On approaches to turiya and consciousness

[Ao]

Namaste friends,

I would like to present the following for discussion, not looking for answers per se but merely for an in-depth and analytical approach to the subject.

Taken from http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Turiya/id/578657 (which may or may not be the best source but does at least have a measure of brevity):



In early Hindu philosophy, turiya (also called caturtha) is a state of pure consciousness, or the experience of ultimate reality and truth. It is a fourth state of consciousness that underlies and at the same time transcends three common states of consciousness: (i) the state of waking consciousness (jagrata), (ii) the state of dreaming (svapna), (iii) and dreamless sleep (susupti).

Turiya - Advaita concept

The first two states are defective as experiences of reality and truth because of their flawed dualistic natures of subject and object, self and not-self, ego and non-ego. In the third state, dreamless sleep, one is not conscious of external or internal objects. But that does not mean consciousness is not present there. It is like saying 'I don't see anything in darkness'. The recognition that I don't see anything is what I 'see'. So also in dreamless sleep, one is not conscious of anything and the very fact that this statement is true proves the existence of consciousness during deep sleep.
In other words consciousness is the constant factor in all the three states and it is unaffected by the presence or absence of objects. Consciousness itself does not require to be revealed by another consciousness. It is self-revealed.While everything is presented to consciousness and is revealed by it, consciousness itself is not presented to anything else. It is never an object in relation to another subject. It is that which underlies both subject and object. It is the fourth, the turiya, the brahman.
The Mandukya Upanishad defines turiya as follows,
"The fourth state is not that which is conscious of the subjective, nor that which is conscious of the objective, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is simple consciousness, nor that which is all-sentient mass, nor that which is all darkness. It is unseen, transcendent, the sole essence of the consciousness of self, the completion of the world."

Turiya - Dvaita Vaishnava concepts

Four states of consciousness
Turiya represents consciousness free from material influence. The idea is that consciousness, of which the atman is constituted, exists in our wakeful state of material experience, as it continues during sleep. In sleep we dream and experience the mental realm, whereas during our waking state the physical plane has more bearing on our lives.
Upon awakening from deep dreamless sleep one remembers existing in that condition. This is evidenced by the common expression, 'I slept well!' One cannot remember something one has no experience of.
Thus in deep sleep when intelligence is transformed by tamo guna, the self continues to exist, as it does when intelligence is transformed by rajo guna during the dream condition and during the wakeful condition when intellect is transformed by sattva guna. The self is thus independent of the body and mind. If the physical and mental realms were to shut down, the self would continue to exist. This we know from our experience in deep sleep. Realizing this involves entering the turiya.
God as turiya
Bhagavata Purana 11.15.16 describes Bhagavan with the words turiyakhye (the fourth), the meaning of which is found in the Bhagavad Gita 7.13:
tribhir guna-mayair bhavair ebhih sarvam idam jagat
mohitam nabhijanati mam ebhyah param avyayam
"Deluded by the three [gunas], the whole world does not know Me, who am above them and inexhaustible."
Fifth state in Gaudiya Vedanta
The fourth dimension is the ground of our existence and the goal of all transcendentalists. For the Vedanta philosophers it is perceived variously, either as undifferentiated consciousness or a relationship with the divine. Regarding the latter, Gaudiya Vaishnava Theology concludes that love is greater than ourselves, and it is the greatest aspect of God, one that he himself is motivated by. For them, the nondual consciousness of Vedanta philosophy is realized when we know that we do not belong to ourselves, what to speak of anything belonging to us. If there is any time at which we can accurately say that something belongs to us, it is when, having given ouselves in love to God, we can say that "he is ours." Thus Gaudiya Vaishnavas are interested in turyatitah gopala (Lord Gopala beyond fourth dimension, Gopala-tapani Upanishad 2.96). This is the fifth dimension, in which one comes face to face with Gopala Krishna in Braj (Vraja Dhama), from adhoksaja to aprakrta, from God consciousness to Krishna consciousness. Jiva Gosvami elaborated on the turiya state in his Sandarbhas.

As a corollary to this, I would also like to kindly ask that we consider the elusive nature of consciousness itself in sentient beings' minds. There is an on-going debate in medical science whether or not consciousness can eventually be defined physically. Take memories, for example. When our brains form a new memory, they do so by building "cortical columns" (synapses, groups of neural networks) which have definite physical shapes and are subject to change, strengthening, and decay. There are also different functions for our synapses: purely informative/rote memory (2+3=5, remembering a phone number), phonological/syntactic connections (learning a word in another language), experiential (recalling a past event), etc. However, with this latter, the physical shape of these structures is always in the present and cannot reach out temporally as our minds do when we think about the past experience that formed the memory.

It is of course very easy to say simply, "Turiya is the fourth state of pure consciousness, brahman underlying all, and our consciousness comes from there", but if possible I would like to hear others' thoughts on this matter in a deeper fashion. Please understand that in no way do I mean to denigrate the truth value of the above statement, I'd just like to go into more detail.

Many thanks and peace to you all!

[Onkara]

Namaste Ao
Interesting perspective above on turiya in relation to Islam and one which comes close to the truth using different words and concepts from Islam. :) It will be helfpul in exploring turiya and consciousness further.

Turiya is consciousness, Allah (or Brahman) is consciousness in Vedanta. It requires consciousness to know material objects.

Modern science (and Islam) believe that consciousness arises and is limited to the body-mind. When we die our consciousness dies or passes on in the form of the immortal soul. This soul (or the individual conscious mind) can then move around space (as a ghost), or go to heaven or hell for example.

In Vedanta it is the opposite, consciousness is the foundation in which all material existence arises and is known. Consciousness is unique, imortal and undividable. So when we die, what dies is only the body-mind-memory, but consciousness remains as it was, there is no going or moving around space, for space itself exists in divine consciousness.

Because consciousness is the foundation for science and scientific investigation it remains aloof from scientific proof. We can show that an object is consciousness, we know it, but we cannot put consciousness under a microscope.

At the ultimate level of understanding there is no “merging” or separation from consciousness, these are ideas to help explain the subtlety of consciousness, for you are already That consciousness limited by the sensation of body: form and name. The atman (soul) is consciousness apparently limited by body (form and name).

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


IMHO one cannot have a meaningful conversation about this without considering turīyātīta , beyond the 4th. It is also difficult to talk and access this academically , as personal experience of the 4th brings value in one's perspective and POV.

turya तुर्य - the forth or forming the 4th part; yet there are no 'parts' other then turya being 4th in line of wake , dream and sleep or turīya तुरीय a 4th or 4th part
turīyātīta is turīya + atīta - the 4th + beyond, past. Hence turīyātīta is beyond the 4th. atīta अतीत - gone beyond, pastThat said, we on HDF have talked of turiya exhaustively ... does that suggest we cannot extend the conversation? No, yet if there is a genuine interest in the subject , the following posts will ( IMO) offer a substantial foundation on this matter:

The import of turiya: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1822

Finding turiya : http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2996

Revisting turiya: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3312

praṇām

[sunyata07]

Namaste Ao,

I was just about to post a thread on the topic of Turiya! I would also be very interested to hear what other members of the forum have to say about Consciousness.

I have always found it a pleasant irony that science has largely chosen to ignore the issue of consciousness when it is the basis of understanding everything else in the universe! I will have to read over the Mandukya Upanishad again on the concept behind the states of consciousness and then, total illumination.

And to think I had my doubts about the concept of consciousness at one point some time ago! I had been undergoing a philosophy module as part of my psychology course where we tackled the issues of consciousness (from a purely Western perspective, albeit!). It staggers me how differently modern western philosophy views consciousness in comparison to the east. In a nutshell, there has been debate as to even the existence of consciousness or even a mind. Some western monist philosophers have debated if it is even real and is just a collection of neurons firing in the brain (isn't it a little funny to think all this theory is coming from, in their words, nothing really?); for more info, look up Daniel Dennett and Western materialist philosophy. I will clarify that the topic of consciousness in western philosophy is the surface consciousness in which one perceives the world around him, and not Consciousness as it is understood in the Vedanta.



IMHO one cannot have a meaningful conversation about this without considering turīyātīta , beyond the 4th. It is also difficult to talk and access this academically , as personal experience of the 4th brings value in one's perspective and POV.


Thank you for suggesting the links, Yajvan. I had not even heard of turiyatita (are they in any particular Upanishad?), but I will look up more on this concept.

Namaste.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

I wrote in the post above,


IMHO one cannot have a meaningful conversation about this without considering turīyātīta , beyond the 4th. It is also difficult to talk and access this academically , as personal experience of the 4th brings value in one's perspective and POV.

turya तुर्य - the forth or forming the 4th part; yet there are no 'parts' other then turya being 4th in line of wake , dream and sleep or turīya तुरीय a 4th or 4th part
turīyātīta is turīya + atīta - the 4th + beyond, past. Hence turīyātīta is beyond the 4th. atīta अतीत - gone beyond, pastSvāmī lakṣman-jū says it this way:
when the awareness becomes fully illumined in its own Self and takes a firm hold of turya and does not lose this not even for a moment that then is turīyātīta .

This has some great significance to the sādhu ( both yogī or yoginī). How so? Not even for a moment means this turīyātīta is there in wake, dream and sleep and even death, this body of consciousness is established in Self-awareness.

Now from a kaśmir Śaivism ( some call Trika Śaivism) this turīyātīta is known by 3 names, pending one's station:

worldly people call it turya - the 4th. This name is used because there is no other reference - no direct experience.
yogins give the name rūpātitā¹ - surpassing the touch of one's Self and now the establishment of one's Self (permanently)
jñānī-s - the entire universe is found in this turīya . They call it pracaya or accumulation , heap , mass , quantity = totality. My
teacher would always us the word fullness. This turīya cannot be divided , it is whole in itSelf.The key point - the establishment in one's SELF takes place in turīya (we also write turya).

praṇām

words
rūpātitā - rūpā+ati+tā rūpā = having the form + ati = beyond, surpassing + tā = crossing

[atanu]

Namaste Ao

Liberation comes in knowing oneself as that undividable consciousness or turiya.


Namaste Snip, Ao, Yajvanji, Sunyata and other friends

The problem (to reverse a role from answering to that of a questioner:) ), i have is that when a mosquito bites my friend sitting beside me, i do not sense it. When i feel like crying, my friend does not feel the same. So, why i do not sense this single undivided consciousness, i do not yet fathom. Can we understand this problem?

Om Namah Shivaya

[Ao]

Namaste Snip, Ao, Yajvanji, Sunyata and other friends

The problem (to reverse a role from answering to that of a questioner:) ), i have is that when a mosquito bites my friend sitting beside me, i do not sense it. When i feel like crying, my friend does not feel the same. So, why i do not sense this single undivided consciousness, i do not yet fathom. Can we understand this problem?

Om Namah Shivaya

An interesting aside. This makes me think that just as empathy is a part of our mental faculties but does not touch on the (practical) external world in the same way our senses do, so also is consciousness a part of us without having the same kind of external contact. Where do the distinctions lie? Perhaps musings like these can help us understand a consciousness that both underlies and surpasses all else.

Am eager to hear other thoughts on the matter.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté atanu,



The problem (to reverse a role from answering to that of a questioner:) ), i have is that when a mosquito bites my friend sitting beside me, i do not sense it. When i feel like crying, my friend does not feel the same. So, why i do not sense this single undivided consciousness, i do not yet fathom. Can we understand this problem? Om Namah Shivaya

A most noble question.
When one looks at a beautiful painting they see the full picture. Then with greater appreciation of this, they put their attention on the brush stokes, on the finer colors, on various shades. When one listens to a symphony , one hears it in total, then upon listening for some time the ear goes to the oboe, the strings, the violin, the meter. The awareness is able to dance within the different sounds/vibrations and subtlest of the music.
When one looks at the forest and gardens , all the flowers and bushes spring out. Yet over time one notices the beauty of the spaces between the flowers that allow the flowers to bloom and stand out.

