praNAms Sri Sada prabhuji
Hare Krishna
A quick note from the desk of amateur vedAnti on your queries and you can always wait for clarifications from ‘scholars’.
1. Samadhi is required for Self-Realization
2. and 2) the mind needs to be eliminated to attain Samadhi for self-realization (mana vinasha).
Many quote from the books that have question-answers sessions Ramana Maharshi had with disciples. There are also many disciples of Ramana Maharshi who further endorse the above statements.
There are also JK groups that denounce all methods as they all condition the mind.
Some even quote Vivekachudamani sloka 447 or something that says the mind is a problem and one has to have a thoughtless mind for self-realization.
Ø Yes, VC very conspicuously endorses the mandatory experience of nirvikalpa samAdhi to have the practical experience of Atmaikatva. bhAmati school does not have any doubt in propagating the same. And HH Sri Abhinava vidyAteertha too narrates how he often entered the samAdhi at particular time, though he does not categorically insisted the mandatory experience of NS he emphasized the importance of this experience in his work called : “yOga perfection and enlightenment”. And some prakaraNa-s like paNchadashi, JMV etc. without any ambiguity endorses the mandatory experience of yOga samAdhi and grades of jnAni-s bases on yOga samAdhi experience and the method they adopt to return back to normalcy.
1. What do you think is samadhi?
> samAdhi is sama chitta, sama darshana, Samyak jnana which is the result of vAkya janita vastu tantra jnana as per AV.
2. Is a thoughtless mind required for self-realization?
Ø As said above manO nAsha or prapancha pravilaya is adhyAtmika yOga as explained in katha not as per patanjala’s deliberate suppression of chitta vrutti. As a matter of fact bhAshyakAra himself says chitta vrutti nirOdha is not a means for self-realization.
3. What do you think is involved in self-realization?
> avidyA nivrutti, svarUpa jnana (self-luminous) effort is required to eradicate avidyA and vidyA / jnana is not a thing obtained afresh through some ‘effort’.
4. Is akhandaakaara vrutti involves thoughtless state?
I am posing these to get input from all the scholars here.
Ø Paradon my brevity here, But you know the reason. Some prakriya-s advocated by some asampradAyavAdins are not so palatable for the saMpradAya ‘scholars’ in this group 😊
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/46047575.1994153.1706757866436%40mail.yahoo.com.
Dear Sada,
I wrote this article on the meaning of samAdhi in Vivekachudamani back in 2019: https://www.advaita-vision.org/samadhi-in-vivekachudamani/.
Best wishes,
Dennis
--
Apologies. I also wrote a two-part article just on samAdhi beginning https://www.advaita-vision.org/samadhi-part1/.
Best wishes,
Dennis
From: 'Kuntimaddi Sadananda' via advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2024 3:24 AM
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org>; Advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [advaitin] What is Samadhi?
PraNAms to all.
--
Namaskaram Shri Acharya ji,
Can you summarize what exactly you finally understand what is involved in Self Realization and is samadhi - required for it, etc.
praNAms Sri Sada prabhuji
Hare Krishna
I reckon these two observations from Dennis prabhuji’s article would suffice to understand his perspective on samAdhi. And being a follower of Sri paramArthAnandaji I hope you too would agree with him.
//quote//
whereas what I would call ‘traditional’ Advaitins believe that Shankara’s teaching was that it is self-ignorance that obscures our understanding of the truth and that only self-knowledge can remove it. Thus, one of the key issues around the topic of neo-Vedanta is that of experience versus knowledge.
But the most convincing argument for not including nirvikalpa samAdhi (in the Patanjali sense) as part of advaita is one I heard recently from Swami Paramarthananda. He argues that Patanjali, having written about this in his yoga sutras, and being regarded as the highest authority in the yoga philosophy, must obviously himself have experienced nirvikalpa samAdhi. Consequently, if its result is as has been argued by the neo-Vedantins, then Patanjali should be the greatest Advaitin ever. And yet his philosophy claims that there are many Atmans and that the world is real. So one has to conclude that his experience of nirvikalpa samAdhi led him to dualism and not non-dualism! Swami Paramarthananda’s last word on the subject is that we can happily be liberated without nirvikalpa samAdhi!
