All are in Me, but I not in them....

[Ganeshprasad]

Namaskar Ganeshprasad Ji,

In the context, Shiva is the absolute (not a being), neither a being nor a non-being, and beyond time (as there is no day no night). Whereas the Creator is endowed with a sense of I and is in the domain of time.

Though it is the Turiya Self that is ONE and ALL (since Pragnya is His), yet this Self is transcendental which has no connection to objects of Taijjassa and Vaisvanara, since there is no mind, which sprouts from Pragnya.


The point is that this timelessly true Turiya constitutes the stable core of Jivas that remains while objects exist and exists even if all objects are removed (when in samadhi or in deep sleep). This is said to be constant substratum while the play goes on and the lone auspicious truth when the play is paused/stopped.

Regards

Om Namah Shivayya

Pranam atanu ji


Krishna also say similar

jneyam yat tat pravaksyami
yaj jnatvamrtam asnute
anadi mat-param brahma
na sat tan nasad ucyate

I shall fully describe the object of knowledge, knowing which one attains immortality. The beginningless Supreme Brahman is said to be neither Sat nor Asat.(13.13)



Undivided, yet appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the creator, sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.17)



Still you have not satisfied my query. Is the absolute not aware of it self is the creator different from the absolute?
The domain of time is only a ref. Point, for the creation and dissolution of this bhovtik sansar.

So I am confused I do not comprehend your answer, what creator are we talking about? Whose turya are you refering to and in this state is eko unaware?

Even the bhovtik sansar is difficult to fathom because of its ever-changing nature.


The real form of this tree cannot be perceived in this world. No one can understand where it ends, where it begins, or where its foundation is. But with determination one must cut down this tree with the weapon of detachment. So doing, one must seek that place from which, having once gone, one never returns, and there surrender to that Supreme Personality from whom everything has began and in whom everything is abiding since time immemorial.

This is why the lord asks us to seek that place from where there is no return and what is this abode of his?

na tad bhasayate suryo
na sasanko na pavakah
yad gatva na nivartante
tad dhama paramam mama

That abode of Mine is not illumined by the sun or moon, nor by fire. One who reaches it never returns to this material world. (15.06)

Here there is no day or night





Since everything that exists is eternal, only play that is paused/ stopped are only temporary phenomena of this material world.




Jai Shree Krishna

[atanu]

Namaste Ganeshprasad Ji,

Pranam atanu ji
----

Still you have not satisfied my query. Is the absolute not aware of it self is the creator different from the absolute?

So I am confused I do not comprehend your answer, what creator are we talking about? Whose turya are you refering to and in this state is eko unaware?

Hirayanagarbha is the creator whose microcosmic counterpart is Taijjassa. The Creator creates using Pragnya in Taijjassa and Vaisvanara states and knows fully well its own nature as pure knowledge.

Since everything that exists is eternal, only play that is paused/stopped are only temporary phenomena of this material world.

Yes, definitely. Nature never stops. But to unravel the unmoving unchanging substratum, it will be necessary to stop the mind and become the controller of Maya.

Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.

This is why the lord asks us to seek that place from where there is no return and what is this abode of his?

Precisely so. Only with the jnana of the non-dual atma (attained with settled samadhi), moksha is granted. The abode of all beings is consciousness. Thats why it is said that Pragnya (sarvesvara) yoni sarvasya (Pragnya is birth place of all: mandukya). But the Turiya remains unchanged. It is transcendental, non-dual and auspicious.

Om Namah Shivayya

[Ganeshprasad]

Namaste Ganeshprasad Ji,




Hirayanagarbha is the creator whose microcosmic counterpart is Taijjassa. The Creator creates using Pragnya in Taijjassa and Vaisvanara states and knows fully well its own nature as pure knowledge.

Surely pure knowledge is an attribute, how can someone be just the knowledge?


By Hirayanagarbha you mean Brahma yes?

Yes, definitely. Nature never stops. But to unravel the unmoving unchanging substratum, it will be necessary to stop the mind and become the controller of Maya.

Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.