When one breathes in-and-out there is no attention paid to the space in-between the breaths. Over time and with instruction one notices the slight pause/space between each breath; same with each thought.

The upaniṣads tell us this Self ( turīya) is the size of 1/100th of a hair. Are they saying that is its dimension? The wise are telling us it is very subtle, very innocent, yet is pervasive. There is no place it is not i.e. pracaya a heap , mass , quantity = totality.

This turīya is found in these gaps, in the middle, in madhya¹ . We initially must shut out all the distractions initially to appreciate it in meditation. We silence the senses and direct the mind to subtler levels to experience this subtle turīya. We are culturing the mind to experience it very innocently.
Then over time we can entertain activity AND still experience this SELF/turīya simultaneously. This is the essence of karma yoga.

This is the refinement of the nervous system. Hence we come to rūpātitā¹ as our personal experience.

praṇām

words

madhya middlemost , intermediate , central
rūpātitā - rūpā+ati+tā rūpā = having the form + ati = beyond, surpassing + tā = crossing

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam All

I am not at all qualified to speak on Turiya that should not stop me, it is that vegetable we make nice curry out of it, you may ask what has it got to do with Turiya, the 4th stage Mandukya UP speaks off? Nothing but that is all that I know of Turiya.


how do I know this? I don’t, in deep sleep (susupti) we have no desire, create no dream, we must feel the bliss why else we go back to it every night? unfortunately we have no recollection off it, not conscious of it. What to speak of Turiya? I cant because words can not reach it, so says Mandukya.
On that note I come back to Atanuji’s query,not that I have any answer. Why can he the conscious being not feel the bite or the pain of the other conscious being; after all the SELF is the lord of all; inhabitant of the heart of all. He is the source of all; creator and dissolver of all beings. There is nothing he does not know.(6)manduka up

This begs a similar question from me who is seeking the fourth stage? i am a part of this SELF so why do I not know this turiya?


brahma-bhutah prasannatma
na socati na kanksati
samah sarvesu bhutesu
mad-bhaktim labhate param (18.54)

bhaktya mam abhijanati
yavan yas casmi tattvatah
tato mam tattvato jnatva
visate tad-anantaram (55)

Would the above from Bhagvat Gita be considered a state of turiya, seems to me that the cessation of desires, material that is that brings us closer to that stage to know that allusive tattva.

Jai Shree Krishna

[Ao]

This turīya is found in these gaps, in the middle, in madhya¹ . We initially must shut out all the distractions initially to appreciate it in meditation. We silence the senses and direct the mind to subtler levels to experience this subtle turīya. We are culturing the mind to experience it very innocently.

Then over time we can entertain activity AND still experience this SELF/turīya simultaniously. This is the essence of karma yoga.

This is the refinement of the nervous system. Hense we come to rūpātitā¹ as our personal experience.

praṇām

words
madhya middlemost , intermediate , central
rūpātitā - rūpā+ati+tā rūpā = having the form + ati = beyond, surpassing + tā = crossingThis is excellent, Yajvan, thank you.

Following from this onto my second consideration in the first post, what is happening physically in our brains during this process of refinement? We know that the brain is a very plastic organ, subject to constant change and refinement. I will have to look into studies done on the minds of people who spend much time in meditation and similar activities.

While on an everyday level, this can help give us guidance for our own devotion and practices. Truly a very interesting topic!

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

Since we have introduced fullness, totality (pracaya) and rūpātitā found in the above posts, I thought it relevant to offer this from the mālinī vijaya tantra , 2nd chapter, 38th śloka. This is proper as we are in the uttara folder - advanced thinking.

प्रचयंरूपातीतंचसम्यक्तुर्यमुदाहृतं ।
महाप्रचयमिच्छन्तितुर्यातीतंविचक्षणाः ॥३८॥

pracayaṁ rūpātītaṁ ca samyak turyamudāhṛtaṁ|
mahāpracayamicchanti turyātītaṁ vicakṣaṇāḥ ||38||

This says,

Turya -the fourth (turyam) is said to be (udāhṛtam) truly (samyák) pracaya -lit. the Mass, totality- (pracayam) and (ca) rūpātītam -the state beyond rūpastha or deep sleep- (rūpá-atītam).
The wise (vicakṣaṇāḥ) wish (to attain) (icchanti) mahāpracaya -lit. the Great Mass, the great fullness, totality - (mahāpracayam) (also known as) turyātīta - lit. beyond the fourth - (turya-atītam) ||38||

The wise seek to attain the Great Mass, the Great Totality, which lies even beyond the fourth. This most profound condition 'the state beyond the 4th' i.e. turīyātīta ,
where one transcends all four ~bodies~ , conditions, and rests only in Pure Consciousness itself, one's true Essence, we can call Being.

Many say this turyātīta and mahāpracaya and synonymous in one's experience.

One can see why having some flavor of this in one's personal experience brings delight to one's comprehension of this subject.

praṇām

[Onkara]

Namasté friends

Here is a slightly different angle to consider along side the excellent threads here already.

Maya Herself can lead us to assume that nature would be different if we were Self-realised. For example we may imagine that once we have the grace of Self-realisation we will see nature in 4 Dimensional colours for example or be able to experience simultaneously the mosquito tasting the skin and our friend’s irritation all at once. But this idea, if one holds it, is a trap of the mind. The idea that our limited experience will change can be illusive and misleading. The idea that nature (or our life) should be different can be a stumbling block. Keep in mind the fact that our sense experiences are limited to our body are whether we like it or not the body is parkiti itself and need not change for moksha whilst living.

Nature is perfect, nature is working just how the Supreme Being willed it to be. The Lord willed Himself to be many and nature (prakriti with maya) became many. However, the Lord is not without compassion. There is a spiritual/mental "get out of gaol card" within the Lord's lila and one may come to 'see' through His maya and know ones True Self. This True Self is nothing more or less than that very same non-dual being in which all this arises, is sustained and dissolves. That which comes to know the True Self is explained as turiya or consciousness. Consciousness is an integral part of Brahman. This consciousness is the chit which we are told is this satchitananda (or Brahman). Advaita concludes that we cannot be anything different to satchitananda at the highest level of human understanding.

[atanu]

Namasté friends

Maya Herself can lead us to assume that nature would be different if we were Self-realised. For example we may imagine that once we have the grace of Self-realisation we will see nature in 4 Dimensional colours for example or be able to experience simultaneously the mosquito tasting the skin and our friend’s irritation all at once. But this idea, if one holds it, is a trap of the mind. The idea that our limited experience will change can be illusive and misleading. ------

Namaste Snip

Thank you for your answer.

Not only 'The idea that our limited experience will change' but any concept can be illusive and misleading. Kena U. has clear instruction on this 'One who knows Brahman does not know it------'.

But the question i put up was not about Turiya. It is about waking state. I will again show it for you.




So, why i do not sense this single undivided consciousness, i do not yet fathom.


Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Pranam All

Why can he the conscious being not feel the bite or the pain of the other conscious being; after all the SELF is the lord of all; inhabitant of the heart of all. He is the source of all; creator and dissolver of all beings. There is nothing he does not know.(6)manduka up

This begs a similar question from me who is seeking the fourth stage? i am a part of this SELF so why do I not know this turiya?

brahma-bhutah prasannatma
na socati na kanksati
samah sarvesu bhutesu
mad-bhaktim labhate param (18.54)

Namaste Ganeshprasadji

Thank you for the answer, which I believe without any dilemma and doubt.

(53) And casting aside self-sense, force, arrogance, desire, anger, possession, egoless and tranquil in mind, he becomes worthy of becoming one vvith Brahman.
(54) Having become one with Brahman, and being tranquil in spirit, he neither grieves nor desires. Regarding all beings as alike he attains supreme devotion to Me.
(55) Thorough devotion he comes to know Me, what My measure is and who I am in truth; then, having known Me in truth, he forthwith enters into Me.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Onkara]

"So, why i do not sense this single undivided consciousness, i do not yet fathom."

Namasté Atanuji

Can we really answer this question by pointing at consciousness itself? Consciousness is Brahman, correct? Is not consciousness then the ultimate witness and the point at which the mind returns (and cannot fathom)?
If I were to try to show it to you (or anyone asking that question) would I not exhaust myself in doing so first. :) This is why neti-neti, meditation and nama japa are encourage by the scriptures and gurus.

But above I didn’t imply to dodge the question. The last post above is to show that you are already that consciousness asking the question above and to consider yourself different or to think that consciousness will be an experience is wrong. In fact whether you ask the question in jest or complete seriousness makes no difference to consciousness nor does the answer make a difference to consciousness itself!

My point here is that no matter what you do or think, you are that consciousness. So the reason why you do not fathom consciousness is because you are looking for something different to yourSelf and the crunch comes when we find that that what we were looking for is verily in and of that consciousness which is doing the looking.

Please let me know if this raises more questions (or pm me) if of use.

[atanu]

hariḥ oṁ
namasté atanu,

A most noble question.
There is no place it is not i.e. pracaya a heap , mass , quantity = totality.

This turīya is found in these gaps, in the middle, in madhya¹ . We initially must shut out all the distractions initially to appreciate it in meditation. We silence the senses and direct the mind to subtler levels to experience this subtle turīya. We are culturing the mind to experience it very innocently.


Namaste Yajvanji

The question was intended to bring out the concept of adhAsya (superpostion). Without naming it, you have put forth the idea. On a white sheet of cloth one may do patchwork of different colours and hide the white. I wanted to make two points wrt to Andrew's question:

This adhAsya is without beginning, because of dual relationship of the Mind (the internal instrument - also equated with physical brain by western scientists) and Atman -- the owner/source of the Mind. The internal instruments of each individual have different unique designs, memories, constituents. As long as the individual mind persists and remains different from the single sattwik mind called Mahat (Hari), the adhAsya (false colouration) will continue.

So, the question will arise whether the Turiya can at all be known by the mind as its object? We know that scripture says "How will the knower be known?"


Second point can again be inferred from "How will the knower be known?" Even if we removed all patch work from the white sheet of cloth, can we know the sheet as an object? In this case, No. Since the Seer is the white sheet itself. So, my point was that while observing the gaps (when the underlying substratum is exposed), what we are seeing? Can the gap and its contents be seen as an object and equated with knowing the objectless subject called Turiya?

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté atanu,



This adhAsya is without beginning, because of dual relationship of the Mind (the internal instrument - also equated with physical brain by western scientists) and Atman -- the owner/source of the Mind. The internal instruments of each individual have different unique designs, memories, constituents. As long as the individual mind persists and remains different from the single sattwik mind called Mahat (Hari), the adhAsya (false colouration) will continue.

So, the question will arise whether the Turiya can at all be known by the mind as its object? We know that scripture says "How will the knower be known?"

Second point can again be inferred from "How will the knower be known?" Even if we removed all patch work from the white sheet of cloth, can we know the sheet as an object? In this case, No. Since the Seer is the white sheet itself. So, my point was that while observing the gaps (when the underlying substratum is exposed), what we are seeing? Can the gap and its contents be seen as an object and equated with knowing the objectless subject called Turiya? Om Namah Shivaya


Yes, I see what you offer. The upaniṣads inform us , it is the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear. Within the gaps (saṃdhi¹) this turīya is present.Yet it is there all the time as the foundation for wake, dream and sleep.
Now the question : can it be an object of inspection? This is where the sādhu falls repeatedly , trying to hold this turīya like an apple in one's hand ( using your analogy).
This turīya is the raw materials of awareness itself. So it is awareness trying to inspect itself under our direction. this is the pickle of understanding this turīya. It is as if you wish to hold clapping in your hands to inspect it. How can this happen? You cannot hold clapping with the same device that makes clapping occur.

Hence the wisdom of the ages say , one must just be innocent and be this turīya. What's this ? What double talk is this yajvan.
In the beginning stages of entering samādhi ( a yogic name for turīya) the aspirant knows s/he had been somewhere after exiting this condition. Then with some time as the awareness is refined, the aspirant knows when s/he entered and exited this samādhi. It is not there for inspection as if to hold a ball in one's hands and look.

