[Advaita-l] Vikalpa, Savikalpa, and Nirvikalpa

[Bhaskar YR]

sAshtAnga praNAms Sri Vidya prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Kindly permit me to share my thoughts on your observation to Sri Sadananda 
prabhuji's mail  :

In my opinion, it is not quite easy to separate out a "yogic" method of 
nididhyAsana
from a "vedAntic" method of nididhySana in the above fashion. 

>  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 whether 
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 the 
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 and
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 yOga, 
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. 
 nidhidhyAsana is vastu tantra rUpa sAdhana cannot be equated with purusha 
tantra dhyAna of patanjali (which shankara clarifies in 1-1-4).  The 
method of nidhidhyAsana,as you know beautifully outlined in Katha yacchet 
vAngmanasi prAjnaH tadyachet jnAna Atmani etc.  how can this vedAntic 
method of nidhidhyAsana be equated with patanjala's dhyAna, kindly 
clarify.  And the 'phala' of this nidhidhyAsana is kevalAtma svarUpa 
clarifies shankara at various places in prasthAna trayi bhAshya.  For 
example in geeta bhAshya he clarifies : Atma saMsthaM Atmani saMsthitaM " 
Atmaiva sarvaM na tatO anyat kiMchidasti" ityevaM AtmasaMsthaM manaH 
krutvA na kiMchidapi chitayet, eshaH 'yOgasya paramO avadhiH'...and 
elsewhere in geeta bhAshya(I think in sixth chapter) shankara further 
clarifies the phala of this vedAntic method of nidhidhyAsana : 
sarvabhUtasthamAtmAnaM, sarvabhUtAni cha Atmani, Ekshate yOga yuktAtma, 
sarvatra sama darshanaH.. can we expect this type of 'phala' from the 
yOgic method of nidhidhyAsana which is followed in pAtanjala yOga shAstra 
which is basically a 'dvaita' shAstra?? Please clarify. 

As one can see easily from these gItA verses themselves, as well as from 
the bhAshya thereon, this is already a "yogic" method adapted to vedAntic 
nididhyAsana, as taught bhagavatA nArayaNena svayaM. Not seeing the
value in this and talking a lot only about intellectually grasping jnAna 
is one of the
biggest banes of most of contemporary interest in vedAnta.

>  IMHO, those who are seeing pAtanjala yOga differently from vedAntic 
method, do not satisfying themselves with mere intellectual understanding 
of the jnAna.  But that does not anyway mean that the paramArtha jnAna 
requires a subsequent step and experience in asamprajnAtha samAdhi.  IMHO, 
the difference is subtle but very significant. 
 
Best regards,
Vidyasankar

Your humble servant
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar