Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Being...

  1. #11
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Age
    77
    Posts
    86
    Rep Power
    190

    Re: Being...

    Namaskaram Yajvan-ji,

    This is an addendum to my earlier note. You had asked: “Does this Being have some quality?” I had replied, in effect, “Absolute Being is unresearchable, yet it is reflected in the certitude and Self-confidence of Shiva.” In other words, the nature of absolute Being is implicit in the qualities of Shiva.

    Kashmir Shaivam regards Consciousness as prakasha-vimarsha-maya, constituted as prakasha (shining forth) and vimarsha (reflective awareness). In this nature of Paramashiva, prakasha has no meaning apart from vimarsha, and vimarsha has no ultimate authority apart from prakasha. Thus the two cannot be separated—except artificially for teaching purposes.

    Satta, absolute Being, is known by not-knowing; there is no other way.The term prakasha ("shining forth") is metaphorical, because Satta is seen by not-seeing. Whatever shines forth is not Satta as such, but rather the qualities and processes of vimarsha.

    The Triad of Powers is vimarsha, implicitly evincing Satta, the Absolute Reality. Clearly the Triad is preeminently Self-aware and perfectly capable of objectifying reflection—otherwise this universe would not exist. However, with respect to Satta, there is no such objectifying vimarsha. Rather there is the non-objectifying vimarsha of immediate identity, Ahamta, whereby vimarsha is implicitly expressive of That.

    Om namah Shivaya.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    71
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    223

    Re: Being...

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    Quote Originally Posted by TrikonaBindu View Post
    Namaskaram Yajvan-ji,

    Satta, absolute Being, is known by not-knowing; there is no other way.The term prakasha ("shining forth") is metaphorical, because Satta is seen by not-seeing. Whatever shines forth is not Satta as such, but rather the qualities and processes of vimarsha.
    Very well said...
    For those that may read your words they may be a bit perplexed. For that let me offer this notion.

    The notion offered by TrikonaBindu is the difference between differentiated and un-differentiated knowledge. With differentiated, it is fractional, pieces; with un-differentiated it is wholeness of knowledge, fullness of Being.
    It is by knowing differentiated that one is caught up in the diversity of the world. It is by knowing the un-differentiated (wholeness) that one lives in fullness. So, the wise say it is by not knowing, that one knows. They mean, by not knowing the differentiated (fragmentation) that one comes to know wholeness
    ( or sattā¹).


    iti śivaṁ

    • sattā; another word often used for Being is sattā. It is defined as existence , being.
      • within this word sattā we have sat + tā .
      • sat = being , existing , occurring , happening , being present ; it is defined also as that which really is , entity or existence ,
        essence , the true being or really existent. At times it is written as satī, with the same definition. This sat is rooted in 'as' which once again means 'to be, exist, be present'.
    यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  3. #13
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    71
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    223

    Re: Being...

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    Is it just inert existence itself, or does it take on some trait, property, some mark ?

    If one thinks about it for a bit, is there anything that might surpass existence itself ? Let me frame it another way. Is there anything more fundamental then existence ?
    If we look at an object say a red apple, there is a more fundamental level - that of all apples as a family. Yet what is more fundamental that that? The atoms that make up the apples. And of that ? The electrons and protons. And of that ? The particles. And of that - we keep going
    deeper and more general in nature and we find those fundamental items that are not only shared with apples but with all things in creation until we get to space or ākāśa which has the quality of avakāśa 'to make room'; this ākāśa makes room for things to exist. But what is more fundamental then that ? It seems to me it must be existence itself. It in fact allows ākāśa to be relevant.

    So, we can say Being is the highest reality of any or everything within the manifest or unmanifest... It is fundamental to any and all, it is most common, most fundamental and it cannot be surpassed.
    What else can be more fundamental then existence/Being ? We then can call it anuttara.

    This word anuttara¹ means chief, principal. Yet the beauty in this word is when we take it apart as an +uttara. One way to look at it is like this:

    • uttara = more, additional ; upper , higher , superior
    • an - is a substitute for 'a' which = not. ( we write 'an' as it appears before a vowel, in this case 'u')
    This an +uttara = not higher. It means one cannot go any higher as one has reached the principal of chief/highest level possible.[/LIST]So, we can say Being = existence = anuttara and one can go no further then this. That is, there is nothing left. There is not another level or Higher Being that can have this anuttara as a subject of experience. It is the final.

