU

AkAsha and sattva (while remaining untouched) are presupposed in every admixture; and the existence of vAyu presumes the existence of all three qualities. Pure bhU and pure jala are without rajas, while the pure tejas of agni is entirely devoid of tamas.

AkAsha = sattva
agni = rajas
jala = sAttvika tamas
vAyu = rAjasika tamas
bhU = tAmasika tamas

Namaste sarabhanga,
thank you for the time to outline the post. I concur on most items you offer... I do not see differences in our views less the following items.

Tattva is that ness - of this there is no doubt. In advaita vedanta I see 'THAT' as Brahman and distingush it from Brahma (we needn't pursue this, as we are discussing this on other threads).

I also concur that tattva in samkhya there is purusa and prakrti. Yet there are other schools which suggest more tattva as they use the term as ~ elements~ and still think of it as that-ness.

Two that come to mind is Saiva Siddhanta and Kashmir Saivism. Their views are a bit different and I enjoy reading them, as it changes ones POV on the use of tattva. In Kashmir Saivism they have the standard 25 elements of Samkaya, yet go on with 11 more for a total of 36. Iy id worth mentioning that the tattva here are not mutually exclusive, as they are expressions of Siva. Again interesting reading.

Let me ask a few questions so I can appreciate and understand the post you offered.... please note this is for comprehension purposes as I am not challanging your writing.



prakRti is tattvatrayamaya, consisting of sattva, rajas, and tamas.
sattvaguNa is pure æther (AkAsha), which exists beyond and implicitly permeates the creation

I will assume the above is a couplet - they are assocated to each other, correct? If so, then sattvaguna (akasha) is subordinate to prakRti tattvatrayamaya, is this correct?

I mention because of my confusion reading 'which exists beyond and implicitly permeates creation'. The dichotomy in the sentence limits the comprehension of the statement. Let me explain.

For me, it (akasha) exists everywhere, its homogeneous... that takes care of here and 'beyond'. You may have a different intent on its use, that I did not ferret out of the sentence. i.e. as you say permeates the creation. Hence for me, there is a 'two-ness' in the statement that limits my comprehension i.e. beyond + permeates creation. Additional questions on prakriti are in the que, yet cannot be posed without the fundamentals in place on akasha.


rajoguNa is essential fire (agni), and the fire of time.
Yes, I see rajas as the energy element epitomized by agni. Are you using agni as the fire of time as in it burns up or consumes time? or as agni as all consuming like time? I miss the implication or value you offer.



And the tamoguNa is also tattvatrayamaya, consisting of vAyu (air or vapor), jala (water or liquid), and bhU (earth or solid).

The admixture for tamoguNa, I do not see how bhu tattva can be offered unless it also carries aksasa. As I read this:
AkAsha and sattva (while remaining untouched) are presupposed in every admixture; it makes it all fit in , as you are supplying space for it to reside in. We are on the same page.

This notion was the essence of the last post. That akasha is at the base of the tattvas. How they come in and mingle ( or not mingle if you will) suggests that our views do not vary. I know see your intent on offering the building blocks step-by-step.

pranams and thank you,

Nuno Matos
30 October 2007, 09:15 PM
Namaste yajvan

Shiva asks "Who am I?'", as he has no boundaries.
Without Ahamkara you and every body else's dies. Without Ahamkara there is no Jiva to experience enlightenment ( Shiva). Without Ahamkara there is only a death process.
So I think it is legitimate to say that Ahamkara is the sustainer.Isn't Vishnou the dark Lord?



Om namah shivaya!

atanu
31 October 2007, 01:27 AM
Namaste yajvan

Shiva asks "Who am I?'", as he has no boundaries.
Without Ahamkara you and every body else's dies. Without Ahamkara there is no Jiva to experience enlightenment ( Shiva). Without Ahamkara there is only a death process.
So I think it is legitimate to say that Ahamkara is the sustainer.Isn't Vishnou the dark Lord?

Om namah shivaya!

Namaste Nuno,

The bounded Jiva also has to ask "Who Am I?", since the "I" has no boundaries.

If, 'Without Ahamkara you and every body else's dies' is true then the God who is beyond Ahamkara should have died? I do not know.

With respect to 'Without Ahamkara there is no Jiva to experience enlightenment ( Shiva)', I feel that it is with the death of vamana ahamkara that Jiva knows "I am Shiva'. Then such a Jiva is indeed Vishnu -- the one Aham.

Om

Nuno Matos
31 October 2007, 02:18 AM
Namaste Atanu Nice way to put things. I agree with you!

sarabhanga
31 October 2007, 02:43 AM
Namaste Yajvan,

nirguNa brahma is pure sattva and pure AkAsha, while saguNa brahmA is guNatvamAya and bhUtatvamAya (distinguishing all of the various qualities and elements, including sattva and AkAsha).

prakRti (implying saguNa brahmA) is tattvatrayamaya, consisting of sattva, rajas, and tamas.


sattvaguNa is pure ćther.

rajoguNa is essential fire.

tamoguNa is physical substance.

sattva and AkAsha both exist beyond the creation (with brahma or nara), and also permeate the whole of creation (with brahmA or nArAyaNa).

sattva and AkAsha are not subordinate to prakRti ~ rather, they are the very basis of prakRti.

rajas = tejas = agni

And the rajoguNa is characterized by activity or change, which presumes time as a foundation; and the most essential form of agni is kAlAgni (“the fire of time”).

sarabhanga
31 October 2007, 04:07 AM
For me, there is a 'two-ness' in the statement that limits my comprehension i.e. beyond + permeates creation.

Namaste,

That 'two-ness' is the same nara-nArAyaNa, turya-turIya, brahma-brahmA, hara-hari (etc.) 'twin' that has often been considered.

brahma is beyond creation, while brahmA propagates and permeates creation.

sarabhanga
01 November 2007, 06:42 AM
Namaste,

brahma remains avyakta (unintelligible, yet implicit), while brahmA becomes Avyakta (explicit and intelligible) through brAhmI (prakRti).

The very first expression of duality arises with mahat (greatness or multiplicity), the mahAtattva known as buddhi (intellect or discrimination), which conceives itself as ahaMkAra (self-consciousness).

It is buddhi that distinguishes brahmA from brahma, and then brAhmI from brahmA (and all that follows).

brahma = sAttvika brahman = avyakta
brahmA = rAjasika brahman = ahaMkAra
brAhmI = tAmasika brahman = Avyakta

The whole of brahman (nara-nArAyaNa) is characterized by buddhi, which has no particular locus.

The pańcatattva are evolved within prakRti to produce the five material elements (mahAbhUta), but their rudimentary seeds are the subtle pańcatanmAtra.

AkAsha = shabdatanmAtra (sound)
vAyu = sparshatanmAtra (touch)
agni = rUpatanmAtra (sight)
jala = rasatanmAtra (taste)
bhU = gandhatanmAtra (smell)

The gross elements (through pańcIkaraNa) are all mixed essences ~ see Atanu's post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=17648&postcount=97

tanmAtra = sAttvika prapańca
indriya = rAjasika prapańca
mahAbhUta = tAmasika prapańca

And, just as the avyakta brahma puruSa (nara) has buddhi, the Avyakta brAhmaNa puruSa (nAra) has manas (mind). :)

yajvan
01 November 2007, 09:26 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,

brahma remains avyakta (unintelligible, yet implicit), while brahmA becomes Avyakta (explicit and intelligible) through brAhmI (prakRti).


Namste Sarabhanga,
let me take a few sections at a time for comprehension.

brahma remains avyakta (unintelligible, yet implicit) - are you offereing that brahma is unintelligible to the individual ( jiva) or that brahma in this state is without intelligence? i.e. which side of coin is brahma being viewed from?

Based upon past posts I am viewing brahma in this case as niguna.
and brahmA as saguna.

This will allow me to better comprehend the following:
The whole of brahman (nara-nArAyaNa) is characterized by buddhi, which has no particular locus.

My orientation is brahman in the final analysis, is pure intelligence/pure consciousness. Are you using buddhi as intelligence or intellect?

pranams

sarabhanga
01 November 2007, 05:59 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

nirguNa brahma is by nature avyakta.

avyakta means “undeveloped, not manifest, unapparent, indistinct, invisible, imperceptible, and unknown as quantity or number”.

And avyakta is “the unevolved” and thus “the evolver of all things, the primary germ of nature, the primordial tattva”, which is the original nature of the saguNa brahmA.

“The wise think that the turya is unseen, unrelated, incomprehensible, indefinable, unthinkable, and indescribable” ~ i.e. avyakta.

And the whole of brahman (brahma-brahmA) is characterized by buddhitattva, which is mahat (greatness or multiplicity), the mahAtattva.

buddhi refers to “the intellect, the power of forming conceptions, intelligence, discernment, judgment, comprehension or understanding”.

In nara there is only pure buddhi, in nArAyaNa there is also ahaMkAra, and in nAra there is also manas.

yajvan
01 November 2007, 09:07 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan,

nirguNa brahma is by nature avyakta.
avyakta means “undeveloped, not manifest, unapparent, indistinct, invisible, imperceptible, and unknown as quantity or number”.

And avyakta is “the unevolved” and thus “the evolver of all things, the primary germ of nature, the primordial tattva”, which is the original nature of the saguNa brahmA.

