Swami Chinmayananda Lectures

[Jarrell Campbell]

Iusually prefer not to write articles that may appear to be critical about other teachers/teachings as I do not want to detract others from their own path. So if you enjoy and benefit from the teachings of Swami Sarvapriyananda and do not want to read about any potential flaws in them, or how they may be improved, please do not read any further.

Both Swami Vivekananda and Ramakrishna emphasised the need for samadhi for liberation, even in the path of Advaita Vedanta. In fact the frequent mention of samadhi is one of the most notable parts of the teaching that comes through when you read either of them and their respective teachings. However with Swami Sarvapriyananda, he discourages this very practice that is emphasised by his Gurus, stating that samadhi is not necessary for liberation, and that this is essentially a false path that one should not undertake.

Note this above verse is one of a whole series of verses by Shankara in which he drums home the importance of nirvikalpa samadhi as being the only way to attain Self-Realisation, see this link to read the other verses in the series: Shankara on the the need for Samadhi. Here is another:

Vidyaranya Swami (1296-1386), author of the wonderful Advaita Vedanta text Panchadasi and Shankaracharya (head monk in the Shankara-Vedanta tradition) of Sringeri Math, wrote another less well known text called Jivanmukti Viveka. In it he, in some considerable detail, outlines the path to Jivanmukti, or liberation in this life. He write the following:

The two main great sages of recent times, Sri Ramakrishna (1836-1886) and Sri Ramana Maharshi (1879-1950) both stressed the need for samadhi in order for liberation to be attained, thus continuing this traditional view. eg. in Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi the following is recorded in Talk 226:

However, more recently, mainly only in the twentieth century, a new line of thought has arisen which claims that the traditional view is incorrect, and that samadhi is not really a requisite for liberation for most people. The idea is that samadhi can be a helpful practice for some, but for most it is not needed. Moreover, they state that this view that samadhi is not required is the actual traditional view that was distorted and corrupted some c. 1400 years ago. ie. they state that the traditional view that has been ongoing for at least 1400 years, if not longer, is not the actual traditional view, and that their view is actually the traditional view that was corrupted c.1400 years ago.

We should see the irony that many of the gurus of those in the right column, are in the left column, so some of these teachers in the right column have actually left the teachings of their lineage and set up a new teaching in its place!

Well essentially, without extreme purity of mind and turning within, the teachings remain predominantly on the intellectual level and realisation does not dawn. This means the blissful and infinite nature of the Self is not really revealed, and duality continues. The Jnana (knowledge) of the scriptures is not mere intellectual knowledge, but a synonym for Self-Realisation which is beyond any intellectual comprehension and does not depend on the mind/thought. This, for most, is revealed only when the mind is turned within towards the Subject-Self and made extremely pure and subtle, as we shall see below.

[Tom: we can see in the next quote that Swami Vivekananda is stating how we have to turn away from objective phenomena and only be with the Pure Consciousness devoid of objects, and that state is Samadhi]

We can see how Swami Vivekananda emphasises the need for meditation in Advaita Vedanta, in which we turn away from the world/objective phenomena, and that this culminates in Samadhi, which in turn leads to liberation. Later we will see how Sri Ramana Maharshi and others state the same. However we see something different from Swami Sarvapriyananda.

I specifically wanted to see what Swami Sarvapriyananda states about verse 7 of the Mandukya Upanishad as this is often cited by some as being as the most important verse in the most important Upanishad in all of Advaita Vedanta. Here is verse 7 of the Mandukya Upanishad:

Questioner: It is stated in the Mandukya Upanishad that, unless Samadhi ,i.e., the 8th and last stage of Yoga, is also experienced, there can be no Liberation (Moksha) however much meditation (dhyana) or austerities (tapas) are performed. Is that so?

Sri Ramana Maharshi also wrote an essay in which he outlines the entire path to liberation and summarises the Advaita Vedanta teachings of Shankara. In that essay he states that Nirvikalpa Samadhi leads directly to liberation, as follows:

196. The unlimited Space of Turiyatita which shines suddenly, in all its fullness, within the Heart of a highly mature aspirant during the state of complete absorption of mind, as if a fresh and previously unknown experience, is the rarely attained and true Shiva-Loka [i.e., Kingdom of God], which shines by the Light of Self.