    Because Being is all inclusive it is also considered uninterrupted - there is no place it stops. So the term used is avicchinnātaparamārthaṁ. This means uninterrupted, without break or pause, present in everything, nor can it be escaped from.

    The word I often bump into is satatoditam (satata + udita)
    • turyātīte bheda ekaḥ
      satatodita ityam || tantrāloka 10.283
      • satatoditam = satata + udita
      • satata = perpetual , continual , uninterrupted
      • udita = being high above, elevated

    So, we are starting to see some 'marks' of Being.

    iti śivaṁ

    1. within kaśmir śaivism anuttara is an epithet/descriptive term for paramaśiva.
    Last edited by yajvan; 28 April 2013 at 02:53 PM.
    यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  4. #14
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    71
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    223

    Re: Being...

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    Because Being is always there, never waivers, never on a holiday, is ubiquitous (uninterrupted, without break or pause); it has come to be known as the Absolute. It is absolutely there all the time , before time, without time, and without a substitute, it is boundless (amita). So, as we begin to give it names it then begs the question of more explanation to understand or define it.

    Being is so full, so supreme it is uccārarahitam vastu - Reality that is devoid/deprived of utterance or pronunciation; it is beyond human speech to properly sound out some word that would capture its total fullness.
    The wise say one could not stur up the proper speech to capture the wholeness of this Supreme Reality (paripūrṇānuttara¹).
    Yet we are told by the trustworthy¹ , ācārya-s, and the like that we may get a better feel for this Reality by some of its indications or marks (lakṣaṇārtha¹).
    For me, this first indicator is of great import. This Reality is vyāvahātika + pāramārthika ( the manifest world of diversity + the transcendent). Reality is the amalgamation of both, and even dividing them in to 2 causes some separateness in the mind as if there is more then one.

    This has caused great consternation in many a seeker (adhikārin¹). That is, its as if this Reality's viśvottīrṇa or 'of a transcendental nature'
    is someplace else, seperate. It is not. It is just so subtle the person misses it. The mind is gross and pāramitā which = transcendentis
    very subtle, is ~passed over~. It is the intent of the adhikārin to make this Reality an experience, to make it prakāś or prakāśa - to become visible , appear , shine , become evident or manifest. This is the intent of the dhyāyin-s ( meditators) of the world.


    We too are informed that this Reality is apauruṣeya (not of human origin) and without beginning (anādi). Yet we can experience as a human. In fact it is my humble opinion that once we experince this Reality in full we really become human and graduate from the laukika - worldly , terrestrial , belonging to or occurring in ordinary life and become alaukika - not current in the world i.e. divine in our nature.

    We are informed it is a arūpastha without form or shape but is the cause for all forms within and throughout creation. Hence it is formless that takes form, even in our own selves. We are informed it is akliṣṭa (untroubled, undisturbed) yet fully Self-aware of its-Self. We too take on this quality with the realization of Self.


    We are told ( by my teacher) that Being is creative and intelligent. It is the reservoir of all that is or can be, perfect, and full potential. It is the home of all knowlege, it is pure intelligence, pure consciousness, pure Being.


    iti śivaṁ


    words
    • trustworthy = āptamanujaprokta - written or said by those that are trustworthy. Such as muni vaikhānasa-ji who passed his insights to bhṛgu, marīci and the like.
    • paripūrṇānuttara = pari+pūrṇa+anuttara or fully whole, Supreme and unsurpassable.
      • pari = fully , abundantly , richly +
      • pūrṇa = full, whole +
      • anuttara = unsurpassable, Supreme
    • adhikārin - fit for; possessing authority. This word is used for one that is 'fit' for kari or accomplishment.
    • indications or marks = lakṣaṇārtha = lakṣaṇa + ārtha

      • lakṣaṇa - indicating , expressing indirectly ; a mark , sign , symbol , characteristic
      • artha - meaning; having to do with
    यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  5. #15
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Age
    77
    Posts
    86
    Rep Power
    190

    Re: Being...

    To all Namaskaram.