Om Namah Shivayya

How can I control Maya? Krishna says


daivi hy esa guna-mayi
mama maya duratyaya
mam eva ye prapadyante
mayam etam taranti te

My divine Maya consisting of three Gunas or states of mind is difficult to overcome. Only they who surrender unto Me cross over this Maya. (7.14)


Jai Shree Krishna

[atanu]

Namaskar Ganesh Prasad Ji,

Discussing with you, I always learn something of value.

Surely pure knowledge is an attribute, how can someone be just the knowledge?

Where is that some one? When scripture says, beyond day and night, only the auspicious, which is neither being nor non being, remains, who is that some one?

The some one you are talking about is the same indescribable Atma, having acquired a body using Maya.

How can I control Maya? Krishna says
daivi hy esa guna-mayi
mama maya duratyaya
mam eva ye prapadyante
mayam etam taranti te
My divine Maya consisting of three Gunas or states of mind is difficult to overcome. Only they who surrender unto Me cross over this Maya. (7.14)
Jai Shree Krishna

Yes this helps to harmonize the understanding, since Shree Krishna also says:

Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.

And pure samadhi, without a tinge of I remaining, alone is total surrender into the Self, which Shri Krishna truly is. A person/personality has a boundary that can only define the personality. Brahman has no such boundary.


The main point of this discussion, however was the verse: All beings are in Me, but I am not in them, which apparently contradicts the following verses (and many others):

13. 17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings; He is to be known as the supporter of beings; He devours and He generates also.

13.23. The Supreme Soul in this body is also called the spectator, the permitter, the supporter, the enjoyer, the great Lord and the Supreme Self.

18.20. That by which one sees the one indestructible Reality in all beings, not separate in all the separate beings—know thou that knowledge to be Sattwic (pure).

On this I wish to write a few lines more.

It is Indra in Vedas who is famed for His act of separating Mother and Father and having kept them separate. It is not a cruel act. Indra, helps us to know the time unlimited infinite unchanging Atma and its play with ever changing Prakriti within consciousness that is us.

Sanatana Dharma upholds that Lord is transcendental and fully immanent and exhorts us to find the transcendental part in us. So, Atma is said to be unchanging and unborn. Atma invested with an I sense is Purusha, who may reamain aloof from Prakriti (as in the case of Ishwara) or may go down trapped by Prakriti (as in Jivas). All through Atma still remains untarnished. As Lord says: Atma Na Lipayate.

Lord says: know this Atma. Mandukya Upanishad says: know this Atma.

Buddha, for some particular reason perhaps, did not mention anything about a non-changing SEER of this dance of Prakriti. He recognised only the ever changing flux. Though He asked devotees to find the shantam within.

This is the suble difference, wherein the particular verse "I am not in beings", comes into play. The same knowledge is imparted by Upanishad in the verse:

Om ! That is infinite, and this is infinite.
The infinite proceeds from the infinite.

(Then) taking the infinitude of the infinite (universe),
It remains as the infinite (Brahman) alone.

There are unlimited forms that arise from Sarvesvara Pragnya, which is known as Sarvasya Yoni. But the Turiya Self remains Turiya Self --- shivoadvaitam, whether one sees forms or not. With the consciousness settled in the Self (without movement of thoughts as in samadhi), only the self effulgent infinite remains.

The forms that teach us about dharma are different in different cultures. But the Self is ONE AND SAME. AND IT HAS ONE PRAGNYA.

Regards (and YMMV, which I respect),

Om Namah Shivayya
Om Namah Shivayya
Om Namah Shivayya

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaskar Ganesh Prasad Ji,

Discussing with you, I always learn something of value.
... When scripture says, beyond day and night, only the auspicious, which is neither being nor non being, remains, who is that some one?

Namaste Atanu and Ganesh Prasad,

What a wonderful, robust and insightful post.. this is the dignity of HDF exemplifed!


I only have little to add, as both of you are adding great value....

When the veda's talk of day and night, they describe the opposites;
Day and night can be used as time, yet day is the brightness of the divine rays of consciousness... night is ignorance, or those ( that would be me) not establish as yet in the brilliance of Self. In the Rig Ved we find the 'rays' as luminious cows (gau). Come here you aspirants for the light (gavyanta); Let us reach Indra (Divine MInd) who increases our needed thought, (pramatim); Invinvible, he bestows on us the supreme (param) ray of the Light (gavam) Rig Ved 1.33.1. This concept of luminus rays i.e. cows, can be found ~ 900 times of so inb the Rig Vedsa we have to use today. No wonder India has a history of repsect for the the divine bovine that walks the steets as equals.

Over all, the day-night concept also can be considered the battle between the daitya's and A-diaitya's. The Aditya' are the devata with expansion and light; the daitya's are considered pani's( sense trafficker's as R.L.Kashap calls them), and vrtra, (the wolf) or lower vital forces that keeps the one amused and tied to possessions, anger, greed, etc. the usual suspects, of which most sadhu's, including me, are breaking aware from).

pranams,

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Atanu ji

Where is that some one? When scripture says, beyond day and night, only the auspicious, which is neither being nor non being, remains, who is that some one?

You see when scriptures say nether being nor non-being it leaves no scope for doubt that the supreme is everything. Sagun as well as nirgun.
Our rishis left no stone unturned and declared neiti neiti. Why? It like describing a bottle half empty or half full. As soon as one says a person then it becomes localized the boundaries are drawn as you like to put it, but to think without form is even harder one can not limit the supreme to be devoid.
To think that supreme is devoid of a form is like thinking creator is less than the creation.
And to think that, a person, is sarva is a difficult notion to digest also.
Energy and energetic constitute the whole that is my understanding of neither being nor non-being.

The some one you are talking about is the same indescribable Atma, having acquired a body using Maya.

ajo 'pi sann avyayatma
bhutanam isvaro 'pi san
prakrtim svam adhisthaya
sambhavamy atma-mayaya

Although I am unborn and My transcendental body never deteriorates, and although I am the Lord of all sentient beings, I still appear in every millennium in My original transcendental form.(4.6)

avyaktam vyaktim apannam
manyante mam abuddhayah
param bhavam ajananto
mamavyayam anuttamam

Unintelligent men, who know Me not, think that I have assumed this form and personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is changeless and supreme.(7.24)


For this, neither being nor non-being, there is nothing to acquire everything is transcendental, it is perhaps our own sorry nature we try to superimpose on to the lord.

The main point of this discussion, however was the verse: All beings are in Me, but I am not in them, which apparently contradicts the following verses (and many others):

13. 17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings; He is to be known as the supporter of beings; He devours and He generates also.


13.23. The Supreme Soul in this body is also called the spectator, the permitter, the supporter, the enjoyer, the great Lord and the Supreme Self.

18.20. That by which one sees the one indestructible Reality in all beings, not separate in all the separate beings�know thou that knowledge to be Sattwic (pure).

I do not see the contradiction, the ParmAtma who dwells in every living this is what 13.17/13.23 is telling us, And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings this is so true of parmAtma. If you contemplate on this verse then 18.2 becomes easy to understand in the context of parmAtma.
Just as space or ether pervades in different vassal as if divided such is the nature of the supersoul pervades all and yet appears divided.

On this I wish to write a few lines more.

It is Indra in Vedas who is famed for His act of separating Mother and Father and having kept them separate. It is not a cruel act. Indra, helps us to know the time unlimited infinite unchanging Atma and its play with ever changing Prakriti within consciousness that is us.

Sanatana Dharma upholds that Lord is transcendental and fully immanent and exhorts us to find the transcendental part in us. So, Atma is said to be unchanging and unborn. Atma invested with an I sense is Purusha, who may reamain aloof from Prakriti (as in the case of Ishwara) or may go down trapped by Prakriti (as in Jivas). All through Atma still remains untarnished. As Lord says: Atma Na Lipayate.

Lord says: know this Atma. Mandukya Upanishad says: know this Atma.

Buddha, for some particular reason perhaps, did not mention anything about a non-changing SEER of this dance of Prakriti. He recognised only the ever changing flux. Though He asked devotees to find the shantam within.

