Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71

Thread: Dream

  1. #61
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    359

    Re: Sarveshvara

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajalakshmi View Post
    Yes.

    Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
    Ishvara is intelligence with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
    Hiranyagarbha is Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat')
    Namaste Rajalakshmi,

    Fine. I will make a few alterations that will not change the essential meaning of what you have posted.

    Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
    Ishvara is Turya Self with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
    Hiranyagarbha is Brahman seen under Avidya mode of Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat with rulership and cattles etc.').

    Om
    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. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    181

    Post Re: Sarveshvara

    Namaste Atanu,

    In saMskRtam ~ ghana is “compact, solid, material, hard, firm, dense, coarse, gross, viscid, thick, full, densely filled, dark, deep, complete, or all”. And ghana refers to any “compact mass” (especially an unborn foetus), or to any “collection, multitude, quantity, or cloud”. BUT NOT NECESSARILY INDICATING “PARTLESS”.

    And in saMskRtam ~ prajñAghana and vijñAnaghana both indicate “nothing but intelligence”. BUT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE IN THE NATURE OF THAT INTELLIGENCE.

    I have certainly not disagreed with shrI shaÑkarAcArya !

    nara = sharva = sarva = nirgarbha = brahmayoni = prajñAna = vijñAnaghana
    nArAyaNa = bhava = sarveshvara = hiraNyagarbha = brahmabIja = prAjñA = prajñAghana

    prajñAghana is pure intelligence, dependent on individuality and BECOMING (i.e. “revealed intelligence”). And vijñAnaghana is pure intelligence, independent and indiscriminate, untouched by becoming, which requires some relation and thus implies duality, but simply BEING, which alone does not imply any duality (i.e. “revealer of intelligence”).

  3. #63
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Age
    43
    Posts
    79
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: Sarveshvara

    Quote Originally Posted by atanu View Post
    Namaste Rajalakshmi,

    Fine. I will make a few alterations that will not change the essential meaning of what you have posted.

    Turya is intelligence without self awareness - it is awareness itself ('am')
    Ishvara is Turya Self with self awareness and undivided.('I am Brahman')
    Hiranyagarbha is Brahman seen under Avidya mode of Prakriti and is multiplicity.('I am Jagat with rulership and cattles etc.').

    Om
    hiraNyagrabha is Jagat - the ruler is sarveshvara. hiraNyagarbha himself undergoes laya in praLaya so how can he be its ruler? Read gita 8.17-8.21. There is no doubt that sarveshvara is the real ruler and hiraNyagarbha only an 'appointment'. Follow up these passages through 8.28 and tell me how it was concluded that devayAna leads to hiraNyagarbha? Certainly you dont think that it is Nirguna Brahman who is doing this sRshTi and laya, do you? So it is Ishvara who is doing all this.

    There is oneness in Ishvara, but you cannot say that there is no multiplicity whatsoever in Ishvara, as he is guNa sampanna - so there is some minor difference from turya.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    359

    Re: Sarveshvara

    Namaste Rajalakshmi,

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajalakshmi View Post
    hiraNyagrabha is Jagat - the ruler is sarveshvara. hiraNyagarbha himself undergoes laya in praLaya so how can he be its ruler?
    I said: Hiranyagarbha is Brahman seen under Avidya mode. In that mode my office boss also says "I am the controller".


    There is oneness in Ishvara, but you cannot say that there is no multiplicity whatsoever in Ishvara, as he is guNa sampanna - so there is some minor difference from turya.
    Sarabhaga and myself have discussed this point two or three posts above.

    Regards,

    Om Namah Shivaya
    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. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    58
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4717

    Re: Dream

    Namaste Atanu,

    The Third Sarvesvara is praGYaanaghana evaanandamayo as per Mandukya. The indescribable Fourth, the Self (called as Samaan as indicatory but really Neti-Neti) is viGYaanaghana as per Brihadaranyaka. Both are ghana (without any parting) and non-dual.

    Actually there should not be any confusion in understanding the distinction. The Fourth is the revealer of Consciousness in intellect, whereas the Third is the revealed (pra -- going ahead) consciousness in the intellect.
    Sorry, was too busy in last a few days to post reply earlier !

    Here in your explanation, imho, there is a sense of duality & therefore doesn't appear correct.

    You say, Pragnya is revealed conciousness & Turiya is the revealer of Conciousness. If that is true, then both Pragnya & Turiya get contaminated with duality. Wherever, there will be "revealed", there must be someone to whom that is revealed .... so there is duality. Similarly, if there is a revealer, there must be something which is revealed & someone to who that is revealed .... & therefore is a case of duality.

    I agree that Pragnya too is Non-dual state but not in the way Turiya is. Pragnya to be all-knower & all-powerful must be non-dual ( i.e. presence in all beings even to the tiniest atoms, otherwise knowing all & having power over all is impossible .... I can further elaborate this if you so desire) but there is still the dream left ... the duality attachment of something to perform as the Isvara ( "Yada -Yada hi dharmasya glanirbhavati ..." ) ..... though undoubtedly, is the highest state possible in duality .... but is still in duality. Turiya has no such attachment & has no compulsion to perform & is thus free from the last trace of the dream.

    Regards
    Last edited by devotee; 23 January 2008 at 10:19 PM. Reason: minor corrections
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  6. #66
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    359

    Re: Dream

    Quote Originally Posted by devotee View Post
    Namaste Atanu,
    Sorry, was too busy in last a few days to post reply earlier !

    Here in your explanation, imho, there is a sense of duality & therefore doesn't appear correct.

    You say, Pragnya is revealed conciousness & Turiya is the revealer of Conciousness. If that is true, then both Pragnya & Turiya get contaminated with duality. Wherever, there will be "revealed", there must be someone to whom that is revealed .... so there is duality. Similarly, if there is a revealer, there must be something which is revealed & someone to who that is revealed .... & therefore is a case of duality.
    I agree.

    Mandukya itself says that one may see OM as AUM, in three padas. But isn't Om single syllabled ONE? Yes. Mandukya says that also.

    I agree that Pragnya too is Non-dual state but not in the way Turiya is.
    Thank you for the opportunity to explain as to what my understanding is. (And understanding is as good as one's level of comprehension of consciousness, which is invariant).

    Only in Samadhi the Self is known.

    Usually, it is an act of Maya (ignorance) that we forget that while analysing the Seen/Heard aspect of consciousness, it is the Self that is seeing/hearing/deciding. With what tool? Definitely the tool is not external?

    Once this realisation dawns one will not divide the revealer and the revealed. But for analysing Self (which is One Pada reallly) as made of three padas, one has to see that the Self is the immutable Person (the being) and the Prajna is the invariant basis of all understanding. And this pure consciousness is separated out in Mandukya and explained as a stand apart thing.

    This stand apart Prajna, cannot know itself and others (as Gaudapada explains). So to know, the Self is required (again I emphasize that this is ONE PADA ony). It is just for understanding purpose that the Self (say Shiva) and its Consciousness (say Girija) are seen as two. How can they be two? Yet, SElf is seen as Atman and Girija as the Prakriti of the Self, so that the 'Na Lipayate' aspect of Self can be comprehended.

    Similarly, Mandukya isolates Self and explains it as indescribable and neither consciousness nor not consciousness, neither internal consciousness, neither external consciousness, nor no consciousness etc etc.. But Gaudapada explains Turya as the all Seer, since Self has the pure Consciousness as its non-dual consort. The consort's brilliantly hued thoughts become all. Yet when there are no many hued thoughts, the Self remains Self.

    I agree with you fully.

    Om
    Last edited by atanu; 24 January 2008 at 01:55 AM.
    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. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    359

    Re: Dream

    Namaste Devotee,

    Sarabhanga has written an extremely subtle piece elsewhere. I have added a few words and placed it here. You may like to comment whether this is how all views of ours emerge -- whether in waking or in dreaming.


    The vishvarUpa of nArAyaNa is expressed in every degree of consciousness (of the conscious subject since consciousness by itself cannot know itself or others, as taught by Gaudapada). When the conscious subject realises itself as pure consciousness, in unity with Shushupti (which is the pure consciousness itself), there the world disappears as the world is from the Consciousness.

    And transcending this prAjña, when the conscious subject knows itself as the arupa, it may view its Prakriti as it wishes.

    Regards,

    Om
    -------------------------
    Some say that one can be stithi pragnya but not the master of Prakriti. Some say one can do so.
    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. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    58
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4717

    Re: Dream

    Namaste Atanu,

    Thanks for the input which is really extremely subtle.

    Quote Originally Posted by atanu View Post
    The vishvarUpa of nArAyaNa is expressed in every degree of consciousness (of the conscious subject since consciousness by
    itself cannot know itself or others, as taught by Gaudapada).
    The meaning of words keep changing depending on many things & one of them is the context in which they have been used.

    Visvarupa = Visva + Rupa ==> The World Form. Therefore Visvarupa must contain everything in this world. But everything is just One thing & there is nothing which is out of that ONE & that ONE is the Conciousness. So, in that respect, Visvarupa is the ONE/the SELF. However, there must be duality for this vision .... as Atmasakshatkar is not vision of Ataman/SELF but BE-ing SELF ( though it is also not the exact expression, because SELF is always SELF).

    IMO, the word "Visvarupa" has been used in Gita to "show" Arjuna the "Ishavariya Shakti" of the Lord & what is actually happening in the world under the command of God, which is not seen by the "prakrit eyes" ... like, the war is just an excuse but all great warriors on Kaurava side are already moving with great speed into the Lord's Mouth to meet their end ... their fate is already decided. This is a show of real thing behind the curtain .... here the world is within Lord & everything going on there is as per His wishes. IMO, here this word has been used for vision ... i.e. for seeing & not being.

    When the conscious subject realises itself as pure consciousness, in unity with Shushupti (which is the pure consciousness itself), there the world disappears as the world is from the Consciousness.
    I agree.

    And transcending this prAjña, when the conscious subject knows itself as the arupa, it may view its Prakriti as it wishes.
    You are linking it with the phrase used by Lord Krishna, " and see everything else whatever you want to see".

    That is quite possible (everything is possible at that state) but where is the need or to wish anything or view anything after transcending Pragnya ? ... and keeping the full text of Chapter-11 in mind, that doesn't appear to be the case. Therefore, I don't see it that way. It is easier to keep duality & Non-duality separate & understand them separately. A cocktail of duality & Non-duality is a strong mix-up !

    IMHO, how it exactly works is beyond our mind (but reality is that It Works) & that is why it can't be expressed exactly by using any combination of words.

    Regards
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  9. #69
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    359

    Re: Dream

    Quote Originally Posted by devotee View Post
    Namaste Atanu,

    Thanks for the input which is really extremely subtle.
    Visvarupa = Visva + Rupa ==> The World Form. Therefore Visvarupa must contain everything in this world. But everything is just One thing & there is nothing which is out of that ONE & that ONE is the Conciousness. So, in that respect, Visvarupa is the ONE/the SELF. However, there must be duality for this vision .... as Atmasakshatkar is not vision of Ataman/SELF but BE-ing SELF ( though it is also not the exact expression, because SELF is always SELF).

    IMO, the word "Visvarupa" has been used in Gita to "show" Arjuna the "Ishavariya Shakti" of the Lord & what is actually happening in the world under the command of God, which is not seen by the "prakrit eyes" ... like, the war is just an excuse but all great warriors on Kaurava side are already moving with great speed into the Lord's Mouth to meet their end ... their fate is already decided. This is a show of real thing behind the curtain .... here the world is within Lord & everything going on there is as per His wishes. IMO, here this word has been used for vision ... i.e. for seeing & not being.
    Namaste Devotee,

    I agree, with a small observation and caution. The One is not ALL or The ONE has not become All, as is explained in VA. But ONE is transcendentally eternally ONE WITHOUT A SECOND (as pure knowledge is partless). The ALL is the effect (three dream states as Aitereya explains) , seen by the ONE WITHOUT A SECOND. This is Rudra, who saw Hiranyagarbha (Svet. Upanishad).

    This is a crucial point. Else Samaan, homogeneous pure intelligence that Atman is, becomes uneven itself -- which is not supported by any Shruti.

    I thought of clarifying this here (mainly for the sake of Sarabhanga Ji who probably, based on this subtle point alone, has gathered the impression that my understanding is not of Advaita).

    You are linking it with the phrase used by Lord Krishna, " and see everything else whatever you want to see".

    That is quite possible (everything is possible at that state) but where is the need or to wish anything or view anything after transcending Pragnya ? ... and keeping the full text of Chapter-11 in mind, that doesn't appear to be the case. Therefore, I don't see it that way. It is easier to keep duality & Non-duality separate & understand them separately. A cocktail of duality & Non-duality is a strong mix-up !

    IMHO, how it exactly works is beyond our mind (but reality is that It Works) & that is why it can't be expressed exactly by using any combination of words.

    Regards
    I think you are correct that one should not at all mix up Advaita and Dvaita. Else "One who sees any diffrence here goes from death to death" reigns.

    Yet, I have a slightly different opinion, which may or may not be correct. I will try to explain it, though I am a bit wary. Be it so. It is my understanding and I do not say that the idea is the Truth.

    The confusion arises because Brahma Sutra, in the final chapter, talks of a Mukta (who is inseparable from Brahman) being able to animate bodies -- obviously in lower states, without getting tainted (because Advaita Atman can never conceptualise that 'me' (say Devadatta), an individual, is creating bodies etc..

