[Advaita-l] Vikalpa, Savikalpa, and Nirvikalpa

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

> In fact, if you agree that most people are madhyama-manda-adhikArin-s,
> then I would suggest reading the bhAshya on the eighth chapter of the
> gItA. Here, dhAraNA yoga is described in detail and explicitly prescribed
> for such adhikArin-s. Needless to say, there is a heavy dose of what you
> would call pAtanjala ashTAnga yoga mArga in this bhAshya chapter. 
> 
> > prabhuji I think we have discussed about this earlier during viveka 
> chUdAmaNi discussions. ( I may be wrong, but I remember somewhere!!) I 
> think we have agreed at that point of time that it talks about 
> yOgAbhyAsi-s krama mukti which can be achievable after yOgi's deha tyAga, 
> tyajan dehaM yOgiH then he would achieve parama gati or something like 
> that says krishna (exact verse of this chapter I can provide you on Monday 
> prabhuji) and I think in this chapter only Krishna eulogizes the yOgi and 
> says he would achieve the superior sthAna (status) that cannot be achieved 
> through vedAdhyayana, yajna & tapas. But can we compare this krama mukti 
> of yOgi-s with shAstra vAkya janita sadyO mukti prabhuji?? If we say 
> yOgAbhyAsa is an another way to reach the parama gati, then antya 
> pramANatva of shAstra-s, ekameva jnAna mArga would suffer from this 
> alternative yOgAbhyAsa method. 

Here's a question to ponder. Is it or is it not possible for jnAna to rise during
the lifetime of a yogAbhyAsI on the path of such kramamukti? Is there any
necessary obstacle to jnAna in the case of such a person, which will require
janmAntara for jnAna to rise? When one repeatedly points out other passages
from the same granthakAra-s and other teachers that show how dhyAnAdi
sAdhana-s are sahakArI kAraNa-s for the rise of jnAna, I fail to see why they
should be misrepresented as if they are compromising the sampradAya. Is
such a criticism a deliberate distortion or based only on a misunderstanding?

> > For manda &madhyamAdhikAri-s shankara recommends, vibhuti upAsana, 
> archana, IshwarArpita karma yOga/ phala etc. I dont think jnAna mArga 
> which has the sAkshAt sAdhana-s such as shravaNa etc. can be linked with 
> patanjali's ashtAnga yOga which is anyway dvaita shAstra and sAdhana-s 
> prescribed there in that system is quite appropriate for the yOgAbhyAsi-s. 
> But vedAntins too can adopt some general anga-s of ashtAnga yOga in the 
> spirit of paramataM apratishiddham anumataM bhavati, like yama niyamAdi 
> till pratyAhAra to gain chitta svAstya & chittaikAgrata to do shravANAdi 

This is an artificial and self-imposed limitation. I have pointed out numerous
places in the bhAshya-s where dhyAna is called antaranga of jnAnanishThA.
I don't know from where you get this prescription of "till pratyAhAra". Earlier,
I thought you had said vedAntins could take yogAbhyAsa up to dhAraNA?
 
> direct sAdhana-s . But as you know shankara himself says chitta vrutti 
> nirOdha is not mOkshOpAya or mOksha sAdhana. na tu brahma vijnAna 
> vyatirekeNa anyat mOksha sAdhanaM avagamyate, as you know, it is the 
> declaration of bhagavatpAda in bruhadAraNyaka immediately after his vAkya 
> on 'smruti saNtAna'.

ananya sAdhanatvAc ca nirodhasya. na hy Atma vijnAna tat smRti saMtAna
vyatirekeNa citta vRtti nirodhasya sAdhanam asti - so says the very same
bRhadAraNyaka bhAshya in the very same passage. Why pick and choose
what one likes from the bhAshya-s and pretend as if the passages that one
doesn't like (or perhaps really understand) do not exist?

Vidyasankar