[Advaita-l] Reply to Praveen's questions on YogAmRRitam #s. 2 and 4.

V. Krishnamurthy profvk at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 29 18:44:44 CST 2005

I try to answer here two of Praveen’s questions, one on
YogAmRRitaM -2 and the other on YogAmRRitaM – 4.

Sorry, I'm lagging in your classes. Could you pls clarify a
basic doubt of
mine on the above?   In no.15, when you say ‘dependent
nature of samadhi’, what is it
meant to be dependent on... doer's characteristics, or
means followed, etc?

VK:  #15 is quoted below.

samAdhipAratantryAchcha tripuTI vikalA hi dhIH .
parAgatisturyaturyA svamAtrasyAvasheShataH .. 15 ..

Because of the dependent nature of samAdhi, the three-fold
nature of the intellect (in terms of knower, known and
knowledge) is ineffective. The Absolute Goal that
‘transcends even the fourth’ ( = ‘turya-turyA’  ?) consists
of the Self alone. 

Here the ‘dependence’ mentioned is on the ‘forced control
of the mind’  by the buddhi.  There is an activity here in
terms of ‘holding the reins of the mind’ by the buddhi. And
thus the buddhi unifies itself in the thought of brahman
thus aiming at the unity of the knower, knowledge and the
known.    But when the buddhi loses its reins, which it
would, because of the fact that any action started has to
end, the samadhi itself is disturbed.  On the other hand,
being in brahman (brahma-bhAva), namely, the turya-turya,
is not something which starts and ends; it is always so.
Only we have to realise it by self-enquiry. This
realisation again is like finding ‘the tenth man’;  it is
not an event that ‘happens’; you were and are and will be
always ‘the tenth man’.

Another way of seeing this is to recognise that in the
ordinary samAdhi, there is a distinction between the mind
which is forced to be still and the brahman which is
meditated on.  In the Atmaikya-j~nAna-yoga, the mind is one
with brahman.

Praveen’s 2nd question is on shloka No.39:
pratyakShaH sarva-bhUteShu na tu tatra hyavasthitaH .
bhUtAni neshvarasthAni tasmAtteShAmasatyatA .. 39 ..

He is certainly present in all beings; but He is not
stationed in them. Nor are the Beings in the Lord and 
hence their unreality.

Praveen:    Explain the last words “and hence their
unreality”; particularly the word “hence”.

VK:  Here we have to go back to a Gita shloka  Ch.9:  #4
(second line) and #5 (first line).  These lines are:

matsthAni sarva-bhUtAni na chAhaM teshvavasthitaH //
na cha matsthAni bhUtAni pashya me yogamaishvaraM /

Meaning:  All Beings are in Me. But I am not in them.  Nor
are the Beings in Me. Know ye this divine magic of Mine!

The apparent contradiction in this sequence of statements, 
saying “All Beings are in Me”  and in the same breath
saying “Nor are the Beings in Me”  is a point of great
importance in understanding the Lord and His divine words
in the Gita. Instead of taking time here to explain this I
shall only refer you to 


Now you should be able to understand ‘their unreality’,
meaning ‘the unreality of the Beings’ and also the word
‘hence’.  Taking the analogy of the movie screen and the
projected images of the above post (m14700)  you will see
that the images are unreal, since they are there only by
the magic of the screen which is able to interrupt the rays
of the projection and show you fictitious (=untrue in the
absolute sense) pictures on the screen. 

PraNAms to all advaitins on this list and to my father

Prof. V. Krishnamurthy
New on my  website, particularly for beginners in Hindu philosophy:

Hinduism for the next generation: http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/contentsbeach10.html

Free will and Divine will - a dialogue:

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list