Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Patañjali's sutras

  1. #11
    Join Date
    July 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    70
    Rep Power
    107

    Re: Patajalis sūtra-s

    It is helpful (to me anyway) to have a translation visible online as we go through the text.

    Swami J. is a disciple of the late Swami Rama and his website is very good on the Yoga Sutras.

    Here is the link: http://www.swamij.com/yoga-sutras.htm

    By-the-by, I noticed that Swami Rama has some Yoga Sutra lectures on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/swamiramahimalayas
    Last edited by Skull; 04 July 2010 at 04:12 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patañjali's sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    I wrote in post 9 above:

    Before this viveka is fully developed perceptions are filtered, influenced by likes, dislikes, prejudices, that taint clear understanding.
    Patañjali-muni calls this out in the 8th sūtra as viparyaya -transposition , change , alteration , inverted order or succession , opposite or false knowledge. They say this viparyaya ( filters as I call 'em) has 5 parts :
    • tamas or mental darkness , ignorance , illusion , error
    • asmitā ego or excessive ego
    • moha , infatuation , delusion , bewilderment , perplexity , distraction
    • mahāmoha - extreme attachment
    • tāmisra ' nightwalker', a rākṣasa or ~the fear of death~

    There too are another ways that errors and blemishes can arise. From a naiyāyaka school of reasoning ( nyāya¹ darśana) knowledge (pramāṇa¹) they say is gained in 4 ways.
    • perception
    • inference
    • comparrison
    • testimony

    Lets take a look¹ at these 4 and see how they too can be challenged by viparyaya .
    • Perception - I view something and say it to be true because I see it. Yet I have the doṣa of color blindness and cannot perceive certain colors - hence I do not see truly.
    • Inference
      • the cause and effect - I see black clouds coming my way and assume it will rain shortly , and it does not.
      • the effect to the cause - I see black smoke arising from the other side of a mountain and infer that is must be fire; yet on further inspection it
        is a dust storm, no fire.
      • what is commonly seen - I am walking behind a person of tall stature, yet am 10 meters from this person. By the looks of the arms, they look
        muscular. The hair in the back of the head is short, the person is wearing pants. I assume by what I commonly see men wearing and looking
        this person too must be male. Yet upon catching up to the person, it is a female by observing her face, gesture and facial makeup.

    • Comparison - I pick up a 1 meter square box and it weighs about 1 kilo. I see another box of the exact same size, shape, color, taped the same way, and
      yet when I try and pick it up I cannot as it weighs in about 10 kilo's.
    • Testimony - a person on the witness stand swears they saw Abba cross the street at 10: 30 AM to which he entered a shop, held it up and robbed the proprietor.
      Yet another eye-witness said Abba entered the shop to stop the crime that was in process.
      • fear - I walk into a dimly lit room and feel timid. I see a snake on the floor and run out. I testify to a friend outside that there is a snake in the room
        and if he would remove it for me. He enters the room, turns on the light and sees nothing but a piece of rope in the corner of the room.
      • scriptures - a true source of knowledge. Yet I read it and completely mistake the knowledge for something else. The source is right and perfect yet my comprehension is flawed.

    We can see that viparyaya can be alive and well in one's daily activities.

    praām

    words
    • Any errors in my examples can only be assigned to me. No author has suggested these examples, hence all blemishes are of my making.
    • nyāya -that into which a thing goes back i.e. an original type , standard , method ; named such as because it ' goes into' all subjects physical and metaphysical according to a method; It is suggested this nyāya darśana is tightly aligned with another branch called vaiśeṣikadarśana
    • pramāṇa - a means of acquiring pramā or certain knowledge.
    • As an fyi in vedānta the are 6 ways:
      • pratyakṣa , perception by the senses
      • anumāna , inference
      • upamāna , analogy or comparison
      • śabda or āpta-vacana , verbal authority , revelation
      • an-upalabdhi or abhāva-pratyakṣa , non-perception or negative proof
      • arthāpatti , inference from circumstances
      • As mentioned the nyāya admits only 4 , excluding the last two mentioned above

    • sāṃkhya views only 3 ways i.e. pratyakṣa , anumāna and śabda
    • viparyaya -transposition , change , alteration , inverted order or succession , opposite or false knowledge
    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 05:58 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  3. #13
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patajalis sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    So, now we two maco-types of perception.

    laukika - worldly , terrestrial , belonging to or occurring in ordinary life , common , usual , customary
    alaukika - not current in the world , uncommon


