Ramana Temp

Ramana Maharshi => The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi => Topic started by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 19, 2013, 04:34:47 PM

Title: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 19, 2013, 04:34:47 PM
Chapter 4: verse 38:
bandas chet maanasam dvaitam tannirodhena shaamyati |
abhyased yogameva atah brahma jnanena kim vada ?

[Objection raised by purva paksha: If mind causes bondages through duality, nirodha (citta vritti nirodha) or elimination of it shall resolve this duality (shaamyati). so only Yoga (that yoga which helps citta vritti nirodha) is sufficient for this purpose; what is the necessity of knowledge of brahman ?]

Verse 39:
taatkalika dvaita shaantau apyagavijanischayah
brahmajnanam vina nasayad iti vedanta dindimah ||

[taatkalika dvaita shaantau : temporarily the thoughts get eliminated (in nirvikalpa samadhi)
  api ... even thought ...
 agami jani kshayah nashyat : future samsara cannot be destroyed (by this process )
 brahma jnanam vina : without brahma jnanam
 nasyad iti vedanta dindimah : vedanta loudly proclaims that without brahma jnana this is not possible.

Though there can be temporary elimination of thought [through mind control) without brahma jnanam the future arising of mind will not cease. ]

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: sanjaya_ganesh on March 19, 2013, 04:56:59 PM
Yoga vasista confirms the same through the story of Brigu. It clearly shows how the vasanas remain intact even after a thousand years into nirvikalpa samadhi. The conversations between Lord Yama and Brigu is fantastic too.

Sanjay
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 19, 2013, 05:07:56 PM
Absolutely.
And yoga vasishta also has a statement saying that mind cannot be brought into control by repeated meditaion practises without the aid of yukti [reasoning -- based upon scriptures].

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 19, 2013, 07:04:27 PM
While the points may be right in book, but in spirit they narrow the unlimited expanse of Truth! i humbly would like to convey that the scriptures do not lay any specific formula which alone works. Neither Shankara nor Ramanuja or Madhva or Jesus or Mohammad or Ramana or Ramakrishna are the sole bearer for the Truth.

For instance, i produce below from Shandilya Bhakti Sutras, the following Sutra -

Jnanamitichenna - dvishato - apt jnanasya  tadasamsthiteh II 4 II
 
Some may opine that for culturing devotion to God philosophical knowledge : jnana is indispensible or there is necessary preconditional subsequence of philosophical  knowledge of God. (Shandilya says) We say absolutely not, because we know an antagonist may also have knowledge  of God but there rests not an iota of devotion in his  mind towards God. And he never gets the state of highest blessedness.


I am yet again reminded Tennyson's wonderful expression -

God fulfils Himself in many ways, Lest one good custom should corrupt the world.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 19, 2013, 08:33:07 PM
Nagaraj,
Here is an excerpt from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna:
Quote
There are innumerable pathways leading to the Ocean of Immortality. The essential thing is to reach the Ocean. It doesn't matter which path you follow. Imagine that there is a reservoir containing the Elixir of Immortality. You will be immortal if a few drops of the Elixir somehow get into your mouth. You may get into the reservoir either by jumping into it, or by being pushed into it from behind, or by slowly walking down the steps. The effect is one and the same. You will become immortal by tasting a drop of that Elixir.
Innumerable are the ways that lead to God. There are the paths of jnana, of karma, and of bhakti. If you are sincere, you will attain God in the end, whichever path you follow.

I am often amused at these narrow sectarian views-be it from whatever books-we never know whether they are interpolations!In any case we are sure they are wrong!We do not find such dogmatic statements in the vedas and Upanishads,nor in the words of the Great ones in recent times that have been well documented.

Namaskar.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: sanjaya_ganesh on March 20, 2013, 07:53:00 AM
Friends

Nothing is "narrow" or "broad". Various scriptures talk about various ways and methods. No scriptures claims to talk complete and whole. So it is up to us to accept what we find as leading us to the goal of Supreme Truth and not accept others. So let us not reject great texts like Panchadasi saying "sectarian" and "narrow" etc. I humbly believe none of us in this forum are greater than Vidyaranya Swamigal to reject his ideas as narrow and sectarian. So if we dont understand, let us say so. If we dont like let us say so. If we find it too hard to accept, let us say so. If we find it too complex, let us say so. Rejecting great men and their works as narrow and sectarian will not serve any purpose in our sadhana - I can assure you. NO need to be amused and reject texts like Panchadasi as narrow and sectarian and take it that far into rejection mode.

Again, Let us accept that goal is one and paths are a million. There may be narrows roads, broad roads, tough roads, easy roads, beautiful roads, ugly roads etc.. all leading to the destination.

Best of luck
Sanjay.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 08:05:59 AM
Sanjaya,

Quote
I humbly believe none of us in this forum are greater than Vidyaranya Swamigal to reject his ideas as narrow and sectarian. So if we dont understand, let us say so. If we dont like let us say so. If we find it too hard to accept, let us say so. If we find it too complex, let us say so. Rejecting great men and their works as narrow and sectarian will not serve any purpose in our sadhana - I can assure you. NO need to be amused and reject texts like Panchadasi as narrow and sectarian and take it that far into rejection mode.


Do we give the same credit to maharshi patanjali?We can see how selectively our minds function.We are not rejecting the works in toto;all the same we are not required to accept the ideas that they may emphasize in an exclsuive fashion as if they are the whole Truth.

Namaskar.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: sanjaya_ganesh on March 20, 2013, 08:09:00 AM
Yes of course. You need to give the same credit to Patanjali too. No doubts on that. No need to be selective.

Sanjay
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 09:17:23 AM
Yes of course. You need to give the same credit to Patanjali too. No doubts on that. No need to be selective.

Dear Sri Sanjay,

not meaning anything personal... but just a discernment, pointer, for all of ourselves... i am sure, what you have conveyed is absolutely in inadvertent, not really meaning... but, doesn't it ring bell within us, as to, who are we to give credit to Sages? or Recognition to Sages? Who are we to evaluate scriptures...

who are we? to say, this is enough, that is not enough, etc...

Who are we?

Bhagavan Ramana says - "The deeper the humility with which we conduct ourselves, the better it is for us."

Tushnim, i do not mean any thing against your thoughts, but, does it really befit wisdom to open a topic thus - "Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi"

You may have some points to bring to light, but there is a beauty and elegance in bringing it open, like a blooming flower. We need not show down something else inorder to show light. There is a way... and that is the beautiful way.

PS: not written with a spirit of pointing out an error or mistake or about what is right or wrong, etc... purely a personal reflection un-aimed at anybody.

Just for Self Pondering, contemplation!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: sanjaya_ganesh on March 20, 2013, 09:20:19 AM
:) Nagaraj garu

I just responded to the following statement by Ravi and used the same words. Your point is valid. That is exactly what I wrote above about criticizing and rejecting texts.

Written by Ravi Ji
Quote
Do we give the same credit to maharshi patanjali?

Sanjay
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 09:33:16 AM
Sri Sanjay,

I do not want to be construed as supporting Sri Ravi, but again, i felt, he too has just conveyed the same essence as what i mused in my previous post, as the very topic was demeaning The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Also, yes, you also have rightfully conveyed that Sage Patanjali ought to be given credit. But in my flawed communication, i pray, hope you get what is being conveyed in essence, which is the Higher essence.

it also brings to our conscience, how flawed our communication is, where as a Jnani's communication can never be misconstrued. This is the command of God what Sri Ramakrishna referred to in Gospel, as to who can really preach.

We got to face it, no matter what clarity we may have within, without the command of God or the Higher power, one cannot preach.

These things cannot be ignored.

Thanks to all.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 10:38:25 AM
Śaṅkara on the Yoga-Sūtrā-S: The Vivaraṇa Sub-Commentary to Vyāsa-Bhāṣya on the Yoga-Sūtra-S of Pātañjali

Vivarana published in 1952 (P. S. Rama Sastri and S. R. Krishnamurthi Sastri, Patanjala-yogasutra-bhasya-vivaranam of Sankara-bhagavatpada [Madras: Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, 1952])

Yogasutrabhasyavivarana of Sankara: Vivarana Text with English Translation and Critical Notes along with Text and English Translation of Patanjali's Yogasutras and Vyasabhasya, vols. 1 and 2. By T. S. RUKMANI. New Delhi: MUNSHIRAM MANOHARLAL PUBLISHERS, 2001. Pp. xxxii + 389; x + 230.

These two volumes combine texts and translations of three works, i.e., the Yogasutra (YS), its authoritative commentary Yogabhasya (YBh), and a subcommentary Vivarana. The focus is, as the title suggests, the subcommentary Vivarana. Texts and translations of the YS and the YBh are provided to help understand the subcommentary. The translations of them are taken from a previous publication of the author, the translation of the Yogavarttika of Vijnanabhiksu (p. ix). This is a second translation of the complete text of the Vivarana, in addition to Leggett (The Complete Commentary by Sankara on the Yoga Sutras: A Full Translation of the Newly Discovered Text [London: Kegan Paul, 1990]).

(http://img7a.flixcart.com/img/084/9788121509084.jpg)

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 10:46:17 AM
The question is simple : Do you accept Vedanta panchadasi or not. Whether or not you agree with Vidhyanarayana swami.
 Yes or no.

For what ever reason ... if you think vidhyanarayana swami is "One sided", "Not broad in views" etc ... thats your choice.
The point is just this: Agree with Vidhyanarayana swami or not. Thats it.

Regarding pathanjali : are we aware why Shankara countered Pathanjali's ideas in some of his works ? Are we aware that he did that ?
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 10:50:55 AM
The question is simple : Do you accept Vedanta panchadasi or not. Whether or not you agree with Vidhyanarayana swami.
 Yes or no.

For what ever reason ... if you think vidhyanarayana swami is "One sided", "Not broad in views" etc ... thats your choice.
The point is just this: Agree with Vidhyanarayana swami or not. Thats it.

Regarding pathanjali : are we aware why Shankara countered Pathanjali's ideas in some of his works ? Are we aware that he did that ?

The counter question is quite simple, do you accept the Sage Shandiya sutra or not? for the same what ever reason, it is your choice if you do not want to accept Sage Shandilya, Sage Patanjali and the likes, that their views are not sufficient!

You have conveyed else where, Shankara countered Sankhya Yoga, what about his Bhashya on Bhagavad Gita which has a whole chapter on Sankhya!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 10:57:13 AM
My stand is clear Nagaraj: Shankara is the authority ... I do not accept anything that deviates from shankara philosophy. Shandilya is not my authority ... if what he says is as per shankaracharya's views, i take it. As such I see what Shankara is saying ... clearly !!

and shankara criticizes certain aspects of pathanjali view ... are we aware of this ?

so i made my stand clear !
do you agree with vidhyanarayana swami in the above quote or not !! thats it! A simple straight question.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:01:48 AM
My stand is clear Nagaraj: Shankara is the authority ... I do not accept anything that deviates from shankara philosophy. Shandilya is not my authority ... if what he says is as per shankaracharya's views, i take it. As such I see what Shankara is saying ... clearly !!

and shankara criticizes certain aspects of pathanjali view ... are we aware of this ?

so i made my stand clear !
do you agree with vidhyanarayana swami in the above quote or not !! thats it! A simple straight question.

Your portrayal and interpretation of Adi Shankaracharya and his works are flawed and not correct and gravely mis-communicate What Adi Shankara Stood for, who united thousands of faiths.

You please substantiate, instead of passing statements such as this -

and shankara criticizes certain aspects of pathanjali view ... are we aware of this ?

I can provide counter points for every points you raise. The whole point is your spirit if wrong! Your citations of Shankara and other shankaracharyas in isolation and not as a whole picture. You are mis communicating Adi Shankara, I keep saying this since when you began communicating on this subjects.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:02:30 AM
Regarding Sankhyas ... Sankhyas system is not the same as Sankhya yoga of Bhagavad Gita. Please do not confuse between the two.

Here is Chendrashekara Saraswathi ji's comment on Shankara's teachings:

Quote
Many believe that Buddhism ceased to have a large following in India because it came under the attack of Sankara. This is not true. There are very few passages in the Acarya's commentaries critical of that religion, a
religion that was opposed to the Vedas. Far more forcefully has he criticised the doctrines of Sankhya and Mimamsa that respect the Vedic tradition. He demolishes their view that Isvara is not the creator of the
world and that it is not he who dispenses the fruits of our actions. He also maintains that Isvara possesses the laksanas or characteristics attributed to him by the Vedas and the Brahmasutra and argues that there can be
no world without Isvara and that it is wrong to maintain that our works yield fruits on their own. It is Isvara, his resolve, that has created this world, and it is he who awards us the fruits of our actions. We cannot find
support in his commentaries for the view that he was responsible for the decline of Buddhism in India.

And more importantly one should have viveka to clearly see wahts ok with those systems and whats not.

Quote
The Acarya goes along with systems like Buddhism, Mimamsa, Sankhya, and Nyaya up to a point. He accepts them on a certain level, but on another level he disapproves of them.

So I do not agree with Buddhism also ... beyond a point...!! That point till which I am in agreement with buddhism is also exactly shankara's position.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:05:36 AM
Regarding Sankhyas ... Sankhyas system is not the same as Sankhya yoga of Bhagavad Gita. Please do not confuse between the two.

Who was confused? You have to please read Kapilopadesam from Bhagavatam.

I do not understand why you are bringing Buddhism here?

