Recent Posts

Sadanandaji,

Namaste. Thanks for your illuminating reply. Please post whatever material from our correspondence that you see fit in the Advaita Forum.

I fully understand that Vedanta is used to go beyond Vedanta and that, as you said, definitions of Brahman are contemplative definitions to be meditated upon. I presume this is what nidhithyasanam refers to. Please explain this part of the Vedantic practice some more. Is nidhithyasanam different from dhyanam?

Is dhyanam one of the prerequisites for Vedantic enquiry? I have heard that the words "dhyanam" and "bakhti" are not found in the Upanishads. Is this correct? Please elaborate on this. Thanks.   

Thanks again and I am very grateful for your responses.

Sekar 
-------------------
Sekarji - PraNAms

Nidhidhyaasana comes after shravana and manana. Shravana involves listening (not hearing) to Vedanta for a prolonged length of time under a competent teacher. A competent teacher is one who himself studied Vedanta under his teacher. Mananam is reflecting on the teaching until there are no more doubts about the nature of reality. The nature of reality is 1. Brahma satyam 2. Jagat mithyaa 3. JiivaH Brahma eva, na aparaH. Each of the items is important. It is not just knowing Brahman, also recognizing I am that Brahman and therefore the whole world that I perceive and experience is neither real nor unreal - just like the dream world.

Knowledge or jnaanam is understanding these are facts, not just as thoughts. Take for example - I am - is a subject and any -this- is an object. Subject cannot be object - yet we take this body as I am, this mind as I am and this intellect as I am. It is easy to say I am not this chair - but it is difficult to live with clear understanding I am not this body. I understand the teaching but I am not able to keep that teaching while I am transacting with this world using this body, mind and intellect. Vedanta understands that this is a major problem, even after having the knowledge. The problem is the past habits accumulated in many lives or previous samskaara. After studying and understanding that I am pure aatma and everything else is anaatma and therefore mithyaa, I need to internalize that teaching by constant reflection on that teaching - either sitting in meditation or slowly meditating even while performing any action with the BMI. It is like musician keeping the back ground Shruti in mind even while singing, going up and down - aarohaNa and avarohaNa. That is nidhidhyaasana - how long you have to do it - until it becomes natural to you - that is you are always constantly aware that I am Brahman and this world that I am dealing with is - you can say it as vibhuuti of the Lord or - leela that I have to play as long as BMI is there or just see as drama of life where you are playing the roles knowing I am an actor unaffected by the roles that I play.

The identification with body (gross, subtle and causal) is difficult to get rid of unless the mind is full purified. Nidhidhyaasana helps to achieve that - that is constant meditation on the nature of truth involving the three aspects pointed above.

Regular dhyaana is upaasana where I invoke the Lord in the object form and do meditation on his form or his qualities etc. This helps initially. Slowly I need to graduate to the next step that God that I am contemplating on is in my own heart - nay - it is the existence consciousness that I am. These come by understanding the Vedanta.

Bhakti normally implies invoking the Lord in the object form with all the infinite auspicious qualities. Slowly Vedanta teaches that Bhakti is contemplating on the self that you are - swa swaruupa anusandhaanaam bhaktiH iti abhidhiiyate - says Shankara in VevekachUDAmaNi.

No, bhakti is not separate yoga since it is the essential part in all yogas. What is Bhakti in normal usage is upaasana. But bhakti is a dedicative mental effort towards the goal. The supreme bhakti as defined above by Shankara is contemplating on the highest truth - sat chit ananda swaruupa, that I am. That I am includes the whole universe too as I am the substantive of the whole universe – to understand that we need study of Vedanta which says you are that. Please study tat tvam asi series posted in the website.

Hari Om!
Sadananda

Dr. Sadananda,

Thanks for your reply.  I have more questions. I hope I am not burdening you too much. 

If the Rishiis had revelations of the truth in meditation, how would it be possible for someone to know this truth by studying the scriptures with a teacher? Should one not have to meditate and experience this truth in samadhi like in nirvikalpa samadhi? Is samadhi experience necessary for Self-realization?

Thanks.

Sekar
-------------------------
Sekharji - PraNAms
 
You have asked the right question. When I study any science, how would I know the facts that they mentioned are correct - even though they are revelations by the scientists? (By the by, Dr. Chandrasekhar, wrote in the Scientific American many years ago that all discoveries in Science are done by intuition. What is intuition - we only have intuitive feeling about what intuition is. When we are contemplating in the direction using proper logic pertinent to that field, the solution strikes. Goddess Saraswati descends on to that mind that is conducive for that knowledge. This, our sages call it as jnaana cakshu or wisdom eye - which is the same as intuition.)
 
Hence Vedanta is like a science. Since it is an abstract science, I need more faith that the revelations revealed in them are indeed true - that is what is called shraddhaa - just as I have faith in both physics and the physics teacher teaching that subject, even if I do not understand fully, I should have faith that Vedanta and the teacher who is explaining it are indeed true, even when I do not fully understand or appreciate that truth with my current state of mind. This is not a blind belief. Faith will get more firm as one proceeds further by enquiring. That is why we first pray vinayaka, the symbolism of infinite intellect. We have to use intellect all the way, even to discover the absolute truth – it is called viveka or discriminative intellect that can differentiate what is real or eternal and what is not real or ephemeral.
 
Since it is about the subject which is not an object, Vedanta has to teach without objectifying the subject. Hence a mind has to be properly tuned to appreciate the truth. Vedanta is not illogical while the truth is beyond the logical deduction.
 
Vedanta therefore provides a working hypothesis for me to proceed further. Yes you are right - I have to meditate and discover the truth myself - but in the direction pointed out by Vedanta. Thus Vedanta is like pole to cross the pole in pole-vault. Use Vedanta to go beyond Vedanta since truth is called aprameyam - it is not an object for even Vedanta to show as - this is aatma - It only uses language that is contemplative. It defines Brahman that cannot be defined as satyam - jnaanam - anantam. Each definition is contemplative definition - satyam is that which cannot be negated in three periods of time - that means it should be present all the time. Hence by definition anything that is not present all the time is not satyam (it is not asatyam also - hence it is called mithyaa - apparent existence - to understand these only we need to study Vedanta - because we struggle all our life worrying about that which is not eternal truth). Therefore any thing that is changing is not Brahman. It is the changeless in the changing entities.  It says it is jnaanam - knowledge - but what is knowledge? We only know knowledge of x or y etc but what is that knowledge without any qualification of x and Y. That is the light of consciousness because of which I am conscious of (or have knowledge of) x and y. I cannot objectify consciousness. Hence Vedanta says Brahman is - that which mind cannot think of but because of which the mind has the capacity to think of.. etc. Next it says it is anantam or infinite. Infinite cannot be defined either other than it is not finite. Space is infinite - but how do you define space without any objects for reference? Hence Vedanta points out only in the direction to contemplate on. In that sense it is a science.
 
Yes you are right - you need to prepare the mind with sufficient pre-requisites to contemplate in the direction pointed out by Vedanta, to discover the truth by yourself. This preparation of the mind is required for any science – they call it as pre-requisites for any study. Same applies to Vedanta too – but these requirements are more subtle since science of Vedanta is not about objective world but about the underlying truth behind both subject-object duality.  That is what Vedanta says too. How to prepare the mind for this study - that is what shravana, manana and nidhidhyaasana involves. If we need a guide for doing any research in any subject, what to talk about the discovery of the absolute truth that underlies all other truths. For that we need a right teacher who can direct the mind in the direction pointed out by Vedanta. - tat patham darshitam yena, tasmi shree gurave namaH| I prostrate to my teacher who directs my mind in the direction of the truth pointed out by Vedanta. A right teacher is one who himself studies this science under a right teacher for a prolonged length of time and free from all doubts. This is what is called sampradaaya teacher, a teacher who comes from a tradition of eternal teacher-taught series.
 