//Unquote//
If I am right not only bhAmati vehemently insisted the mandatory experience of ‘yOga school type samAdhi’ even in vivaraNa school too this non-dual practical experience advocated. Though as per this school the jnana of I am brahman devoid of any duality (nishprapancha etc. ) is the result of shAstra vihita vedAntavAkya shravaNa. After the vAkya jnana dawns the qualified jnAni ( he is mere qualified seeker of mOksha at this stage) has to continue to practice both the vedAnta vAkya shravaNa and vAkya janita jnana over and over again and over a period of time he would become aparOksha jnAni and he will be considered as custodian of direct intuitive knowledge. But even for this aparOksha jnAni there is prArabdha and avidyA lesha hence he would continue to see the duality of world when he is not in asaMprajnAta samAdhi. And for him, on certain occasions he would get the practical and ‘literal’ experience of Atmaikatvam.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581F87F0C6435D08C43D0F484422%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.
praNAms
Hare Krishna
And further below observations from Sri Dennis prabhuji’s article say that few initial stages of patanjali’s ashtanga yOga not completely out of syllabus in traditional shankarAdvaita and it has been accepted ‘as it is’.. For that matter Sri VidyA prabhuji ( Sri Vidyashankar Sundareshan prabhuji) too agreed that dhyAna and samAdhi as explained in Advaita vedAnta in general and shankara bhAshya in particular something different from orthodox patanjala yOga. Paramatam apratishiddham anumataM bhavati…that does not mean shankara advocated NS in a mind inert state as a means for self-realization. Having said this noway Advaita belittling the dualistic yOga school and its practices, it has its own flavor and significance for its followers. All respects to them.
//quote//
Advaita borrows a number of elements from Sankhya and Yoga philosophies. For example, the teaching about the guNa-s is essentially from Sankhya (although Sankhya treats them as actual physical parts of prakRRiti, whereas Advaita regards them as merely attributes). And the satkArya vAda theory (which is that the effect is pre-existent in the cause) is used in the initial stages of the teaching, although it is later rescinded. Furthermore, Shankara is happy to make use of the initial practices of yoga, referred to in Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras as rAja or aShTA~Nga yoga. These include the moral injunctions (yama-s), such as not injuring others, being truthful and modest, not stealing and so on; the obligatory standards of behavior (niyama-s) such as purity of mind, austerity and studying the scriptures; the asana-s and prANayAma of haTha yoga etc. There is much similarity and overlap with Shankara’s advocated sAdhana chatuShTaya sampatti (which stem from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, I believe) so they pose no problems.
But there is a danger in taking this too far, and considering nirvikalpa samAdhi as understood by Patanjali to be an aspect of advaita is definitely taking things too far. According to Advaita, nirvikalpa samAdhi is only a means for obtaining single pointedness of the mind (the samAdhAna of sAdhana chatuShTaya sampatti), not a means for knowing brahman.
//unquote//
Namaste.
SamAdhi is if two types ;; चित्तवृत्तिनिरोध (chittavRRittinirodha) and चित्तएकाग्रत (chittaekAgrata) types. The former is what is advocated in the Yoga Darshana School while the latter is what is advocated in the Advaitic School. Gradations are recognized in the sAdhana path in both schools. In Advaitic School, the terms used are उपासन (upAsana) निदिध्यासन (nididhyAsana) ब्रह्मसंस्थ (brahmasaMstha) ब्रह्मनिष्ठ (brahmaniShTha) etc. These can be understood as corresponding to the terms used in the Yoga Darshana School like धारण (dhAraNa) ध्यान (dhyAna) समाधि (samAdhi) etc.
Regards
Namaste Chandramouli ji.What is the difference between akhanDAkArA-vritti (of BhAmatI and VivaraNa) and nirvikalpaka samAdhi (of Patanjali Maharshi)?Regards.Sudhanshu Shekhar.
On Fri, 2 Feb, 2024, 4:40 pm H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l, <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
Namaste.
I have not come across anywhere in Bhamati School or VivaraNa School that
Nirvikalpa Samadhi of the type advocated by Sri Patanjali Maharshi is
mandatory, or even recommended, for Realization as advanced by the Advaitic
School. If anyone has come across such declarations, please provide the
references.
Regards
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 4:17 PM 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <
adva...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> Can you summarize what exactly you finally understand what is involved in
> Self Realization and is samadhi - required for it, etc.
>
>
>
> praNAms Sri Sada prabhuji
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> I reckon these two observations from Dennis prabhuji’s article would
> suffice to understand his perspective on samAdhi. And being a follower of
> Sri paramArthAnandaji I hope you too would agree with him.
>
>
>
> //quote//
>
> whereas what I would call ‘traditional’ Advaitins believe that Shankara’s
> teaching was that it is self-ignorance that obscures our understanding of
> the truth and that only self-knowledge can remove it. Thus, one of the key
> issues around the topic of neo-Vedanta is that of experience versus
> knowledge.