Moreover, It is widely well known that Shankara's ideas reflect the Madhyamika school of Buddhism, many thoughts and ideas almost similar to Nagarjuna.

Goudapada karika - pls refer to that.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:08:04 AM
Quote
Your portrayal and interpretation of Adi Shankaracharya and his works are flawed and not correct and gravely mis-communicate What Adi Shankara Stood for, who united thousands of faiths.

You have not studied Shankara Bhasyas. How do you know what I present is correct or incorrect ? Did you even see Shankara Bhasyam of Bhagavad Gita ? Please read it in original and come back to me.  I will talk to you then.


Quote
You please substantiate, instead of passing statements such as this -


Quote from: Tushnim.Asanam on Today at 10:57:13 AM
and shankara criticizes certain aspects of pathanjali view ... are we aware of this ?

You can find refereces in Brahma Sutra Bhasyam. But long before you do that, you need basic knowledge of some shankara bhasyams. If you read them, i am sure you will find sufficient material to reevaluate your stand. For that matter What I quoted above of Panchadasi is itself sufficient if you read what it says. I would be very happy if you disagree with it and leave it at that than misinterpret what it says

Quote
I can provide counter points for every points you raise. The whole point is your spirit if wrong! Your citations of Shankara and other shankaracharyas in isolation and not as a whole picture. You are mis communicating Adi Shankara, I keep saying this since when you began communicating on this subjects.

--

You should say this after reading atleast BG shankara Bhasyam. I am sure you did not read ... i am not miscommunicating ... i am presenting what he said ... you are confusing it coz you are trying to prove that all people said the same thing ... some views of vivekananda , some of ramakrishna , some of aurbindo etc ... just an amalgamation of various theories without viveka or proper clarity. if you set all of them aside and just read shankara you will see what he is saying ... but while reading dont predecide that i should find pathanjali and ramanuja also to be equally true ... coz he rejects their views ruthlessly.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:09:37 AM
Quote
Your portrayal and interpretation of Adi Shankaracharya and his works are flawed and not correct and gravely mis-communicate What Adi Shankara Stood for, who united thousands of faiths.

You have not studied Shankara Bhasyas. How do you know what I present is correct or incorrect ? Did you even see Shankara Bhasyam of Bhagavad Gita ? Please read it in original and come back to me.  I will talk to you then.

What is the proof you have studied Shankara Bhashya?

:)

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:10:27 AM
Regarding Sankhyas ... Sankhyas system is not the same as Sankhya yoga of Bhagavad Gita. Please do not confuse between the two.

Who was confused? You have to please read Kapilopadesam from Bhagavatam.

I do not understand why you are bringing Buddhism here?

Moreover, It is widely well known that Shankara's ideas reflect the Madhyamika school of Buddhism, many thoughts and ideas almost similar to Nagarjuna.

Goudapada karika - pls refer to that.

--

I just gave a complete paragraph which showed that chandrashekara saraswati ji also said that shankara rejected sankhyas ! it was my response to your earlier statement:

Quote
You have conveyed else where, Shankara countered Sankhya Yoga, what about his Bhashya on Bhagavad Gita which has a whole chapter on Sankhya!

I just said that the 2nd chapter of Gita is not about Sankhya philosophy ... when i said shankara countered sankhya ... you should know that what he contered is different from 2nd chapter... and the quote of chandrashekara saraswathi ji clearly explains it.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:12:51 AM
Regarding Sankhyas ... Sankhyas system is not the same as Sankhya yoga of Bhagavad Gita. Please do not confuse between the two.

Who was confused? You have to please read Kapilopadesam from Bhagavatam.

I do not understand why you are bringing Buddhism here?

Moreover, It is widely well known that Shankara's ideas reflect the Madhyamika school of Buddhism, many thoughts and ideas almost similar to Nagarjuna.

Goudapada karika - pls refer to that.

--

I just gave a complete paragraph which showed that chandrashekara saraswati ji also said that shankara rejected sankhyas ! it was my response to your earlier statement:

Quote
You have conveyed else where, Shankara countered Sankhya Yoga, what about his Bhashya on Bhagavad Gita which has a whole chapter on Sankhya!

I just said that the 2nd chapter of Gita is not about Sankhya philosophy ... when i said shankara countered sankhya ... you should know that what he contered is different from 2nd chapter... and the quote of chandrashekara saraswathi ji clearly explains it.

Isolated citations.... no substantiations!

i can also counter your points with Shankara points picking them from isolation, in some of his works!

even if you provide 1000 points, i will call a spade a spade, i will say that which is not right as incorrect. because, your spirit is incorrect.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:14:45 AM
Quote
Your portrayal and interpretation of Adi Shankaracharya and his works are flawed and not correct and gravely mis-communicate What Adi Shankara Stood for, who united thousands of faiths.

You have not studied Shankara Bhasyas. How do you know what I present is correct or incorrect ? Did you even see Shankara Bhasyam of Bhagavad Gita ? Please read it in original and come back to me.  I will talk to you then.

What is the proof you have studied Shankara Bhashya?

:)

--

Dear Nagaraj,
         :) Please do not stoop down to such low levels ... our objective is not to win this argument. I have studied or not , only i will know ... and my statements will clearly indicate ... but only another person who has studied can even comment on it. That you did not study is clear from the stand you are taking .

The statement of vidhyanarayana swami is clearly there in this thread itself.
You have not yet answered whether you agree with it or not. The statement is there ... before you.
i am atleast clear enough to say i do not agree with anything that deviates from shankara philosophy.
be clear and straight nagaraj ...
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:16:07 AM
Regarding Sankhyas ... Sankhyas system is not the same as Sankhya yoga of Bhagavad Gita. Please do not confuse between the two.

Who was confused? You have to please read Kapilopadesam from Bhagavatam.

I do not understand why you are bringing Buddhism here?

Moreover, It is widely well known that Shankara's ideas reflect the Madhyamika school of Buddhism, many thoughts and ideas almost similar to Nagarjuna.

Goudapada karika - pls refer to that.

--

I just gave a complete paragraph which showed that chandrashekara saraswati ji also said that shankara rejected sankhyas ! it was my response to your earlier statement:

Quote
You have conveyed else where, Shankara countered Sankhya Yoga, what about his Bhashya on Bhagavad Gita which has a whole chapter on Sankhya!

I just said that the 2nd chapter of Gita is not about Sankhya philosophy ... when i said shankara countered sankhya ... you should know that what he contered is different from 2nd chapter... and the quote of chandrashekara saraswathi ji clearly explains it.

Isolated citations.... no substantiations!

i can also counter your points with Shankara points picking them from isolation, in some of his works!

even if you provide 1000 points, i will call a spade a spade, i will say that which is not right as incorrect. because, your spirit is incorrect.

--

What more do you want ? I cited chandrashekara saraswathi ji's statement that shankara countered sankhyas. what else you need for proof ? the exact location where he countered ? Read Brahma Sutra bhasyam yourself. dont ask me to reproduce the whole book here coz you disagree !! :D
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:16:46 AM
Who is stooping such low level -

Please see yours -


Quote
Your portrayal and interpretation of Adi Shankaracharya and his works are flawed and not correct and gravely mis-communicate What Adi Shankara Stood for, who united thousands of faiths.

You have not studied Shankara Bhasyas. How do you know what I present is correct or incorrect ? Did you even see Shankara Bhasyam of Bhagavad Gita ? Please read it in original and come back to me.  I will talk to you then.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:18:16 AM
Thats not stooping to a low level ... i did not ask for a proof from you that you have studied or not.
 i clearly said u did not study.
its obvious from your stand and position.
:)

i know u did not study.

to ask "whats the proof" is stooping coz you clearly know , even as you ask ... that there is no proof other than the knowledge thats presented.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:20:33 AM
i give the same response to you -

Dear Nagaraj,
         :) Please do not stoop down to such low levels ... our objective is not to win this argument. I have studied or not , only i will know ... and my statements will clearly indicate ... but only another person who has studied can even comment on it. That you did not study is clear from the stand you are taking.

in your own stlye -

LOL  ;D

How can you know if i have studied or not? YOu believe your knowledge is alone right and only you have studied Shankara Bhashya?

I say, you are wrong! i would say 100 times you are wrong! You have not studied Shankara Bhashya :D

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:24:22 AM
Dear Nagaraj,
     :) Its your choice how many times you will say i am wrong. :) ... but plz do not waste your energies in just repeating ... if you repeat rama nama ,... you may get some punya ... what will you gain by repeating "udai did not study shankara" ? its absolutely stupid thing to do! anyways if you do not want ot heed to this advise also and continue to repeat it ... plz do so.

You have the lines of Vidhyanarayana swami in this thread itself.
you have your conscience to answer ... whether you accept them or not.
its your choice Nagaraj.

I am sure you cannot accept what vedanta panchadasi says ... but are not bold enough to take a stand and say i do not agree with it !! :)
if you have studied shankara you would not have had to struggle with this statement of vedanta panchadasi.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:28:05 AM
Dear Udai,

I will reject your thoughts, because you have not grasped the whole essence of Shankara as yet! For if you truly did, you would not be wasting all your energies thus.

I have read most of Shankara's works inicluding Panchadasi, but i ought right reject your way of conveying. If you truly grasped the true essence of Shankara you would not be so polarizing!

A wrong is wrong, even if Shiva opens his third eye!

Your essence if wrong!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:32:53 AM
Dear Udai,

I will reject your thoughts, because you have not grasped the whole essence of Shankara as yet! For if you truly did, you would not be wasting all your energies thus.

I have read most of Shankara's works inicluding Panchadasi, but i ought right reject your way of conveying. If you truly grasped the true essence of Shankara you would not be so polarizing!

A wrong is wrong, even if Shiva opens his third eye!

Your essence if wrong!

--

Thanks for that feedback ... but then you have still not explained what the quotes of this thread mean :D ...
and if you agree or disagree with them.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: sanjaya_ganesh on March 20, 2013, 11:44:59 AM
Dear Udai,

I will reject your thoughts, because you have not grasped the whole essence of Shankara as yet! For if you truly did, you would not be wasting all your energies thus.

I have read most of Shankara's works inicluding Panchadasi, but i ought right reject your way of conveying. If you truly grasped the true essence of Shankara you would not be so polarizing!

A wrong is wrong, even if Shiva opens his third eye!

Your essence if wrong!

--

I thought Panchadasi was by Swami Vidyaranya. No?

On a light note - Nice dialogue from 40 year old Thiruvilayadal Tamil Movie :) - "Netrikann thurappilum kutram kutrame" ( Even if third eye is opened a crime is a crime) as told to Shiva :)

Sanjay
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 11:46:32 AM
Udai

Fron whom have you studied shankara bhashya. Which Guru or is it through cds and tapes? Has your guru given you go ahead to go about talking about shankara and his bhashyas? Do you know sanskrit?

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 11:48:10 AM
Dear Nagaraj,
       :) You plz answer the basic question... what do the statements of Vidhyanarayana swami mean ... as quoted in this thread ?

Why are you avoiding it ?

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 12:04:53 PM
Dear udai

I do not deem it obligatory to respond to your question as you are mis interpreting and mis quoting various statements especially of Shankara parampara. What point would it serve? I dont want to add to your mis quotations.

Your essence is wrong. Period.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 12:28:16 PM
Friends,
The whole problem with the thread is that it immediately jumped and latched onto the word 'nirodhena' and extrapolated this to mean the Negation of Patanjalai's Yoga sutras!!!
Here is Swami Vivekananda's commentary on verse 51 of chapter 1 of Patanjali's Yoga Sutra.The way Swamiji dived into the essence of these sutras -by a direct samyama is a story in itself.

Quote
तस्यापि निरोधे सर्वनिरोधान्निर्बीजः समाधिः ॥५१॥
 
51. By the restraint of even this (impression, which obstructs all other impressions), all being restrained, comes the "seedless" Samadhi.
 
You remember that our goal is to perceive the Soul itself. We cannot perceive the Soul, because it has got mingled up with nature, with the mind, with the body. The ignorant man thinks his body is the Soul. The learned man thinks his mind is the Soul. But both of them are mistaken. What makes the Soul get mingled up with all this? Different waves in the Chitta rise and cover the Soul; we only see a little reflection of the Soul through these waves; so, if the wave is one of anger, we see the Soul as angry; "I am angry," one says. If it is one of love, we see ourselves reflected in that wave, and say we are loving. If that wave is one of weakness, and the Soul is reflected in it, we think we are weak. These various ideas come from these impressions, these Samskaras covering the Soul. The real nature of the Soul is not perceived as long as there is one single wave in the lake of the Chitta; this real nature will never be perceived until all the waves have subsided. So, first, Patanjali teaches us the meaning of these waves; secondly, the best way to repress them; and thirdly, how to make one wave so strong as to suppress all other waves, fire eating fire as it were. When only one remains, it will be easy to suppress that also, and when that is gone, this Samadhi or concentration is called seedless. It leaves nothing, and the Soul is manifested just as It is, in Its own glory. Then alone we know that the Soul is not a compound; It is the only eternal simple in the universe, and as such, It cannot be born, It cannot die; It is immortal, indestructible, the ever-living essence of intelligence.

What panchadasi is referring to is just 'suppression' of mental vrittis by an act of will;whereas what Patanjali aims is to reach the source of the mind through the elimination of Vrittis  in a step by step scientific manner.Only those who have practised it will know how it works.

Namaskar.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 12:57:09 PM
Dear Ravi ji,
      :) LOL! Are you sure thats the interpretation ?
Please read the verse again... it says "Though temporary lulling of mind is possible, without Brahma Jnanam its not possible to end mind ... and so vedanta proclaims loudly."

Ravi ji ... i would happily accept if you say that you do not agree with panchadasi ...
please do not bring in your own interpretations.
The discussion in context ... in chapter 4 of panchadasi is ... that elimination of duality through elimination of thoughts is not sufficient and hence yoga is not sufficient.
i can quote many verses in panchadasi itself which support this view.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 12:58:14 PM
Dear udai

I do not deem it obligatory to respond to your question as you are mis interpreting and mis quoting various statements especially of Shankara parampara. What point would it serve? I dont want to add to your mis quotations.

Your essence is wrong. Period.

--

:D I knew u would not give interpretation ...coz you cannot.
as i said your own conscience if you are able to answer thats good enough.
you need not answer me !
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 01:03:45 PM
Haha hehe  ;D

Continue udai...

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 01:06:32 PM
Order or suggestion ? :D
lol both are unasked.

I'll do what i have to do.
if you cannot interpret those statements better not involve in this discussion ... coz this discussion is about those two verses of panchadasi.
please dont disturb the thread if u have nothing to interpret about those statements.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: sanjaya_ganesh on March 20, 2013, 01:07:32 PM
"Ego feeds on being right and making others wrong. The need to be right is the grand master of ego consciousness"

- Unknown Author
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 01:10:50 PM
udai,

Quote
"Though temporary lulling of mind is possible, without Brahma Jnanam its not possible to end mind"

I am pretty sure of what I have posted.Anyway,for your reference,I am posting Swami Krishnananda's commentary on these verses:

Quote
If the mind is the cause of the sufferings of people, a question is raised here: “We can suppress the mind by a kind of yoga where the will is applied in an act of powerful concentration, and we can see that the mind does not function. What is the purpose of knowing God, Brahma jnana, and such relevant matters about which we discussed?”

This is a question that arises from an ignorant mind. Suppression of the vrittis does not mean yoga. The word ‘yoga’ should not be applied to such a process at all. Suppression is a negative activity. Yoga is a positive union, and it is not enough if the mind does not function. It has also to function in relation to God’s existence.

The difference between mental restraint and God-consciousness is this: while the vrittis or the functions of the mind are inhibited, the mental qualities that describe the objects outside may appear to be not there. Not seeing something is not knowledge. There is also a necessity to see what is really there. When the mind is withdrawn, it will not see what it was earlier seeing as imposed upon the objects of the world, the creation of God. But it cannot see the creation of God. Brahma jnana is the vision of God’s creation, God Himself. Therefore, a negative activity in the form of the suppression of the vrittis in any manner whatsoever, voluntarily, will not suffice"

This again is also Patanjali's perspective as well.He is aiming to go to the source of Mind-Pure consciousness.Dwelling in Pure consciousness automatically reigns in the vrittis of the mind.No suppression needs to be resorted to.

The complete commentary of Swami Krishnananda is here:
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/panchadasi/pan_20.html (http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/panchadasi/pan_20.html)

Anyway,I am not banking on any second hand knowledge to understand how it works.

Namaskar.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 01:11:21 PM
Udai

Atleast u now know what disturbance to a thread is.

Sanjaya you have indirectly proved somebodle else wrong by first pisting thst qte now.

.
.
Thats where we all are... Nobe of us are in some pedastal...
We all need to know where we are.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 01:17:58 PM
Dear Ravi ji,
        :) :D ...
Ravi ji ... did you read the verse. The verse says without Brahma Jnanam the mind will arise again!
Its clear in what it says.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 01:19:14 PM
Infact I can give very detail quotes stating why Samadhi is not sufficient !
SAMADHI is not enough.
this I can give quotes from Panchadasi.
but i would rather leave it to you to verify.

dont read that partial translation of panchadasi ... read the verses and see what it says.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 01:23:57 PM
Udai,
Samadhi means to be sama with adhi-source of consciousness.There is nothing more to be attained.
What do you mean by 'sufficient'?
Namaskar.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 01:35:32 PM
Dear Ravi ji,
             :)

Samyak AdhIyate iti samAdi: Mind thats totally absorbed in the source
Another way could be Sama+Dhi ... Dhi is Intellect. Sama is evenness.

निःसंगो निष्क्रियोऽसि त्वं स्वप्रकाशो निरंजनः।
अयमेव हि ते बन्धः समाधिमनुतिष्ठति ॥१-१५॥

Ashtavakra Gita: You are without any "Sangam" , without any "Action", Self Effulgent, Ever Spotless.
This alone is your bondage that you try for Samadhi.

Yoga is defined as citta vritti nirodah... elimination of thought forms. Samadhi or citta vritti nirodha is an aid for someone who has known the truth or has got jnanam to abide as Self.

Jnanam needs bodha or teaching from scriptures not citta vritti nirodham. This is wrong idea perpetuated by many swamis also ... including some very famous swamis.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 03:57:44 PM
Friends,

Just to express that Sri Vidyaranya, has extensively quoted from Yoga Sutras of Patanjali in his Jivan Mukti Viveka in support  to establish the Truth of his expressions in that work.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:02:06 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
            :) Yes Vidhyanarayana swami ji has indeed quoted pathanjali in Jivan Mukti viveka...
Because advaitins have viveka... they dismiss buddhism does not mean they dismiss everything they say. its not taking sides. We dismiss certain ideas of buddhism ... like the shunya vada. But at the same time we accept their meditation methods as useful.

The place of those methods is purification of mind but self knowledge alone can grant liberation.
Same vidhyananrayana swami has quoted in jivan mukthi viveka:

Quote
उपविश्योपविश्यैकचित्तकेन मुहुर्मुहुः।
न शक्यते मनो जेतुँ विन युक्तिम्-अनिन्दिताम्॥ [Laghu yoga vasishta 28.126]

By repeatedly bringing the mind back to One-pointedness, it cannot be conquered unless one is equipped with faultless reasoning [scriptural reasoning in the context]

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:09:13 PM
But Udai,

Haven't you in past, have conveyed ideas that nothing is required absolutely? one is already the knowledge? now you have come to express that yes, purification of mind is required.

Udai, there have been inconsistencies in your communication over some period, which is why i am urged to counter your views. You take strong stands without taking whole picture in to account.

I do not think anybody disagreed to the point of Chitta Shuddhi ever, anywhere.

More over, in the same topic of this Thread, i post from Vasishta -

द्वौ क्रमो चित्तनाशस्य योगो ज्ञानं च राघव ।
योगस्तद्वृत्तिरोधो हि ज्ञानं सम्यगवेक्षणम् ॥

असाध्यः कस्यचिद्योगः कस्यचिच्ज्ञाननिश्चयः ।
प्रकारौ द्वौ ततो देवो जगाद परमेश्वरः ॥


There are two ways to dissolve the mind, O Raghava! the one is yoga and the other is knowledge. Restraining the transformations of the mind is called yoga and right seeing is called knowledge.

and thus,
Yoga is unattainable for some and for the others realization through right knowledge is not possible. Therefore, God, the supreme Lord, said about the two varieties or means.

again is quoted by Sri Vidyaranya.

I would certainly never revolt, had you been reasonable and consistent in your views. Again i am not personally attacking you, rather, if you take it in right spirit and express in a balanced manner and with a fore-thought, your expressions will certainly be enjoyable and reasonable.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:14:20 PM
            :) Yes Vidhyanarayana swami ji has indeed quoted pathanjali in Jivan Mukti viveka...
Because advaitins have viveka... they dismiss buddhism does not mean they dismiss everything they say. its not taking sides. We dismiss certain ideas of buddhism ... like the shunya vada. But at the same time we accept their meditation methods as useful.

Udai,

i would make a small observation -

Advaitins never dismissed Buddhism, the only dismissed avidya everywhere. Jnana dismisses Avidya even in Advaita as well, Jnana dismissed avidya anywhere and never the parent of any such school that is being dismissed.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:23:34 PM
विवेकोऽपि योगे पर्यवस्यति

The application of discrimination becomes yoga itself.

(JMV, Sri Vidyaranya)

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: ksksat27 on March 20, 2013, 04:33:04 PM
The question is simple : Do you accept Vedanta panchadasi or not. Whether or not you agree with Vidhyanarayana swami.
 Yes or no.

For what ever reason ... if you think vidhyanarayana swami is "One sided", "Not broad in views" etc ... thats your choice.
The point is just this: Agree with Vidhyanarayana swami or not. Thats it.

Regarding pathanjali : are we aware why Shankara countered Pathanjali's ideas in some of his works ? Are we aware that he did that ?


Dear Udai,  and others,


again and again this is going in a loop --  Yes or No , authentic or not as per such and such sage ,  such and such scripture etc.

this is not a law book like quran.

let us not make ourselves narrow minded and fanatic.

or we can believe that those who adopts simple japa without study of scritpures -- all of them straigh away going to land in hell.

Sri Ravi and Sri Nagaraj has only quoted correctly --  there are many many paths to Truth.

Whoever for whatever reason clings to only one way of attaining and condemns other ways --  something fundamentaly wrong in their attitudes.


Udai -- let me ask you simple question.  what are we going to achieve by this microscopic scriptural study and rejection of all other type of sadhanas?    is Realizaiton is a bonafide certificate to be issued by some university? 

Is this blue print has reference books shortlised to attain that degree? 

No.

Even assuming so,  if you say, all of us who dont subscribe to this view,  all of us go to darkness and hell -- well Udai, Truth shines there also fully.  There is no infinite suffering.   Hell can be made heaven by again that same simple devotion.


ISCKON did it,  Madhvas and Sri Vaishnavas did it,  Alleluyaa of Christ did it.  Let us not repeat that again here.


Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:33:30 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
        :) You should read what Vidhyanarayana swami is teaching in Jivan Mukthi Viveka carefully.
He clearly mentions that Realization is impossible without jnana .

He does mention Yoga as a practise for purification of mind. He clearly states at multiple places that its not possible to find liberation without jnana .
IF i give a list ... it would be pretty long :D ...

in jivan mukthi viveka , Vidhyanarayana swami makes a point to tell where yogic practises are useful.
infact the statement you quoted is from yoga vasistha as quoted by swami in jvm.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:35:40 PM
Dear ksksat27,
     :D Why did shankara spend pages in every bhasya to dismiss karma and upasana as means of liberation?
why should he do such a thing and not say mimamsakas are fine ... they can do karma and find liberation :D

These are pure nonsense notions that there are lot of paths etc ... these are just ideas of neo-advaitins. nothing more.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:38:48 PM
I do not think anywhere, it has been denied that jnana is not required. The only contention is that Jnana can dawn from any source. There is no fixed way. Jnana may happen at the even at the very instance of Nayana Dheeksha the holy glance of Realised Guru, and need not necessarily dawn only out of intellectual study. It may dawn in a devoted action of intense prayer to the Higher power and so on.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:40:50 PM
Why did shankara spend pages in every bhasya to dismiss karma and upasana as means of liberation?
why should he do such a thing and not say mimamsakas are fine ... they can do karma and find liberation :D

These are pure nonsense notions that there are lot of paths etc ... these are just ideas of neo-advaitins. nothing more.

Perhaps Shankara was the only saint ever to standardize Karma and Upasanas. He established Shanmatam. He set the ground rules for sanyasa and the duties and upasanas for sanyasis, it is only from his dasanami tradition all other sanyasis have borrowed their standards. He regularised Ritual worship.

It is this hasty expression, i am against. They are untruth!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: ksksat27 on March 20, 2013, 04:44:10 PM
Dear ksksat27,
     :D Why did shankara spend pages in every bhasya to dismiss karma and upasana as means of liberation?
why should he do such a thing and not say mimamsakas are fine ... they can do karma and find liberation :D

These are pure nonsense notions that there are lot of paths etc ... these are just ideas of neo-advaitins. nothing more.

let it be Tushnim. 

that is where I am saying --  one just minds his own sadhana --  let him be neo or fake or whatever you call.

let him reach Hell also.

In Hell also, the Love can be felt and shared --- is not it?

His devotion and absolute faith in his own path,  his devotion and faith in his Guru who taught him --  It stands all tests in Hell and shine unto three worlds.

You will say, such a blind disciple reach hell along with his Guru --  let it be.

The modest acceptance and humility of the disciple will shine in Hell.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: ksksat27 on March 20, 2013, 04:45:50 PM
Dear ksksat27,
     :D Why did shankara spend pages in every bhasya to dismiss karma and upasana as means of liberation?
why should he do such a thing and not say mimamsakas are fine ... they can do karma and find liberation :D

These are pure nonsense notions that there are lot of paths etc ... these are just ideas of neo-advaitins. nothing more.

let it be Tushnim. 

that is where I am saying --  one just minds his own sadhana --  let him be neo or fake or whatever you call.

let him reach Hell also.

In Hell also, the Love can be felt and shared --- is not it?

His devotion and absolute faith in his own path,  his devotion and faith in his Guru who taught him --  It stands all tests in Hell and shine unto three worlds.

You will say, such a blind disciple reach hell along with his Guru --  let it be.

The modest acceptance and humility of the disciple will shine in Hell.

And now Sri Chinmaya mission must come with a concept of eternal hell for such nonsense cases.  Because,  here disciple does not require further progress,  so we must block artificially by quoting some scritpures. no other way.  he has renounced even liberation.   


Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:47:43 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
          :) Once again "Viveka"... when i say Shankara dismisses karma leads to moksha ... it does not mean he dismisses karma altogether.
karma has its place.
its useful where its useful.
but it cannot lead to liberation.

This is viveka.
we are not taking sides "karma" or "jnana". ... Shankara does say clearly as to where karma is not useful and he is eloquent in it.
just coz he established rules or rituals ... it does not mean he says those are for liberation.
those serve a purpose of their own.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:48:48 PM
Dear ksksat27,
     :D Why did shankara spend pages in every bhasya to dismiss karma and upasana as means of liberation?
why should he do such a thing and not say mimamsakas are fine ... they can do karma and find liberation :D

These are pure nonsense notions that there are lot of paths etc ... these are just ideas of neo-advaitins. nothing more.

let it be Tushnim. 

that is where I am saying --  one just minds his own sadhana --  let him be neo or fake or whatever you call.

let him reach Hell also.

In Hell also, the Love can be felt and shared --- is not it?

His devotion and absolute faith in his own path,  his devotion and faith in his Guru who taught him --  It stands all tests in Hell and shine unto three worlds.

You will say, such a blind disciple reach hell along with his Guru --  let it be.

The modest acceptance and humility of the disciple will shine in Hell.

What wierd concepts ksksat27 :D
Where did i bring in hell to this ?
Plz have the basic viveka to distinguish what is said and what is not said!!
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:51:20 PM
Quote
बोधोऽन्यसाधनेभ्यो हि साक्षान्मोक्षैकसाधनम्।
पाकस्य विहिन्वत् झानम् विना मोक्षो न सिध्यति॥

Just as cooking is not possible without fire, Liberation is not possible without Jnanam.
Amongst the various means of liberation, Knowledge alone is the direct means.

अविरोधितया कर्म नाविद्याँ विनिवर्तयेत्।
विद्याविद्याँ निहन्त्येव तेजस्तिमिरसङघ्वत्॥

Karma being non-opposing to ignorance does not destroy it. Knowledge alone destroys ignorance, just as deep darkness is destoyed by light alone.


Atma bodha.

if i quote from Rama Gita and other texts ... you will be astonished to see how karma is dismissed.
again when we say karma is dismissed ... one should have basic viveka ... not to mean that if my car needs a repair, i do not do karma there !! so karma has a purpose ... but moksha is impossible without jnanam. karma alone is useless.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:52:55 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
          :) Once again "Viveka"... when i say Shankara dismisses karma leads to moksha ... it does not mean he dismisses karma altogether.
karma has its place.
its useful where its useful.
but it cannot lead to liberation.

This is viveka.
we are not taking sides "karma" or "jnana". ... Shankara does say clearly as to where karma is not useful and he is eloquent in it.
just coz he established rules or rituals ... it does not mean he says those are for liberation.
those serve a purpose of their own.

The contentious statement made by you

Quote
"but it cannot lead to liberation."

is of concern for one who does karma with Phala Apeksha, with a desire for fruits of the action, be it spiritual or otherwise. But when the Fruits are surrendered, where is the point here?

You are basically revolving round and round and just merely saying, that karma with Phala Apeksha is binding.

Haven't we seen that even the desire to get liberated ought to be given up?

All this is binding when one has set eyes on the result. be it liberation as well!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:55:13 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
         :) Whether with phala apeksha or without phala apeksha ...
karma only purifies the mind: enabling it to grasp the jnana.
jnana leads to moksha.

There is no choice here.
This is firmly and well stated by shankara ... if you read enough of shankara you would not have got these doubts.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:56:39 PM
Quote
बोधोऽन्यसाधनेभ्यो हि साक्षान्मोक्षैकसाधनम्।
पाकस्य विहिन्वत् झानम् विना मोक्षो न सिध्यति॥

Just as cooking is not possible without fire, Liberation is not possible without Jnanam.
Amongst the various means of liberation, Knowledge alone is the direct means.

अविरोधितया कर्म नाविद्याँ विनिवर्तयेत्।
विद्याविद्याँ निहन्त्येव तेजस्तिमिरसङघ्वत्॥

Karma being non-opposing to ignorance does not destroy it. Knowledge alone destroys ignorance, just as deep darkness is destoyed by light alone.


Atma bodha.

if i quote from Rama Gita and other texts ... you will be astonished to see how karma is dismissed.
again when we say karma is dismissed ... one should have basic viveka ... not to mean that if my car needs a repair, i do not do karma there !! so karma has a purpose ... but moksha is impossible without jnanam. karma alone is useless.

Udai,

Karma is not dismissed, rather it is the kartrutva that is dismissed.

Karma is jada, no where the stress is laid on karma, the focus is ever on the kartrutva.

Chittasya shuddaye karmanaha na tu vastupa labhyate - shankara in Vivekachoodamani. Karmas are for purification purposes only and never for liberation.

I do not think anybody disagree with this.

But Having said this Shankara did not do away with Karma. He himself carried out tough anushtaanas and set examples for his disciples and people in society and got LIngas and established Mathas, and set the procedures for worship at various temples, from Pasupatinath temple in Nepal to Kamakshi temple in Kanchipuram.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 04:57:52 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
         :) Whether with phala apeksha or without phala apeksha ...
karma only purifies the mind: enabling it to grasp the jnana.
jnana leads to moksha.

There is no choice here.
This is firmly and well stated by shankara ... if you read enough of shankara you would not have got these doubts.


This is what i said, you are saying the same now, after going round about, in the end! IT can never be said Karma is useless. YOu have in past made such statements, Karma is useless, i think even in this thread you have!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 04:58:51 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
     :)

Quote
Chittasya shuddaye karmanaha na tu vastupa labhyate - shankara in Vivekachoodamani. Karmas are for purification purposes only and never for liberation.

I do not think anybody disagree with this.

But Having said this Shankara did not do away with Karma. He himself carried out tough anushtaanas and set examples for his disciples and people in society and got LIngas and established Mathas, and set the procedures for worship at various temples, from Pasupatinath temple in Nepal to Kamakshi temple in Kanchipuram.

This is Exactly the point. So if you agree to this ... all your meditation practises are only for chitta sudhi and only JNANA leads to Moksha. Thats all i am saying.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Subramanian.R on March 20, 2013, 05:00:00 PM
What is chitta vritti nirodham?  Being thoughtless. The thoughts come from mind/ego. If one does chttavritti nirodham, he becomes
egoless. Egoless state is Mukti.  Because the egoless state, pushes the mind back to the Self and that is Self realization.

Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:01:20 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
         :) Whether with phala apeksha or without phala apeksha ...
karma only purifies the mind: enabling it to grasp the jnana.
jnana leads to moksha.

There is no choice here.
This is firmly and well stated by shankara ... if you read enough of shankara you would not have got these doubts.


This is what i said, you are saying the same now, after going round about, in the end! IT can never be said Karma is useless. YOu have in past made such statements, Karma is useless, i think even in this thread you have!

--

:) Yes I said that before I saw your other statment.
I never said karma is useless. its purpose is only to purify the mind and there it ends.
I have always maintained that karma cannot lead to moksha and only jnana does.
without jnana moksha is impossible.

This is my stand.
karma is for purification of mind ... not for vastu upalabdhi.

jnana is a must.
thats all that i am saying ... not now ... for a long time ...
so this being so there is no karma yoga, jnana yoga ... since vastu upalabdhi is only through jnana and not through karma. so karma is for a different purpose , jnana for another. and vastu is available only throgh jnana.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:01:38 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
     :)

Quote
Chittasya shuddaye karmanaha na tu vastupa labhyate - shankara in Vivekachoodamani. Karmas are for purification purposes only and never for liberation.

I do not think anybody disagree with this.

But Having said this Shankara did not do away with Karma. He himself carried out tough anushtaanas and set examples for his disciples and people in society and got LIngas and established Mathas, and set the procedures for worship at various temples, from Pasupatinath temple in Nepal to Kamakshi temple in Kanchipuram.

This is Exactly the point. So if you agree to this ... all your meditation practises are only for chitta sudhi and only JNANA leads to Moksha. Thats all i am saying.

From the beginning, i can assure, no members disagree with this point! But, at the same time you have to accept this as well -

I do not think anywhere, it has been denied that jnana is not required. The only contention is that Jnana can dawn from any source. There is no fixed way. Jnana may happen at the even at the very instance of Nayana Dheeksha the holy glance of Realised Guru, and need not necessarily dawn only out of intellectual study. It may dawn in a devoted action of intense prayer to the Higher power and so on.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:03:47 PM
What is chitta vritti nirodham?  Being thoughtless. The thoughts come from mind/ego. If one does chttavritti nirodham, he becomes
egoless. Egoless state is Mukti.  Because the egoless state, pushes the mind back to the Self and that is Self realization.

Arunachala Siva.   

This is exactly what panchadasi rejects. This is precisely the objection raised by purvapaksha and panchadasi rejects it outright.

This is why i wrote this thread in the first place.

Quote
Chapter 4: verse 38:
bandas chet maanasam dvaitam tannirodhena shaamyati |
abhyased yogameva atah brahma jnanena kim vada ?

[Objection raised by purva paksha: If mind causes bondages through duality, nirodha (citta vritti nirodha) or elimination of it shall resolve this duality (shaamyati). so only Yoga (that yoga which helps citta vritti nirodha) is sufficient for this purpose; what is the necessity of knowledge of brahman ?]

Verse 39:
taatkalika dvaita shaantau apyagavijanischayah
brahmajnanam vina nasayad iti vedanta dindimah ||

[taatkalika dvaita shaantau : temporarily the thoughts get eliminated (in nirvikalpa samadhi)
  api ... even thought ...
 agami jani kshayah nashyat : future samsara cannot be destroyed (by this process )
 brahma jnanam vina : without brahma jnanam
 nasyad iti vedanta dindimah : vedanta loudly proclaims that without brahma jnana this is not possible.

Though there can be temporary elimination of thought [through mind control) without brahma jnanam the future arising of mind will not cease. ]


Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:06:06 PM
Quote
I do not think anywhere, it has been denied that jnana is not required. The only contention is that Jnana can dawn from any source. There is no fixed way. Jnana may happen at the even at the very instance of Nayana Dheeksha the holy glance of Realised Guru, and need not necessarily dawn only out of intellectual study. It may dawn in a devoted action of intense prayer to the Higher power and so on.


:D LOL! Jnana is obtained through study of scriptures ... not through nayana dheeksha :D ...
sravana-manana-nidhidhyasanam leads to jnana .
mahavakya vichara alone leads to jnana ... this is why maha-vakya - vichara is given that importance in sadhana panchakam.

give me a single referece from shankara works where he says nayana deeksha gives moksha :D ... if that were so then sri krishna wasted his whole time !

nayana deeksha ... LOL!
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:07:17 PM
A person seeking knowledge should go to a guru who is a Srotriya and Brahma Nishta and learn Scriptures from him.... how many references should i give you of this statement ?

can you show me one reference by shankara of nayana deeksha as a means to jnana !?
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:09:08 PM
You said -

Quote
Though there can be temporary elimination of thought [through mind control) without brahma jnanam the future arising of mind will not cease.

There is not sayingm, without Brahma Jnanam. Brahma Jnanam is merely the residue that shines when there is complete Chitta Shuddhi

There are several ways to attain that unsullied Chitta Shuddhi. From Yoga, to Bhakti to Karma to Hata Yoga, all are advised even in Yoga Vasishtam.

I do not think there is anything to disagree, if there is no complete CHitta Shuddhi there is no Brahma Jnanam.

But, you say, without Brahma Jnanam the future arising of mind will not cease.

Brahma Jnana is the residue that is already our nature that is hidden due to impurities in Citta.

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:15:13 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
    :)
Quote
Brahma Jnanam is merely the residue that shines when there is complete Chitta Shuddhi

Another wrong idea. This jnana is something to be practised in nidhidhyasanam and mananam.
its not the residue of purification of mind. otherwise why even study scriptures ? why not simply sit
and practise yoga. This is the idea that was rejected by panchadasi in this thread start.

Atma bodha says:
Quote
अझानकलुषँ जीवँ झानाभ्यासाद्विनिर्मलम्।
कृत्वा झानँ स्वयँ नश्येज्जलँ कतकरेणुवत्॥

Jiva(individual) who is defiled by ignorance can purify himself with the practise of jnana or self knowledge. Having purified the jiva (individual) the knowledge gets resolved too, as even when the power of kataka nut is added to water it settles the impurities in it and having done that it also settles down at the bottom.


Practise of jnana ... and then having established the person jnana leaves.
so this jnana ... cannot be ... residue to pure mind !!
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:15:25 PM
A person seeking knowledge should go to a guru who is a Srotriya and Brahma Nishta and learn Scriptures from him.... how many references should i give you of this statement ?

can you show me one reference by shankara of nayana deeksha as a means to jnana !?

Firstly, Your prejudice is very evident in your above statement (given below) by mentioning only Shankara!!!! :D

Quote
can you show me one reference by shankara of nayana deeksha as a means to jnana !

Please read Srimad Bhagavatam, there are plenmty of instances, where you will find the prostitude, Gajendra Moksha, Story of Ajamila, etc... there are plenty, Gopikas!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:16:27 PM
BTW Nagaraj ... you are giving all the purvapaksha arguments that were raised against shankara / vidhyaranya swami. :) :D
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:17:20 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
    :)
Quote
Brahma Jnanam is merely the residue that shines when there is complete Chitta Shuddhi

Another wrong idea. This jnana is something to be practised in nidhidhyasanam and mananam.
its not the residue of purification of mind. otherwise why even study scriptures ? why not simply sit
and practise yoga. This is the idea that was rejected by panchadasi in this thread start.