This is the suble difference, wherein the particular verse "I am not in beings", comes into play. The same knowledge is imparted by Upanishad in the verse:

Om ! That is infinite, and this is infinite.
The infinite proceeds from the infinite.
(Then) taking the infinitude of the infinite (universe),
It remains as the infinite (Brahman) alone.
There are unlimited forms that arise from Sarvesvara Pragnya, which is known as Sarvasya Yoni. But the Turiya Self remains Turiya Self --- shivoadvaitam, whether one sees forms or not. With the consciousness settled in the Self (without movement of thoughts as in samadhi), only the self effulgent infinite remains.
The forms that teach us about dharma are different in different cultures. But the Self is ONE AND SAME. AND IT HAS ONE PRAGNYA.

The unlimited forms that do arise, then i understand that, The infinite proceeds from the infinite.

Therefore when krishna says na tv evaham jatu nasam
na tvam neme janadhipah
na caiva na bhavisyamah
sarve vayam atah param
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.(2.12)

Regards (and YMMV, which I respect),

Please explain I am not good at this.


Om Namah Shivayya
Om Namah Shivayya
Om Namah Shivayya

Jai Shree Krishna

[Ganeshprasad]

Hari Om
~~~~~

I only have little to add, as both of you are adding great value....

When the veda's talk of day and night, they describe the opposites;
Day and night can be used as time, yet day is the brightness of the divine rays of consciousness... night is ignorance, or those ( that would be me) not establish as yet in the brilliance of Self. In the Rig Ved we find the 'rays' as luminious cows (gau). Come here you aspirants for the light (gavyanta); Let us reach Indra (Divine MInd) who increases our needed thought, (pramatim); Invinvible, he bestows on us the supreme (param) ay of the Light (gavam) Rig Ved 1.33.1. This concept of luminus rays i.e. cows, can be found ~ 900 times of so inb the Rig Vedsa we have to use today. No wonder India has a history of repsect for the the divine bovine that walks the steets as equals.

Over all, the day-night concept also can be considered the battle between the daitya's and A-diaitya's. The Aditya' are the devata with expansion and light; the daitya's are considered pani's( sense trafficker's as R.L.Kashap calls them), and vrtra, (the wolf) or lower vital forces that keeps the one amused and tied to possessions, anger, greed, etc. the usual suspects, of which most sadhu's, including me, are breaking aware from).

pranams,

Pranam yajvan ji

Thank you for your kind words, your addition is of great import (it is your greatness that considers it as little)

The concept of day �night, equated as satva and tama could be further expanded as Hari and Hara or Vishnu and Shiva ( part of the same coin)

and what to me I find very interesting is that the satva is dark complexion while the tamas is of white.


Jai Shree krishna

[atanu]

Pranam Atanu ji

I do not see the contradiction, the ParmAtma who dwells in every living this is what 13.17/13.23 is telling us, And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings this is so true of parmAtma. If you contemplate on this verse then 18.2 becomes easy to understand in the context of parmAtma.

Just as space or ether pervades in different vassal as if divided such is the nature of the supersoul pervades all and yet appears divided.

Namaste Ganesh Prasad Ji,


a) All beings are in Me, but I am not in them, -------

b)13. 17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings; He is to be known as the supporter of beings; He devours and He generates also.


If pervasion was the only case then the above two verses would definitely be contradicting. The full import is that Brahman remains intact and infinite, even when infinite forms are isolated as spandan through sadhana:

Om ! That is infinite, and this is infinite.
The infinite proceeds from the infinite.
(Then) taking the infinitude of the infinite (universe),
It remains as the infinite (Brahman) alone.

Therefore when krishna says na tv evaham jatu nasam
na tvam neme janadhipah
na caiva na bhavisyamah
sarve vayam atah param
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.(2.12)

Now, what is this You and I? And what is this Future?

If param atma was only apparently divided then where from this I and You came into being? Isn't the I and You also apparent? Isn't 'I' after Pragnya? And what is this 'future'? Isn't this about after awareness of time? Does this verse represent the truth beyond time?

