[Advaita-l] Vikalpa, Savikalpa, and Nirvikalpa

[Bhaskar YR]

sAshtAnta praNAms Sri Vidya prabhuji
Hare Krishna

>  with your permission, here is my thoughts :

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? 

>  as you know for the jnAna (Atmaikatva jnAna) there is no other way 
(nAnyaH pantha vidyateyanAya) other than veda mArga, shAstra janita mArga. 
 yOgAbhyAsI, bhakta-s  would get the krama mukti depends upon their 
sAdhana bala and adhikARa but for them also jnAna is the ONLY mArga to 
realize their own svarUpa. 


Is there any necessary obstacle to jnAna in the case of such a person, 
which will require
janmAntara for jnAna to rise? 

> I think that is the reason why arjuna asks about 'yOga brashta-s' and 
subsequent clarification by lord.  OTOH, for the jnAni-s there is no other 
obstacle other than avidyA and once this ajnAna goes there is nothing that 
can stop jnAni to realize & establish in his Atma svarUpa. 
phalatvaprasiddhirapi mOkshasya baNdhanivruttimAtrApekshAH clarifies 
shankara in sUtra bhAshya. 

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, 

>  prabhuji, those who talk that dhyAna as sAdhana is purusha tantra 
(dhyAnaM yadyapi purusha taNtraM, kartuM, akartuM, anyathAkartum vA 
shakyaM)  do not objecting to the fact that dhyAna is sahakAri sAdhana. 
But the question is whether this dhyAna is as prescribed in the ashtAnga 
yOga of patanjali or it has its own vedic flavor!!?? 


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?

>  prabhuji, if you are directing these comments towards me, I can only 
say it is only an effort on my part to understand the shankara 
siddhAnta..I dont have any personal aversion towards yOga & related 
matters to do the deliberate distortion. 


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 do agree with this prabhuji.  jnAnanishtA rUpa 'sahaja' (aprayatna) 
dhyAna which shankara talks in bruhadAraNyaka 1-4-7 & 1-4-10. 


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?

>  dhAraNa in veda mArga does not mean we have to concentrate our chitta 
on chakra-s (svAdhishtAnAdi chakra-s, desha bandhaH chittasya dhAraNa so 
says yOga sUtra ) or any other external objects (like lotus, bindu etc.).  

 
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?

>  sometimes your comments really hurts me prabhuji. But I know whatever 
you say that is only for my betterment.  Since you have already quoted the 
bhAshya vAkya, I have not quoted the full sentence.  Even if I quote the 
full sentence that does not say chitta vrutti nirOdha is mOksha sAdhana. 
Since jnAni's jnAna is ekadhAra towards Atmaikatva it can be called as 
chitta vrutti nirOdha but it is sahaja & aprayatna, we cannot compare this 
with patanjali's prayatna pUrvaka chitta vrutti nirOdha as a purusha 
tantra sAdhana.  In that bhAshya vAkya itself shankara clarifies 
abhyupagamya idaM uktaM. 

Your humble servant
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar