[Advaita-l] Meditation Vs nitya karma

[Sundaresan, Vidyasankar (GE Infra, Water)]

>Sri Vidya prabhuji :
>
>However, I would seriously object to clubbing together japa,
>nAmasankIrtana, bhajana etc. under the title of meditation. In the
>vedAntic sense, dhyAna is a very different thing from japa and bhajana.
>
>bhaskar :
>
>Kindly elaborate how vEdAntic dhyAna is different from normal (or
should I
>say yOgic) dhyAna?? Further, I dont think 'japa' a sAdhana in the real
>sense is something less efficacious than meditation. IMHO, *japa*
sAdhana
>does have more inherent powerful efficacy than what we normally think
of
>it. So, I think both dhyAna & japa are equally efficacious in one's
>sAdhana...Hence the term japa yOga has been used by Krisna in gIta. 

I am not talking about the relative efficacy of japa and dhyAna. I am
also not
saying anything here about vedAntic dhyAna vis-a-vis "normal" dhyAna. In
its
process, what is called dhyAna by vedAntins is not very different from
what
is usually understood to be yogic dhyAna. I am cautioning against using
one
English word "meditation" to denote japa, dhyAna, bhajana etc.
indiscriminately.

The very fact that different words such as japa, dhyAna and bhajana
exist in
the saMskRta language indicates that different things are meant thereby.
To
take just one example, one can do japa of the omkAra, counting off the
number
of times one utters om. Often, the result is that the mind focuses on
the count
rather than the significance of om. Or, one can use the omkAra as part
of pUjA,
as in sahasranAmAvali, etc. vedAntic meditation on om, as per the
mANDUkya
Sruti, for example, is obviously different. There is a very clear
distinction that
Sankara bhagavatpAda makes in this regard. See the bhAshya on the 8th
chapter of the gItA, verse 10 onwards.

Best regards,
Vidyasankar