Dear Ganeshprasad Ji, Turiya is beyond Pragnya and Time. This cited verse on 'i and you and kings' cannot overrule the fully advaitic verse: And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings. And it also does not over-rule the ONE WITHOUT A SECOND (shivoadvaita atma). This also does not speak of the condition: '---when light arises there is no day and night, only the blessed one exists -----'.


YMMV is a borrowed term meaning 'Your mileage may Vary'.


Om Namah Shivayya
Om Namah Shivayya
Om Namah Shivayya

[atanu]

Pranam yajvan ji

Thank you for your kind words, your addition is of great import (it is your greatness that considers it as little)

The concept of day –night, equated as satva and tama could be further expanded as Hari and Hara or Vishnu and Shiva ( part of the same coin)

and what to me I find very interesting is that the satva is dark complexion while the tamas is of white.


Jai Shree krishna

Jai Shree Krishna Ganesh Prasad Ji,

The verse is '----when there is no day and no night only that Shiva exists from whom proceeds the Pragnya of Savitur'.


Constancy is to be known beyond --- when there is no day no night ---- in whatever fashion one draws the meaning of day and night; Tamas/Sattwa or Knowledge/'lack of knowledge' or Asur/Sur etc. etc.


Pragnya of Savitur (Sun) only creates Time, Day/Night and all the Universe. The awareness of I is also post Pragnya. Since Savitur has an I, there are You. The constant Lord that sees all the flux remains all the time.

Forms change in flux. What is there today will not be there tommorrow. Turiya remains changeless and remains so when the flux is isolated through sadhana.

Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.


Om
Jai Shree Krishna
Om Namah Shivayya

[atanu]

Pranam Atanu ji

----
ajo 'pi sann avyayatma
bhutanam isvaro 'pi san
prakrtim svam adhisthaya
sambhavamy atma-mayaya

Although I am unborn and My transcendental body never deteriorates, and although I am the Lord of all sentient beings, I still appear in every millennium in My original transcendental form.(4.6)

avyaktam vyaktim apannam
manyante mam abuddhayah
param bhavam ajananto
mamavyayam anuttamam

Unintelligent men, who know Me not, think that I have assumed this form and personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is changeless and supreme.(7.24)

-----

Namaskar Ganesh Prasad Ji,

avyaktam vyaktim apannam
manyante mam abuddhayah
param bhavam ajananto
mamavyayam anuttamam

Unintelligent men, who know Me not, think that I have assumed this form and personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is changeless and supreme.(7.24)


And consider:

4.6 Ajo’pi sannavyayaatmaa bhootaanaam eeshwaro’pi san;
Prakritim swaam adhishthaaya sambhavaamyaatmamaayayaa.

4.6. Though I am unborn and of imperishable nature, and though I am the Lord of all beings, yet, ruling over My own Nature, I am born by My own Maya.


I Agree. This is what I am telling again and again. Only immature will use these verses to prove that the Lord's form is as they have clothed Him. Actually it is Lord's maya form. And what Arjuna saw will not be seen by an englishman ever. These visions are as per culture and as per pre-dilections.

4.6 Ajo’pi sannavyayaatmaa bhootaanaam eeshwaro’pi san;
Prakritim swaam adhishthaaya sambhavaamyaatmamaayayaa.

4.6. Though I am unborn and of imperishable nature, and though I am the Lord of all beings, yet, ruling over My own Nature, I am born by My own Maya.

What underlies the Maya body? That same Atma is the substratum knowledge and the knower in every form. And that is Paratpara. Beyond cognition by any means since by that only, all cognitions is effected.

What cognizes my eyes cannot be cognized by my eyes. What cognizes my hearing cannot be cognized by my ears. Thus:


Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.


HK claims of knowing the transcendental form of Lord is a bag of gas, as if Prabhupada has seen the transcendental form. It is their imagination they love, since Rig Veda says: Those who have clothed Him, surely from them He is hidden (Asiya Vamiya Sukta).

For this, neither being nor non-being, there is nothing to acquire everything is transcendental, it is perhaps our own sorry nature we try to superimpose on to the lord.

Cannot agree more, since this is what I have been saying.


Om Namah Shivayya