Chanting of the name
ravi at AMBAA.ORG
Fri Jan 31 17:55:15 CST 2003
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 04:36:44 -0800, kuntimaddi sadananda
<kuntimaddisada at YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>As the meditation proceeds the there is a shift in the attention from
>the thought to the silence in between the thoughts.
>This is the essence of japa-yoga.
The example of krishhNa and gopika-s was cited by you is very beautiful and
can throw one into a devotional rapture.
But how do you reconcile this looking between thoughts with shankara-s
definition on verse 13-25, meditation is like continuous flow of oil.
ekAgrataya tat chintanam dhyAnam tatha dhyAtiitiva bakaH dhyAtiitiva
pR^thvi dhyAtiitiva parvataH iti upamApAdAnat | *tailadhAravat* santataH
avachchhinnapratyayo dhyAnam ....
Here the dhyAnam is on Atman, (If I am not mistaken and remember
correctly) this idea comes in trishatii bhAshyA and also in vyAsa bhaashya
of patanjali's yoga suutra. It is not like oil dripping drop by drop and
one is looking at the gaps in the drops. It is a continous flow, where
ceases to see gaps.Even in verse 61 of shivAnandalaharI, dhyAnam on Lord is
like continous flow of river into ocean (sindhu sarit vallabham).
I may be wrong, hence look forward to your corrections and comments.
In namasmaraNa, one need not think on the same nAma. One can think on
string of nAma-s, for examples the 300 names lalitAtrishatI, one after
another. This is nAma smaraNa. You literally try to remember nAma-s of
God. This is lot easier for a beginner like me to keep thoughts focussed on
one single entity, even though the words are not same. And works such as
trishati can be easily memorized.
>From Fri Jan 31 20:43:27 2003
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 20:43:27 -0500
Reply-To: besprasad at lycos.com
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
<ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
From: Prasad Balasubramanian <besprasad at LYCOS.COM>
Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80)
Subject: parakAya praveSa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I was reading "Sankara - a BioGraphy" in our website and I've a question on the following paragraph.
< "Sankara's debate with viSvarUpa was unique. The referee at the debate was viSvarUpa's wife, bhAratI, who was herself very well-learned, and regarded as an incarnation of Goddess sarasvatI. At stake was a whole way of life. The agreement was that if viSvarUpa won, Sankara would consent to marriage and the life of a householder, whereas if Sankara won, viSvarUpa would renounce all his wealth and possessions and become a sannyAsI disciple of Sankara. The debate is said to have lasted for whole weeks, till in the end, viSvarUpa had to concede defeat and become a sannyAsI. bhAratI was a fair judge, but before declaring Sankara as the winner, she challenged Sankara with questions about kAmaSAstra, which he knew nothing about. Sankara therefore requested some time, during which, using the subtle yogic
process called parakAya-praveSa, he entered the body of a dying king and experienced the art of love with the queens. Returning to
viSvarUpa's home, he answered all of bhAratI's questions, after which viSvarUpa was ordained as a sannyAsI by the name of sureSvara. He was to become the most celebrated disciple of Sankara, writing vArttikas to Sankara's bhAshyas on the yajurveda upanishads, in addition to his own independent texts on various subjects.">
Can someone explain the significance of Shankara Bagavadpaadal's doing parakAya pravESam to answer the questions of Bharathi ?
My question is that why did BhagavadpAdAl have to know kAmaSAstrA (only) by doing parakAya praveSa ? As Bhagavadpaadaal was JivanMuktha, why did He not answer those questions without doing parakAya praveSa ? If there is any hidden significance in it, someone kindly explain it.
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list