Atma bodha says:
Quote
अझानकलुषँ जीवँ झानाभ्यासाद्विनिर्मलम्।
कृत्वा झानँ स्वयँ नश्येज्जलँ कतकरेणुवत्॥

Jiva(individual) who is defiled by ignorance can purify himself with the practise of jnana or self knowledge. Having purified the jiva (individual) the knowledge gets resolved too, as even when the power of kataka nut is added to water it settles the impurities in it and having done that it also settles down at the bottom.


Practise of jnana ... and then having established the person jnana leaves.
so this jnana ... cannot be ... residue to pure mind !!

Nidhidhyasana is also mere for Chitta Shuddhi purposes only! If one is established why practice nidhidhyasa? Its only because there is potential for the CHitta to be corrupted!

You are just saying the same Udai, going round and round!

Any practice is only for CHitta Shuddhi! Abidance if not practice! Abidance is pure Nishta or Being!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:19:15 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
  :) Prejudiced or otherwise ... Shankara clearly dismissed lot of views... if bhagaatam believes otherwise or vishnu puran or siva puran speak something else ... i take them only as long as they are as per Shankara's teachings ... else they have to be rejected outright. This is my stand ... whether or not others agree.

so all i am saying ehre also is that shankara does not support nayana deeksha , touch deeksa etc ... they may lull the mind but not give moksha.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:23:04 PM
You are Rama Bhaka,

Do you believe at least in Rama? Do you believe Ramas feet touching the stone liberated Ahalya?

Your interpretation of nayana dheeksha etc.. is merely restricted to one birth on hand, you do not know how many birth one had and how much sadhana has one already performed, look at Hastamalaka look, he never spoke a word before Shankara came to him, he was categorised as deff and dumb. Look at Bhagavan Ramana.



BTW, do you have trust in Srimad Bhagavatam?



--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Subramanian.R on March 20, 2013, 05:23:54 PM
Dear Tusnim,

What Sri Bhagavan referred to was permanent irreversible thoughtless state. Egoless state - permanent.  Simple thoughtless
state will only a glimpse of the Self. Only permanent egoless state helps in abidance in Self.

In Vivekachudamani, Sri Sankara uses the phrase Nayana Kataksham.


Arunachala Siva.   
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:25:19 PM
BTW Tushnim

  :) Prejudiced or otherwise ... Shankara clearly dismissed lot of views... if bhagaatam believes otherwise or vishnu puran or siva puran speak something else ... i take them only as long as they are as per Shankara's teachings ... else they have to be rejected outright. This is my stand ... whether or not others agree.

so all i am saying ehre also is that shankara does not support nayana deeksha , touch deeksa etc ... they may lull the mind but not give moksha.

DO not believe, that you have completely read and studied all about Shankara! The Shankaracharya of Sringeri is more humble than you!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:25:46 PM
Nidhidhyasana ... means prior sravana-manana.
without sravana - manana nidhidhyasanam is not possible.
Quote
M.: A mere desire to be Liberated cannot make a man fit
for enquiry into the Self. Without sravana one cannot have even
an indirect knowledge. How can one succeed in one’s enquiry?
Only after knowing the nature of the Self, should one proceed
to seek It. Ignorant of Its true nature, how can one investigate
the Self? Simple desire to be liberated will not suffice.


13-14. D.: Can the Self not be realised by austerities
accompanied by desirelessness and tranquillity, without enquiry?

M.: No. By non-enquiry the Self has been lost sight of; to
regain It enquiry is needed. In its absence how can even crores
of austerities restore the sight? Always to enquire into the Self is
the only remedy for the blindness of the ignorant whose mental
eye has been bedimmed by the darkness of non-enquiry
spreading its veil. Unless by the eye of knowledge gained
through enquiry, the Self cannot be realised.

15-16. D.: What is this enquiry into the Self?

M.: With one-pointed intellect to seek within the five
sheaths the Self which is shining forth as “I” in the body, senses
etc., considering “who is this Self?, where is It? and how is It?”,
is the nature of the enquiry into the Self. With subtle intellect
the enquiry into the Reality, namely the Self within the unreal
sheaths must always be pursued.

D.: How can an investigation into unreal things lead to
the recognition of the Reality?

M.: The unreal coverings must be removed to disclose the
Reality hidden in them. They are superimposed on the Real Self.
They must be examined and ascertained to be unreal so that their
substratum which is the sole Reality can be known. Unless the
external trappings that are superimposed are looked into, their
substratum, that is the Reality, cannot be found. Has any one in
the world been able to find the rope without looking and enquiring
into the nature of the seeming snake, though this is superimposed
on it and unreal? Or can there be any one, who having enquired
into the superimposed snake, did not discover its substratum to be
the rope? No one.
In the same manner an indirect knowledge
should be gained by sravana that the five sheaths are superimposed
and unreal; but by a keen intellect the seeker must probe deep into
this superficial knowledge and experience the truth of it; just as the
directly experienced gross body is clearly known to be built up by
food and recognised to be only the food-sheath covering the Self,
so also the other four subtler sheaths remaining unknown to the
common people but taught by the scriptures and the master must
be known by their characteristics; they must be enquired into and
directly experienced; at the same time they must be recognised to
be only sheaths and successively dismissed in order to seek their
witness, Consciousness-Being or the subtle Self.



: Advaita Bodha deepika.

Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:27:38 PM
BTW Tushnim

  :) Prejudiced or otherwise ... Shankara clearly dismissed lot of views... if bhagaatam believes otherwise or vishnu puran or siva puran speak something else ... i take them only as long as they are as per Shankara's teachings ... else they have to be rejected outright. This is my stand ... whether or not others agree.

so all i am saying ehre also is that shankara does not support nayana deeksha , touch deeksa etc ... they may lull the mind but not give moksha.

DO not believe, that you have completely read and studied all about Shankara! The Shankaracharya of Sringeri is more humble than you!

--

Humility is not an expression. Saying "I am Humble, I wont disagree with anyone" is not humility.
to be humble is something internal... one need not "Express humility" and if one expresses its not truely humility.
Understanding is To Get the Vision of Truth.
I have the vision of truth as presented by Shankara ... Aparoksha jnana ... once htis is there , i know what and why he is syaing what he is saying.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:29:12 PM
Nidhidhyasana ... means prior sravana-manana.
without sravana - manana nidhidhyasanam is not possible.

ok! accept it, what about it? This Sravana Manana Nidhidhyasa may happen in any manner, there is no standard protocol  See this Story of Narada, all the said Sravana manana nidhidhyasa happens at Grace, he did not even know what sravana manana nidhidhyasa was  -

nAradA's past

In my previous birth in an earlier kalpA (cycle of time) I was born as the son of a maid-servant in a community of vEdic ritualists. I was, therefore, from boyhood engaged in attending on yOgIs who gathered at the place for the chAturmAsyA (4 month retreat during rainy season) Those holy men, though even minded in their outlook, were mightily pleased with my services, especially seeing how I, thought a mere boy, was devoid of all fickleness and boyish playfulness, was disciplined and brief-spoke, and atteneded on them with dedication and understanding of their needs.

Permitted by these holy men, I once partook of the remnants of the food left by them Being purified in mind by this act, I developed a taste for the devotional life which these holy men followed. By their blessing I was able to hear every day their attractive recitals of kRushnA's life and actions. Hearing every syllable of those recitals with faith and attention, I developed the feeling of delight in the Lord, whose glories are charming to contemplate.

After I developed this delight in the Lord, my mind would never disengage itself from Him of endearing glory. In this mental state I experienced that the whole of the universe in its subtle as well as gross condition is generated y His power of mAyA in Himself, from whom my entity, the jIvA, too has no separate existence.

Listening continuously all through the spring and the rainy season, at the three sandhyAs of the day, to the recitals of the Lord's sanctifying glory by these holy men, there sprang up in me that powerful devotion which obliterates all traces of tamas and rajas.

When dispersing after the chAturmAsyA period, the kind-hearted and merciful holymen imparted to me the transcendent knowledge of the Supreme Divine (jnyAnam guhyatamam), whjich He himself had revelaed to them. For, though a boy, they found in me a fit recipient, as I was loving, humble, sinless, attentive, self-controlled and obedient.
(http://www.harekrsna.com/gallery/narada1/narada8.jpg)

By that knowledge I was enabled to obtain the grace of the mAyA of vAsudEvA, the omiscient and omnipotent Lord, by which the jIvA attains to His being.

(nAradA to Sage vyAsA, when vyAsA was discontent inspite of segregating the vEdAs, writing mahAbhAratA, etc.,)

(I, 5, 23-31)



--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:31:45 PM
Humility is not an expression. Saying "I am Humble, I wont disagree with anyone" is not humility.
to be humble is something internal... one need not "Express humility" and if one expresses its not truely humility.
Understanding is To Get the Vision of Truth.

I have the vision of truth as presented by Shankara ... Aparoksha jnana ... once htis is there , i know what and why he is syaing what he is saying.

Fine, i am not going to question your claim, you may know. Just remember the following, i had already posted.

न चाध्यात्माभिमानोऽपि विदुषोऽस्त्यासुरत्वतः ।
विदुषोऽप्यासुरश्चेत्स्यान्निष्फलं ब्रह्मदर्शनम् ॥


There cannot be pride of learning in a knower of Brahman because
such things belong to the demoniac; if even a knower of Brahman
suffers from this demoniac quality then his knowledge is futile.

(Sureshwaracharya, Naishkarmya siddhi)

ननु विजिगीषोरात्मबोध एव नास्ति,

Vidyaranya - Moreover, there is not even Self-knowledge in him who
is desirious of defeating others, Sureshwaracharya quoted from Naishkarmyasiddhi, thus:

रागो लिङ्गमबोधस्य चित्तव्यायामभूमिषु ।
कुतः शाद्वलता तस्य यस्याग्निः कोटरे तरोः ॥

Attachment to the grounds on which the mind exercises indicates absence of knowledge.
How can a tree remain verdant which has fire in its hollow?

याज्ञवल्क्यस्तु विजिगीषुदशायां न हीदृशः, चित्तविश्रान्तये विद्वत्संन्यासस्य तेन करिष्यमाणत्वात् । न केवलमस्य विजिगीषा किंतु धनतृष्णापि महती जाता, यतो, बहूनां ब्रह्माविदां पुरतः स्थापितं सालंकारं गोसहस्रमपहृत्य स्वयमेवेदमाह - नमो वयं ब्रह्मिष्ठाय कुर्मो गोकामा एव वयं स्मः ।

Yajnavalkya was verily not in this state while he was still desirous of victory in disputation, since he was yet to take the vidvatsannyaasa in order to set the mind at rest. Not only he was desirous of victory but had a great thirst for wealth as well, since he, while carrying away thousand cows decorated with gold and put before the assembly of many knowers of Brahman, himself said thus - 'we bow to the wisest of the Brahmanas, but we just wish to have the cows.'

(Vidyaranya, Jivanmukti Viveka)

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:33:10 PM
You are Rama Bhaka,

Do you believe at least in Rama? Do you believe Ramas feet touching the stone liberated Ahalya?

Your interpretation of nayana dheeksha etc.. is merely restricted to one birth on hand, you do not know how many birth one had and how much sadhana has one already performed, look at Hastamalaka look, he never spoke a word before Shankara came to him, he was categorised as deff and dumb. Look at Bhagavan Ramana.



BTW, do you have trust in Srimad Bhagavatam?



--

Dear Nagaraj, Did you read Ramayana ? Was ahalya a stone ? This is typical TV Ramayana .
Ahalya was asked in Valmiki Ramayana to sit like a stone ... not be a stone.
And she had already studied the scriptures.
there were specific spiritual instructions given to her...
if you read valmiki ramayana.

and plz stop quoting puranas ... coz puranas may or may not be in accordance with shankara's teachings.
there are many contradictory and wrong ideas also in puranas.

Finally...
Quote
ok! accept it, what about it? This Sravana Manana Nidhidhyasa may happen in any manner, there is no standard protocol  See this Story of Narada, all the said Sravana manana nidhidhyasa happens at Grace, he did not even know what sravana manana nidhidhyasa was  -


Sravana means hearing scriptures.
if one does not know how it happened :D LOL thats interesting !! IT just means he was sleeping all along :D

I have nothing against narada or bhagavatam ... they just teach bhakti
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:35:40 PM
Oh Udai,

Long long before i have mentioned many times in the forum even to you the real significnce of ahalya turning into stone -

Dear Udai,

That Ahalya became a stone is described in all other kinds of Ramayanas, especially in the Kamba Ramayana and Tulasi Ramayana. But it is just a poetic expression of the poet. Becoming a stone does not mean literally. It means Ahalya lost her glory and wisdom and discernments and discrimination and remained like a "jada" She had become a stone hearted and had lost all the virtues of a celebrated human being.

I too have seen so may say things about Ahalya, they say things without proper understanding and discerning the inner essence of the poets expression.

Such a stone hearted Ahalya needed the Sparsha Dheeksha of the soft hands of Sri Rama and his sweet and caressing words of Sri Rama. One of the names of Sri Rama in Sri Rama Ashtottara is "Mridu Bhashine" meaning "Soft Spoken"

Look at the story of Angulimaala who used to kill people and cut the persons thumb and had it as a garland as a testimony to his killing. He needed the soft words of Buddha to wake him up, He was a stone too, till Buddha's touch graced him!