“The wise think that the turya is unseen, unrelated, incomprehensible, indefinable, unthinkable, and indescribable” ~ i.e. avyakta.

And the whole of brahman (brahma-brahmA) is characterized by buddhitattva, which is mahat (greatness or multiplicity), the mahAtattva.

buddhi refers to “the intellect, the power of forming conceptions, intelligence, discernment, judgment, comprehension or understanding”.

In nara there is only pure buddhi, in nArAyaNa there is also ahaMkAra, and in nAra there is also manas.


Namaste sarabhanga,
thanks for the post... I am much more comfortable talking of Brahman holistically i.e. brahma-brahmA as you cogently point out; That becomes the spring board then for looking at Its (His) saguna and niguna properties. And yes, I concur avyakta=unmanifest as this is how I was taught i.e. manifest values and unmanifest values.

That said, I still am not sure of your POV on the buddhi. I understand buddhi as intellect, not as intelligence. That was the crux of my last post.
In niguna Brahman I see that quality as intelligence, pure intelligence; pure potential intelligence residing in aksara ( the immutable, imperishable, indestructible)

When Brahman manifests, then intelligence is applied or used, and it becomes intellgent. I see a difference - my question was do you see this difference from your experience, readings or studies? I am fine with my understanding, as I am not looking for a new axiom on buddhi - just poking around for your notions on this matter and kinda compare notes.

pranams,

sarabhanga
01 November 2007, 10:21 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

intellect (from the Latin intellectus) is “discernment or understanding”.

intelligence (from the Latin intelligentia) is “understanding or discernment”.

And both terms are derived from intelligere (literally “to choose between”, meaning “to understand, comprehend, discern or discriminate”).

I can see no difference between “intellect” and “intelligence”, and I have not used the adjective “intelligent”, so I do not really understand your point.

As previously mentioned, the very first application of buddhi was the conception of brahmA (the discrimination of nara and nArAyaNa) ~ so would you call that intellect “intelligent”?

buddhi is identical with mahat.

yajvan
02 November 2007, 10:33 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan,
intellect (from the Latin intellectus) is “discernment or understanding”.
intelligence (from the Latin intelligentia) is “understanding or discernment”.
And both terms are derived from intelligere (literally “to choose between”, meaning “to understand, comprehend, discern or discriminate”).
I can see no difference between “intellect” and “intelligence”, and I have not used the adjective “intelligent”, so I do not really understand your point.
As previously mentioned, the very first application of buddhi was the conception of brahmA (the discrimination of nara and nArAyaNa) ~ so would you call that intellect “intelligent”?

buddhi is identical with mahat.


Namaste sarabhanga,
I see your point as it is supported by intelligentia and intellectus.

My point was with the suffix ence of intelligence. As a noun suffix it suggests a state or condition...e.g. potential. So in the unmanifest Brahman is pure intelligence, the conditon of; not yet arising and being applied. That is my orientation.

So for now we just have a different view on this matter and I will let it rest. I am not suggesting right or wrong - just different.

Thanks for considering the idea.

pranams

sarabhanga
02 November 2007, 06:50 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

We have been discussing tattva (“thatness”), which is (by definition) an abstraction ~ the condition or faculty of ____.

buddhi tattva is “the faculty of Intellect” ~ i.e. “the ability to form conceptions” or “Intelligence”.

buddhi (mahat) existed even before manifestation, and nArAyaNa was conceived in avyakta before any manifestation of his subsequent creation.

nirguNa brahma is pure avyakta, with buddhi arising together with the very first conception of diversity or multiplicity (i.e. mahat).

I suppose that “Intellect” can not be described as “intelligent” until it has actually conceived something, so brahma alone (before any conception or creation) could not be described as “intelligent” ~ but nirguNa brahma is (by definition) indescribable anyway!

buddhitattva = mahAtattva = “intellect” or “the faculty of intelligence”

yajvan
02 November 2007, 07:40 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan,

We have been discussing tattva (“thatness”), which is (by definition) an abstraction ~ the condition or faculty of ____.

buddhi tattva is “the faculty of Intellect” ~ i.e. “the ability to form conceptions” or “Intelligence”.

buddhi (mahat) existed even before manifestation, and nArAyaNa was conceived in avyakta before any manifestation of his subsequent creation.

nirguNa brahma is pure avyakta, with buddhi arising together with the very first conception of diversity or multiplicity (i.e. mahat).

I suppose that “Intellect” can not be described as “intelligent” until it has actually conceived something, so brahma alone (before any conception or creation) could not be described as “intelligent” ~ but nirguNa brahma is (by definition) indescribable anyway!

buddhitattva = mahAtattva = “intellect” or “the faculty of intelligence”

namaste sarabhanga,
yes I agree i.e. nirguNa brahma is (by definition) indescribable anyway!