    With laukika, perception is blemished. Even with 20-20 vision one does not see clearly . Why so ? viparyaya¹ .
    With alaukika, perception or cognition one sees clearly. It is talked about as ṛtambharā prajñā¹ - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out. This is what is developed within patañjali’s yogadarśana (the yoga sūtra-s of patañjali) .

    praām

    words

    • viparyaya - see post 9 and 12 above.
    • ṛtambharā prajñā - see post 9.
    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 11:55 AM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  4. #14
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patajalis sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    we two maco-types of perception:
    laukika - worldly , terrestrial , belonging to or occurring in ordinary life , common , usual , customary
    alaukika - not current in the world , uncommon

    With laukika, perception is blemished. Even with 20-20 vision one does not see clearly . Why so ? viparyaya¹ .
    With alaukika, perception or cognition one sees clearly. It is talked about as ṛtambharā prajñā - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out.


    One day a young man called ātmāśraya¹ walked into the forest and wished to see a gavaya¹ or wild ox. He came upon a man and asked, I wish to view a gavaya but I do not know what they look
    look like. Do you? The man said I have heard they look just like a cow, and off he went.

    The man with this mental picture of a cow in his mind continues to walk through the woods hoping to encounter a cow-like creature known as the gavaya. He came upon a man sitting by a river and asked have you seen a gavaya in this part of the forest? The man said no, not of late, but I am not exactly certain what this creature looks like, I was told it looks like a deer.

    So, ātmāśraya continued his wandering and came upon a man, who he asked the same thing. Can you tell me where I may find a gavaya, I wish to know this type of being. The man said yes, I can tell you of this gavaya, I know of it. I will describe it for you intimately and I will bring you to the herd of these beings, yet in the end I cannot see for you. Will this meet with your pleasure dear boy? The boy said this will bring satisfaction to my wondering.
    The man, of clear vision outlined the salient features, behaviors, and qualities of this gavaya. The boy ātmāśraya asked many questions to his hearts content. Yet better questions and more insightful conversation began after the boy viewed the gavaya with his own eyes. The man who ātmāśraya called yogāya-ji¹ taught the boy upon his request all that he knew regarding this animal-being.

    What are the lessons here? It is of upamāna and śabdha-pramāṇa.
    • This upamāna is comparison , resemblance , analogy and śabdha-pramāṇa is testimony;
    • śabdha-pramāṇa is śabdha = sound, the right word , correct expression + pramāṇa = a correct notion , right perception or testimony, evidence = knowledge (pramā -right measure , true knowledge)

    The first two people that ātmāśraya met gave the best information they had but it fell short. They did not have direct experience, yet offered upamāna i.e. cow, deer comparisons.
    Their testimony was flawed i.e. laukika¹, perception is blemished. Yet when ātmāśraya met yogāya-ji his knowledge was not flawed and can be considered unflawed (alaukika).

    This is what we wish to converse with as much as possible , śabdha-pramāṇa, right knowledge that is infallible. We do not have this infallibility on HDF as yet. We all are here to help the best we can yet our vision (including mine) is not to the level of ṛtambharā prajñā - luminous wisdom that is carried out , brought out, some may say sung out. This is what is developed within patañjali’s yogadarśana (the yoga sūtra-s of patañjali) .

    Hence the notion then is we offer the best we can with the best intentions. We offer the knowledge based upon śāstra-s as often as possible, or direct personal experience if that aligns with the knowledge. Yet we are all still learning , no?

    For some that had this direct experience of listening to the wise from their lips are fortunate indeed. Others may not have had this option.
    So it seems the best we can do is remain open to the idea and notion of finding this muni that may assist us. It seems to me studying the śāstra-s, the āgama-s the best we can is worthy of merit. This study also includes the conversations on HDF with the notion that the final word on truth may be offered here but not comprehended to the full level of one's ability.

    praām

    words
    • ātmāśraya - dependence - one that approaches the self for protection , asylum , refuge , protection
    • yogāya-ji - yogāya = to be changed into religious contemplation or devotion + ji = word or respect given.
      śraya - approaching for protection , asylum , refuge , protection
    • gavaua is a species of oxen yet some writers have used this word for a species of deer
    • viparyaya - see post 9 and 12 above.
    • ṛtambharā prajñā- see post 9.
    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 11:55 AM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  5. #15
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patañjali's sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté

    from post 9 above,

    Can you tell me where I may find a gavaya, I wish to know this type of being. The man said yes, I can tell you of this gavaya, I know of it.
    I will describe it for you intimately and I will bring you to the herd of these beings, yet in the end I cannot see for you. Will this meet with your pleasure dear boy? The boy said this will bring satisfaction to my wondering.
    What do you think is the significance of yogāya-ji informing ātmāśraya that he cannot see for him? Any POV's on this matter?

