[Advaita-l] Vikalpa, Savikalpa, and Nirvikalpa
swami.sarvabhutananda at gmail.com
Thu Oct 11 00:16:31 CDT 2012
One is doing and the other is knowing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > prabhuji do you mean to say here there is absolutely no difference
> > between yOgic method of nidhidhyAsana and vedAntic method of
> > nidhidhyAsana?? Kindly clarify what exactly is the meaning of
> > nidhidhyAsana according to pAtanjala yOga. for that matter I doubt
> Dear Bhaskar,
> I am going to try and keep my response short and sweet. I was responding
> to a post
> by Sri Sadananda, so I would request you to read that again and then my
> in that context.
> As you yourself have rightly raised a doubt, there is no such thing as
> in pAtanjala yoga. Anybody who talks of nididhyAsana is talking of it only
> against the
> background of vedAnta. That is precisely why I said that it is not
> possible to easily
> distiinguish a "yogic method" from a "vedAntic method." What is often
> described as
> a method unduly influenced by yoga is nothing but an authentic vedAntic
> method, as
> acknowledged by the bhAshyakAra and vArttikakAra themselves. It is not for
> that "yogAbhyAsa" is prescribed by sureSvarAcArya in the mumukshu's
> That said, I fail to see why the adjective "pAtanjala" is inferred by you
> every time
> someone uses the word yoga. All I am saying is that it is not possible to
> separate out
> a method of nididhyAsana that is somehow more "yogic" from a nididhyAsana
> that is
> somehow more "vedAntic". A lot of what is called "yoga" in the context of
> is an acknowledged method of vedAnta sAdhana. There is nothing "pAtanjala"
> about it.
> The most one can do is to differentiate between what are called "sAMkhya
> yoga" and
> "dhyAna" in gItA and bhAshya 13.25. Please read the bhAshya very
> carefully. If your
> response is going to be to raise an objection that this dhyAna has nothing
> to do with
> (pAtanjala) yoga, my response will again ask, (a) who is talking about
> "pAtanjala" yoga?,
> (b) what do you understand by the term dhyAna in pAtanjala yoga?, and (c)
> what do
> you understand by the term dhyAna in vedAnta? The last two above go back
> to what I
> once described as making a distinction without a difference, as far as the
> word dhyAna
> is concerned.
> > this nidhidhyAsana term used in patanjala yOga as an alternative to
> > 'dhyAna'. Here vedAntic nidhidhyAsana follows the vedAntic method of
> > shravaNa and manana. Is there any provision to this method of vedAntic
> > nidhidhyAsana in patanjala yOga??
> > We also have to take into account the entire set of verses that follow
> > question,
> > "sthitaprajnasya kA bhAshA" in gItA chapter 2, which bhagavatpAda
> > explicitly describes
> > as the saMyag-darSana-lakshaNa and as jnAna-nishThA. As part of manana
> > nididhyAsana, one has to really take to heart the teaching of "yadA
> > saMharate ...
> > indriyANi indriyArthebhyaH" (gItA 2.58) etc. The reasons for why this is
> > extremely
> > important are also given in those same set of verses. In similar vein,
> > kaThopanishad
> > tells us, "parAnci khAni vyatRNat ... AvRtta-cakShuH" etc. Given the
> > highly ingrained
> > tendency of the senses to dwell on the objects of the senses, unless and
> > until a
> > sAdhaka takes the trouble to master a degree of saMyama, there is no real
> > personal
> > progress towards jnAna.
> > > I agree, but adhyAtma yOga outlined in kaTha (for example 1-2-12,
> > 1-3-13 etc.) is something different from orthodox patanjali ashtAnga
> > I failed to see any relevance here. nishchayena dhyAtavyaH is the
> > explanation given my bhagavatpAda for the nidhidhyAsitavyaH in
> > bruhadAraNyaka. Where as in patanjala yOga, it is dhyAna on the chakra-s.
> Sorry, there is really very little about cakra-s in pAtanjala yoga. The
> application of
> the word dhyAna in yogaSAstra has a wide range. To restrict it to
> meditating on the
> cakra-s is to be unduly influenced by later developments in tAntric
> traditions. All of
> those also may have a value towards vedAntic nididhyAsana, but on a
> level, in a passion to differentiate advaita vedAnta from pAtanjala yoga,
> you should
> not misunderstand and misrepresent pAtanjala yoga. In my opinion, by doing
> you also risk misunderstanding and misrepresenting advaita vedAnta. You
> will miss
> the core of what is said about dhyAna in the yogasUtra-s and bhAshya, as
> also how
> this core is very, very close in spirit and practice to what a serious
> vedAntin needs
> to incorporate in his or her personal nididhyAsana.
> It is all well and good to read and/or produce text after text and think
> that it is all part
> of "niScayena dhyAtavyaH". Beyond a point, all that is just vAg vaikharI.
> The risk is that
> it will become a mega SAstra vAsanA, as is being discussed in another
> current thread.
> SAstra is absolutely important, but a serious jijnAsu has to realize, at
> some point of
> time, that he or she has to act on the advice given in SAstra, rather than
> talking about
> SAstra. One needs to concentrate on "om ity evaM dhyAyatha AtmAnam" and
> vAco vimuncatha". Once this is started, all these doubts about where
> pAtanjala yoga
> and advaita vedAnta stand with respect to each other will start vanishing.
> Best regards,
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
WELCOME YOUR INTERACTION.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list