Hope this helps.
 
No problem you can ask any question related to Vedanta and I will try to answer to the best I can - since that is the how I learned whatever I know. If I do not know, that also I will tell and perhaps direct you to people who know more.
 
Do you mind If I post this question in the advaita forum - so that other also can benefit if they have the same question.
Hari Om!
Sadananda

Dear Dr. Sadananda,

My name is "Sekar" Chandrasekaran. I have been studying your work in Dennis Waite's website and in Advaita Vedanta & Forum. Your explanations on the topics in Advaita Vedanta are crystal clear and I have benefitted greatly from them.

I hope you would not mind me asking the following questions :

I understand that Shruti is the only pramana for Atman-Knowledge. Does one have to accept the authority of Shruti for this?

For example, that we are conscious-existent (chit-sat) entities is evident but that we are limitless (anantam) is not evident. We have to resort to the Shruti for this knowledge but how did this knowledge get written into the Shruti?

In other words, did the Upanishadic sages get this knowledge through meditation or mystical experiences and Upanishads record the results of these experiences?

I hope I am not intruding on your time. I would very much like to hear from you. Thank you.

Sekar
------------------

Shree Sekhar - PraNAms
 
Thanks for your kind words and for visiting the advaitaforum.
 
Yes, you are right that to know I am totality, I need the scriptural statements which are mahaavaakyaas in Vedanta. Any statement in any scriptures that makes similar statement is then mahaavaakya where I am and the tat which is the totality are identified as one. For most of the religions, it is a blasphemy. Even in Vedanta there are interpretations that do not accept the identity relation.
 
Yes, I need to have a faith in the statement for me to proceed - just like faith of any scientist in his hypothesis for him to workout and arrive at the truth.
 
The sages of the yore in the seat of meditation have discovered this truth and recognized that these are revelations and not intellectual discoveries - hence they are called Rishiis who are Veda dRiShTaas - seers of the truth.
 
You can discover yourself too and become a Rishi. - But Vedas provided well established facts which have been analyzed and examined thoroughly to insure that what we understand from these Upanishad statements are indeed correct. Hence the study of scriptures under a competent guru is advised.
 
It involves not only study of Vedas, but yukit since they are not blind belief and are subject to through logical analysis and also anubhava or experience of waking, dream and deep sleep states since it takes into consideration complete human experience. That is what ManDukya Up. does - very logical and scientific too.
 
Hence it faith but not blind faith - faith with understanding is required for further inquiry of the subject which cannot be objectified.

Hope this helps.
 
Hari Om!
Sadananda

Shree Brahmiam – PraNAms

Addressing me as  Sada or Sadaji is fine – normally ji is added as a respect.

Do not worry about the use of the words. We get the connotational meaning slowly as we understand their full implication.

True the understanding of tat tvam asi – it is tvam – meaning you – and tat meaning the entire creation that includes the creator since creation is not different from the creator – asi involves identity of both as one. Clear understanding as a fact not as just a thought involves removal of my misunderstanding that I am this body, mind and intellect (BMI) – that is the localized entities. Hence in that very understanding all the problems associated with BMI are disowned while claiming oneness with the whole universe. Hence realization of tat tvam asi involves I am eternal, ever present and not this changing BMI. That understanding itself is the mukti – there is no other mukti since there is nothing other than I am. Hence in the realization of tat tvam asi – two aspects are involved. 1. That I am the totality and 2. there is nothing more to understand or do.  Now- look at the death- death is the death of BMI, right.  But in the realization, I have realized that I am not the BMI, or rather I am the whole universe that includes this BMI. From the point of the realized master – body dies but I do not die – why, because I was never born to start with for me to die.