Yet over time, when the SELF chooses to reveal itSELF to itSELF, then this turīya is present all the time - wake, dream , sleep, death. Yet what are we doing ? We are refining the nervous system via practice to hold this perfect silence and activity to occur at the same time.

What is this practice you mention yajvan? The daily practice of entering this turīya to unveil ( really for our awareness to still itself) and for it to just shine through...
where does one do this? At any saṃdhi. The gap of a breath, the gap of a thought, the gap between waking and sleeping, between dreaming and sleeping
( this take a bit more culturing of the nervous system). Where there is a gap there is the possibly of turīya to shine through.

Just like clouds. Once clouds move away what comes though? Light. Yet was the sun really covered? No - it shines all the time. Like that this turīya is there all the time.

praṇām

words

saṃdhi - containing a conjunction or transition from one to the other ; an example is saṃdhya or twilight - the transition from night to morning, from day to evening.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté Ao



[/list].

Following from this onto my second consideration in the first post, what is happening physically in our brains during this process of refinement?

If you wish to pursue this interest, the transcendental meditation program® Has conducted over 300 lab tests on meditiators to quantify what occurs with EKG, EEG, blood cortisol , etc. all that from a body-mind POV. I looked at the studies some years back and found the differences striking - between meditators and the non-meditating control groups.

Now I have not viewed any data done with those that are completely realized beings a.k.a. exponents of Reality i.e. completely established in mahāpracaya - the Great Mass, the great fullness, totality.

praṇām

[atanu]

hariḥ oṁ
Since we have introduced fullness, totality (pracaya) and rūpātitā found in the above posts, I thought it relevant to offer this from the mālinī vijaya tantra , 2nd chapter, 38th śloka. This is proper as we are in the uttara folder - advanced thinking.

प्रचयंरूपातीतंचसम्यक्तुर्यमुदाहृतं ।
महाप्रचयमिच्छन्तितुर्यातीतंविचक्षणाः ॥३८॥

pracayaṁ rūpātītaṁ ca samyak turyamudāhṛtaṁ|
mahāpracayamicchanti turyātītaṁ vicakṣaṇāḥ ||38||

This says,

Turya -the fourth (turyam) is said to be (udāhṛtam) truly (samyák) pracaya -lit. the Mass, totality- (pracayam) and (ca) rūpātītam -the state beyond rūpastha or deep sleep- (rūpá-atītam).
The wise (vicakṣaṇāḥ) wish (to attain) (icchanti) mahāpracaya -lit. the Great Mass, the great fullness, totality - (mahāpracayam) (also known as) turyātīta - lit. beyond the fourth - (turya-atītam) ||38||

The wise seek to attain the Great Mass, the Great Totality, which lies even beyond the fourth. This most profound condition 'the state beyond the 4th' i.e. turīyātīta , where one transcends all four ~bodies~ , conditions, and rests only in Pure Consciousness itself, one's true Essence, we can call Being.
----

praṇām

Namaste Yajvanji

I wished to say a few things on Turiyatita as there might be some confusion in the mind of readers that there was something beyond Turiya to be attained. Mandukya Upanishad simply says: The Turya must be known. It does not teach of any higher state or higher being.

As per Kashmir Saivism understanding:



The individual subjective body travels in the five states of jagrat - wakefulness, svapna - dreaming, sushupti - deep sleep, turya - the fourth state, and turyatita - beyond the fourth.

Abhinavagupta explains, that when there is vividness of objectivity, that is the state of jagrat. When this vividness is shaky and unstable, that is svapna, and when this vividness is gone completely that is sushupti. When super-observation is found that is turya, and when objectivity is individually dead and found full of life in totality, that is turyatita.

The Turiatita is the perceiver who has gone unto Turiya or transcended into Turiya, which itself is devoid of individually.

Vedanta states seven states of perceiver consciousness, wherein the last and the highest stage is Turiya itself:

1. śubhecchā (good desire)
2. vicāraṇā (inquiry)
3. tanumānasī (thinned mind)
4. sattvāpatti (attainment of sattva)
5. asaṃsakti (non-attachment)
6. padārtha-bhāvanā (analysis of objects)
7. turīya (fourth or final stage)

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=48498&postcount=8

As stated in earlier posts, Shri Ramana Maharshi teaches that when Self is seen as existing in four states, then there is question of Turiya -- the fourth. But when the Turiya is seen as the Self itself -- as one whole and as the gates for the three other steps it is called Turiyatita. This view is supported, as shown below, from Shruti:

MAITRAYANA-BRAHMAYA-UPANISHAD

(7) There is the person in the eye, there is he who walks as in sleep, he who is sound asleep, and he who is above the sleeper: these are the four conditions (of the Self), and the fourth is greater than all.
(8) Brahman with one foot moves in the three, and Brahman with three feet is in the last.
.........

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté atanu,

thank you for your post... another way of saying this ( too) is turyātīta occurs when turya is stable in one's experience. It is there 7x24x365.

It is good to drive to clarity on this matter - as it is one of appreciation and of getting a real view on this turyātīta.

There is more to be said, but will await others' input and your further assessments.

praṇām

[saidevo]

namaste everyone.

It is rather amusing to read--this top-down approach to turIya and the Self. On the one hand we say that we are the Self--or rather the Self is us; and on the other, we say that we must attain and be established in the state of turIya to know the Self in its pUrNatvam--fullness, and enjoy its Ananda--bliss.

It seems we do not have to do anything to know and experience the Self, except to let the Self assert its Self through all the muck of individuality that marks our koshas--sheaths (physical, astral, mental, causal) as many and different.

The paradox of the TWO WE's is caused by adhyAsa--imposition, of the consciousness (light) of the Self on an individual set of antaH-karaNa, which is otherwise known as the mind. Therefore, all we have to do is to mind our mind.

Human mind is pre-emptive and multi-threaded in action, to use the Infotech terminology. All that is required is to shut down the extraneous threads and let the mind run in a single thread as tailadhAra--flow of oil, without any break. To the extent our mind (not we if you please) does it, the gaps of turIya will widen and reveal its nature as the Self, ripping off the systolic-diastolic vibrations of breathing, thoughts, etc. that punctuate the state of turIya.

This is not to say that the mind must be killed--only that it must be stilled into a single thread of a single thought, to let the light of the Self shine through assertively (rather than be passively reflected), and the Ananda of the Self fill up the mind. This single thread of thought may be a mantra in meditation, a mantra in ajapa--involuntary litany, or simply sustained awareness of the gaps of turIya and the extraneities to the Self.

It is the mind that clouds over the Self, and it is the mind that lets the Self shine through. The mind is the knower until the Self is known, and when that knowledge arrives, the mind becomes shuddha--pure, always filled with the sat-chit-Ananda of the Self in sahaja-samAdhi, with the knower-knowledge-knowing limitations merging into the single entity of the Self as in a jnAni, whose all koshas shine with the light of the Self.

[atanu]

namaste everyone.

It seems we do not have to do anything to know and experience the Self, except to let the Self assert its Self through all the muck of individuality that marks our koshas--sheaths (physical, astral, mental, causal) as many and different.

The paradox of the TWO WE's is caused by adhyAsa--imposition, of the consciousness (light) of the Self on an individual set of antaH-karaNa, which is otherwise known as the mind. Therefore, all we have to do is to mind our mind.


Namaste saidevoji

I agree on this, noting that according to Shankara, the imposition is two way -- the inertness of mind on Self and intelligence of Self on inert mind. JUst as a hot red iron ball may seem to be having property of agni, which though subtle may appear as hard due to its association with the iron ball.


This is not to say that the mind must be killed--only that it must be stilled into a single thread of a single thought, to let the light of the Self shine through assertively (rather than be passively reflected), and the Ananda of the Self fill up the mind. This single thread of thought may be a mantra in meditation, a mantra in ajapa--involuntary litany, or simply sustained awareness of the gaps of turIya and the extraneities to the Self.
It is the mind that clouds over the Self, and it is the mind that lets the Self shine through. The mind is the knower until the Self is known, and when that knowledge arrives, the mind becomes shuddha--pure, always filled with the sat-chit-Ananda of the Self in sahaja-samAdhi, with the knower-knowledge-knowing limitations merging into the single entity of the Self as in a jnAni, whose all koshas shine with the light of the Self.

Respectfully, i disagree here (based on Guru Ramana's teachings, which is ajAtivAda of advaita.

According to Guru Ramana (which is supported from Mandukya Karika), the mind is manifestation of desire. Mind, though beginningless is destroyable, while Brahman is not (Note: This is theoretical for me). While teaching that a transparent mind is maintained by sadhu in the state of Jivan mukti, He says that manonAsa (disappearance of the entity called individual mind) and manolaya (sleep-submergence) give different results. Submergence of mind as in sleep inevitably leads to rise of the mind again. But manonAsa (with the established knowledge that the mind is only a bundle of thoughts arising of Self and with individuality gone is not associated with individual me), a state where repeated submergence and rise do not take place is attained. This He calls the sahaja state.

In this regard, i will point out that the mind and consequent fragmentation and jiva parts are not in Turiya-Brahman (as per scripture, which allows no difference in Brahman). Both the Dvaita and advaita schools criticise the VA teaching that the jivas form part of the Brahman. The former schools hold that Turiya-Brahman is entirely free of division and devoid of mind. In other words, the Seer and the Thinker are products and not the root, which is division and duality free.

The above is as per advaita and particularly aJAtivada as taught by Shri Ramana.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

Note: I am concerned that Ao may be getting upset about the direction of this discussion. Sorry.

[Onkara]

Namaste Atanu and Saidevo
I am glad you raise the point of manonAsa (disappearance of the entity called mind). As it raises the question: How does consciousness (or turiya) know itself (without mind)?

[atanu]

Namaste Atanu and Saidevo
I am glad you raise the point of manonAsa (disappearance of the entity called mind). As it raises the question: How does consciousness (or turiya) know itself (without mind)?

Namaste Snip

This an important question, which has been partly answered above (i think).

Brihadaranyaka U. teaches that the functions of knowing and sensing are immortal. What is lost is is the sense of individuality, the sense of a personal mind and thus the tendency of associating the thoughts arising in Self as my thought/my mind etc. The scripture that there is no knower but Him attains reality.

This is how i comprehend it.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Onkara]

Namaste Snip

This an important question, which has been partly answered above (i think).

Brihadaranyaka U. teaches that the functions of knowing and sensing are immortal. What is lost is is the sense of individuality, the sense of a personal mind and thus the tendency of associating the thoughts arising in Self as my thought/my mind etc. The scripture that there is no knower but Him attains reality.

This is how i comprehend it.

Om Namah Shivaya
Namasté Atanu
Thanks for the answer. I think you are correct too :) I like the teaching that the mind is desire, it helps a lot.

Logically if we stop thoughts, then there must be someone there to do the stopping. Likewise if we see thoughts as "mine" or "yours" then again we enforce a duality of owner and object (albeit known to be only apparent with further investigation). The whole crux of the problem rests on one single deep rooted idea: "I am the body-mind-intellect". This is considered an error of sorts in Advaita.

I conclude that the body-mind-intellect i.e. thoughts, continue but as you say, what is lost is the sense of individuality which is found to arrise with the "I am the body" idea.

manonAsa is an important topic, because, in my opinion, there is an overlap of the "no mind" or "no thoughts" teachings and Advaita teaching found today under the neo-advaita school which appears to pick up ideas which feel right rather than are traditional. In my personal opinion the term "no mind" is dominated by Zen philosophy as Buddhist believe the world arises in the mind and mind must "stop" it seems. From an Vedanta perspective the foundation is Brahman (satchitananda) or consciousness and not mind. If the aspirant is really serious they need to be clear on this topic.

This leads me to ask how Sri Ramana explains mind to be destroyable. How does he describe this, as I think the context will clarify further?

