Who or what controls the mind and intellect, according to the Bhagavad Gita?

[Onkara]

I am a scientist / engineer for my sansar life but my actual life is spirituality. The spirituality has manifested in terms of my work style, life style and creativity in engineering and other space. I do not know what I have been in my previous life, but I have been graced by Lord at end of my childhoodin this life. As far as I remember this "Who am I" question was there from class 3 and the intensity grew over the years. The intellect was not coherent in the childhood period so it could not process properly. After the end of childhood the intellect matured and took me through a journey, an experience - a few times - self realisation (I know now). I did not know that it is the spirituality road. I thought I was going mad. The pull was so strong that any time I was alone - it would take me through that journey - beyond the universe - scary - no end - bottomless - unfathomable. Only after the engineering degree, I chanced upon the lectures of Vivekananda. It stunned me. It was the same knowledge which was disturbing me. So I was relieved to know that I was not mad.

Now I listen to the discourses of Gita. It helps me understand some terminologies. But more than so the totality of the knowledge is what I cherish. It is pure science (present and future) and totally logical.

To grasp the totality one needs God's grace. From the Advaita POV, it is easier to understand the arupam, biswarupam, bahurupam and ekarupam.

Love and best wishes

Dear Kallol
I can related to the sensation of going mad. The "shock" is that all that I once took as real is actuall quite different from a perpective I held before, as if I was concentrating on the wrong part then suddenly realised my error. What I find most remarkable is that this knowing never fails to hold true under analysis. I cannot negate or find an underlying fault in the upanishads, Gitas etc. Additionally they seem to say the same things, albeit form different perspectives or in different ways. It is slightly unnerving, yet who is there to be unnerved!

Likewise I also feel that no one is free from that pull. So why worry about "others" in a negative way. There is no other to "help" or to "fear" who is beyond this. Rather I sometimes have the thought that all of this talk on philosophy is just play (lila).

Best wishes.

[kallol]

Dear Kallol
I can related to the sensation of going mad. The "shock" is that all that I once took as real is actuall quite different from a perpective I held before, as if I was concentrating on the wrong part then suddenly realised my error. What I find most remarkable is that this knowing never fails to hold true under analysis. I cannot negate or find an underlying fault in the upanishads, Gitas etc. Additionally they seem to say the same things, albeit form different perspectives or in different ways. It is slightly unnerving, yet who is there to be unnerved!

Likewise I also feel that no one is free from that pull. So why worry about "others" in a negative way. There is no other to "help" or to "fear" who is beyond this. Rather I sometimes have the thought that all of this talk on philosophy is just play (lila).

Best wishes.

Thanks for the encouraging words.

The nectar out of these discussions is the fuel for my daily life and the emcouragement to explore more from all perspective.

Love and best wishes

[atanu]

Namaste Atanu
-----Would you be so kind to point me towards an explanation of "sadashiva", if you know of one please, I am not 100% clear on the term in its full philosophical sense?

I am not sure if you are asking a question or proposing your perspective above. If the latter then I would like to add that I agree: mahesvara is beyond prakriti and I feel that the bonds of prakriti loosen on knowing that and knowing mahesvara as our core self (as consciousness or turiya). This knowing is what fulfills all desires.

I think the original question has been explored sufficiently and I am happy to take on tangents or let this topic rest. To be honest, I enjoy exploring "what is" with you all more than feel that any one of us needs a concerte answer to any question

Namaste Snip

I reciprocate fully about the nice feeling i get while discussing with you -- that of course is not easy, given your penchant for difficult questions and high order critical faculty.

Shruti scripture says that sadashiva is om and controller of all beings and things and bramhA. In other scripture, Sarvesvara (all controller) is said to be the Self abiding in Shushupti.

Shri Krishna says he plants the seeds in mahat brahma (creator BrahmA) and He also says that He is unborn Mahesvara.

Shushupti is dark yet all attractive (krsna). Shri krishna is all attractive and known as sarvesvara.

Shri Krishna says that mahevara is beyond prakriti. And beyond prakriti is the Turya, also called advaita shivam. Shri Krishna also says that He is the Self.

.....................

Hope you enjoy the above and feel the joy of uniting names.

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Dear Atanu,

3. At all levels of existence from human to the God, the systems are made of two parts / entities (however you want to term it) - Purusha (it can be also termed differently as in point 1) and Prakriti (it can be also termed differently). The purusha part is know as higher nature and the prakriti part is known as the lower nature.

Love and best wishes

Namaste Kallol

Thanks for your grand post. In regard to above, i will request you to kindly let me differ.

Brahman (God) is both kAla and akAla. Your above statement is true in kAla domain and as we are in kAla domain, the above is true for you and me. But in akAla domain, hint of which everyone recieves in deep sleep when time is not, the above, IMO, do not hold.

If by 'existence' you mean samsara-agni-vaisvanaro waking state only, then the above is fully agreeable to me.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast� snip (et.al)


you mention,

Rather I sometimes have the thought that all of this talk on philosophy is just play (lila).

These words may be wiser then you think. To be specific on this matter may cause an upheaval so I will not venture to comment too too much on this.
Yet a most adored goal of some of the talks of philosophy is that of remembering and reminding of the Supreme. To be top of mind in one's day.


praṇām

[kallol]

Namaste Kallol

Thanks for your grand post. In regard to above, i will request you to kindly let me differ.

Brahman (God) is both kAla and akAla. Your above statement is true in kAla domain and as we are in kAla domain, the above is true for you and me. But in akAla domain, hint of which everyone recieves in deep sleep when time is not, the above, IMO, do not hold.