Hence from the point of liberated one- there is no jiivan mukti or videha mukti – But clean understanding that I am the totality – tat tvam asi (tat tvam asi is an instruction to the student but when realization occurs the same statement becomes aham brahmaasmi – I am the totality).

Jiivanmukta or the one who has realized (now and here) sees the BMI operating in his presence. The operation of BMI is dictated by the karmas that were cause for the birth of the Body – called praarabda karma or destiny of the BMI. He sees the whole world as  his play or (gracefully he can say – It is His play). Play is just fun. Even a cat or dog wants to play - that is natural.
Videha mukti is a liberated soul, that particular BMI drops out since the karmas that sustained are over and there is no new karmas or accounts left since the addressee has left – like dead letter office.
In scriptures they also talk about karma mukti- whole who by prayer and good deeds go all the way to heaven (we have few higher lokas) and there if he attends Vedanta classes and gains the knowledge of tat tvam asi – he gets liberated there.

But if we can get that knowledge here itself and study the scriptures here and now, we do not have to go there to attend those classes.

Brahmiam – my advice is not to go into the analysis of great souls. If you can appreciate the teaching of Bhagavan Ramana- accept him as your guru, then just proceed in the direction he has pointed. All realized souls are pointing to the same truth since truth cannot be different. The language may be different and mode of operation may be different. But the essence is the same. They point out to their students based on the students’ background and their own training. Ramana had the background of Vedanta as his works shows clearly. Hence study Vedanta taking Bhagavan Ramana as your guru until the essence of Vedanta is clear. Then why you look at other teachers writings you will be able to take that the essence leaving the details that pertain to specific cases that do not apply to you.

From my understanding – nirvikalpa samaadhi and sahaja samaadhi or just samaadhi all are the same – it is clear understanding of tat tvam asi. – there are no more vikalpaas or misunderstandings as I am this or that etc. sahaja samaadhi also means the same – sahaja means natural state – my natural state is I am sat chit ananda swaruupa and everything else is just superficial drama of life. Even just samaadhi also means the same samatvam in the dhii – equanimity of the intellect arising from clear understanding that I am the total – Like I am an actor but playing in the drama various roles. Problems of the roles do not affect me, the actor. But in the drama I have show action as though I as the role is affected. That is what good action who as though lives in that role, while not getting affected by that role in real life.
Hope this helps.

Hari Om!
Sadananda

PrANams Shree Sadaji,

If it is not polite to address you as Sadaji, please correct me.

I am still struggling with the vocabulary used in Advaita, and I ask your patience if I do not use, or "understand" the correct signification of some words.

The Realization of Tat Svam Asi removes ignorance of bondage, which are in the mind. And with that Realization of Tat Svam Asi, at the death of the body there is videha mukti.

Jnanis like Shree Ramana, Nisargadatta, Sankaran were Jivan Mukti. I would like to understand the differences, if any, of both, in relation to Nirvikalpa Samadhi, Sahaja which is "attributed" to Jnanis.

Namaste
 

Dear Sir,
Namaskar, Hari Om!
I feel thankful to you for the reply.
Yours faithfully,
Hasmukh

Shree Hashmukji - PraNAms

The purpose of discussion of vyavahaara is only to show that it is not real nor unreal, but mithyaa only. And in every mithyaa, there has to be a satya or real part that does not change. Hence the discussion of even maaya, involving the two aspects - aavaraNa and viskhepa. aavarana involves ignorance of the truth - just as in the pitch dark room I cannot see anythiing - why - all the objects are covered by the darkness. What should I do to remove the darkness - turn the light on - there is no other path- Then the underlying truth is self-revaling - the objects are seen; I donot have to do any thing else, as long as I keep my eyes open.

Vedanta removes the darkness of the ignorance so that the truth that is self-revealing is visible if I have my eyes open.
One can go on the discussion of how vishepa occurs - but that does not help us see much - More important is to see the underlying the truth.

