[Advaita-l] GunAtIta and jIvanmukta

[Sujal Upadhyay]

praNAms,

The purpose of khaNDana is to remove the obstacles and not to refute the
path itself. If a disciple is stick up and cannot rise beyond a certain
point, then khaNDana is necessary. If everything is happening as it should,
then there is no need of doing any khaNDana if the final destination is
nirvikalpa samAdhi.

The misconception that any type of kriyA can result in brahmaGYAna is
refuted, as limited efforts cannot bring limitless results. There are other
types of samAdhi-s like s-avalambana samAdhi, nir-avalambana samAdhi (we
have nirAlamba Upanishad), sa-bija and nirbija samAdhi, prakRti laya, etc.

In system of yoga, as I understand, there is tuning with any tatva say
prakRti and then mind mixes in it. In siddha siddhanta paddhati, there is a
word 'sAmarasya'. I means uniting or merging. whereas, in advaita, one has
to separate oneself from what is not Atma i.e. separate oneself from anAtma
tatva. At times in yoga, kriyA-s are given undue importance. The advantage
of kriyA-s is that mind remains occupied in doing kriyA-s but in
nidhidhyAsana only mental activity goes on that too with the goal of
abiding in Brahman from the beginning of advait asAdhanA. If mind is
unstable i.e. is emotionally disturbed or has a lots of thoughts speeding,
then it is practically not possible to meditate the advaita way. Whereas in
yoga, the stabilizing mind via breath, prANa or any other means a a part of
sAdhanA. Preparatory exercises help calm down mind and so an advaitin, IMO,
can use them.

The problem with yoga is that since one gets results of stabilizing mind
through kriyA that that, at times, character building is not given
importance. So mind does not change the behaviour. In case of advaita, we
go to the root cause and by detachment, one knows or tires to know what is
it that is making mind to behave in such and and way. One can find out the
cause i.e. desires, excessive thinking, emotional attachment, etc. Next
step is the be aware that mistakes are not repeated. Advaitin trains mind
(not by use of force) and one changes behaviour, approach or perception
towards what is causing the problem and stay detached. Since the very
sAdhanA is to be aware and stay detached, it helps an advaitin to overcome
obstacles. If a yogi also takes similar approach, he too will benefit.

nirvikalpa samAdhi, nature of Brahman and jivan mukti are very clearly
explained. Emphasis is given to them so that mind gets attracted to this
blissful state.

Again, in yoga, the bliss experienced may be because of a result of kriyA
like rising kuNDalini and touching anAhata (heart) chakra. this shows
tuning of mind with kuNDalini and chakra, whereas, in advaita, due to
detachment one experiences deep peace and Bliss. Since the reason of peace
and bliss is vairAgya so this bliss is not a result of any kriyA, but from
detachment. Hence both feelings are different as one is dependent upon
kuNDalini and anAhata chakra and other is not.


Hari OM


On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> praNAms
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> praNAms,
>>
>> I have not followed the thread, but this just caught my attention. Just
>> wish to offer my two cents.
>>
>> *Samādhi*—This state of complete identity with non-dual Brahman, arrived
>> at
>> as a result of discrimination and negation of phenomena, is the Vedāntic
>> conception of *Samādhi. *(which is quite different from any mystical or
>> mechanical state described as *Samādhi* in the *Yoga* system).
>>
>>
>> This is quite true. In yoga texts, the word samAdhi is used when one
>> becomes in total sync with what one is doing i.e. the engagement is so
>> intense that nothing except the process is experienced. In Patanjali Yoga
>> sUtra-s, vyAsa bhAshya, many types of samAdhi-s are pointed out like
>> savitarka, nirvitarka, savichAra, nirvichAra, etc later better than former
>> (in this case). SrI madhusUdana sarasvatI in his gItA bhAshya says that all
>> these types of samAdhi-s imply abhyAsa only. Hence in this case, samAdhi
>> would mean mastery over thoughts, etc.
>>
>> Whereas, in vedAnta, samAdhi i.e. nirvikalpa samAdhi is only one.
>>
>> Also note that the thoughtless state does not mean one is in samAdhi. Sri
>> Ramana Maharshi says that thoughtlessness would mean arresting thoughts for
>> a definite period and gives example of pakshi jAlavat i.e. just like a bird
>> trapped in net cannot move so by controlling prANa, thoughts can be
>> arrested. This is not samAdhi. Hence samAdhi can only be achieved by GYAna
>> i.e. realised only in Atma-GYAna and not as a result of any kriyA like
>> controlling prANa, etc. There is nothing that needs to be controlled in
>> order to know one's true nature. However, at times, a yogI is always
>> habituated of processes, it s/he finds hard to transcend it. This is
>> because of years of practice of awakening kuNDalini and getting in tune
>> with prANa and various chakra-s that even when the boat (of yogic kriyA-s)
>> has reached the other side of shore, it is not quit. This is the problem
>> with yoga. Hence when a person, with the help of boat, reaches river bank
>> and wants to reach the destination, which is away from river bank, steps
>> one leg outside boat on river bank, but is not ready to renounce other leg,
>> ans keeps it inside boat.
>>
>
> :-)
>
>
>>
>> In such case, guru has to do the khaNDan of yoga and it's kriyA-s for the
>> good of disciple. It is possible that same guru must have extolled various
>> yogic processes in the beginning of sAdhanA.
>>
>> If one, by any means, destroys aGYAna,
>>
>
>
> Yes, thru Atma GYAna, one knows non-duality (ekam eva advitIya brahman)
> alone is (sarvadA)
>
>
>> then only non-duality remains, as GYAna cannot be different.
>>
>> Hari OM
>> Sujal
>>
>>
>> Regards
>