685. If the inner instruments of knowledge [ie. mind, intellect, chittam and ego] and the outer instruments of knowledge [ie. the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and skin] have been brought under control day and night [i.e. always], the supreme Reality which shines in the inexpressible state of turiya will dawn.

Please note that I am not trying to denigrate anyone, rather I am just attempting to make clear the path to liberation, in my view, as taught in the vedanta scriptures and by Sri Ramana Maharshi. I am simply presenting this information to you and you can make your own descision on this topic thereafter for yourself.

Here are also a couple of videos I have created to explain the teaching. The first one is a teaching from me given spontaneously during satsang. The second video contains quotes read out loud that explain the practice of Self-Enquiry clearly and concisely.

Similarly you will see how Swami Sarvapriyananda has to change the definitions, as found in scripture, of the four qualifiations, as the definitions found in scripture support the view that one needs to turn away from objects towards the Self and this then culminates in Nirvikalpa Samadhi/Turiya.

Many want liberation without having to engage with practice/sadhana/meditation. Many want liberation without having to dissolve their ego-mind in samadhi/turiya/self-abidance. And so they advocate teachings that state that you do not need to do these things. Note how these teachings remain predominantly on the level of the mind-intellect (ie. ego).

How to know if this is what you are doing? Answer: the suffering keeps on coming back. Until the true teaching is discerned, and then followed, the suffering will keep on returning and the illusion of duality/multiplicity will persist.

The traditional teaching is that without Samadhi, the limitless nature and blissful aspect of the Self will not be apprehended, and the teachings will remain at the mental level; suffering and duality will continue, even if genuine insights have been made. eg:

To Tom: excessive intellectualism! without reaching nirvikalpa samadhi you will have no conviction. what is most important is that you are not addicted to samadhi. A single achievement of Samadhi is sufficient. From there you just have to remember or visualize that state until it becomes your natural condition //

Hi, you say excessive intellectualism, but then you respond with a theory of your own that a single achievement of Samadhi is sufficient followed by recollection of that state. How is that not just as intellectual! I am simply pointing out differences in teachings that are fairly obvious to me when I come across them, but perhaps may not be obvious to others. You are welcome to have a different view of course.

Personally I do not feel I am excessively intellectual, but this kind of post necessitates quoting various sources to make the point clear. Perhaps it gives the wrong impression? In this vein, see here, a quote from Sri Ramana Maharshi:

Thanks for you comments Padma! Belur Math is very much aware of these issues already. As I mentioned in the post, there are broadly 2 different views in Vedanta that are present today, and as this is a personal blog, I am happy to share my personal point of view freely whilst respecting others who may hold other views. Namaste

Interesting point of view about Swami Sarvapriyananda. In this context, a contemporaryVedanta teacher, James Swartz claims to teach authentic Vedanta. Sri Tom Das can u plz share your views about this?

Thanks for your comment and question. If you read the above article carefully you should hopefully be able to decide for yourself which of these paths is right for you (as well as discover my view on such things).

He is essentially pointing to what is understood as Turiyatita, as always present (just as Vasistha reminding Rama hes already liberated). The four states arise through ignorance of self. Hes not really saying anything new, the scriptures do a phenomenal job in reminding us that we are self-illuminating and spotless already

I have been listening to swami sarvapriyananda ji for quite a few years now, as well as other voices from my local swami chinmayananda and ramakrisha/vedanta study centers, and i do not personally find any distortions in his expression on the four qualifications. So, perhaps this comes from the study i have and then hearing what i want to from, i am not sure; but i do know he has staunchly stressed proper sadhana many, many times. I have never heard him advocate shortcut paths; he has, though, spoken out against there potential pitfalls, and relating it to the reasons why we have traditions, guru-shishya, etc etc.

While I enjoy your blog I regret to say your extensive publicizing a split/a division when there is none is not good. If you take time to reflect perhaps it merits retracting your conclusion and humbling offering an apology, but given the strong attachment to your lengthy article I would be very surprised if that will occur.

3a8082e126