    While offline I had already composed a post, and now revisiting this Thread, I find that Yajvan-ji has meantime contributed another essay. Herein he introduces the term Anuttara, which he equates with BEING (and also with Paramashiva). Earlier Yajvan-ji had employed another term for BEING—Satta, which carries the connotation of Truth/Reality as well as BEING. I had no previous acquaintance with the term Satta, but I like it very much, whereas the term Anuttara causes mild consternation. Shaiva Shastra (the accepted understanding of the nature of Shiva) will, I expect, support Yajvan-ji. Whereas my own discomfort with the equation “Anuttara = BEING” may well put me at variance with Shastra. (Fact is, I sorely lack the learning to know if I'm in or out of line.) Still, due to fervor for Shiva, I cannot easily discard my previously established opinion. Now to begin:

    If Anuttara means simply “One can go no further than this,” then I accept (albeit uneasily) that Anuttara can connote BEING. However, if the use of the term Anuttara implies that BEING is somehow superior to the Triad of Powers, if it implies that Anuttara is somehow at a higher level than the Triad of Powers, that is a sticking point for me. As I see it, Paramashiva or Supreme Consciousness is prakasha-vimarsha-maya. Herein, prakasha = BEING, while vimarsha = Triad of Powers. For me, Anuttara refers not exclusively to BEING but rather to That Integral Whole, which includes the Triad of Powers. After all, BEING, were it not shining forth as the Triad, would be devoid of any value or significance. (I would welcome Yajvan-ji's assessment as to whether this opinion is off course from Shastra.)

    Meanwhile, to continue on what I believe is common ground: In yogic practice, one does reach Anuttara, the point where one can go no further. Both Veda and Vijnanavada agree on this. When the yogi is continuing on the path of profound meditation (i.e., keen, perspicacious inner research), there comes a moment described as Turning Back or Turning About. It happens when the faculty of gnostic grasping comes undone. Inevitably it comes undone, because at the very ground or inmost core of reflective awareness, there is no object. Simply, I AM. Veda declares that words fail utterly to describe that absolute reality which I AM.

    So the yogi turns back, not in defeat, but rather in fulfillment. Turning Back is Recognition. And Recognition is a new beginning with fresh possibilities and expanded powers. Uh...can I now be God Almighty? Yes, in my essential identity. But not in my role and function as a character in God's theater. Within God's theater, due to the wish of Parameshwara and also due to my own ingrained tendencies, the intensity/persistence of Recognition may be more or less. In every case, Recognition will surely be occluded to some degree. Within this Creation, there is always some occlusion of consciousness—otherwise where's the fun of having the universe? Yajvan-ji has written about residual occlusion in his Uttara thread entitled “Lesavidya…remains….” (sorry for the lack of diacritics), dated 5 July 2010.

    Yet for any soul who has enjoyed this Recognition, how to forget completely that unspeakable degree of REALITY in comparison to which all worldly objects, including a ton of bricks, are reduced almost to daydreams? Those who not only enjoy that Recognition but also communicate it to others are justly titled Guru, which means Heavy. Why Heavy? The adjective is a nearly helpless verbal gesture towards that Absolute Density of REALITY that is I mySelf.

    In closing, to clarify and apologize: Let no one imagine I offer this essay from the confidence my own direct experience. This little soul is nowhere in yoga. Only there is some excitement for the topics of Shiva. In such a mood one may become excessively declarative.

    Pranam.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Age
    59
    Posts
    639
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Being...

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté


    If one thinks about it for a bit, is there anything that might surpass existence itself ? Let me frame it another way. Is there anything more fundamental then existence ?
    If we look at an object say a red apple, there is a more fundamental level - that of all apples as a family. Yet what is more fundamental that that? The atoms that make up the apples. And of that ? The electrons and protons. And of that ? The particles. And of that - we keep going
    deeper and more general in nature and we find those fundamental items that are not only shared with apples but with all things in creation until we get to space or ākāśa which has the quality of avakāśa 'to make room'; this ākāśa makes room for things to exist. But what is more fundamental then that ? It seems to me it must be existence itself. It in fact allows ākāśa to be relevant.

    So, we can say Being is the highest reality of any or everything within the manifest or unmanifest... It is fundamental to any and all, it is most common, most fundamental and it cannot be surpassed.
    What else can be more fundamental then existence/Being ? We then can call it anuttara.

    This word anuttara¹ means chief, principal. Yet the beauty in this word is when we take it apart as an +uttara. One way to look at it is like this:

    • uttara = more, additional ; upper , higher , superior
    • an - is a substitute for 'a' which = not. ( we write 'an' as it appears before a vowel, in this case 'u')
    This an +uttara = not higher. It means one cannot go any higher as one has reached the principal of chief/highest level possible.[/LIST]So, we can say Being = existence = anuttara and one can go no further then this. That is, there is nothing left. There is not another level or Higher Being that can have this anuttara as a subject of experience. It is the final.