Salutations to Bhagavan

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:37:09 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
     :) There is no ahalya turning into stone episode in valmiki ramayana.
the verse just says she was asked to sit like a stone.

Anyways ... pride also is something internal.
externally whether i reject some ideas or not ... it hardly matters.
a person who accepts everything does not mean he has no pride.
one need not express "non-pride" as well.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:37:17 PM
and plz stop quoting puranas ... coz puranas may or may not be in accordance with shankara's teachings.
there are many contradictory and wrong ideas also in puranas.

Finally...
Sravana means hearing scriptures.
if one does not know how it happened :D LOL thats interesting !! IT just means he was sleeping all along :D

I have nothing against narada or bhagavatam ... they just teach bhakti

You are ridiculous! DO you realise You are even Against Shankara!:D :D

God Bless you!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:39:38 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
     :) Puranas are not Shabda Pramanas.
Shankara might have quoted them at some places only to give examples ...

shanakra did not quote bhagavatam anywhere in his bhasyams do you know this ?
coz quoting puranas does not matter.

however quoting a prakarana grantha makes some sense ... like quoting yoga vasishta or one of the shankara's prakarana granthas ... coz those are elaborations or thesis on the shaba pramanas.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 05:45:08 PM
Do not side track, see the points at face value.

That is it.

you are now just merely arguing for argument sake, Kutarka is stepping in.

BTW you had asked for examples for nayana dheeksha etc... hence Puranas and Bhagavatam was quoted. If you believe them to be myth. Then, God bless you!

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 05:52:05 PM
Dear Nagaraj,
      :) I do not take puranas as pramanas.
to me Shankara and shankara's teachings are what I am discussing here.
and they clearly disagree to any nayana deeksha etc.

All I am saying in the thread itself is ... this is what shankara and panchadasi says ... if you do not agree with this thats your choice.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 06:05:34 PM
Dear udai,

Ok. Lets nit go in puranas or bhagawatam. You trust the authority og bhagawan ramaba right? What do u gave to say abt his declaration of cow lakshmi moksha. Bhagawan himself said and composed a small song her liberation. Wt sravana manana nidhidhyasa could cow do ?

Moreover do u think bhagawans mother did such intricate analyses such as suggested by you?


Take shankara hinself, he liberated his mother in her death bed.

Do u trust these ? Can the rational mind even near these?

--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 06:59:05 PM
Udai/Nagaraj/Friends,

Quote
I do not take puranas as pramanas.to me Shankara and shankara's teachings are what I am discussing here.and they clearly disagree to any nayana deeksha etc

Here is an excerpt from Kanchi mahaswami's talks on Sri sanakara's magnum opus-Soundarya Lahari,Verse 22.

Quote
Even in the portion of Anandalahari, which is supposed to be mainly the esoteric content of the ShAkta scriptures, there are shlokas which reflect the pure bhakti sentiment coupled with excelling poetry. One such shloka is No.22. In this shloka one is lifted from the dvaita-bhakti to an advaita-like stage where there is a symbiosis of bhakti, shakti and jnAna.
bhavAni tvam dAse mayi vitara dRShhTiM sakaruNAM
iti stotuM vAnchan kathayati bhavAni tvam-iti yaH /
tadaiva tvaM tasmai dishasi nija-sAyujya-padavIM
mukunda-brahmendra-sphuTa-makuTa-nIrAjita-padAM //22 //

 
“bhavANi” – Oh Mother bhavAni.  Bhava is the name of Shiva. The Shakti of Bhava is BhavAni.
tvam vitara : Please (you) cast
dRShhTiM  : (your) glance
sakaruNAM : (which is) coupled with Grace and Compassion
mayi : on me

dAse : (who is your) servant.
vAnchan : Wishing
iti stotuM : to praise thus,
yah: whoever
kathayati :says
bhavAni tvaM iti : “bhavAni tvaM” ,
tadaiva (= tadA + eva) : then and there, (that is, even before  you complete the remaining words “dAse mayi vitara dRShhTiM sa karuNAM”)
tvaM : You
dishasi : grant, give
tasmai : to him
nija-sAyujya-padavIM : your own sAyujya status.
(We shall come to the fourth line of the stanza later)

The marvel here is, that the devotee has not yet said the full prayer of his, namely: Oh Bhavani, You please cast on me, your servant, your glance of compassion and grace. He has just said: “Oh Bhavani, You” !  That itself is sufficient for the Goddess to pour Her maximum Grace of Her own sAyujya status on the devotee.  This is the implication of the words ‘tadA-eva’ in the beginning of the third line of the stanza. The very moment one says ‘bhavAni tvaM’, he is granted the Grace. How is this? And what is this sAyujya status that is being granted?
The sAyujya status is that which becomes one with the Object of Adoration. But what is being said here is not the oneness with the nirguNa-brahman. Why am I saying this? Now go to the fourth line of the shloka.
Mukunda:  vishnu
Brahma : creator brahma
Indra : Indra, the King of the divines
sphuTa-makuTa : the shining crown
nIrAjita-padAM : the feet which have been offered the ceremonial waving (nIrAjana) of lights before them.
And thus, the last line means, in conjunction with the third line, “Then and there, You give him your sAyujya status, (which earns them) Your feet that have been given the ‘nIrAjana’ (waving of lights) by the Gods Vishnu, Brahma and Indra who, by falling at Your feet, have had their shining crowns touch your feet and thus have offered worship to it”.
It is the sAyujya status (the identity in form and essence)  that privileges the devotee to enjoy the worship of even the Gods, through their ‘nIrAjana’ to the Divine Feet, with which there is identity now.


continued....
 
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:05:38 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami on Soundarya lahari verse 22 continued...

Quote
If one reaches advaita-sAyujya (identity) with the Ultimate, things will not be like this; for there is no ‘form’ there and there are no feet to be worshipped! And then there will be no gods in name and form.  The advaita sAyujyam is the oneness with the Ultimate nirguna-brahman where there is no more universe. So what is said in this shloka is not the sAyujya of advaita.

It is the supreme brahman which manifests itself as the First Cause in terms of parAshakti. She is the Queen of this Universe and She adminsiters this whole universe by Her own agents such as Brahma and Indra. It is those divine agents  who fall at Her feet in obeisance. It is in that state that the individual soul (jIvAtma) becomes one with the parAshakti in its sAyujya status. It is that sAyujya that is spoken of here.

The interesting fact is that even the advaita shAstras do speak of this state. Of course the goal of the advaita scriptures is not this. The peaceful nirguNa state without any mention of shakti or of any ‘action’ is the goal of advaita. But the ‘Ishvara’ that advaita talks of does ‘get into action’! It is He (taking the place of ‘parAshakti’ of the shAkta schools) who does all the leelA with the devotee. That is why, even though the Ultimate is something in which there should be no talk of ‘the rise of desire’ or the ‘occurrence of determination (sankalpa)’, the Upanishads do speak like ‘Whatever objects He desires, they appear by His very desire’. (‘yam kAmam kAmayate saH asya sankalpAd-eva samut-tishhTanti’  --Chandogya U. VIII -2). This means just that He has the quality of ‘aishvarya’, namely,  the godliness of being parAshakti.

Even if the person goes via the path of jnAna and looks forward to the advaitic union in nirguNa brahman, the parAshakti catches hold of him, as it were, on the way and makes him play along with Her in saguNa-sAyujyam (identity with Ishvara, the aspect of brahman with form) in the world of action! But the play does not end there. He soars even higher spiritually. He is now in identity with the parAshakti, the Director of the entire universe and all its play. It is in that state he enjoys the bliss of union with the saguNa Ultimate.  It is a state where there is the apex of Devotion and also the sense of advaita-jnAna – a perfectly peaceful and blissful state.
Thus the identity (sAyujyam) that shloka 22 talks about in its third line has something to do with jnAna, bhakti and shakti. It is not the brahman-realisation spoken of in advaita.
Now we shall take up the pun on the words ‘bhavAni tvaM’ in the shloka.  As soon as  the devotee utters the words ‘bhavAni tvaM’ as a beginning for his full sentence: ‘bhavAni tvaM dAse mayi vitara dRshhTim sakaruNAM’  the Goddess is ready to grant him the highly merited sAyujyam (identity) with Her. What is so powerful in those two words ‘bhavAni tvaM’?  This is where the poet has played with Sanskrit grammar.
The word ‘bhavAni’ can be interpreted in two ways – one as a noun, and another as a verb. The verbal root is ‘bhava’. This itself gives the two meanings. When ‘bhava’ is a noun it is a name of Lord Shiva. In this context ‘bhavAni’ would mean ‘the consort of bhava’, that is, ambaal. ‘bhava’ as a verb would mean ‘be’ or ‘become’. In this context, ‘bhavAni’ would mean ‘Let me become’ or ‘Let me be’. So ‘bhavAni tvaM’ would mean ‘May I become You’. Remember that in Sanskrit a sentence accommodates  changing the order of the words in the  sentence without affecting the meaning.
Ambaal is an ocean of compassion and grace. So when a devotee seeks the identity with Her by the two simple words ‘bhavAni tvaM’, She doesn’t wait for his further words; She simply grants the sAyujya-status ‘then and there’ !  But the irony of it is, he, the devotee, considers himself too low in the spiritual ladder to merit anything great and  he has no conception of what honourable return from the Goddess awaits him. ‘Just a glance towards this poor me, Oh Mother!’ – this is all what he pleads for. Note that the poet uses the word ‘yah’, meaning, ‘whoever’. So the devotee does not have to be a great ‘sAdhu’. He could be any one. He may not even know that there is a status called ‘sAyujyam with ambaaL’! The couple of words ‘bhavAni tvaM’ has such an effect even on ordinary persons who recite it.

continued.....
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Tushnim.Asanam on March 20, 2013, 07:11:15 PM
Dear udai,

Ok. Lets nit go in puranas or bhagawatam. You trust the authority og bhagawan ramaba right? What do u gave to say abt his declaration of cow lakshmi moksha. Bhagawan himself said and composed a small song her liberation. Wt sravana manana nidhidhyasa could cow do ?

Moreover do u think bhagawans mother did such intricate analyses such as suggested by you?


Take shankara hinself, he liberated his mother in her death bed.

Do u trust these ? Can the rational mind even near these?

--

Exceptions ... due to sravana in previous birth!
Not to be taken as rule.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:17:44 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami on soundarya lahari verse 22 continued....

Quote
The Almighty is the Lord. I am only a servant – This is the attitude of the devotee in the first line of the shloka. Of course it is an attitude of duality, not advaita. But even to such a person who only wants to be a servant of the Goddess, ambaal hands over in a platter the very advaita itself. Certainly this is saguNa-advaitam. But would She not also grant him, in due course,  the nirguNa-advaitam?

Take the case of Hanuman. He was always steeped in the concept “dAsohaM”, (‘dAsaH + ahaM’) meaning, “I am your servant”.  ‘dAsa’ means servant. By the very fact that he was steeped in that concept of “dAsohaM” all his life, he reached the advaitic stage of “sohaM” (‘saH + ahaM’), which means, “I am He (That)”.   What this shloka says is that ambaal transforms every one who comes to Her with the attitude of “dAsohaM”, to the apex stage of “sohaM”! It is a stage which is difficult  for  countless persons who struggle for the realisation of “aham brahmAsmi” and for even still more who ceaselessly meditate on the words “tat-tvaM-asi” of the guru. While  many of them find it an inaccessible ideal,  it is granted even to the ordinary person who  sincerely  comes to ambaal with the two words “bhavAni tvaM” though with something else in mind.

We have still not finished with ‘bhavAni tvaM’. So far we considered ‘bhavAni tvaM’  as two words. But ‘bhavAni-tvaM’ can also be considered as a single word. Then it means ‘the state of being bhavAni or parA-shakti’. The structure of the single word is something like ‘amaratvaM’ which means ‘the state of being immortal’ and like ‘kavi-tvaM’ which means ‘poetic talent’. So the moment the devotee says ‘bhavAni tvaM’ ambaal takes it as a request for ‘bhavAni-tvaM’ and She grants the ‘bhavAni-tvaM’ to him. In other words She gives Her own status, namely the status of sAyujya with Her to him.
Remember the devotee has not even begun his petition to Her. But even before He asks in full, She is ready to give him not only what he asks but even more. Recall the “vAnchA-samadhikaM” of shloka 4, where it was said that Her feet are capable of gracing the devotee with ‘more than what is wished’!

We may next review what Sri Ramakrishna has said-It is exactly what Kanchi Mahaswami has said!In fact in his introduction to soundarya Lahari,Kanchi mahaswami refers to sri Ramakrishna.I will post this introduction in my next post .
Namaskar.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Nagaraj on March 20, 2013, 07:23:31 PM
Sri Ravi

What an inspiring post. I have head about this story. 'Bhavanitvam. What beautiful narration. Cannot be more sweeter.

Bhagawan has said in one instance, atma jnana will be thrust on us even if we dont want it.


--
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:27:04 PM
Kanchi mahaswami -Introduction to Soundarya Lahari....