If by 'existence' you mean samsara-agni-vaisvanaro waking state only, then the above is fully agreeable to me.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

Dear Atanu,

As we all are at different point of time, space and material - the difference of perception and opinion is natural and is also good to have.

Before bowing out from this thread I would like to make 2 points for clarifications.

1. Brahman is beyond time. The dancing (waves) of the prakriti, with the purusha as base, comes within the time (when it manifests) and goes beyond when it is unmanifested.

2. The existence at all levels means the manifested and unmanifested states of the prakriti. It includes all the 14 lokas.

Thanks to all of you for the grand discussion.

Love and best wishes

[atanu]

Dear Atanu,
As we all are at different point of time, space and material - the difference of perception and opinion is natural and is also good to have.
Before bowing out from this thread I would like to make 2 points for clarifications.

1. Brahman is beyond time. The dancing (waves) of the prakriti, with the purusha as base, comes within the time (when it manifests) and goes beyond when it is unmanifested.

2. The existence at all levels means the manifested and unmanifested states of the prakriti. It includes all the 14 lokas.

Thanks to all of you for the grand discussion.

Love and best wishes

Namaste Kallol

That is nice summary. I agree to the 1st point, subject to the suggestion for the 2nd point. I cannot say unequivocally that i can agree to the 2nd point, as dance of prakriti cannot be known by the inert alone.

It does not matter however, since 'who controls ---', the main theme of the thread, IMO, is understood commonly now.

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Dear Kallol
----- I cannot negate or find an underlying fault in the upanishads, Gitas etc. Additionally they seem to say the same things, albeit form different perspectives or in different ways. It is slightly unnerving, yet who is there to be unnerved!

Likewise I also feel that no one is free from that pull. So why worry about "others" in a negative way. There is no other to "help" or to "fear" who is beyond this. Rather I sometimes have the thought that all of this talk on philosophy is just play (lila).

Best wishes.

Namaste Snip, Kallol, and Yajvanji

First, i must say that the above is gem, if experienced and practised. I am not able to -- fully.

I have a spiritual friend at office with whom i sometimes kill time. Once into a discussion, i asked him how and what sadhana he does. He told me that he did nothing. He added that if sweet did not taste sweet then it was unnatural. On same vain, he said, that if bitter did not taste bitter then it was unnatural. On another day, in a meeting, our common boss passed a bitter remark against him and after the meeting, i found my friend complaining bitterly about the behaviour of the boss. I again asked him and he said it would be unnatural not be bitter.

That was ok and i do not have any answer. Neither do i have any way of knowing whether that bitterness was thrown away or stored. I have no judgement since i do not know his mind.

From my perspective, however, sadhana is a must. From Shri Ramana's perspective, Ramana has never done any sadhana.

From Gaudapada's perspective, there is no one bound and no one seeking liberation. From my perspective, that is the pinnacle of attainment. My Guru teaches that it is ever the truth beneath the mental turbulence and thus the only job is to shed away the turbulences and their causes.

I say "Guruji, kindly grace me". He says "Do your work".

Just rambling. Regards to you all.

Om Namah Shivaya

[Onkara]

Namaste Snip, Kallol, and Yajvanji

First, i must say that the above is gem, if experienced and practised. I am not able to -- fully.
(cut)

From my perspective, however, sadhana is a must. From Shri Ramana's perspective, Ramana has never done any sadhana.

From Gaudapada's perspective, there is no one bound and no one seeking liberation. From my perspective, that is the pinnacle of attainment. My Guru teaches that it is ever the truth beneath the mental turbulence and thus the only job is to shed away the turbulences and their causes.

I say "Guruji, kindly grace me". He says "Do your work".

Just rambling. Regards to you all.

Om Namah Shivaya

Namaste Atanu,
In my reflection of your comment above, I would say this is a sound observation. That which speaks in bold is the mind. The mind is "not able to fully", because it is by its very nature transient and changeful. The mind is influenced by the gunas. However the mind is resting in something which is not changeful. That which does not undergo change and is able to confirm the above statement is your consciousness. In other words there has to be a witness of inability as well as ability, and that witness is the eternal You. Change is irrelevant when one recognises their changessless Self. Abiding with that is, in my opinion, the highest sadhana. All sadhana is a must to come to that point of observation. So I agree and wish to point out that the observation you share is an importnat one.

Dear Yajvanji I apprectiate your feedback always and I feel you are absolutely correct. This remembering or being reminded of the Supreme is itself a grace.

[atanu]

Namaste Atanu,
In my reflection of your comment above, I would say this is a sound observation. That which speaks in bold is the mind. The mind is "not able to fully", because it is by its very nature transient and changeful. The mind is influenced by the gunas. However the mind is resting in something which is not changeful. That which does not undergo change and is able to confirm the above statement is your consciousness. In other words there has to be a witness of inability as well as ability, and that witness is the eternal You. Change is irrelevant when one recognises their changessless Self. Abiding with that is, in my opinion, the highest sadhana. All sadhana is a must to come to that point of observation. So I agree and wish to point out that the observation you share is an importnat one.

Dear Yajvanji I apprectiate your feedback always and I feel you are absolutely correct. This remembering or being reminded of the Supreme is itself a grace.

Namaste Snip

That is excellent and matches with Gurus teaching. Who am I? is the work that small i - the ego (individual sense of being body mind) has to initiate and conduct, ironically, to its destruction.

Yet, on the other hand, see the difficulty of say Shri Ramana (i cite Him, simply because iI have knowledge of this knowledge only. There are other examples as well). Ramana could not take a shishya -- He could not ever utter 'You are my shishya'. i thinks that that must be a difficult situation (grammar is correct).