    praṇām
    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 05:58 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  6. #16
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patajalis sūtra-s

    hari o
    ~~~~~~

    namaste



    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    Let me offer an idea or two this is based upon the 2nd ūtra ,samādhi-pāda ( 1st chapter,). Patañjali-muni defines yoga in the following manner:
    yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ
    • yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
    • citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
    • vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
    • nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction

    My view
    Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).
    If we look at this one sūtra (yogaścittavṛttinirodhaḥ), the one word that has not sat well with me is nirodhaḥ. Why is that ? It is because the prefix 'nir' is another way of writing 'nis'. This 'nis' too can be written 'nir' but also niḥ , niś , niṣ , and nī.

    If we look at this word 'nis' it means ' away from'; 'out of' , 'without' . And the end of the word nirodhaḥ is nirodhaḥ . dhaḥ or 'dha' which means the following:
    • holding , possessing , having
    • bestowing , granting , causing
    • placing , putting

    So, if we look at nirodhaḥ from this POV we have holding (dha) the moving mind (or citta-vṛtti ) or being without (nis) mind (or citta-vṛtti ).

    One more word too needs to be polished., that of yogaś. We know yoga is union and this makes perfect sense. Yet too we can look at yogaś as yogas and this is defined as 'meditation'.

    Now we have an other meaning albeit tangent and applicable to the 1st offered , this sūtra (yogaścittavṛttinirodhaḥ) can now mean :
    meditation (yogaś) is holding or being without (nirodhaḥ) the movement of the mind (cittavṛttini).

    Why mention this ? Because many-an-author take nirodhaḥ as suppression , destruction ; restriction. It suggests a more aggressive or deeply disciplined approach then I think patañjali-ji intended , based upon my personal experience.

    iti śiva
    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 05:58 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  7. #17
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patañjali's sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~
    svāgata (hello)


    Revisiting the very first post,

    · yogaś - process of yoking; union from 'yuj'
    · citta - as a noun it is thinking , reflecting , imagining , thought; some put this as active mind
    · vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements.
    · nirodhaḥ - suppression , destruction ; some prefer stilling, cessation, restriction

    My view
    Yoga is the stilling (nirodhaḥ) of the active (vṛtti) mind (citta).
    If one critically reviews this one sūtra we can find just how insightful it is...it takes a ‘razor’s edge’ in one’s discernment to ‘capture’ the idea within one’s own personal experience. It took me quite some time to ‘get’ this – that is, to comprehend it properly. For others it could be in an instant ; others may take a period of time, and still for others may not as yet have that discernment¹ to ‘capture’ this idea in themselves. But first one needs to be told of it, AND be aware of it before any capturing can occur.

    Within this string and another ( http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthr...-light-on-yoga ) I offered some very granular information and knowledge. This offer will be consumed by the intellect but it is important to find this in one's self, within their direct personal experience. So what is it? Let’s begin.

    The sūtra says this: yogaś citta-vṛtti-nirodhaḥ
    The only term I wish to literally point one’s attention to is vṛtti - ' rolling , or rolling down' i.e. patterning, turnings, movements of mind; many translate this term as ‘fluctuation’. It is a reasonable translation. This ~fluctuation~ is some bubbling-up of a thought or even feeling, even an impression that comes to you with or without a label of identification on it. They come and go all day long, wave after wave they ‘roll’ in.

    When these occur ( these thoughts & feelings) we come to associate them as if they were our own self and we refer to them as ‘I’ . We think ‘ I’ had this thought. The thoughts come and go yet for some reason we think that ‘I’ had them, but in fact they were just ‘fluctuations’ that occur, some call mental modifications. Try it yourself. Watch a thought come and go... it is our awareness watching , no? And it is the mind that did this fluctuation, yes? And they keep on coming. Yet when our awareness
    does not pay attention to this and gets absorbed in the thought, that is , awareness is not on the outside watching these thoughts come and go, we then think ‘ oh I had this thought, that thought’ as the awareness is stuck to the thought. Some say, you are caught-up in the thought. You had no distance between the thought and the awareness of that thought. See the point?

    With all this going on within one’s mind we have been conditioned to think ‘I’ am doing this and that... Yet it is none other than these waves that continue, yet we think ‘I’. We have been groomed by repetition and by some of the distinct traits we inherited that bundled ( thoughts, feelings, likes , responses to dislikes, etc.) form an ego and we take this to be our real self. In fact the term ‘ego’ is Latin for ‘I’. so ‘I’ and ‘ego’ are one and the same. And, we are supported by all these ego’s around us: I, we, me, us, myself, ourselves, are all ‘I’ bundles of mind modifications / fluctuations.