Quote
“How could Adi Sankara, who preached the jnAna mArga, have promoted this work (Soundaryalahari) of bhakti?  It cannot be his,” say some who profess ‘Philosophy’.  But our Acharya was not a professor who isolated philosophy as a separate discipline. Having written very profoundly on advaita and its deepest implications in his several Bhashyas and the other works of his, he promoted the spiritual pursuit of the common man by writing and talking about the need to follow one’s swadharma by Karma and Bhakti. His intent was to raise the common man  from his  own level. For this purpose he went from one pilgrim centre to another all his life and composed hymns after hymns and also established yantras in  temples.
The philosophers argue: JnAni says everything is One. But Bhakti can happen only when there is the duality of the devotee and the deity. Therefore, they say, the  jnAni can never be a bhakta. These philosophers cannot themselves claim to have the Enlightenment of advaita ! But there have been those who could have so claimed, like the sage Suka, Madhusudana Saraswati or Sadasiva-brahmam. If we carefully study their lives we will know that they were devotees of God in the fullest sense of the word and have themselves written works of Bhakti. Even in our own times Ramakrishna Paramahamsa has been a great devotee of Mother Goddess and Ramana Maharishi has done works of devotion on God Arunachalesvara. Again, on the other side,  great devotees like Manikka-vasagar, Nammazhvar, Arunagiri-nathar, Tayumanavar, etc. have themselves been convinced advaitins, and this is reflected in innumerable flashes in their compositions.
If a jnAni should not do a Bhakti composition, then I would say that he should not also do a work of jnAna. Why am I saying this? Let us go back to the definition of a jnAni.  ‘ The world is all mAyA;  the thinking of people as if they were separate separate jIvAtmAs is nothing but Ignorance’ -  with such a conviction through personal experience, they have thrown away that Ignorance as well as its basic locus, the mind, and they live in the non-dualistic state of ‘ ‘I’ am everything’ – such should be the status of the jnAni; shouldn’t it be so? Such a person preaching, or writing a book, even if it be about the subject of jnAna – is it not a contradiction? Unless such a person thinks there is a world outside of him and there are jIvAtmAs outside, how can he think of ‘teaching’? Teaching whom? And when we look at it this way, all those great teachers of jnAna should really not be jnAnis ! What power will there be for such a teaching about jnAna from teachers who are not jnAnis themselves?
On the other hand what do we observe in our experience? Whether it is the teaching about jnAna in the Gita, or the Viveka Chudamani of our Acharya, or the Avadhuta Gita of Sri Dattatreya or the teaching in the Yoga-vASiShTa, or a song of Tayumanavar – even when we just read these we feel we are being taken beyond the curtain created by mAyA to some distant peaceful state of Calm. Just by reading, in one’s spiritually ripe stage,  such teachings, there have been people who have renounced the world  and reached the state of Bliss-in-one-Self !. If these teachings had not been written from that spiritual apex of Experiential Excellence, how could such things have ever happened?
Therefore, however much  by your intellectual logic, you argue whether a jnAni can get bhakti, how  the  jnAni  can do any preaching  and so such possibilities cannot exist and so on, these are certainly happening,  by the Will of the Lord which is beyond the Possible and the Impossible.

continued....
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:34:12 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami -Introduction to soundarya lahari continued....

It is only the Play of the Lord that the jnAni, who is non-dualistic internally, appears to do things in the dualistic world. His mind may have vanished, mAyA might have been transcended by him; but that does not mean that the outside world of jIvAtmAs has disintegrated. What do we gather from this?  There is a Super-Mind which does all this and in some mysterious way is compering and directing the entire universe. And it also means that it is the same Supra-Mind that is making the minds of men revolve in the illusion of mAyA. It is that Power which is known in advaita scriptures as saguNa-brahman or Isvara. In the scriptures devoted to shakti or Shiva , whenever they call the Actionless nirguNa-brahman as ‘Shivam’  they call  this saguNa-brahman as ‘shakti’, ‘parA-shakti’ or ‘ambAL’. Just as that nirguNa-brahman exhibits itself and acts as the saguNa-brahman, so also, it must be presumed, that the enlightened jnAni also does his external actions and that again, is the work of the saguNa-brahman!
What is the path of jnAna? It is the effort through self-enquiry and meditation for the eradication of the mind and vanquishing of mAyA.  But the other path is to dedicate oneself and all one’s thoughts and actions to that very parA-shakti (who produced this mAyA on us) with an attitude of devotion. It is like giving the house-key to the thief himself !  However much the parA-shakti may play with you and toss you and your mind hither and thither, Her infinite compassion cannot be negated. Only when we separate and rejoin, we realise the value of that union. To pray to Her for that reunion and for Her to get us back to Her in answer to our prayers – this is the great Leela of Duality wherein She exhibits Her Infinite Compassion ! So when one prays with Bhakti  for such release She releases Him by giving Him that Wisdom of Enlightenment.

It is wrong to think that the goal of Bhakti lies in  the dualistic attitude of being separate from God. It is by this wrong assumption that people ask the question: How can a jnAni exhibit Bhakti? In the very path of Bhakti wherein it appears there is an embedded duality, the same Bhakti would lead the practitioner to the stage where he will ask: Oh God ! May I be one with You ! This is the subtle point which the questioning people miss. When that stage comes to the devotee, the very parA-shakti known as kArya-brahman or saguNa-brahman will bless him with that jnAna that takes him to the non-dual  kAraNa-brahman  or  nirguNa-brahman.

Not everybody can practise the path of jnAna that brings the realisation of  the mahA-vAkyas by sravaNa (hearing), manana (thinking and recalling) and nididhyAsana (contemplating). Only when the mind vanishes one can realise the Self  as the Absolute brahman. If that is so, the real question is: How to kill the truant mind, which refuses to be subdued, much less vanquished ? The very effort of vanquishing the mind has to be done by the mind only. How can it kill itself ? The palm can slap another; but it cannot slap itself. Though we are thus brought to a dilemma, there is a supreme power which has created all these minds. So instead of self-effort to kill our minds, we should leave it to the parA-shakti and surrender to Her. Instead of falling at the feet of the witness for the prosecution we fall at the feet of the prosecutor himself !  Then She will help us quell the mind; She will grace us with the necessary jnAna.

continued.....
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:42:47 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami -Introduction to soundarya Lahari continued...

Either She might totally eradicate your mind and give you the peaceful state of ‘I am shiva’  (shivoham) or She might tell you from within: “Look, after all, all this is My Play. The Play appears real to you because of mAyA. I shall totally erase  that mAyA-view for you. Then you can also be like me, with that calm non-dual bliss inside and having on the outside a mind which is untouched by mAyA. Thereby you can also be a witness to all this worldly Dance. You will thus see yourself in Me and see Me in all the worldly multiplicities. In other words instead of making the mind non-existent, your mind will then be full of Me”
And She might make you just exactly that way. But I know your worry. You constantly worry about the impossibility of transcending mAyA, of eradicationg this worldly vision and of vanquishing the mind. You keep worrying to the extent of almost weeping over it. To such a weiling seeker She replies:
“Why do you worry and weep like this?  You are worrying that you cannot discard the world from your view. But you forget that the world was not your making. This Sun and Moon, mountains, trees, oceans, animal kingdom, and the millions of living beings and categories – all this was not created by you.
“When that is so, you are worrying about the little ‘you’ that you are, and you forget that this little ‘you’ also was not your creation. Instead of thinking all this is not only one but one with Me, your mAyA-clouded view makes you think they are all different and distinct. And even that mAyA-view that clouds you, again was not your making!
“My dear child, you are caught up in the web of the world, a mind and a mAya-cloud  -- all this is My making. Did I not make Krishna say to you: mama mAyA duratyayA ? (My mAyA is intranscendable).  I have also told you there that it is ‘daivI’ (made by the Power of God).  If you had made it all, then you could have overcome them. But it was all made by Me in the fullness of Power.

“You jIvas have only little fragments of that Power. So if you cannot eradicate the world, the mind and the mAya that I have made, you don’t have to cry over it. It is not in your Power. It has to take place only by My Grace. Come nearer to Me through Devotion ! I shall do the eradication in proper doses  for you.

That somebody is able to control his mind and is able to walk on the path of jnAna – that again is My own Grace. It is I who  have granted that privilege to him. What appears as  many and different must be seen as one. To crave for that view is what is called ‘advaita-vAsanA’. One gets it only by My Grace”.

(Now the Paramacharya, who has been talking in the words of the Mother Goddess, continues on his own).

There is another novelty here. Even the jnAni who has had the non-dual Enlightenment, still enjoys the play of mAyA. He sees the different things; but knows they are all one. Just as a spectator of a play who is not  playing any role  in it, the jnAni enjoys the playful novelties of mAyA and revels in his devotion to that parA-Sakthi who is the author of it all. To be keeping such  jnAnis in this  dual-non-dual state is also the work of Mother Goddess. Mark it. It is not that the jnAni is  showing Devotion just for the sake of others only. No, By himself he is indeed thinking:
( I think the Paramacharya is here letting out an autobiographical tip  ! -- VK,The Translator)

What a pleasure to witness this dualistic play of the non-dualistic One ! What a multiplicity of beauty,  panoramic variety  and continuity of Love !’ . Thus revelling in that blissful vision, he continues to pour out his own love (bhakti) to that Transcendental Power from the bottom of his heart. This tribute to the jnAni has been given  by the great Teacher Suka himself.

(Cf. Bhagavatam 1-7-10:

AtmArAmAshca munayaH nirgranthA apy-urukrame;  kurvanty-ahaitukIm bhaktim itham-bhUta-guNo hariH. – meaning,

Those who revel in the Self, even though rid of all attachments, show a causeless bhakti towards the Lord, just naturally.)

On the one hand the devotee who has yet to get the Enlightenment enjoys the devotional state for the very reason of getting the Enlightenment; on the other hand, the one who is already enlightened and is a jIvan-mukta shows his bhakti for the sake of enjoyment of that bhakti and not for any other reward or purpose.

continued.....
 
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:52:22 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami -Introduction to soundarya Lahari continued...

(The Paramacharya continues to speak the words, as if,  of the Goddess):

“Thus I am the One who gives this new Bhakti in the state of jnAna.  And I  will be the One who will give you that jnAna to you, my devotee,  when the time is ripe. Don’t you worry. You have come to Me as your Mother. I will take care of you. The  bondage in which I threw you shall be removed from you by Myself. You need not have to keep on crying for ‘Release’. Once you know I am the only One there is, hold on to that steadfastly;  there is no question of  ‘Release’ thereafter. ‘Release’ from what?

“Let  jnAnis think that they will get the Ultimate Peace only when the duality-awareness goes away from them and let them go their own way of Enquiry of the Self. When you feel you don’t have the interest or the stamina to go that way, don’t feel bad or incomplete. Come through the path of Love. See the multiplicities. But instead of seeing them as different and separate, try not to forget that the basis of all of them is the single Me. Love Me from your heart and view everything through Love. Encompass everything in Love. I shall raise you to the Ultimate Enlightenment by My Love and Grace”.

Thus arises the godly experience that is blessed by the Mother Goddess. By Mother Goddess I also mean the Lord-God, the paramAtmA, and also the individual favourite deity of each of us. It is the same  supreme Power that engulfs you into the mAyA, that graces you as saguNa-brahman and also takes you to that blissful state of jnAna.

Finally let me also say this. By the very fact that the jnAni writes a book on jnAna, it must follow that he should also write on Bhakti. For, writing a book means communicating with others. So that means he has accepted the presence of a world of duality in which he has to communicate and educate. The jnAni as he is, must have already ‘descended’ to this world of duality and   decided to raise the commonfolk to his level. He who knows that the source of all this duality is that Infinite Compassionate God–principle, would ipso facto have no compunctions for making a hymn of praise for that Ultimate in Its saguNa form. And he also knows that it is that very same Power that prods him on to make this hymn.  So where is the contradiction here?

 But if you contend that he is writing jnAna works for the benefit of the world – ‘loka-sangrahArtham’ without any ‘kartRtva-buddhi’  -- the awareness of doership – then with the same non-awareness of doership he can write both jnAna works and bhakti works. What and where is the difference?  The World-welfare (loka-kalyANam) is the purpose. It is the Lord who is effecting the welfare through the hands and mouth of these chosen jnAnis.  And the most efficient way for the jnAni, the Lord knows, to reach the masses,  is to propagate hymns of praise of the divine, pilgrimage to holy centers, installation of mystic yantras, and all the way down to ritual worship.

continued....
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 07:58:32 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami-Introduction to soundarya lahari continued...

There are three superlative hymns of praise on  Mother Goddess in the form of Lalita. Chronologically they are: ‘AryA-dvishati’  (also called ‘lalitA-stava-ratnam’) a 200-sloka piece by Sage Durvasa; ‘Soundarya-lahari’ which is actually made up of two parts – ‘Ananda-lahari’ , a 41-sloka piece brought from Kailas by Adi Sankara and ‘Soundarya-lahari’  the 59-sloka piece composed by Adi Sankara himself, the two pieces together going by the popular name of Soundarya lahari by Adi Sankara; and ‘Panca-shati’  (a 500-sloka piece) by the poet Muka.

Durvasa’s  Arya-dvishati gives us a spiritual experience of the presence of the Almighty-Goddess in the very words of AryA-dvishati. In this he describes the complicated structure of the Sri-chakra . The Goddess’s Grace descends on those who read and recite such  hymns of praise composed by great devotees who have already merited the descent of Her Grace on them. Durvasa, Adi Sankara and Muka are three such. Such Grace exhibits itself first in the eloquence of these hymns. And the result is, the devotee who revels in the recitation and repetition of these hymns, himself gets that eloquence and flow of language and of speech.