>
>
>
> But the most convincing argument for not including *nirvikalpa samAdhi* (in
> the Patanjali sense) as part of advaita is one I heard recently from Swami
> Paramarthananda. He argues that Patanjali, having written about this in his
> yoga sutras, and being regarded as the highest authority in the yoga
> philosophy, must obviously himself have experienced *nirvikalpa samAdhi*.
> Consequently, if its result is as has been argued by the neo-Vedantins,
> then Patanjali should be the greatest Advaitin ever. And yet his philosophy
> claims that there are many Atmans and that the world is real. So one has to
> conclude that his experience of *nirvikalpa samAdhi* led him to dualism
> and not non-dualism! Swami Paramarthananda’s last word on the subject is
> that we can happily be liberated without *nirvikalpa samAdhi*!
>
>
>
> //Unquote//
>
>
>
> If I am right not only bhAmati vehemently insisted the mandatory
> experience of ‘yOga school type samAdhi’ even in vivaraNa school too this
> non-dual practical experience advocated. Though as per this school the
> jnana of I am brahman devoid of any duality (nishprapancha etc. ) is the
> result of shAstra vihita vedAntavAkya shravaNa. After the vAkya jnana
> dawns the qualified jnAni ( he is mere qualified seeker of mOksha at this
> stage) has to continue to practice both the vedAnta vAkya shravaNa and
> vAkya janita jnana over and over again and over a period of time he would
> become aparOksha jnAni and he will be considered as custodian of direct
> intuitive knowledge. But even for this aparOksha jnAni there is prArabdha
> and avidyA lesha hence he would continue to see the duality of world when
> he is not in asaMprajnAta samAdhi. And for him, on certain occasions he
> would get the practical and ‘literal’ experience of Atmaikatvam.
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581F87F0C6435D08C43D0F484422%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
Dear Sada,
Apologies. As usual, I am in the process of writing and not wishing to join in any discussion. But I always keep an eye out on Advaitin in case there is something relevant. Knowing that I have written about samAdhi in the past, I dug out the references to throw them in for anyone wishing to read them.
Very briefly, my view (and Ṥaṅkara’s, as I understand it) is that Self-realization ONLY comes from Self-knowledge. SamAdhi is not a pramANa – it is an experience. Accordingly, samAdhi cannot give rise to enlightenment – simple as that.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/1806846236.2058473.1706793249672%40mail.yahoo.com.
Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,
Reg // What is the difference between akhanDAkArA-vritti (of BhAmatI and VivaraNa) and nirvikalpaka samAdhi (of Patanjali Maharshi)? //,
nirvikalpaka samAdhi (of Patanjali Maharshi) is cessation of all vrittis of the mind in that state. akhanDAkArA-vritti of Advaita Siddhanta is the अहम् ब्रह्मास्मि (aham brahmAsmi) vritti which is originated automatically, without any further effort, following the shabda vritti, when the sAdhaka hears any of the MahAvAkyAs from the Guru at the time of fructification of the sAdhana. It is admitted in Advaita SiddhAnta that such a vritti can pervade अवच्छिन्न ब्रह्मन् (avachChinna brahman ), Brahman veiled by ajnAna. The vritti replicates the veiled Brahman. The Chaitanya in that vritti destroys the veil of ajnAna in that replication. That jnAna is termed Realization.
RegardsDear Sada,
Apologies for interruption again! I wrote an article on manonAsha about 12 years ago, which I included as an appendix in my book on Gaudapada’s kArikA-s. I posted it to the site at https://www.advaita-vision.org/manonasha-not-the-literal-death-of-the-mind/.
Best wishes,
Dennis
.
Is there not a contradiction between the following statements as between laghuyogavAshiShTha and JMV ?
As per laghuyogavAshiShTha cited by you in connection with manonAsha, // The formless death of the mind which was spoken of by me oh Raghava, is for the videhamukta only, where no part of the mind remains //. Also // In jIvanmukti, the destruction is with form, whereas it is without form in the bodiless mukti //.
And
As per JMV cited by you in connection with videhamukti, // videhamukti is not the mukti that takes place at the end of the jnAni's life - rather it is a mukti that is contemporaneous with the rise of jnAna //.
Regards--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CACT7j-Fg52vT5fzkE1EkOYBOqGE310YZt2UFmmDprxnG0T2uRg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/98901920.2616226.1706955287552%40mail.yahoo.com.