Even my teacher would preamble 15 min with this notion of the indescribable-ness of the unmanliest. He then would say now that we realize this lets talk of a few of these boundless - boundaries such as pure intelligence. He was so cautious to not corner Brahman with an attribute that the sisya would run off and think Brahman is just that ( small 't' used to suggest a definition on some thing that is beyond definition).

thanks for the post.

yajvan
24 December 2007, 11:40 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,
I was reading Chapter 6 today (6.1.38 Nirvāṇa Prakaranam).
Vasisthi asks, What is the method of worshiping the Lord which destroys all sins and promotes all auspiciousness? ( this was asked back in 6.1.29).

Siva goes on to say ' Do you know who God is?' and discusses this from 6.1.29 to 6.1.34. Starting 6.1.35 discusses Deva Puja with Vasistha...
Now I fast forward to 6.1.38 which is a continuation of Diva Puja, and Lord Siva says


'Meditation alone is true worship. Hence one should constantly worship the Lord of the three worlds by means of meditation. How should one contemplate him? He is pure intelligence, he is as radiant as a hundred thousand suns risen together, he is the light that illumines all lights, he is the inner light, the limitless space is his throat, the firmament is his feet, the directions are his arms, the worlds are the weapons he bears in his hands, the entire universe is hidden in his heart, the gods are hairs on his body, the cosmic potencies are the energies in his body, time is his gate-keeper,and he has thousands of heads, eyes, ears and arms.
Meditation is the offering, meditation is the water offered to the deity to wash his hands and feet, self-knowledge gained through meditation is the flower — indeed all these are directed towards meditation. The self is not realized by any means other than meditation.

If one is able to meditate even for thirteen seconds, even if one is ignorant, one attains the merit of giving away a cow in charity. If one does so for one hundred and one seconds, the merit is that of performing a sacred rite. If the duration is twelve minutes, the merit is a thousand fold. If the duration is of a day,one dwells in the highest realm. This is the supreme yoga, this is the supreme kriya (action or service). One who practices this mode of worship is worshipped by the gods and the demons and all other beings. However, this is external worship.

I shall now declare to you the internal worship of the self which is the greatest among all purifiers and which destroys all darkness completely. This is of the nature of perpetual meditation — whether one is walking or standing, whether one is awake or asleep, in and through all of one’s actions. One should contemplate this supreme Lord who is seated in the heart and who brings about, as it were, all the modifications within oneself.'

ॐनमःिशवाय




pranams,

atanu
25 December 2007, 07:53 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,
I was reading Chapter 6 today (6.1.38 Nirvāṇa Prakaranam).
Vasisthi asks, What is the method of worshiping the Lord which destroys all sins and promotes all auspiciousness? ( this was asked back in 6.1.29).

Siva goes on to say ' Do you know who God is?' ----


Namaste Yajvan,

The whole teaching was posted earlier. Thank you for refreshing and reviving.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=573


Om

yajvan
25 December 2007, 09:18 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan,

The whole teaching was posted earlier. Thank you for refreshing and reviving. http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=573

Om


Namste atanu,
yes, how could I have missed this... There is never a time when picking up this Yoga Vasistha that I not inspired or learn something new from this work.

I was hoping to post the discussion of the coconut and the crow and kākātālīya.

pranams

yajvan
25 December 2007, 04:37 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,

For those that wish to read some of this great work, here is a site offering the pdf with ~ 70 pages of selected slokas and stories.
http://homepage.mac.com/dbhill/.Public/Yoga%20Vasistha.pdf (http://homepage.mac.com/dbhill/.Public/Yoga%20Vasistha.pdf)

For me, this is one of my, if not my, favorite book. It is insightful and one of the more valuable treaties I have had the opportunity to study. I am in debt to sage Valmiki for his works.

pranams,

sarabhanga
25 December 2007, 06:20 PM
I am in debt to sage VALMILKI for his works.




VALMILKI - the author of the Ramayana, is from 'Valmika' meaning an ant-hill.

VALMILKI’s original name was Ratnakar, and he had a dubious career (a robber of sorts). He was fortunate to correct his ways by meeting with some enlightened beings and they give him his new name VALMILKI from 'Valmika' meaning an ant-hill.

VALMILKI, the author of the Ramayana.

Namaste Yajvan,

Sorry to be so pedantic, but the sage’s name is VALMIKI (correctly pronounced vAlmIki) not VALMILKI. :cool1:

yajvan
25 December 2007, 07:27 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

... but the sage’s name is VALMIKI (correctly pronounced vAlmIki)


thank you for the typo correction...the fingers have their own memory.