Hope this helps
Hari Om!
Sadananda

Dear Sir,
I feel thankful to you for answering my questions.
Since your intention is to orient students towards the PARAM-AATMA,
you have answered the questions from The Parmarthik view-point.
Blessed are those lucky students who are able to directly grasp the Parmarthik
answer. But I am still in the vyavaharik dream-world. One more dream-answer
given by Aadi Shankaraacharya that comes to my memory is: that Maya has
two aspects, (i) Vikshepa, and (ii) Aavarana. Vikshepa can be interpreted as
purturbations, and these purturbations have created a sort of veiling, Avarana,
due to which we mistake ourselves as individual Jeeva, though from your
Parmarthik view-point we are Anadi-Ananta-Brahman always.
We students will find it very helpful if you give example of  a Vyavaharik-model different from gold, snake, sea-shell, ghat-matha, which can easily take one to the Parmarthik understanding of A-dwaita.
Pranama, Hari-Om ! to you,  from Hasmukh

Aham-Sahamukhaji - PraNAms
My answers are briefly provided below:
----------------
Gold is always gold; various names and forms imposed on gold are true only from the view-point of worldly transactions.
Similarly, I am eager to understand, how exactly the ultimate-reality has assumed
various names and forms. In the Ishaavashya Upanishad we find a stanza

KS – Even the creation is only vyavahaara only – from paaramaarthika point there is no creation, just as from Gold point there is no creation – Gold example is given in Ch. Up – yathaa soumyaa, ekena lohamaNinaa sarvam lohamayam vijnaata- vaachaarambhanam vikaaro naamadheyam, lohamitiyeva satyam.. etc. Hence it is Upanishadic declaration that whole creation is vaachaarambhanam means it is – naamkevaste – it is not real. One can explain until one investigates further:

At vyaavahaarika level creator, Iswara, creates with maayaa shakti and you are inquiring about the details of maayaa shakti. Simple answer is – you should ask Him since it is He who created it.

Next level of answer is – it is just like the way you create your dream world – how do you start the dream creation – do you create first space then land then people etc. You find yourself in your dream that you created and you entered as one of the jiivas of your own creation and looking at the creation ask how did creation started since Ishaa vaasys says one way while katha says in another way?

Third level of answer is, when there is no creation what is the point of asking how this creation started.

Creation is by maayaa and the nature of maayaa is indescribable – anirvachaniiyam. Hence Shankara says in VivekachuuDaamaNi – avyakta naamnii paramesha shaktii .. sudhiyaiva maayaa..- it is avyaktam – it cannot be described it is this way and thas way. If you can explain how you are creating your dream world everyday, then we can explain how Lord creates this waking world.
-----------
Does in mean that the vibrating aspect of Brahman, i.e. dynamic aaspect of
Brahman appears as the physical-world?

KS – From Brahman point there is no creation – it is sajaati-vijaati-swagata bheda rahita – pure existence-consciousness, which cannot undergo any modification since it is infinite. Only finites can transform not infinite.
From Brahman point there is nothing to appear or disappear.
From our point, who are caught up in this maayaa – there is a creator who created it. All Vedanta says is – this appearance is not real and hence mithyaa. Why it appears to be snake there where it is rope? And how does the rope start appearing as a snake- does it start with vibrations as snake first –etc if someone asks, what would you answer?
   
The best approach is to try to see the rope, so that the false vision of snake disappears.- In any further inquiry of the nature of the snake what kind of snake it is – is it poisonous or not poisonous, etc. will not accomplish much.
------------------------
This stanza also suggests that the physical-world is of the nature of waves.
Sir, do you agree with this?

KS – only if you agree that snake came out of rope first forming waves and then vibrations and then crystallizing as snake! – While it is a rope all the time, in the past, present and future – with no snakes around.
 
Hari Om!
Sadananda

PraNams
----------