The Goddess gave such an eloquence to Muka. ‘Muka’ means ‘dumb’. We do not know what name he had before. But from the moment he composed the five hundred slokas in Her praise, we have known him as the poet Muka !. Both the AryA-dvishati and the MUka-pancashati bring to our vision the majestic splendour of the form of Mother Goddess  like an expert painter’s masterly painting. The third one, the Soundarya-lahari is the crowning glory of all three and of all  hymns of praise of the Mother Supreme.

Of Soundaryalahari it may be said that there never was one like it, nor ever will be. It has a perennial charm that does not satiate. And its majestic eloquence is unbeatable. In his bhaja-govindam our Acharya uses very elementary words because it happens to be  the alphabet of Vedanta. But here he is describing the undescribable. So he uses words very precisely. Consequently  the vocabulary turns out to be difficult.  But the words  chosen only add to the lilting charm of the poetry that he weaves. The metre  used is ‘shikariNI’, meaning ‘that which is at the apex’. It has 17 syllables for each of the four lines.
Through the descriptions of the Goddess’s form that make up the latter 59 slokas, he brings ambaal right before our mental eyes in all Her majesty, grace and splendour and overwhelms us by the bliss which the very words and metaphors pour on us. Just as a master-sculptor dedicates each movement of his chisel to the object of his sculpture, he transforms each word, as it were,  by his own spiritual experience of the Goddess and thus in turn we readers feel the  words themselves constitute the Goddess.
 It is not only blissful poetry, but blessed poetry. Such blessedness arises not because of any flowery  language, but by the fact the Acharya  is himself blessed ! ‘Mother, this hymn is nothing but a composition of yours in your own words’ (‘tvadIyAbhir-vAgbhiH tava janani vAcAm stutir-iyam’ – Verse no.100), says he in  the concluding line. Inspirations of great saints and sages, not only benefit mankind by their inspired poetry, but bring to successive generations, an inspired contact with the great men, even  long after they have passed away. Thus our  Acharya in enabling  us  to have a ‘darshan’ of the Goddess herself, gives us, in addition,  a ‘darshan’ of himself !

continued....
 
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 08:07:05 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami-Introduction to soundarya Lahari continued....

The concept of ‘intense’ devotion does not care for the  language used, or for the manner of  worship. It is the intensity of devotion and depth of feeling that matter. But getting that intensity and depth is the most difficult thing. That is exactly what eludes us. Now that is where the beauty of such blessed poetry like ‘Soundaryalahari’ excels. Whether you understand it or not, whether you pronounce the words correctly or not, the very attempt itself of reciting it   produces in you the needed bhakti! This is the word-power of the words of such blessed poetry.  The vibrations of the words  give us all the material  and spiritual success. We have only to keep the objective of bhakti steadfast in our minds. Everything else just follows.

 Of all the stotras that our Acharya has done, it is the Soundaryalahari that is the topmost. The aShTottara-nAmAvaLi of the Acharya has the nAmA ‘soundarya-laharI-mukhya-bahu-stotra- vidhAyakAya namaH’ meaning: ‘prostrations to the one who composed many stotras with soundaryalaharI as the prime one’. Of the bhAshyas that he wrote, ‘brahma-sUtra-bhAshya’ towers supreme; of his expository works, ‘viveka-chUDAmaNi’ is prime and of all his works of bhakti, the Soundarya-laharI tops the list.

SundarI, the beautiful, is Her name. Tripura-sundari or mahA-tripura-sundari both derived from the root name, SundarI, is the Goddess propitiated by the great mantra called ‘shri-vidyA’. Of the many names of ambaal, such as PArvatI, durgA, KALI, BAlA, BhuvaneshvarI, etc., it is the sundari name that goes with ‘RAja-rAjesvari’, the Queen-name of all the scriptures that talk of and dwell on the Mother Goddess. Sage Ramakrishna has said: I have seen many forms of Gods and Goddesses; but I have never seen one more charming than ‘Tripura-sundari’ !  The word ‘soundaryam’ pertains to SundarI and means ‘The Beauty’.

But the beauty of it all is, that the name ‘Tripura-sundarI’ or any of the other (synonymous) names of the same form, namely, ‘LalitA’, ‘RAja-rAjeshvarI’, ‘KAmAkshI’ or ‘KaAmeshvarI’ do not occur anywhere in the text, including its title ! Even the other descriptive names of the Goddess like ‘hima-giri-sutA’ (daughter of Himalaya mountain), or simply, giri-sutA,  shivA, bhavAnI, umA, satI, pArvatI, chanDI – occur only at one or two places. General attributed names, like ‘jananI’, ‘mAtA’, ‘ambA’, ‘devI’ meaning either ‘mother’ or ‘goddess’, -- which commonly go with all feminine deities --  occur at a few more places, but even  they are few.
While he begins with ‘shivaH-shaktyA’, the most potent name of ambaal, namely ‘shakti’,  gets mentioned. ‘Shakti’ means ‘power’. It is the absolute brahman’s power or energy that ambaal personifies. So this name tells everything about the Goddess. And it comes in the very beginning, but never after.
Finally, one more point regarding occurrence of names. The role of a woman has three stages: as daughter, as wife, as mother. The last two roles certainly do get mentioned  very  often in  stotras pertaining to a feminine deity. But the Soundaryalahari uses the daughter-reference such as ‘himagiri-sute’, ‘tuhina-giri-kanye’, more often.  And again,  when the first part of 41 slokas ends, he ends by referring to ‘janaka-jananI’ , the mother-father role of both Isvara and IsvarI of the whole universe.

continued.....
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 08:13:48 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami-Introduction to soundarya lahari continued...

The shAkta philosophy (ShAktam) talks of ‘Shivam’ in  place of the actionless substratum ‘Brahman’. Even if it is actionless, it is Cit, knowledge, says advaita. In  place of this Cit, ShAktam talks of Cit-Shakti or simply,  Shakti. The Brahman of advaita peacefully rests in itself. In ShAktam, on the other hand, the peaceful Shivam has the Shakti, power or energy, that manifests as  knowledge potential (Cit-Shakti) and this manifestation is its  play as the multiplicity of the universe. In advaita there is no second.  What appears as the universe is only an appearance created by mAyA.  MAyA has no relationship with Brahman. What it is, and how it came – all this is inexplainable. That research is not necessary. What is needed is how to get out of it and obtain the  personal realisation of the basic Brahman behind. And hence the path of jnAna.  In ShAktam, it is claimed that the play of duality starts by the Will of Shivam coupled with Shakti. Even here there is a role of mAyA-Shakti. But we shall dwell on it later.

It is Brahman that appears as jIva, through the effect of mAyA. If one follows the path of jnAna and transcends mAyA, then jIva realises itself as Brahman, says advaita. In ShAktam also it says that the jIva and Shivam are basically the same and actually become the same in the state of moksha; particularly in the Shri-vidyA scriptures it is specifically accepted so. Dvaitam, VishishhTAdvaitam, SiddhAnta-shaivam (Shaiva-siddhantam), ShrIkaNTa-shaivam (ShivAdvaitam), Kashmiri Saivism – in this order, the philosophies start from a concept totally distinct from advaita, gradually nearing and ultimately becoming very near to advaita.

And in ShrIvidyA the identity of jiva with Brahman is clearly stipulated. The two philosophies differ only in the concept of creation. In advaita, duality is said to be only an imagination and so is to be totally negated. In shAkta philosophies, duality is said to be created by parA-Shakti, the energy of Brahman. It is also the parA-Shakti that grants the moksha, which is the identity of Brahman and jIva in eternal peaceful bliss. This bliss is called shivAnandam and/or shAntAnandam  in the shaivite schools,  and cidAnandam in the shAkta schools.

continued....
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 20, 2013, 08:18:05 PM
Kanchi Mahaswami-Introduction to soundarya Lahari continued...

There is no difference in the concept  of moksha as the realisation of the one-ness of jIva and Brahman, between advaita schools and the Shri-vidyA tantra of the shAkta schools. The philosophy of advaita takes creation as a ‘vivarta’ (a false appearance, manifestation,  of reality) whereas the Shri-vidyA school takes it as ‘AbhAsa’ (an effulgence of a ‘reflection’). That the sun appears as a reflection in water is ‘AbhAsa’. In the same way the universal Cit-Shakti reflects itself with a limitation and becomes the jIva as well as the universe  -- this is the shAkta concept of creation. But without the original object called the Sun there could be no reflection. So in basics it comes back to the  advaita concept. But the shAkta holds that to the extent there is an object with its reflection, there is a phenomenal reality for jIva and the universe. It does not hold that it is ‘mithyA’ which is the advaitin’s contention.

It is the latter part of Soundaryalahari that dwells on  the beauty (saundaryam) of ambaal’s form.The former part dwells on Her Shakti. It is called Ananda-lahari. The identity between Shakti and Cit is referred to in the word ‘cidAnandalaharI’ in verse no.8 of Anandalahari. “bhajanti tvAm dhanyAH katicana cidAnanda-laharIm”, meaning, ‘Only the most fortunate few (recognize you and) worship you  as the flood of knowledge-bliss (cidAnanda)’. Note here that while for  every  reader of the Soundaryalahari portion the whole beauty of Mother Goddess is fully experiential, in  the Anandalahari portion the people who can experience the bliss of the Shakti-lahari, that is, the cidAnanda-lahari, are only the few fortunate (katicana dhanyAH) !

The close correlation between advaita and the various shAkta schools, particularly the Shri-vidyA tantra school,  has been used by our Acharya who is aware that many cannot follow the abstract path of jnAna. And that is why perhaps he  chalks out a path whereby one starts from the ‘leela’ of creation of duality and goes forward along the path of Shri-vidyA and finally ends up in advaita itself. In accordance with this, even when he composed many stotras on Shiva and VishNu, he never goes deep into the shivAgama or vaishNava-Agama nuances but dwells mainly on the bhakti and  consequent emotions only.  On the other hand when he worked on Soundarya-lahari, the first part, Anandalahari, – even though it is said that he only ‘brought’ it (from Kailas) and not composed it – is totally a shAkta scripture. The sum and substance of the twin work of Ananda-lahari and Soundarya-lahari seems to be: “advaita is The path; if not, the next (alternative) is Shri-vidyA” !
In fact, Shri-vidyA is the connecting cord between advaita and all that is dvaita. It unifies the shAntam-Shivam-advaitam with Shakti, the creator of duality, and therefore, of the universe.  In LalitA-sahasranAma also, the last name is lalitAmbikA and the last but one is shiva-shakty-aikya-rUpiNI. And this takes us to the very beginning sloka of Soundarya-lahari !

concluded.
We may see the parallel in Sri Ramakrishna's approach,which is exactly what the Mahaswami has detailed.
Namaskar.
Title: Re: Yoga (Patanjali) is Not Sufficient - Panchadasi
Post by: Ravi.N on March 21, 2013, 05:07:54 AM
Friends,
I will now post Excerpts from The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna where the Master has said exactly what Kanchi mahaswami has said about the liberating Grace of The Divine Mother.Here is an excerpt:

"Is Kali, my Divine Mother, of a black complexion? She appears black because She is viewed from a distance; but when intimately known She is no longer so. The sky appears blue at a distance; but look at it close by and you will find that it has no colour. The water of the ocean looks blue at a distance, but when you go near and take it in your hand, you find that it is colourless."
The Master became intoxicated with divine love and sang:
Is Kali, my Mother, really black?
The Naked One, of blackest hue,
Lights the Lotus of the Heart. . . .
The Master continued: "Bondage and liberation are both of Her making. By Her Maya worldly people become entangled in 'woman and gold', and again, through Her grace they attain their liberation. She is called Saviour, and the remover of the bondage that binds one to the world."
Divine Mother's sport
Then the Master sang the following song in his melodious voice:
In the world's busy market-place, O Syama, Thou art flying kites;
High up they soar on the wind of hope, held fast by maya's string.
Their frames are human skeletons, their sails of the three gunas made;
But all their curious workmanship is merely for ornament.
Upon the kite-strings Thou hast rubbed the manja-paste of worldliness,
So as to make each straining strand all the more sharp and strong.
Out of a hundred thousand kites, at best but one or two break free;
And Thou dost laugh and clap Thy hands, O Mother, watching them!
On favouring winds, says Ramprasad, the kites set loose will speedily
Be borne away to the Infinite, across the sea of the world.
The Master said: "The Divine Mother is always playful and sportive. This universe is Her play. She is self-willed and must always have Her own way. She is full of bliss. She gives freedom to one out of a hundred thousand."
A BRAHMO DEVOTEE: "But, sir, if She likes, She can give freedom to all. Why, then, has She kept us bound to the world?"
MASTER: "That is Her will. She wants to continue playing with Her created beings. In a game of hide-and-seek the running about soon stops if in the beginning all the players touch the 'granny'. If all touch her, then how can the game go on? That displeases her. Her pleasure is in continuing the game. Therefore the poet said:
'Out of a hundred thousand kites, at best but one or two break free;And Thou dost laugh and clap Thy hands, O Mother, watching them!'
Reassurance to householders
"It is as if the Divine Mother said to the human mind in confidence, with a sign from Her eye, 'Go and enjoy the world.' How can one blame the mind? The mind can disentangle itself from worldliness if, through Her grace, She makes it turn toward Herself. Only then does it become devoted to the Lotus Feet of the Divine Mother."