    Because Being is all inclusive it is also considered uninterrupted - there is no place it stops. So the term used is avicchinnātaparamārthaṁ. This means uninterrupted, without break or pause, present in everything, nor can it be escaped from.

    The word I often bump into is satatoditam (satata + udita)
    • turyātīte bheda ekaḥ
      satatodita ityam || tantrāloka 10.283
      • satatoditam = satata + udita
      • satata = perpetual , continual , uninterrupted
      • udita = being high above, elevated

    So, we are starting to see some 'marks' of Being.

    iti śivaṁ

    1. within kaśmir śaivism anuttara is an epithet/descriptive term for paramaśiva.
    Aum Swastiyastu

    Back in my early years, I studied the Upanishads.

    I got half way through reading the Chhandogya Upanishad and then I wasn't just 'reading' it anymore. The words had a much deeper meaning than what was printed on paper.

    "By studying one atom of clay, all things made of clay shall be known".

    Sometimes we can be like Svetaketu...confident (and arrogant) within our own limited knowledge and teachings, but miss the real purpose behind them all, until some sage like Uddalaka points that out.

    We can go into apples, apple atoms, apple gluons and that almighty "Boson-Apple Particle"....we can travel down spirals of apple DNA and arrive in an apple universe populated by the nicest of apples...'pick of the crop'.

    We can even 'become' an apple, if we really try hard enough...

    What is more fundamental than that? Oranges!

    ....and who said we couldn't compare them?

    Aum Namah Shivaya
    Last edited by Necromancer; 29 April 2013 at 01:33 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Age
    77
    Posts
    86
    Rep Power
    190

    Re: Being...

    Namaskaram to all.

    Yajvan-ji begins: Because Being is always there, never waivers, never on a holiday, is ubiquitous (uninterrupted, without break or pause); it has come to be known as the Absolute.

    Now I begin to wonder if I have lost the track. Parties to a conversation may use the same word but with divergent meanings. At first they fail to recognize that, but then there comes the moment of doubt: Are we speaking at cross-purposes? Especially when the subject matter is so abstruse, this can happen. So to clarify what my focus has been, since first contributing my two cents:

    The term Existence derives from the Latin existere, to emerge, to stand forth. Theologically, Existence pertains to transitory phenomena, entities that appear and disappear. When I contemplate BEING as opposed to Existence, whatever I have in mind relates to concepts of the Eternal. Hence, I don’t relate BEING to ubiquity, since that has a spatial connotation. Space is not eternal but derivative—unless we are speaking of chid-akasha, the space of Supreme Consciousness. If I were to select a symbol of BEING, it would be a dot, not an infinite expanse—because Parameshwara does not occupy space. Rather He produces space within chid-akasha, which is and always remains (in the material sense) non-spatial. We can understand this by the analog of the human mind, which somehow holds so many objects—elephants, mountains, trains—in non-material space.

    Sadashivom.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    71
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    223

    Re: Being...

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    Quote Originally Posted by TrikonaBindu View Post
    Yajvan-ji begins: Because Being is always there, never waivers, never on a holiday, is ubiquitous (uninterrupted, without break or pause); it has come to be known as the Absolute.

    The term Existence derives from the Latin existere, to emerge, to stand forth. Theologically, Existence pertains to transitory phenomena, entities that appear and disappear. When I contemplate BEING as opposed to Existence, whatever I have in mind relates to concepts of the Eternal. Hence, I don’t relate BEING to ubiquity, since that has a spatial connotation. Space is not eternal but derivative—unless we are speaking of chid-akasha, the space of Supreme Consciousness. If I were to select a symbol of BEING, it would be a dot, not an infinite expanse—because Parameshwara does not occupy space.
    First let me say I am quite happy to discuss this with you. You have offered a balanced approach to your positions and have kept the dignity of this knowledge at a most noble level.

    First, the pickle of using English for terms that are so vast, so profound, leaves many ideas lacking. This is why I have introduced satatoditam
    and sattā in the above posts. They begin to give us a feel for the expansiveness we wish to discuss.

    I took the approach of building the overall idea of Being in a sequential manner. To form some foundation so we can finally add the roof and coverings that allow the whole subject to be expanded upon.

