[Advaita-l] Does praNava upAsanA leads to brahmaloka?

[Sujal Upadhyay]

praNAms,

Thank you All those who have contributed. I am more interested in the
fourth - turiyA state, which is the origin of Om. Here Om does not exist. I
am not talking on meditation on Om itself, but be aware of origin of Om.
For me Om continues by itself, and I just have to be aware of it's origin.
After mind calms down, even Om vanishes. After I cannot explain what it is
like, but it is so peaceful, it brings a smile on my face after I wake up.

As said in intro of mANdukya, Om is a-para brahman.  It is also said that
all that when [existence of] drashya prapancha (world) is destroyed [in
mind], then GYAna happens by itself.

I will re-read mANDukya bhAshya on 12 verses and other verses related to
the verses quoted here. I will have to understand the right context in
which it is said. Without re-reading patiently, I do not want to ask or
comment on anything.

If anyone has anything to share, please share your thoughts for educative
purpose.

Thank you once again.

Hari OM
Sujal



2016-09-08 21:30 GMT+05:30 Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>:

> Namaste Sri Bhaskar ji,
>
> Do you mean 'Om iti brahma' because 'OmityekAkshram brahma' is from
> Mahanarayana Upanishad, not Taittiriya. On the former, Shankaracharya says
>
> इदानीं सर्वोपासनाङ्गभूतस्य ओङ्कारस्योपासनं विधित्स्यते ।
> परापरब्रह्मदृष्ट्या हि उपास्यमान ओङ्कारः शब्दमात्रोऽपि
> परापरब्रह्मप्राप्तिसाधनं भवति ; स ह्यालम्बनं ब्रह्मणः परस्यापरस्य
> च,प्रतिमेव विष्णोः, ‘एतेनैवायतनेनैकतरमन्वेति’ (प्र. उ. ५-२) इति श्रुतेः ।
> ओमिति, इतिशब्दः स्वरूपपरिच्छेदार्थः ; ॐ इत्येतच्छब्दरूपं ब्रह्म इति मनसा
> धारयेत् उपासीत; यतः ॐ इति इदं सर्वं हि शब्दस्वरूपमोङ्कारेण व्याप्तम्, ‘तद्यथा
> शङ्कुना’ (छा. उ. २-२३-३) इति श्रुत्यन्तरात् । ‘अभिधानतन्त्रं ह्यभिधेयम्’
> इत्यतः इदं सर्वमोङ्कार इत्युच्यते । ओङ्कारस्तुत्यर्थ उत्तरो ग्रन्थः,
> उपास्यत्वात्तस्य ।
>
> Now OmkAra which forms a preliminary part to all upAsanas is going to be
> explained. Om, is meditated as either the higher or lower Brahman because
> despite being a word is a means to attain both the higher and lower Brahman
> (unmanifest and manifest Brahman), just like an idol of Vishnu (is
> worshipped representing the Lord Vishnu) - As the Prashna Upanishad says,
> "He becomes one with either, by his sanctuary". The word "iti" in "Om iti"
> is used to call attention to the form of the word (as opposed to the
> meaning). One should meditate upon Brahman in the form of the word "Om".  (All
> this, all the objects, are words) and all words are represented by the
> OmkAra - hence Om is all this. Like the Chandogya which says "Just like
> the stem etc", all the things that are named, are dependent on the name.
> Hence OmkAra is all this. The next portion is for the glorification of
> OmkAra, because OmkAra meditation has being enjoined.
>
> By Omkara, saguNa upAsana only is being enjoined because nirguNa Brahman
> can never be an object of upAsana. On the other hand, the yato vAco
> nivartante shruti is describing nirguNa Brahman.
>
> Regards
> Venkatraghavan
>
>