    Now for this post ( and many others I have offered) the ‘I’ that is the ego being discussed will be called small ‘i’. This keeps our terms aligned and will cause less thrashing. The key idea of this ‘i’ then that it is composed of thoughts and feelings that come and go. Now we will not get involved in the storage of these thoughts and feelings, responses to actions and reactions as it only complicates the matter.

    The point is, if these thoughts and feelings come and go, it also suggests that ‘i’ rises and falls, it too comes and goes. The litmus paper test is when you are in deep sleep. Where is this ‘i’ ? Where is anything ( any object) as a matter of fact, when in deep sleep, yet you still wake up the next day, existing. So if you relate to yourself as 'i' , who then are you? do 'you' come and go from existence to non-existence? How can this be? There must be more to 'me' than a bundle of thoughts and feelings. This is what patañjali-muni is pointing to in a very-very condensed way in this sūtra. How so? We will take a look.


    So for those that are interested, i will continue the conversation in the next post, but ask you to do one thing... see for yourself on your own ‘screen’ ( the mind) how thoughts come and go. Take some time to catch yourself having thoughts. The content is of less importance. Note how they come and go.

    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ


    terms
    • razor's edge or discernment:

    vivekakhyātiraviplavā hānopāyaḥ|| pātañjali’s yoga-sūtras - 2.26
    This says, discriminative knowledge/perception (vivekakhyāti) is the means (upāya) for its removal (hāna).
    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 05:57 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  8. #18
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patañjali's sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~
    svāgata (hello)


    The point is, if these thoughts and feelings come and go, it also suggests that ‘i’ rises and falls, it too comes and goes. The litmus paper test is when you are in deep sleep. Where is this ‘i’ ? Where is anything ( any object) as a matter of fact, when in deep sleep, yet you still wake up the next day, existing. So if you relate to yourself as 'i' , who then are you? do 'you' come and go from existence to non-existence? How can this be? There must be more to 'me' than a bundle of thoughts and feelings. This is what patañjali-muni is pointing to in a very-very condensed way in this sūtra. How so? We will take a look.
    To answer this question above patañjali-muni says if ( or when) all the fluctuations are stilled (nirodhaḥ) then yoga occurs. That is yoga = yuj, to yoke or join or fasten or harness. One is ‘joined’. But to what? Here’s a way to think this through.

    If this ‘i’ that was offered in the last post comes-and-goes it must have some foundation to rest on which provides it the ability to come-and-go. Think of a wave on an ocean ... it to rises and falls but it’s foundation is the ocean itself. It rises up then comes back down but all within the unboundedness of the ocean’s waters.



    What patañjali-muni is saying is when all the thrashing of thoughts stops or are stilled (nirodhaḥ), then one regains (yuj) one’s original status, the ocean. The individuality of ‘i’ disperses and becomes Self ... the ocean of pure awareness once again.
    It is the thrashing of the mind over and over that convinces ourselves that the trashing is ‘i’; yet if you look for it, it is none other than the rise and fall of thoughts, feelings and emotions that come and go. We are the ocean (Self) and not the trashing (wave).

    Patañjali-muni says then it is possible to re-recognize and establish ( uplift your self with your SELF as the wise say) one's very being back to its original condition. In fact it has never left anyone' it is impossible for It to leave anyone because there is no place It is not. So where could it possibly go?

    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ

    Last edited by yajvan; 04 October 2016 at 07:55 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  9. #19
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,681
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Patañjali's sūtra-s

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~
    svāgata (hello)

    But first one needs to be told of it, AND be aware of it before any capturing can occur.
    If one really ‘gets’ what was offered in in the last two posts ( number 17 & 18) then one could conclude the following:

    this ‘i’ = ego
    Many times we are taught in our practices that curtailing the ego is a ‘good thing’. An inflated ego is looked down upon in many circles. Yet we can conclude that if one continues to frame themselves as ‘i’ ( ‘i’ am this, ‘i’ and going there, coming here, ‘i’ need this or that) we have not dampened the ego at all . For it to be big or small seems a trifle if this ‘i’ continues to remain.
    Some look to great men and women in which this ‘ego’ is quite small or non-existent from our point of view i.e. the various muni-s, svamī-s, ācārya-s & sāstri-s we may encounter. We then say, let me emulate what I see in these beings. But, pretending to have a small ego and still have this ‘i’ being fed daily does little good. It may be a noble gesture and it in some way instills better values in the person emulating the ‘small’ ego, this is all well and good; but at its root, that ‘i’ still persists and is the instigator of ego ( big or small). We are still stuck in ignorance.