    This existence you and I speak of ... From the West's point of view it 'emerges' - yet too is it also 'to be' . This notion of 'emerges' is trying to define an object's condition of 'coming into being' and not the state of pure existence that has no birth. This is a key idea. Hence this is duly noted within the quality of sattā as it is existence, being without the notion for it to arise.

    So, if we went further in this thought process, within kaśmir śaivism all of this 'coming into being' comes or originates in paramaśivā. Now this paramaśivā = absolute = Being = maha-sattā. And from here, the 36 tattva-s arise. Yet each and every tattva is filled with paramaśivā. How can this be ? Because of the quality of satatoditam - it is without break or pause.
    And with anuttara - it too considered absolute = paramaśivā , as nothing can surpass it.
    So how does this all come into the universe ? This is keenly explained via abhinavagupa-ji's work, his parā-trīśikā vivaraṇa¹. Within this work he outlines anuttara, the 3 corners ( trikona) which you have alluded to along with bindu; he also aligns this knowledge of 3 with triśūlābījamaṇḍala (triśūlā-bīja-maṇḍala) in a meaningful and useful manner.

    Yet above all abhinavagupa-ji takes the time to teach and inform the aspirant of yoga about anuttara in no less then 16 different ways. Just reading this uplifts a person to a new understanding.
    This anuttaraṃ is the very first word that comes out of śrī devī's mouth¹. She is none other then parāśakti and asks this question for the benefit of mankind... Yet to the wise they know that śrī devī is no-different then śiva, and we become the beneficiary of a conversation of the most high within him Self.

    iti śivaṁ

    words
    Last edited by yajvan; 29 April 2013 at 10:48 PM.
    यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  9. #19
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Age
    77
    Posts
    86
    Rep Power
    190

    Re: Being...

    Namaskaram Yajvan-ji,

    I am so grateful for your encouragement and patience. As this tradition of sacred knowledge is communicated to people outside India, semantics will present obstacles, one after another. This is especially the case when, in both interfacing languages, a term such as Existence, or a term such as Atma, can have more than one connotation. Actually, you pointed to this difficulty in your initial post on Being.

    There is also the challenge of engaging in discussion with readers, while simultaneously making a serialized presentation of an integral understanding. We readers have only partial views of the whole, meanwhile the conversation proceeds apace. The predictable result, especially when it comes to arcane, convoluted topics, is that sometimes we readers do not apprehend the intended context for a particular set of remarks. It can’t be helped, especially since all this is taking place in an internet forum, not in a classroom, nor in a gurukula, nor between the covers of a book. Anyway, despite all these challenges, when I survey HDF, I find it truly amazing to see the breadth and depth of knowledge, culture, and personal experience communicated here.

    Checking Amazon, I find that Para-trisika-vivarana is available in the English translation by Jaideva Singh. Up till the present, I have avoided reading a single work of Abhinavagupta. Now at your suggestion, I will make a start. Hope I have adequate capacity and background to catch the drift. Also hope to maintain self-control in case I encounter certain features of Shakta thought that never fail to make me bristle. (Yes, I’m that childish! Might even throw the book... ) It will be a challenge, but I want to do whatever I can to advance my contemplation of Parameshwara.

    Thank you!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    71
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    223

    Re: Being...

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté


    Quote Originally Posted by TrikonaBindu View Post
    Checking Amazon, I find that Para-trisika-vivarana is available in the English translation by Jaideva Singh. Up till the present, I have avoided reading a single work of Abhinavagupta. Now at your suggestion, I will make a start. .
    I am happy you may find some interest in the parā-trīśikā vivaraṇa . Yet let me say this would be like starting to swim in the deep end of the pool. If I were asked to offer introductory knowledge that would prepare one for parā-trīśikā vivaraṇa it would be the following:

    - kaśmir śaivism the secret supreme by svāmī lakman-jū
    - śiva sutra-s by svāmī lakman-jū

    I have been studying the parā-trīśikā vivaraṇa for some years now. I am ever amazed of the new knowledge that continues to arise from this great work.
    Just 36 + 1 sutra-s that raises ones knowledge and insight to new heights. I am never tired of reviewing the great work again and again.

    I also suggest reading the paramārthasāra ; in essence the work of śeṣa patañjali ( some call ādiśeṣa ) consisting of 85 śloka-s and is expanded upon by abhinavagupta within the framework of advitīya (~ non dual~, without a second) kaśmir śaivism.

    One comes to the realization that there is a vast difference in reading vs. studying these great works.

    iti śivaṁ
    यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •