Mandukya Upanishad

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

III i-2 to III-i-4.Consciousness is Brahman.
This is very clearly stated in upanishad.
Now, since (1.) Consciousness is Brahman and (2.)Atman is conscious ==Atman is brahman.

There is no doubt that brahman is consciousness...
Some say brahman is pāramārthika (absolute) and vyāvahārika (relative). Many talk of brahman as ekam evādvitiyam - One truly without a second. Yet we note the following:

daśa santaiḥ tat kṛtam - What is created of that One becomes 10. (chāndogya upaniṣad 4.3.8)

To think brahman is only consciousness is a miscalculation in the fullness (bhūman) of this Being. But is there something that is subtler then consciousness is then the question... to this I say yes, it is sattā. Brahman is also this sattā, Being itself.

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast�

To think brahman is only consciousness is a miscalculation in the fullness (bhūman) of this Being

He is the One that shines ( rāṭ ) in every specific form ( vi ) ~ virāṭ � ~ . He manifests in all the worlds.

praṇām

words

• virāṭ is the form of virāj to be illustrious or eminent , shine forth , shine out ; we also know this word as a ruler, to reign , rule , govern , master
  • vi is from dvi mean in parts, directions, distribution. the rsi applies it to mean 'specific forms' or diversity.

[karthikm]

Hi,

Regarding the turiya state, i will only give a hint to that for those who have not experienced it. (as scriptures are against giving "gyan" to others). Please draw a chart comparing the diff between all the four states. u can figure it out urself. Also Aum is said to be soundless sound. Please ponder over this and u will get that answer urself.

Please reply if u get any hints or want to comment otherwise.

Thanks,
vishnu.

Namaste Vishnu,

Turiya is NOT a state. It is the base (adhishtanam) on which waking, dream & deep sleep state come and go. If you say that you have experienced Turiya, from which state did you experience it? What Upadhi did you have to experience Turiya?

[rainycity]

Obviously, fire, water or air are not the building blocks in modern science, so these must be properly explained with respect to science to be taken seroously. Philosophy devoid of science is idle talk, so I dont want to elaborate on these tattvas as done by ancient commentrators. Vaishnvanara falls in the realm of avidya, meaning material science. If anybody could present a modern view of this, that would be impressive.(please attempt so even if it is not rigorous)

ether - space
air - vibration, movement
fire - energy
water - fluidity
earth - form

[Waruna]

Namaste Vishnu,

Turiya is NOT a state. It is the base (adhishtanam) on which waking, dream & deep sleep state come and go. If you say that you have experienced Turiya, from which state did you experience it? What Upadhi did you have to experience Turiya?

turiya is a state, it is a continual state in which the yogi has unbroken or continual absorption in Aum/soundless sound/nada/shabda/omkar/pranava (inner sounds of bell, flute, ocean, mridanga/damaru, thunder etc...). Hopefully when Vishnu says Aum is soundless sound he is educated enough to know that is refering to the inner sounds continuosuly resounding in the head at all times

[karthikm]

turiya is a state, it is a continual state in which the yogi has unbroken or continual absorption in Aum/soundless sound/nada/shabda/omkar/pranava (inner sounds of bell, flute, ocean, mridanga/damaru, thunder etc...). Hopefully when Vishnu says Aum is soundless sound he is educated enough to know that is refering to the inner sounds continuosuly resounding in the head at all times

From which state is Turiya experienced? Is it from the waking state? If so, which organ of perception and which organ of knowledge is used to identify and experience Turiya? Or is it experienced in the Turiya state? In that case what is the upadhi that we have in Turiya state to experience that?

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté karthikm,

From which state is Turiya experienced? Is it from the waking state? If so, which organ of perception and which organ of knowledge is used to identify and experience Turiya? Or is it experienced in the Turiya state? In that case what is the upadhi that we have in Turiya state to experience that?

turīya - starts its origin in the word catur meaning 4. Hence turīya has come to be known as the 4th. Yet when we talk of the 2nd derivitive
of this turīya it is a discussion of the spirit and no longer does this 'part' or 'state' perfectly apply as spirit is far from be fractionated as a part
or state. It is considered whole ( bhūman or full, filled )

The wise also teach us of turīyātīta : turīya + atīta - the 4th + beyond, past. Hence turīyātīta is beyond the 4th; atīta अतीत - gone beyond, past.
What is this then? Perhaps others may wish to offer their views.

Another view ( not differnt, just extended) of this turīya is called turyasvastha ( some spell turīyasvastha) . It means/defined as Self-abiding ,
being in one's Self or really 'in the Self' one's natural state.

We see then how 'state' can sneak into the conversation as one wishes to talk of natual state of Being. It is based upon the 4th ( turīya )
and beyond the 4th ( turīyātīta ).

praṇām

[karthikm]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast� karthikm,




turīya - starts its origin in the word catur meaning 4. Hence turīya has come to be known as the 4th. Yet when we talk of the 2nd derivitive
of this turīya it is a discussion of the spirit and no longer does this 'part' or 'state' perfectly apply as spirit is far from be fractionated as a part
or state. It is considered whole ( bhūman or full, filled )

The wise also teach us of turīyātīta : turīya + atīta - the 4th + beyond, past. Hence turīyātīta is beyond the 4th; atīta अतीत - gone beyond, past.
What is this then? Perhaps others may wish to offer their views.

Another view ( not differnt, just extended) of this turīya is called turyasvastha ( some spell turīyasvastha) . It means/defined as Self-abiding ,
being in one's Self or really 'in the Self' one's natural state.

We see then how 'state' can sneak into the conversation as one wishes to talk of natual state of Being. It is based upon the 4th ( turīya )
and beyond the 4th ( turīyātīta ).

praṇām

Namaste yajvan,

Absolutely agree with all your points. In fact Mandukya Upanisad only refers to the 4th pada as chaturtam (4th) and it is the base on which the other three states come and go.

Regarding Turiyatita and/or Turiyavastha, Mandukya upanisad does not refer to them. They are discussed more in the Yoga philosophy. Since this thread is about Mandukya upanisad, my humble opinion is bringing them in into this discussion would only confuse. Mandukya upanisad lays out a different path before explaining about Turiya. Similarly Yoga philosophy lays out a different path before explaining about Turiyatita. To me they should be discussed separately and not together.

Namaste.

[kd gupta]

Namaste vishnu
Your quotes are very complicated for me to understand . mandukya means frog which can have four stages..awake,sleepwhen dreaming,deep sleep and turiya or hibernation .
May be in samadhi when human can attain turiya . During all these stages IS the soul said to be in consciousness? .
Taking shlokas 10 to 13/8 , atma tries to attain brahman , means soul is not the real consciousness .
Gita shloka 59/18 says ...prakritih tvam niyokshati..means the nature borne by sanskar will engage you in war .
60/18 says...nibaddhah sven karmana...means your past deeds will lead you to war .
Both these shlokas hint the soul not to be the real consciousness otherwise gita was not needed .
Vedic word sayuja sakhayau...means brahman is present with soul hence soul is not the real consciousness .
So how you infer ..seeker to be the SOUGHT ?

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

If there is something more subtle than consciousness is there than we cannot detect it ever !!!

I am happy with your certainty. Yet consciousness rests on sattā. If you think that it takes consciousness to experience it, then there is 2,
and you are not at its subtlest level - see the point?

To say I want to know Reality - this too is a misnomer. This then suggests there is the object of knowing ( Reality) and the knower.
Once again there is 2, duality, and this is not the final resting point.

If there is 2, then one is not in the most subtlest level. One can only be reality.