    this ‘i’ comes and goes
    By our own experience one should be able to conclude that this ‘i’ waxes and wanes. The ‘easy’ conclusion is during sleep. It ( ‘i’ ) is no-where to be found. In fact one does not even have the facilities to look , as ‘looking’ would suggest an active awareness and it is not there in sleep.
    Sleep is the absence of experiencing things. It is not the absence of consciousness ( yet for some they use the term ‘unconscious’ for sleep); a more
    precise proclamation of is ‘I was not aware of any thing, even my body, or thoughts, as these are things’ ; yet ‘i’ wake up the next day, ‘i’ am still here
    and ‘i’ know ‘i’ slept soundly , in fact it was an enjoyable rest.

    So , here is one conclusion that is not so easy to discern without help... this ‘i’ cannot exist independently. It only exists when in the company of objects. And what are some of these ~objects~? Thoughts for one as they are most readily available to us. People usually do not see thoughts as objects but they are. So is our body, and the ‘objects’ of the world that stimulate thoughts or notions and that stimulates ‘i’ to exist. This ‘i’ can only exist when there is an object ( thoughts, the environment of things) and subject ( ‘i’ ). Some even think ‘i’ am the body and the wise suggest this is the root of the problem.
    There is just a flow of things that come to us that stimulate thoughts, feelings and the like. Hence the ‘i’ is propped-up by these things but once gone
    ( as in sleep) the ‘i’ subsides.

    we are challenged
    We are challenged on occasion by the wise (rāmaṇa mahaṛṣi, śrī nisargadatta maharāj, śrī siddharameśvara maharāj, etc.) to find this ‘i’ if it really exists. They instruct us to look for it , for this aham-vṛtti or ‘i’ thoughts that one thinks they are. They suggest ātmavicara or Self-inquiry as one possible practice. Their premise is quite simple, if a thing comes-and-goes it cannot be real. Others say if it ( ‘i’ ) comes and goes it cannot be sustainable.
    This ‘sustainable’ is more palatable to many , as ‘real’ seems to be a bit much to digest for the average person. So, why do the wise use the term ‘not real’ ? To get your attention, to get your focus. Hey wait a minute, I ‘feel’ real, I see real things, I think real things, how can you say it is not ‘real’ ? From here, one can teach and take one step-by-step into what you really are.

    What is to unfold
    If I take this ‘i’ away , am I dead? I only know this ‘i’ as being ‘me’... what else can I be? To use a fancy term , the subsidence of ‘i’ is upahṛtāhaṅkāraḥ or we can say then one becomes the upahṛtāhaṅkāraḥ. That is, for whom (yasmai) ego (ahaṅkāraḥ) (has been) destroyed (upahṛtaḥ).
    When we see a term like this it causes some angst and some bewilderment ( I hope!). If the ‘lesson’ has stuck properly by the wise what is to be destroyed if there really is not an ‘i’ to begin with? This is a reasonable assessment to make.
    If anything is ~destroyed~ it is the notion of limitation and individuality. It is the notion of fractional awareness. Thought-after-thought is differentiatedness, awareness divided again and again by the incessant rise-and-fall of ‘i’. What then comes? continuity of awareness. And, we are told by the wise ( abhinavaguapa-ji) it is present in everything – nothing can elude it or give it the slip ( hide); in fact everything is an expression of it!

    continuity
    If something is uninterrupted, in continuity, it therefore is whole, full. One goes from viśeṣa (particular) to aviśeṣa (non-particular). Rāmaṇa mahaṛṣi said ( my words here) that the difference of appearance falls to the back and the unity of things comes to the front. He said ( his words now) differences are but appearances , he ( the jñāni¹) sees them ( appearances) as not separate from the true, the real, with which he (the jñāni) is one. Equality is the true sign of jñāna¹. It is the unity that the jñāni perceives in all differences, which I call equality.

    So, one may think everything is vanilla! everything is just plain white and all the diversity is gone! This is not the case. The multiplicity of the world
    is sewn together by the unity of it all, as an expression of Self, of Being, of the Supreme , and one sees this whole creation as an extension of one’s
    Self.


    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ

    1. jñāni is one with jñāna or the higher knowledge; possessed of Self, pure awareness is his/her frame of referenc
    e.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'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
  •