    IMO, what I say, does not constitute a break in Advaita, since Advaita Atman remains without any taint, but it is absolutely free to enjoy in its lower states, as a pure Seer in Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. Whereas Advaita Atman is beyond Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. It never slumbers. It never has a thought that "I am sleeping" etc. As Brihadaranyaka says :self as if roams in three states seeing only and not partaking any karma of acting.

    This is my understanding from Mandukya, Maitrayana Brahmaya, Chandogya, Brihadaraynaka and other Upanishads and reading of Shankara.

    Lord also says in Gita that a portion of His energy is eternal in Jivaloka. Mandukya Upanishad states that Atman abiding in three states enjoys.

    If it is said that there is a deluded VisvaAtman and there is one undeluded Turya Atman, does Advaita Atman remain valid? However, this is again a tricky point: The One Atman has not become Many. The One impartible Atman ever remains so.

    Else the knowledge of Uttama Purusha becomes invalid.

    True, the world is Myth (Maya) but it is not Asat. It is an effect of ONE ANADI, INDESCRIBABLE, UNCHANGED, UNTAINTED ADVAITA ATMAN. And in the effect (called Karya or Universe), there is Avidya and pain due to apparent duality, which Lord assuages as Karunavatara. This is Maya (Myth) yet not Asat. Lord Krishna is Sat (being same as unborn Mahesvara) yet He is Asat, since His form (appearance) is a Maya product -- manifested with the help of His own Maya. He is actually the unborn mahesvara.

    Dear Devotee, I have tried to write it down. There are very great chances of lapses, since it is human limited understanding (and conveying). Whereas the Lord -- The Self, is unlimited, untainted, indescribable and ever ONE.

    I think it is necessary to clarify that I am not supporting the translations of a school that shows Krishna saying (Gita 13th chapter) : Param Brahman, under my control, should be known to attain immortality". This is gross misunderstanding, since Krishna has also said Akshara Param Brahma is the ultimate.

    And Aitereya upanishad says that Eko Atma brought up a Purusha from the waters. So, obviously nothing exceeds Self-Brahman.

    In Gita verse, the word "Anadimatparam" is parsed as "anadi matparam", deriving "having me as the ultimate" or "under my control". How can Param Brahman have an ultimate when it is same and constant and highest always?

    On the other hand, parsing "anadimatparam", as most tranlators have done, as "Anadimat Param", means 'without beginning'. This "Anadimat nirgunatwatt" is also used for Atman in Svet. Upanishad. There the question of 'under my control' does not arise since a sage is writing.

    So, I am not supporting any school of Dvaita.

    IMHO, how it exactly works is beyond our mind (but reality is that It Works) & that is why it can't be expressed exactly by using any combination of words.
    I agree whole heartedly. All true Gurus, including Lord Krishna in Gita, say that the truth is known in Samadhi, which going by experience and teaching of Upanishads is Advaita. "What the knower can know?"

    When the knower and the known is ONE, there is nothing different that can be known.

    Regards,

    Om
    Last edited by atanu; 28 January 2008 at 05:58 AM.
    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. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    58
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4717

    Re: Dream

    Namaste Atanu,

    It is well written post, worth reading. Thanks !

    I agree with almost eveything what you say in your post.

    IMO, what I say, does not constitute a break in Advaita, since Advaita Atman remains without any taint, but it is absolutely free to enjoy in its lower states, as a pure Seer in Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. Whereas Advaita Atman is beyond Waking, Dream, and Shushupti. It never slumbers. It never has a thought that "I am sleeping" etc. As Brihadaranyaka says :self as if roams in three states seeing only and not partaking any karma of acting.


    I think you are correct because it is the closest logical explanation bridging the gap between Advaita philosophy & God (apparently acting) in duality.

    I think it is necessary to clarify that I am not supporting the translations of a school that shows Krishna saying (Gita 13th chapter) : Param Brahman, under my control, should be known to attain immortality". This is gross misunderstanding, since Krishna has also said Akshara Param Brahma is the ultimate.


    I think you are refering to Chapter 13, sloka -12. There is no word indicating "under my control", in the said verse. If the full verse is read with appropriate context, it is clear that there is no reason to show Krishna himself above Brahman ... in fact, He is just trying to explain the "attributes" of the Brahman to Arjun. If he wanted to say that he was above Brahman, Chapter-10 was the correct place !

    For a Non-dualist, all the paths lead to One ... what is the difference between Shiva, Krishna, Vishnu, Ganesha, Shakti ? They are all the same at the "top". When we see them from our lower levels we see the differences !

    Regards
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

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
  •