I would agree that mind is a part of prakriti (as explained above) so mind too is transient and that implies it is created and can be destroyed, but that which creates, sustains and destroys prakirit (including mind) is Brahman - Sri Krishna. Mind is His to destory, not "mine". This leads us back to the topic of Shakti (already discussed as being one with Brahman, but appearing as two to our minds).

[Ao]

Note: I am concerned that Ao may be getting upset about the direction of this discussion. Sorry.

Not at all! :) This third page has been most fascinating, and if no one shares my interest in the physical manifestations of these cognitive changes, I'm more than happy to abandon the point.

Regarding Snip's allusion to Zen's teaching on "no mind" vis a vis Saidevo's mention of a single-flowing thread, I think some clarity will help move the issue forward. To me, the teaching of "no mind" is a direct result of non-duality and therefore in line with Advaitan thought. There can only objectively be a computer screen in front of me if there is also a non-computer screen in front of me to act as its negation and hence delineate the former as being present. A mind game to break down the distinctions we place on the world around us.

This same thinking, though it may be expressed in completely different terms like Snip's, Saidevo's, Yajvan's gaps or even Atanu's patchwork cloth, all leads to the same conclusion--namely, the unity of all. It is up to each of us how we realize that unity, and discussions like these fill me with a great sense of wonder and joy.

[Onkara]

Regarding Snip's allusion to Zen's teaching on "no mind" vis a vis Saidevo's mention of a single-flowing thread, I think some clarity will help move the issue forward. To me, the teaching of "no mind" is a direct result of non-duality and therefore in line with Advaitan thought. There can only objectively be a computer screen in front of me if there is also a non-computer screen in front of me to act as its negation and hence delineate the former as being present. A mind game to break down the distinctions we place on the world around us.

This same thinking, though it may be expressed in completely different terms like Snip's, Saidevo's, Yajvan's gaps or even Atanu's patchwork cloth, all leads to the same conclusion--namely, the unity of all. It is up to each of us how we realize that unity, and discussions like these fill me with a great sense of wonder and joy.

namasté Ao
Two points :)
1) "No mind" implies that we will not have a mind, this, in my opinion can add confusion because we still must recognise the teaching of Sri Krishna i.e. Samkhya philosophy. Unless anyone can provide a reason not to?

It is non-dual, I agree, and this is why it is picked up by people who feel it explains the next step. However, isn't one at risk of confusing themselves in thinking that they can have no mind?

2) It is up to each one of us, this is the paradox. We are told to find a non-dual unity, which goes beyond being individuals, yet it is the individual who apparently must strive to arrive at the point of enlightenment.

[atanu]

Namasté Atanu
This leads me to ask how Sri Ramana explains mind to be destroyable. How does he describe this, as I think the context will clarify further?


Namaste Snip.

Vedanta position is that under overall plan of Self only, the respective leaders of Shushupti, Taijjassa, and Vaisvanara create and control their respective worlds. But with more and more clarity, it becomes obvious that the whole process originates from Self, which does not change and remains unborn.

Shri Ramana does not, to begin with, teach about a real individual mind. So, there is actually nothing to destroy, except the notion that there is something -- some intelligent apparatus called 'my mind'. He does not deny mahat - the universal sattwik mind. But that again, he holds, is a product and thus not necessary for Sat-Chit-Anand.

Shri Ramana's technique is rather simple at surface and requires unbroken enquiry with every thought as to whose thought it was? In other words, it amounts to holding on to the "I" sense, which according Guru, is of Self alone and also is the beginning of samsara. Beyond that He says, is beyond the capacity of ego. Individual must only strive to centralise the wandering mind and rest would follow from power of Self. The answer to the aforesaid query is not rational and never resolves. But as Vasista teaches rAma "I have enquired after the 'I' for eons and not found it", this process helps and the knowledge gets deepened. Shri Ramana does not deny the ego as notion. It is the ego that initiates the dialogues. Even if the enquiry fails to confer the rise of knowledge, it helps to keep one centralised. The method is only possible for some practitioners. Thus he recommends surrender as another option for most others.There is literature on the process.

Shri Ramana was a brahmarishi and to label His teaching as Neo is an insult that some jealous people might resort to. We have seen it suggested in HDF by some who proclaimed Shri Laksman Joo as teacher. Funny thing is that Shri Lakshman Joo himself visited Shri Ramana several times -- prostrating to Him -- as is the practice among us. It is immaturity to label Gurus. In every shcool there would be some freshers/theorists who might probably be holding that only the theoretical knowledge is sufficient. But that is not so. And that has been my point all along. The Turiya must be known.


I would agree that mind is a part of prakriti (as explained above) so mind too is transient and that implies it is created and can be destroyed, but that which creates, sustains and destroys prakirit (including mind) is Brahman - Sri Krishna. Mind is His to destory, not "mine".

Yes and No. Ekanta would answer this nicely. You are speculating this way becuse a-priori you are holding yourself as real and different from Shri Krishna -- the Self of you and of All. You are a-priori creating 'mine' and 'His', which is falsity.

Yes. Because unconditional surrender is this only -- just Be.

No. Since, Shri Krishna Himself says that He abides not in objects. Here the knowledge of adhyAsa is required. I repeat that Shri Ramana does not deny ego in a sadhaka. And Shri Krishna Himself teaches "Renunciate I am doer notion". Neti-Neti process will also lead to rejection of all mental and sensual adhAra, which props up the so-called mind.

So, there is indeed something to be lost.

I have rambled for long.

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Namaste Ao

WRT to 'No Mind' and 'one single flowing mind'

Both Buddha and Vedanta teach of the unborn unchanging substratum. Vedanta also recognises Mahat, whom some call Hari -- the pure Sattwik Mind, as Manifestor, as Maintainer, as Destroyer. Yet this Sattwik Mind has its stable in the immutable 'NO MIND'.

It does not matter whether you believe in 'No Mind' or 'Mahat' -- since it is a futile intellectual argument/exercise. The scriptures teach that the Supreme being unfolds and withdraws the mind and its contents just as spider unfolds its network and withdraws it. So, this is happening at a level beyond us.

But what is taught in scripture is:The Turiya must be known. (The Turiya is Mindless). And thus the mindless primeval state must be known.

I think that should be simple.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Ao]

namasté Ao
Two points :)
1) "No mind" implies that we will not have a mind, this, in my opinion can add confusion because we still must recognise the teaching of Sri Krishna i.e. Samkhya philosophy. Unless anyone can provide a reason not to?

It is non-dual, I agree, and this is why it is picked up by people who feel it explains the next step. However, isn't one at risk of confusing themselves in thinking that they can have no mind?

2) It is up to each one of us, this is the paradox. We are told to find a non-dual unity, which goes beyond being individuals, yet it is the individual who apparently must strive to arrive at the point of enlightenment.

Apologies for cutting in, Atanu.

I think it is easier to understand the concept of "no mind" as that of a "perfectly still mind"--one at rest in unity. To me this more accurately reflects the Zen teachings using the "mu" character (mumon, mugen, etc.). However, that said, one can always be at risk of confusing oneself! ;) Personally, I like a lot of Zen's esoteric teachings but find its core a little hollow. Still, these points can be useful for our discussion here, I think.

[atanu]

Apologies for cutting in, Atanu.

I think it is easier to understand the concept of "no mind" as that of a "perfectly still mind"--one at rest in unity. To me this more accurately reflects the Zen teachings using the "mu" character (mumon, mugen, etc.). However, that said, one can always be at risk of confusing oneself! ;) Personally, I like a lot of Zen's esoteric teachings but find its core a little hollow. Still, these points can be useful for our discussion here, I think.

Namaste Ao

I do not know whether this post is in response to post 29 or not. But the Veda view is that there is not a Mind and another Self. Veda says that the truth is One. Self is without a second. Anyway, we may further discuss, if i know whether you have replied after reading the post 29 or not?

Om

[atanu]

namasté Ao
Two points :)
2) It is up to each one of us, this is the paradox. We are told to find a non-dual unity, which goes beyond being individuals, yet it is the individual who apparently must strive to arrive at the point of enlightenment.

Namaste Snip

Actually it is not a paradox. It is said in scripture that consciousness is all this. Yoga Vasista teaches "Whatever is true in consciousness is true, since consciousness is true". It is the magical power of consciousness (also called kalpataru or kAmdhenu) that holds notion of being this and that and many and one etc etc. The released ones do not hold such notions. It is simple for them. For us, wherein, the notions are brick solid, effort is required. Frankly I do not see any paradox.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Ao]

Namaste Ao

I do not know whether this post is in response to post 29 or not. But the Veda view is that there is not a Mind and another Self. Veda says that the truth is One. Self is without a second. Anyway, we may further discuss, if i know whether you have replied after reading the post 29 or not?

Om

Namaste

No, my post was in reply to #27. I read your #29 after submitting it, and understand the Vedic view here (although it is a certainty that I can always learn more).

[Onkara]

Yes and No. Ekanta would answer this nicely. You are speculating this way because a-priori you are holding yourself as real and different from Shri Krishna -- the Self of you and of All. You are a-priori creating 'mine' and 'His', which is falsity.

Yes. Because unconditional surrender is this only -- just Be.

Namasté Atanuji
There is a subtle point in the above a-priori perception you highlight which I feel is useful for us to explore. Sri Krishna speaks of “His prakriti” in this a-priori sense, as if it were separate to Him. Mind is within His prakriti. If we say He experiences His prakriti then so mind is witnessed by Him also.

Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind,
Intellect, ego-principle:
These are the eight divisions of
My prakriti, O Arjuna.1 (Bhagavad Gita 7.4)

It is no coincidence then that we too experience the mind, we witness its movements. However, as I mentioned on the Dream thread, mind is only an object when we objectify it for explanation. Likewise so is the Lord’s prakriti only an object when we talk of it. In order to explore it we need to objectify it, yet we know it exists without having to talk about it. Likewise we objectify Shri Krishna when we do puja, I bow to His lotus feet. He who knows Brahman is Brahman, even if he speaks of it objectively.

This is the trap of mind I speak of in the earlier thread. To assume that I will feel the mosquito bite your friend after realization is to assume that it is wrong to objectify.

Although I appreciate you point is slightly different (an I agree with you my friend. Unconditional surrender is key). This is why I must also add the question? Is it possible to “Just Be”? Being can include philsophising, dobuting and even posting on forums. All of which may appear to be symbolic of missing the supreme goal. But all these actions are only His lila and our doubt to know it as such is maya.

---
Bonus question :) - Does Saivism have a different view or is it identical?

[Onkara]

Namaste atanuji
It seems we are saying the same in different ways :)

I wil take a back seat


Namaste Snip

Actually it is not a paradox. It is said in scripture that consciousness is all this. Yoga Vasista teaches "Whatever is true in consciousness is true, since consciousness is true". It is the magical power of consciousness (also called kalpataru or kAmdhenu) that holds notion of being this and that and many and one etc etc. The released ones do not hold such notions. It is simple for them. For us, wherein, the notions are brick solid, effort is required. Frankly I do not see any paradox.

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Namasté Atanuji
There is a subtle point in the above a-priori perception you highlight which I feel is useful for us to explore. Sri Krishna speaks of “His prakriti” in this a-priori sense, as if it were separate to Him. Mind is within His prakriti. If we say He experiences His prakriti then so mind is witnessed by Him also.



Namaste Snip

Exactly. That is why i said that eventually it is "I" of the primordial Purusha. Consciousness is situated as we and using that 'we' must work to remove the ignorance of separated selfs, yet ultimately, everything must be known as the unborn consciousness.

You are correct. To “Just Be” is the most difficult attainement. So, we try to engage the mind in things that will not add to adharma.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Onkara]

To “Just Be” is the most difficult attainement. So, we try to engage the mind in things that will not add to adharma.

Om Namah Shivaya

Wonderful :) then we can understand the meaning quoted below (http://www.srigranth.org):


ਜੋਤੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਮਿਲਾਈਐ ਸੁਰਤੀ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਸੰਜੋਗੁ ॥
जोती जोति मिलाईऐ सुरती सुरति संजोगु ॥
Joṯī joṯ milā▫ī▫ai surṯī suraṯ sanjog.
When one's light merges into the Light, and one's intuitive consciousness is joined with the Intuitive Consciousness,

ਹਿੰਸਾ ਹਉਮੈ ਗਤੁ ਗਏ ਨਾਹੀ ਸਹਸਾ ਸੋਗੁ ॥
हिंसा हउमै गतु गए नाही सहसा सोगु ॥
Hinsā ha▫umai gaṯ ga▫e nāhī sahsā sog.
then one's cruel and violent instincts and egotism depart, and skepticism and sorrow are taken away.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਜਿਸੁ ਹਰਿ ਮਨਿ ਵਸੈ ਤਿਸੁ ਮੇਲੇ ਗੁਰੁ ਸੰਜੋਗੁ ॥੨॥
गुरमुखि जिसु हरि मनि वसै तिसु मेले गुरु संजोगु ॥२॥
Gurmukẖ jis har man vasai ṯis mele gur sanjog. ||2||
The Lord abides within the mind of the Gurmukh, who merges in the Lord's Union, through the Guru. ||2||

ਕਾਇਆ ਕਾਮਣਿ ਜੇ ਕਰੀ ਭੋਗੇ ਭੋਗਣਹਾਰੁ ॥
काइआ कामणि जे करी भोगे भोगणहारु ॥
Kā▫i▫ā kāmaṇ je karī bẖoge bẖogaṇhār.
If I surrender my body like a bride, the Enjoyer will enjoy me.

[atanu]

Wonderful :) then we can understand the meaning quoted below (http://www.srigranth.org):

Kā▫i▫ā kāmaṇ je karī bẖoge bẖogaṇhār.
If I surrender my body like a bride, the Enjoyer will enjoy me.

Namaste Snip

:) That is wonderful and honey. Some will say sweet mAyA has covered up dry old Brahman.

However, being given to worry too much, cannot but have apprehension that the enjoyer may complain:

And the other day the whole night thrusome
was it you who snored so gruesome?

(From a gibberish poem of Shri Sukumar Ray, father of Satyajit Ray.)

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


I am happy to see our posters qualify their statements on the knowledge that is offered. This is very important.

It suggests a view of the truth from one angle then another. That does not infer angle A is better then angle B.
Atanu has been correct to qualify the views from vedānta and me from the POV of kaśmir śaivism, or others from sāṃkhyā, or yoga, or the nyāya¹ school ( which yet is to be offered). It is good we do this so we can see the different views offered.

Now that said, there is no doubt that the maṇḍūkaya upaniṣad is brilliant regarding this turīya... it tells us turīya is na prājña - not cognizable as if it were an object. It is key to remember this.

Yet this turīya can be experienced, this too we should not forget. Who says so? The kaṭhopaniṣad (1.3.12) It ( the SELF) is perceived by seers ( that could/would be us) in their penetrating subtle intuitive thinking. This word 'thinking' is not the best translation, it should be more like budhya or 'awaken-ness', but will leave this for another time.

Now atanu was kind enough to remember abhinavagupti-ji and his views from a kaśmir śaivism perspective. This muni is brillant and his insight, depth and breath of knowledge from a being that lived Reality is most uplifting to read. I mention this as the knowledge of turīya is more then meets the eye. Let me explain.

In one of his most noted works ( for me) the parā-trīśikā vivaraṇa , he mentions the following, In all dealings , what ever happens whether it is a matter of knowledge or of action - all that arsies in the fourth stage turyabhuvi i.e. in parāvāk in an undifferentiated (gatabhedaṁ) way.
This to the avg. reader may mean lttle , but clearly suggest spanda¹ ( some vibration some movement ) in this turīya. My teacher called it Self-referral. We will talk of this at a later date.

What does this have to do with anything? If we look at the maṇḍūkaya upaniṣad it says this turīya is alakṣaṇa ( a+lakṣaṇa) without a mark i.e. without qualities. Because it is unseen (adṛṣṭa) and cannot be grasped (agārhya) because it is not an object. Yet in kaśmir śaivism it's nature suggests spanda.

See how we can look at this differently yet not be in opposition ?

So for the esteemed HDF reader - let us go back to vedānta and revisit a key upaniṣad aforementioned - the kaṭhopaniṣad ( kaṭha upaniṣad ).
Note this upaniṣad IMHO is not considered pure vedānta but is sāṃkhya by nature.

Let's look to the 10th and 11th śloka of the 1st chapter, the 3rd & 4th vallī (1.3.10-11). My question has much to do with the notion of 'beyond the 4th' , it says the following:

Beyond the senses are their objects
Beyond sense-objects is the mind
Beyond the mind resides the intellect
Beyond the intellect is the great SELF ( called out as ātmā-mahān)<--- I stand corrected on the use of this word - see atanu's next post for the correction.


At this point we are all comfortable and are pretty much at home with this wisdom, yet continuing in the 11th sūtra it says the following:

Beyond the great (Self) is the unmanifest
Beyond the unmanifest is puruṣa
Beyond puruṣa none there is ( or said another way there is no more, this is the end)
That is the destination, that is the final refuge.

Dearest friends - where then is turīya - is it not the Self or the unmanifest? Yet there is something beyond this ( turya-atītam) ?
How can this be?

praṇām

words

nyāya - that into which a thing goes back i.e. an original type , standard , method , rule
a darśana or school of philosophy delivered by gautama (one of the 6 darśanas ) so called , because it 'goes into' all subjects physical and metaphysical .
spanda - throbbing , throb , quiver , pulse , vibration

[atanu]

--- the kaṭhopaniṣad ( kaṭha upaniṣad ).
Note this upaniṣad IMHO is not considered pure vedānta but is sāṃkhya by nature.

Let's look to the 10th and 11th śloka of the 1st chapter, the 3rd & 4th vallī (1.3.10-11). My question has much to do with the notion of 'beyond the 4th' , it says the following:

Beyond the senses are their objects
Beyond sense-objects is the mind
Beyond the mind resides the intellect
Beyond the intellect is the great SELF ( called out as ātmā-mahān)


At this point we are all comfortable and are pretty much at home with this wisdom, yet continuing in the 11th sūtra it says the following:

Beyond the great (Self) is the unmanifest
Beyond the unmanifest is puruṣa
Beyond puruṣa none there is ( or said another way there is no more, this is the end)
That is the destination, that is the final refuge.




Namaste Yajvanji

There seems to a is a mix-up between Mahat and Mahan Atman on side and atman on the other. The chathurta-Turya is the goal - the Purusha, the Self, the atman. What is originated from the unmanifest moola prakriti is the Mahat. And what manifests the moola prakriti - pragnya ghana is the Self.

The verses are below:



Katha U.

indriyebhyaH paraa hyarthaa arthebhyashcha paraM manaH .
manasastu paraa buddhirbuddheraatmaa mahaanparaH .. 10..

mahataH paramavyaktamavyaktaatpurushhaH paraH .
purushhaanna paraM ki.nchitsaa kaashhThaa saa paraa gatiH .. 11..

eshha sarveshhu bhuuteshhu guuDho.a.atmaa na prakaashate .
dR^ishyate tvagryayaa buddhyaa suukshmayaa suukshmadarshibhiH .. 12..

yachchhedvaaN^manasii praaGYastadyachchhejGYaana aatmani .
GYaanamaatmani mahati niyachchhettadyachchhechchhaanta aatmani .. 13..



1-III-10. The sensory objects are subtler than the senses, and subtler than the sensory objects is mind. But intellect is subtler than mind and subtler than intellect is Mahat (the Hiranyagarbha).


1-III-11. The unmanifested (avyakta) is subtler than Mahat (Hiranyagarbha) and subtler than the unmanifested is Purusha. There is nothing subtler than Purusha. That is the end, that is the supreme goal.


1-III-12. This Self hidden in all beings does not shine. But by seers of subtle and pointed intellect capable of perceiving subtle objects, It is seen.


1-III-13. Let the wise man merge speech in his mind, merge that (mind) into the intelligent self and the intelligent self into the Mahat. (Let him then) merge the Mahat into the peaceful Self.


The word used, in these sets of verses, is not maha atman but param manah or mahat, which originates from the unmanifest mola prakriti; The dream mind of light and shade, which is intermediate between the dark sleep and the waking.

The vaisvanaro is the waking world (A of AUM).
The mahat is Hiranyagarbha, the mahat, world soul, equivalent of dream state of shushupti, where all creation takes place. (U of AUM)
Mahat has origin in Pragnya Ghana, unmanifest moola prakriti, which is the first step and manifested Pragnya of Self. (M of AUM).
Self is transcendental (OM) into which the world soul Mahat dissolves.Katha Upanishad 1.3.11 - 1.3.12 clarify together that Purusha and the Self are the same Being beyond unmanifest Pragnya Ghana .

You may like to examine the above and distinguish between mahat (the first mind), the unmanifest, and the Atma-Purusha, the hidden manifestor of Pragnya.

Mahan atman word is used at places for Nachiketa himself (I.1.16) and also for Mahat (III.2.7). One may note that Maha is usually used for the embodied.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Shankara in his bhasya of Brihadaranyaka upanishad has explained concisely that the hidden Self, the Param Purusha, is the manifestor of Pragnya, wherein Hiranyagarbha the world soul sprouts.

Om

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast&#233; atanu,

what you offer makes sense and 'breaks the code' . Yet do you not find it interesing that within the unmanifest there are differences?

A ~part~ is prakṛti , some wish to call pradhāna. This is the home of the guna-s with no differences, yet no need to bring this into view as yet.
For me it is of great interest to consider within the unmanifest there is something that is subtler, and there we find puruṣa.

Now the wise, me thinks , can be doing this discrimination ( splitting this up) for our benefit in undertanding. Why so ? Because we are told this turīya is pracaya is a heap , mass , quantity = totality, as I have mentioned previously.

That is why I hold turya-atīta as having merit. How so ? Can this unmanifest ~begin~ below the intellect , but not yet fully submerged in akṣara ? See my point? Then this turya-atīta makes sense ( to me) and it is beyond just a taste of it, and when fully established it then holds true to be beyond this initial transcending the intellect.


praṇām

[atanu]

namast&#233; atanu,
what you offer makes sense and 'breaks the code' . Yet do you not find it interesing that within the unmanifest there are differences?
praṇām

Namaste Yajvanji

Thank you for considering the code as broken (solved i suppose).

Yes. The unmanifest is called the kArana -- the cause. It has all designs (desires), which only sprout in dreams and further solidify in jagrat (waking). Poets say that the unmanifest is like an uncut slab of marble, in which the sculptor (Self) has visualised the design of shapes, which are yet to be cut and carved out. Yet, those are mental designs and not yet sensually manifest (as is the situation in deep sleep).


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

So, though non-duality characterises both the Shshupti and the Turiya, the latter alone is truly non-dual and known so while being fully awake.

Turiyatita is defined as one who has gone through the fourth state. When the fourth state Turiya itself is non-dual, therefore Tutiyatita cannot be the second being. The Turiya is thus desribed in Mandukya Upanishad:


That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual.

So, what is described as non-dual explicitly in sruti, should be taken as non-dual only, without any other speculation.

From our end there are three sensual states and one transcendental state. But from Turyiatita's point of view, the Self alone (the chaturtha alone) exists, yet Turiyatita is swantantra-free to roam through states and animate forms.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[saidevo]

namaste Atanu and others.

In reply to my statement in post no.21:

"It seems we do not have to do anything to know and experience the Self, except to let the Self assert its Self through all the muck of individuality that marks our koshas--sheaths (physical, astral, mental, causal) as many and different.

The paradox of the TWO WE's is caused by adhyAsa--imposition, of the consciousness (light) of the Self on an individual set of antaH-karaNa, which is otherwise known as the mind. Therefore, all we have to do is to mind our mind."

Atanu said in post no.22:

"I agree on this, noting that according to Shankara, the imposition is two way -- the inertness of mind on Self and intelligence of Self on inert mind. JUst as a hot red iron ball may seem to be having property of agni, which though subtle may appear as hard due to its association with the iron ball."
=====

First I thought how could the senseless world and the idiosyncratic mind 'impose' those features on the Self, which should at all times remain pure. Then I understood that the adhyAsa--imposition, by the non-Self on the Self is like the reflection of a red flower on a crystal which makes the crystal appear red (without completely hiding the crystal as in the example of a rope appearing as snake).

Yet, one thing remains vague to me, which perhaps Atanu, Yajvan or another member might explain: The Self is said to be a witness to all the states of existence. A witness is one who does not partake an action but testifies to the truth. Although Self as the witness is a silent observer, it knows about the unreality of the non-Self as non-existent at its level, and it constantly asserts its knowledge by being self-luminary. This knowing and knowledge also makes the Self the knower. How are these things about the Self explained at its own level?

One answer that pops up to my mind is that the Self, like a jnAni, is jIvanmukta--liberated while living, during its manifest existence in Creation. Just as a jnAni witnesses, asserts true knowledge and knows about the unreality of the world the ultimate reality of the jIvas, the Self/Brahman in Creation remains. And just as the jnAni is dissolved in the Self when he attains videhamukti--bodyless liberation, the Self becomes the absolute reality of unmanifest Brahman after it gives up Creation, that is, during the interval between Dissolution and the next Creation.

Shankara's exposition of adhyAsa is nicely explained in the Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhyasa

[saidevo]

Here are some quotes about turIya and turIyAtIta (emphasis added) for our discussion:

01. Zen master Tai-yung, passing by the retreat of another Zen master named Chih-huang, stopped and during his visit respectfully asked, "I am told that you frequently enter into Samadhi. At the time of such entrances, does your consciousness continue or are you in a state of unconsciousness? If your consciousness continues, all sentient beings are endowed with consciousness and can enter into Samadhi like yourself. If, on the other hand, you are in a state of unconsciousness, plants and rocks can enter into Samadhi." Huang replied, "When I enter into a Samadhi, I am not conscious of either condition." Yung said, "If you are not conscious of either condition, this is abiding in eternal Samadhi, and there can be neither entering into a Samadhi nor rising out of it."
http://www.angelfire.com/indie/anna_jones1/chidakasa.html

02. From Nisargadatta Maharaj's 'I am That' (emphasis added):

"Outside the Self there is nothing. All is one and all is contained in 'I am'. In the waking and dream states it is the person. In deep sleep and turiya it is the Self. Beyond the alert intentness of turiya lies the great, silent peace of the Supreme. But in fact all is one in essence and related in appearance. In ignorance the seer becomes the seen and in wisdom he is the seeing."
=====

"At the root of all creation lies desire. Desire and imagination foster and reinforce each other. The fourth state (turiya) is a state of pure witnessing, detached awareness, passionless and wordless. It is like space, unaffected by whatever it contains. Bodily and mental troubles do not reach it -- they are outside, 'there', while the witness is always 'here'."
=====

"In the Supreme the witness appears. The witness creates the person and thinks itself as separate from it. The witness sees that the person appears in consciousness which again appears in the witness. This realisation of the basic unity is the working of the Supreme. It is the power behind the witness, the source from which all flows. It cannot be contacted, unless there is unity and love and mutual help between the person and the witness, unless the doing is in harmony with the being and the knowing. The Supreme is both the source and the fruit of such harmony. As I talk to you, I am in the state of detached but affectionate awareness (turiya). When this awareness turns upon itself, you may call it the Supreme State, (turiyatita). But the fundamental reality is beyond awareness, beyond the three states of becoming, being and not-being."
=====

To be the point of light tracing the world is turiya. To be the light itself is turiyatita. But of what use are names when reality is so near?
=====

03. RamaNa MaharShi (in 'Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi'):

Talk 353:
There are three states only, the waking, dream and sleep. Turiya is not a fourth one; it is what underlies these three. But people do not readily understand it. Therefore it is said that this is the fourth state and the only Reality. In fact it is not apart from anything, for it forms the substratum of all happenings; it is the only Truth; it is your very Being. The three states appear as feeting phenomena on it and then sink into it alone. Therefore they are unreal.
...
Turiya only another name for the Self. Aware of the waking, dream and sleep states, we remain unaware of our own Self. Nevertheless the Self is here and now, it is the only Reality. There is nothing else. So long as identifcation with the body lasts the world seems to lie outside us. Only realise the Self and they are not.
=====

From David Godman's book 'Be as you Are':
http://www.messagefrommasters.com/Enlightenment/ramana_turiya.htm

Question: Is samadhi the same as turiya, the fourth state?

Ramana Maharshi: Samadhi, turiya and nirvikalpa all have the same implication, that is, awareness of the Self. Turiya literally means the fourth state, the supreme consciousness, as distinct from the other three states: waking, dreaming and dreamless sleep. The fourth state is eternal and the other three states come and go in it. In turiya there is the awareness that the mind has merged in its source, the Heart, and is quiescent there, although some thoughts still impinge on it and the senses are still somewhat active. In nirvikalpa the senses are inactive and thoughts are totally absent. Hence the experience of pure consciousness in this state is intense and blissful. Turiya is obtainable in savikalpa samadhi.
=====

Question: What is the difference between the bliss enjoyed in sleep and the bliss enjoyed in turiya?

Ramana Maharshi: There are not different blisses. There is only one bliss which includes the bliss enjoyed in the waking state, the bliss of all kinds of beings from the lowest animal to the highest Brahma. That bliss is the bliss of the Self. The bliss which is enjoyed unconsciously in sleep is enjoyed consciously in turiya, that is the only difference. The bliss enjoyed in the waking state is second-hand, it is an adjunct of the real bliss .
=====

Question: Is samadhi, the eighth stage of raja yoga, the same as the samadhi you speak of ?

Ramana Maharshi : In yoga the term samadhi refers to some kind of trance and there are various kinds of samadhi. But the samadhi I speak of is different. [u]It is sahaja samadhi. From here you have samadhana [steadiness] and you remain calm and composed even while you are active. You realize that you are moved by the deeper real Self within. You have no worries, no anxieties, no cares, for you come to realize that there is nothing belonging to you. You know that everything is done by something with which you are in conscious union.
=====

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam all

Forgive my impudence, from reading all the post, it seams there question still remains unanswered.

We all accept The Self, to make it simple I say the super Self is all knowing, is never deluded, so whose upadhi is all this, who is striving to transcend the three stages Jagrat, Sapna and susupati and reach that fourth Turiya call it Brahman. Some has eluded that it is the Mind, another explanation is offered is that the adhyAsa--imposition, by the non-Self on the Self. Please tell me if I am reading it wrong to my simple mind. Yajvan offered Turiyatit to which Atanu objected that there can not be a second being fair enough.Now what do I learn from Gita? Chapter 15.7

mamaivamso jiva-loke
jiva-bhutah sanatanah
manah-sasthanindriyani
prakrti-sthani karsati
Now there are many translation offered but for me bold part is self explanatory.
Lord Krishna further says in 16th sloka that there are two entity, one is ksaras and the other aksara we know the body is perishable and the jive the conciousness which transmigrate from body to body until is librated or reach the turiya state is imperishable but then he goes on to say there is utam purash other then the ksaras and aksara.

uttamah purusas tv anyah
paramatmety udahrtah
yo loka-trayam avisya
bibharty avyaya isvarah
There is another supreme purusas called Ishvara or Paramaatma, the indestructible Lord who pervades the three worlds and sustains them. (15.17)

Wait Atanu will remind me that the Vedas do not admit to a second, yes sure but second what, Godhead ?
We exist no one can deny that. Either you guys are suggesting that the super self is deluded and therefore needs to discover itself again or we as an individual striving to reach that stage which is Turiya.

Jai Shree Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast&#233; atanu (et.al)


Turiyatita is defined as one who has gone through the fourth state. When the fourth state Turiya itself is non-dual, therefore Tutiyatita cannot be the second being. The Turiya is thus described in
This of what you say , I am in full agreement. The wise have used different words to announce this. Hence I hold turya-atīta as having merit.
Yet my appreciation still persists with this following view ( which is non-competing with your offerings):



worldly people call it turya - the 4th. This name is used because there is no other reference - no direct experience.
yogins give the name rūpātitā&#185; - surpassing the touch of one's Self and now the establishment of one's Self (permanently)
j&#241;ānī-s - the entire universe is found in this turīya . They call it pracaya or accumulation , heap , mass , quantity = totality. My
teacher would always us the word fullness. This turīya cannot be divided , it is whole in itSelf.
Now why would I offer this again - surely not to poke anyone in the eye on this matter.

I offer this because you bring to light the following:


Turiyatita is defined as one who has gone through the fourth state.


When one experiences this , then the conversation changes from a spectator to a participant and the definitions come to life.

When one goes 'though it' and it begins to even penetrate the senses, then the experience comes to appreciating this turīya in sight, sound, smell, i.e. in matter , in creation. The '1st stop' is turīya within our self, as SELF, as pure silence, as pure awareness. There is action and there is the silence of the SELF, yet there is more.

This my friend is another way of saying 'going beyond it' - it is not as if there is a 2nd, or another, but it is what gets totally filled-up in everything. The bṛhadaraṇyaka upaniṣad informs us this SELF entered all bodies and fills us up to our nail ends ( finger tips).

I hope you have the opportunity to consider this as plausible. This is not my conjecture but what I have learned from my teacher, my studies, etc.

I also hope to address Ganeshprasad's questions and ask you to join me on this matter.


praṇām

[atanu]

Pranam all

Forgive my impudence, from reading all the post, it seams there question still remains unanswered.
----
mamaivamso jiva-loke
jiva-bhutah sanatanah
manah-sasthanindriyani
prakrti-sthani karsati
Now there are many translation offered but for me bold part is self explanatory.


Namaste Ganeshprasadji

So, if you are the jiva-bhutah, then how do you know that? bhuta is element and has no intelligence of its own.

(We have in past noted that the verse talks about jiva-loke, which is not the Self. Further, Shri Krishna has also taught that the Atma is not cuttable. We have also noted earlier that spirit is continous. But looking from the view point of a fleshy body as me, this continuity is not known. Shankara calls this Adhyasa. And, IMO, that is why Mandukya U. teaches that the Turya must be known. In Lokas of waking, dreaming, and Sleeping, the adhyasa hides the ever continuous Turya.)



Wait Atanu will remind me that the Vedas do not admit to a second, yes sure but second what, Godhead ?

You know as well as atanu that 'there is one Truth'. That is what Veda says. 'Godhead' conjures a picture of a delineated body -- different from all other bodies, whereas Truth does not conjure up such an imagination.

We need to be on the same page to understand and appreciate each other.



We exist no one can deny that. Either you guys are suggesting that the super self is deluded and therefore needs to discover itself again or we as an individual striving to reach that stage which is Turiya.
Jai Shree Krishna

That, as per teaching of my teacher, is the main question that one has to seek for oneself "Who am I who is striving to discover itself?"

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Namaste Friends

There was a question from Snip about the view of Mandukya Upanishad from Shaiva perspective. As far as I know, most Shaiva perspectives coincide with the Vedic view of the Four States, out of which the Fourth is the Truth in itself and also of the three phenomenal states. One who knows the Fourth as the advaita truth is the Turiyatita sage. But some dvaita view prevails in both the Shaiva and in Vaishnava schools, wherein the Fifth is taken as the truth.

(I note that in his analysis of Mandukya Upanishad, Shri Madhavacharya, on the other hand, takes the clear cut Veda view and declares Turya as the Brahman -- the Supreme Vishnu, who is distinct from the phenomenal states -- and thus dvaita.)

Below I paste an article that appeared in yesterday's newspaper (such articles keep appearing as 'Just in Time' Inventory Management Model.


THE SPEAKING TREE
Dreams And Nightmares

Sreeram Manoj Kumar

Four basic qualities of consciousness that we experience are: jagrat or waking,swapna or dreaming,sushupti or dreamless sleep and turiya or sleepless sleep.These four stages of consciousness are governed by the four vyuha or forms of Para-Vasudeva.

Jagrat is the stage in which we are awake,when the five sense organs and mind are active,doing decisive activities.The most significant aspect of this state is the capacity of an individual to recognise a thing which had been cognised some time back,whether through vision,taste,smell,sound or feel.

According to Pancharatra Agamas,Aniruddha,the emanated form of Para-Vasudeva is among those deities responsible for this aspect and is regarded as the uncontrollable unifier of experiences.One more faculty He governs is the ability to reconcile the five senses and mind which fall prey to likes or dislikes of events happening in the materialistic world;hence it is possible to slowly overcome bereavement of dear ones.Aniruddha,the provider of individual consciousness,is the grandson of Krishna and son of Pradyumna and Kakudmati.

Swapna is the dreaming stage in which the individual enjoys the five objects of senses while all the five sense organs are at rest and only the mind is working.Dream is the imitation of the experiences of the wakeful stage with some modifications and is created out of materials supplied from the waking stage.Mind itself is the seer and seen.Pradyumna is responsible for this aspect and is regarded as the provider of unfulfilled desire experiences.With these experiences unfolding the individual is denied peaceful sleep,like in a house where though elders are asleep (the five senses) the naughty child,the mind,is awake and causing illusions.Some believe that the mind weaves dreams due to experiences that happen in the day and has control over it,if so is it possible to choose only sweet dreams and avoid nightmares Pradyumna is the giver of astral consciousness.He is the son of Krishna and Rukmini and incarnation of Kama,god of love.

Sushupti is stage of deep sleep where the individual is self-oblivion unaware as the mind is also at rest along with the five senses.In this state individual is not aware of his worries or reassurances.Sankarshana is responsible for this aspect and is regarded as the annihilator of experiences.The individual experiences deluge every night and is in union with the Self and due to ignorance there is no authenticity for the same. Sankarshana is the provider of subconsciousness and He is the elder brother of Krishna, also called Balarama.Turiya also called chaturtha is the stage of transcendental consciousness where the individual experiences ultimate reality and truth.This state is inexperienced by the five senses and indescribable,incomprehensible by the mind which is tied to continuous cycle of births.The transcendental mind is within itself a possibility of creating anything and everything that mind conceives and the possibilities are infinite.Vasudeva is responsible for this aspect and is regarded as the merger of individual and universal experiences. In this state the individual experiences the sleepless sleep or bliss,witnessing similarities of macrocosm and microcosm and is well aware of the union of Self and Absolute. Vasudeva is the provider of superconsciousness; He is Lord Krishna Himself.


So, the pancharatra Vaishnava concept, similar as dvaita Shaiva concept, holds that Vasudeva (or Para Shiva) provides the Turya state. Or as if para Vasuveva (or para Shiva) is another different from the Turya. But Mandukya Upanishad itself says: The three periods of Time and whatever transcends Time is OM, the Turya alone. As noted above, the Vedantic school of Madhava holds Turya as Brahman, as Vishnu, as Supreme. Note that in Veda, Indra-Agni, Hiranyagarbha, Vena are the respective Lords of three states of Waking, Dreaming, and Deep Sleep. Turya-Om has no Lord but pervades and controls all states.

Mandukya U. says: That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual.

What is the need for another non-dual Lord Head beside this Turiya? (especailly when Mandukya Upanishad itself teaches that Sarvesvara Lord is the Third state -Shshupti).
....................................................................................

The following is the essence of Shri Ramana's teaching on the subject that complements the text already shown by Shri Saidevo. (Probably Shri Ramana can be called a sort of Shaiva?). I note that turiyatita is not a term or subject declared in any of the major upanishads. The need for its explanation arises because some dvaita devotional schools use the term Turiyatita, which as per my understanding is superfluous, since Turiya itself is transcendental and Without a Second. There cannot be Two Without a Second.




From 'Be As You Are' of David Godman

Ramana Maharshi : There is only one state, that of consciousness or awareness or existence. The three states of waking, dream and sleep cannot be real. They simply come and go. The real will always exist. The `I' or existence that alone persists in all the three states is real. The other three are not real and so it is not possible to say they have such and such a degree of reality.

We may roughly put it like this. Existence or consciousness is the only reality. Consciousness plus waking, we call waking. Consciousness plus sleep, we call sleep. Consciousness plus dream, we call dream. Consciousness is the screen on which all the pictures come and go. The screen is real, the pictures are mere shadows on it.

Because by long habit we have been regarding these three states as real, we call the state of mere awareness or consciousness the fourth. There is however no fourth state, but only one state.

There is no difference between dream and the waking state except that the dream is short and the waking long. Both are the result of the mind. Because the waking state is long, we imagine that it is our real state. But, as a matter of fact, our real state is turiya or the fourth state which is always as it is and knows nothing of the three states of waking, dream or sleep.

Because we call these three avasthas [states] we call the fourth state also turiya avastha. But is it not an avastha, but the real and natural state of the Self. When this is realized, we know it is not a turiya or fourth state, for a fourth state is only relative, but turiyatita, the transcendent state.
....................

(from, "Spiritual Instruction" no. 8.)

turIya means that which is the fourth. The experiencers (jIva-s) of the three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep, known as vishva, taijasa and praj~nA, who wander successively in these three states, are not the Self. It is with the object of making this clear, namely that the Self is that which is different from them and which is the witness of these states, that it is called the fourth (turIya). When this is known, the three experiencers disappear and the idea that the Self is a witness, that it is the fourth, also disappears. That is why the Self is described as beyond the fourth (turyatita)."


Apart from the above, Sri Ramana generally refers to turIya in the traditional way, as follows:

(Talk 353.)

D.: What is turiya?
M.: There are three states only, the waking, dream and sleep. turIya is not a fourth one; it is what underlies these three. But people do not readily understand it. Therefore it is said that this is the fourth state and the only Reality. In fact it is not apart from anything, for it forms the substratum of all happenings; it is the only Truth; it is your very Being. The three states appear as fleeting phenomena on it and then sink into it alone. Therefore they are unreal.



It was the time when cinema just took birth. Shri Ramana took the metaphor of a cinema screen as the pure consciousness and the ever changing story playing on the screen as the states. In this metaphor the three darshanas of dvaita, vishistaadvaita, and advaita are all satisfied.

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Namaste friends

This, i feel, has been the best thread for me. As a token of leave taking, may the following be the essence of all these discussions.

Mandukya Upanishad
.........shaantaM shivamadvaitaM chaturthaM manyante sa aatmaa sa viGYeyaH .. 7..
.......and the Fourth, which is peace, auspicious, and non-dual. That is the Self; that is to be known.

May this remind of the goal for those who wish so.

Om Namah Shivaya

[saidevo]

namaste everyone.

01. An upaniShad called 'turIyAtIta upaniShad' of the Yajur veda, describes how an ascetic becomes a 'turIyAtIta-avadhUta' by graduating through the stages of kuTichaka--hut-dwelling, bahUdaka--mendicant, haMsa, paramahaMsa and finally becomes avadhUta. From the descriptions and prescriptions in this upaniShad, it seems that turIyAtIta is not a stage past turIya, but only an abundance/fullness--atIta, of turIya. This is perhaps the reason that this upaniShad the pUrNamadaH-pUrNamidam mantra as its shAnti mantra that occurs both in the beginning and the end. The source text of this upaniShad is at: http://www.gatewayforindia.com/upanishad/Turiyatita_Upanishad.pdf , the ITX transliteration at http://www.ms.uky.edu/~sohum/sanskrit/yogavasishtha/backup/doc_upanishhat/turiya.itx and the translation at file://localhost/D:/svAdhyAyaSkt/Sanskrit01/upanishads/turiya.pdf .

In our times, BhagavAn RamaNa maharShi was a turIyAtIta-avadhUta, who was catapulted to the fullness reality of turIya when he was only eleven years old, and soon thereafter lived a life demonstrating that an avadhUta can be in and of and for the world.

02. Atanu's sculptor-slab-sculpture example of the Self in post no.43 is telling. It is said that after the praLaya, the artefacts of life and forms merge in and are dormant in Brahman until the next cycle of creation. Since the subtratum of turIya is not different from the Self/Brahman, perhaps we may say that Brahman's state of deep sleep between two cycles of creation is turIyAtIta. As Yajvan has indicated in post no.47, turIya, like everying else has been called by other names with differing connotations.

As Atanu has stated in post no.49, turIya is timelessness and colorlessness of the white screen. Its fullness spills over the sandhi gaps in time and space in the duality of creation. Although those gaps appear to us as 'moments', they are the 'portkeys' (to use a term from the Harry Potter book) to the timeless, eternal reality of turIya.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Atanu ji and all

Yes we have discussed this many a times, this repetition may be is off no value, so I think I must stop.

Before I do that I must clear few things. With hind sight it was presumptuous of me to suggest that sloka 15.7 was self explanatory, obviously I did not suggest that the body is sanatan, when Lord Krishna says jiva-bhutah sanatanah , he is referring eternity of some thing which is further explained in 15.7 it is interesting to note that he describe two purusha in this sloka one is perishable and other eternal and off course he himself a purushotama a clear distinction.

Eko the supreme Self is Sat Chit Anand, so I repeat my self again who is seeking the turiya stage ? That is the bit I can not get.
What is being super imposed and why and by what?

Yes Atanu if we are on the same page, its not necessary that our comprehension would be the same. If and when we reach the turiya stage I wonder who would be arguing with whom?

Jai Shree Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast&#233; ganeshprasad,




Eko the supreme Self is Sat Chit Anand, so I repeat my self again who is seeking the turiya stage ? That is the bit I can not get.
What is being super imposed and why and by what?

Let me offer this, and perhaps it will solicit more conversation.

This is a very delicate subject as it is easy to get mis-guided by words. This seeking is an ~okay~ word but I am of the opinion pratyabhij&#241;ā darśana is better suited to this notion of turya ( some like to spell it turīya).

Pratyabhij&#241;ā means to recognize , re-member and darśana is knowing ( sometimes we use this word to define a philosophy , a knowledge). So this pratyabhij&#241;ā darśana is 'knowing' and re-membering who you are. Who are you (we) ? That Self that you have been discussing. So, this life's process is the notion of remembering who we are. We have forgotten our true heritage.

Now this super-imposition - adhyāsa (imposing) sounds very mystical yet ādi śaṅkara-ji says it is cognizing something as something else.
He says it this way in his vivekacūḍāmaṇi&#185; , 140th śloka : Being confused by ignorance a person mis-takes a thing for what it is not.
It is this absence of discrimination which causes one to mis-take a snake for a rope. Then , great danger befalls one subject to it. Hence listen my friend.
Taking unreal things to be real is definitely what constitutes bondage.

One may say I'd like to read more about this adhyāsa from ādi śaṅkara-ji . I would then suggest his adhyāsabhāṣya that he offers
at the beginning of the brahma-sūtra-s. This may assist one in understanding this matter .

praṇām

words

vivekacūḍāmaṇi - viveka= विवेक = the ability to discriminate, discrimination + cūḍāmaṇi चूडामणि = a crown jewel , or the crown jewel of discrimination ( some say crest jewel)

[saidevo]

namaste Ganeshprasadji and others.

If I may, I have some thoughts on the issues you have raised.

You said in post no.46:
We exist no one can deny that. Either you guys are suggesting that the super self is deluded and therefore needs to discover itself again or we as an individual striving to reach that stage which is Turiya.

and again in post no.52:
Eko the supreme Self is Sat Chit Anand, so I repeat my self again who is seeking the turiya stage ? That is the bit I can not get.
What is being super imposed and why and by what?
=====

I think that the answer to why the Supreme Self which is already the eko--One, sat-chit-Ananda should seek to realize it in its Many, lies in the praNava mantra AUM.

• AUM as the sum total of all knowledge, is an akShara--an unalterable, imperishable syllable that is verily equated with Brahman the Self. The three alphabets A,U,M and the comprehensive stillness of the anusvAra--the bindu--dot, with a crescent mark are usually spoken of as representing the four states of consciousness: vaishvAnara, taijasa, prajnA and turIya. The bindu of turIya penetrates the other states and yet lies separate, as the cresent mark indicates. [For more details: http://www.swamij.com/om.htm ]

• Since Brahman is eko-sat--One Reality, and AUM is Brahman, this would mean that AUM is the eko-sat. What is the nature of this satyam?

• ChAndogya upaniShad 8.3.4-5 says:

etasya brahmaNo nAma satyamiti |
tAni ha vA etAni trINi akSharANi, sa, ti, yaM, iti |
tadyatsa tadamRutam, atha yatti tanmartyam, atha yadyaM tena ubhe yachchhati |

"The name of Brahman is Truth, or the True, satyam, which consists of three letters, sa, ti, and yam. Sa is the Unperishing; Ti is the Perishing; Yam holds, binds, Relates the two together."

BRhad-AraNyaka upaniShad 5.5.3 confirms this:

satyaM brahmoti satyaM hyeva brahma |
te devAH satyamevopAsate |
tadetat tryaksharaM satyamiti |
sa ityekamaksharaM, ti ityekamaksharam, yamityekamaksharaM |
prathamottame akshare satyaM, madhyato anRutaM tada 'etada' anRutaM ubhayataH
satyena parigRuhItaM satyabhUyameva bhavati |
nainaM vidvAMsamanRutaM hinasti ||

"Truth, satyam, verily is Brahman. ... The gods contemplate and worship the truth, satyam, only. Three-lettered is this satyam; sa is one letter, ti is one letter, and yam is one letter. The first and the last letters, imperishables, are true; in the middle is the false and fleeting. The False is encompassed round on both sides by the True. The True is the more, the greater, the prevailing. He that knoweth this he may not be overpowered by the False."

• Thus, in the akSharam AUM, A primarily stands for Atman, the Self; U stands for the anAtman, the Not-Self, and M as niShedha--negation, binds them both in a relationship of negation--neti neti. Brahman in manifest creation is the totality of AUM with its four types of connotations, which is why the GAyatrI mantra says 'AUM bhUr bhuva suvaha'--the three worlds have AUm as their substratum; and the upaniShads exhort us to inquire into and meditate on AUM to know and realize the Self.

• Thus Brahman the Self which is immanent in every atom of the universe, eternally performs a 'neti neti' on the Not-Self it has projected on itself (in a desire of knowing itself better), negating the Not-Self as not him the Self, which is the reason that the Not-Self is driven in a cycle of eternal change. This change is recognized as motion in space and its sequence of events in a point of space is recognized as time.

• The term samsAra--World Process, means 'to slide on, to move on, pass through a succession of states', and thus the universe is expanding in space and changing in time.

• In the process of saMsAra, because of paraspara adhyAsa--mutual superimposition, of the consciousness of the Self, the Not-Self acquires the reflected consciousness and in turn clouds over the Self. Such reflected consciousness in the ghaTAkAsha--limited space, constitute the many jIvas--individual souls, causing in them the free will to associate themselves with the Not-Self or the Self. But since the Self is un-de-fin-able, it eventually asserts itself and pops the bubble of jIva.

• Brahman, the inherent Self is ubiquitously understood as 'I', the I-sense, in the jIvas. This I-sense as the reflection of Self in us is so strong in the waking state that even though we normally associate 'I' with an individual soul, the fact that all of us perceive the external world in the same way is more indicative of the underlying unity of the I-sense to its source in the waking state than in the dream state where the I-sense must necessarily be far more individualistic.

There is absolute unity with the source in the suShupti--deep sleep, state, which is represented by the 'M' of AUM, but the relationship of negation of Self by the Not-Self asserts and brings the jIva back to the waking state in the cycle.

• In the cyclic recurrence of creation-dissolution-(silence of )yuga-saMdhi, the bindu of turIya permeates all space and time since it is the screen on which the picture runs, but the gaps of turIya are hardly noticed by the jIvas which are busy with their roles in samsAra. Although the cycle recurs with sustained precision in time and space in jaDa-prakRti--insentient Not-Self, in the reflected chaitanya--consciousness, of the Not-Self of the jIvas (body-mind-intellect), the vAsanas--impressions, of karma--actions, accumulate over time, thus complicating the World Process--saMsAra.

• While the negative karma thus acquired by jIvas involves them in a wild goose chase for lasting happiness and peace, the positive karma directs them to seek inward for such happiness and peace. Among the jIvas which has the spiritual propensity to look inward, some are at the level of upAsana--worship, some at the level of vichAra--intellectual inquiry, some are set in the nivRtti-mArga of jnAna, while a few are jIvan-muktas, guiding others.

The scriptures do not explain as to WHY the One Brahman wanted to become the Many JIvas. But it did became Many, emanating the jaDa-chaitanya prapancha--insentient-sentient universe, out of it, creating the Self and Not-Self and setting up the cyclic process of AUM as the saMsAra of worldly life. However, since nothing is outside the Consciousness of Brahman, this universe is only a dream in his universal mind, although we as jIvas do not readily realize that our true nature is turIya and the other states of existence are only in our mind as dreams.

(Paraphrased from the relevant chapters of the book 'The Sciece of Peace' by Bhagavan Das, which is serialized from here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2598 )

[atanu]

Pranam Atanu ji and all

Eko the supreme Self is Sat Chit Anand, so I repeat my self again who is seeking the turiya stage ? That is the bit I can not get.
What is being super imposed and why and by what?

Yes Atanu if we are on the same page, its not necessary that our comprehension would be the same. If and when we reach the turiya stage I wonder who would be arguing with whom?

Jai Shree Krishna

Namaste Ganeshprasadji

You have asked the most auspicious questions, which my guru requests everyone to ask themselves (this was hinted above also). brahmA is known to have asked the question "Who?" kA? and got enlightened.

You have asked a question or two. But, Shri Krishna teaches "Arjuna know that you are not a doer". So, ask yourself "If I am not the doer, then who asked this question and who is seeking the answer?"

More. Suppose a heinous crime, worthy of death by hanging, happens in your dream. Then who should be hanged? You or the dream character?

More. Suppose Clark Gable plays a role of villain in a movie and rapes a girl. Then who is to be held the sinner? Clark Gable, or the director, or the story writer, or the character that Clark Gable plays in the movie? Who should be punished?

I request humbly and sincerely that please do not be dismissive of these questions in hurry, especially the first one.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Yajvan ji Saidevi ji Atanu ji and all

Thank you for engaging me in this auspicious discussion, on offer for me to consider is, pratyabhijñā darśana, remembering, mistaking Being confused by ignorance a person mis-takes a thing for what it is not, non self, dreams and actors acting and directors.

Let us remind ourselves who Bhagvan is, Sat, Chit Ananda.

Does the self have to remember who he is? Can he be in ignorance so that he mistake that which is not?

What is this non self, is it another entity? Is it so powerful that the self get deluded by it?

Atanu you ask me not to dismiss your questions, no my friend I have always respected what you have to say, I respect advaita , now I am not here to challenge what you and others follow but at the same time I can not go pass the question I have in my mind.

In a dream we wake up with a nightmare, if we are God’s dream, then when he wakes up we should all disappear.

Director of a film is always in control, he never punishes the actors that commits the crime out side of the film, but we carry our karma even after we die, and get punished or rewarded for what we do. Our actions are not what God wrote as a script and then punishes us for enacting that script. In such a case a director is better.

"Arjuna know that you are not a doer". I believe you are quoting this from bg18.17 now prior to that Lord Krishna say many things like Duty action work , Human beings cannot completely abstain from work and so on.
But in the end Arjun’s statement .

arjuna uvaca
nasto mohah smrtir labdha
tvat-prasadan mayacyuta
sthito 'smi gata-sandehah
karisye vacanam tava

Arjuna said, My dear Krsna, O infallible one, my illusion is now gone. I have regained my memory by Your mercy, and I am now firm and free from doubt and am prepared to act according to Your instructions.(18.73)

We certainly have a different take or understanding of what Lord Krishna is saying, Arjun having removed all his doubts, is ready to act, why if he is not the doer?

With this I take a break on this particular discussion and contemplate what has been said and no doubt further answers and questions that may follow.

Jai Shree Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté ganeshprasad,



Does the self have to remember who he is? Can he be in ignorance so that he mistake that which is not?

The kaṭhopaniṣad and muṇḍaka upaniṣad informs the same, He whom the Self chooses, by him the Self is revealed. To him the Self unveils the Self.

praṇām

[atanu]

"Arjuna know that you are not a doer". I believe you are quoting this from bg18.17 now prior to that Lord Krishna say many things like Duty action work , Human beings cannot completely abstain from work and so on.
But in the end Arjun’s statement .

arjuna uvaca
nasto mohah smrtir labdha
tvat-prasadan mayacyuta
sthito 'smi gata-sandehah
karisye vacanam tava

Arjuna said, My dear Krsna, O infallible one, my illusion is now gone. I have regained my memory by Your mercy, and I am now firm and free from doubt and am prepared to act according to Your instructions.(18.73)

Jai Shree Krishna

Namaste ganeshprasadji

Let us kindly take a step at a time. I think that you have not answered the question that was asked above and which is reproduced below:


. You have asked a question or two. But, Shri Krishna teaches "Arjuna know that you are not a doer". So, ask yourself "If I am not the doer, then who asked this question and who is seeking the answer?"

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté



'arjuna, know that you are not the doer ' can almost be said as a key theme of the Bhāgavad gītā and is called out in various chapters in different ways.

Now the question atanu asks is a reasonable one... the answer lies within the word 'you' i.e. understanding who 'you' is referring to.
If one thinks of a bound individual that comes and goes then the question is perplexing. If one sees 'you' as the SELF, as the Infinite
as the unbounded, then this question addressable.

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

If we go back to some of the initial posts in this string, the notion of approaches to turīya was initially considered. This turīya is within us ( some say we are within turīya) and it surrounds us. Yet due
to distractions, to fluctuations, the nature of the mind in vikapla¹ this turīya remains hidden from our preview. What then does it take to have a glimpse of something that is present all the time ( 7x24x365x forever) ? Nirvikalpa or a non-wavering mind.

These are not my views but are the essence of the patañjali’s yogadarśana, 1st chapter ( called samādhi pāda); This same knowledge is also the essence of the nistaraṇga upadeṣa ( undistracted instructions) found in the vijñāna bhairava kārikā-s ( part of the rudrayāmala tantra).

If in fact this turīya is wholeness, fullness (bhūman) non-differentated, we cannot not approach it with a differentiated (vikapla) ~mind~ or awareness. It is the wise teacher who knows how to apply yukti ( a means, device, approach) and make it a yuktistha (a method and practice). That is, that teacher, instructor, guru who knows the workings of the ignorant mind and shows it the path to this turīya is a blessing to this earth.

Sometimes it even takes a trick... to trick the mind ( this is also another definition yukti - trick, cunning device) into experiencing the perfection of this Silence within. The mind is so caught-up with actions, and thoughts, and internal jibberish all day long , many come to think this is the normal mode of operations for this ~mind device~. This mind (we) has forgotten śamaṁ (calmness, rooted in kṛ , 'to calm one's self' , 'be tranquil').

This IMHO is what needs to be re-established . Bringing balance back to the system. From here one finds not only the mind needs this balance, but the body too i.e. proper rest, activity, eating habits all play a role in how one hone's the awareness to experience this turīya.

praṇām

words

vikapla - mental occupation , thinking ; difference of perception , distinction , differences