[Advaita-l] Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti
kuntimaddi sadananda
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 22 10:58:12 CDT 2015
AurobindJi - PraNAms
In the swayam jyoti Brahmana the deep sleep state is described close to turiiyam. For ajnaani, when he goes to deep sleep state he sleeps as ajnaani only - no ajnaani gets up from deep sleep state as jnaani. I think in the end Shankara points out that deep sleep state different from turiiyam as emphasized in the Mandukya - where it negates all the three states ,na prajnana ghanam..
One has to be careful in interpretation of this section in consistence with the Mandukya Upanishad.
In the Tai. Up. the deep sleep ananda is classified as ananda, moda and pramoda -The degree of ananda corresponds to the pratibimba ananda only. If it is jnaana swaruupam then ananda swaruupam also should be there.
Vidyaranaya provides an exhaustive analysis in the 11th Ch. of Pancadashi - the deep sleep state where akhandaakaara ajnana vRitti of the deep sleep state is described.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 6/22/15, Aurobind Padiyath <aurobind.padiyath at gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti
To: "kuntimaddi Sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
Cc: "advaita-l at lists advaita-vedanta. org" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Monday, June 22, 2015, 11:29 AM
Hari Om!
Sadaji,
I've studied in the Brhadaranyaka Bhashya
that there is no Ajnana in deep sleep. The "I don't
know" is a memory on waking up from sleep and never
expressed otherwise. That deep sleep is a swaroopa state
where no vishesha vijnana of anything other than swaroopa.
In the presence of swaroopa which is of nature of knowledge
ignorance can't stand unless assisted by anthakarana.
Upon waking the anthakarana becomes active and we have a
mixture of knowledge.
Even in waking and dream what we experience is
both Sat and Asat together. The very reason that we have
knowledge is because of that Sat but the Asat conceals the
truth to those who do not have the Sat-Asat viveka.
Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Hari Om!
Aurobind Padiyath
On 22 Jun 2015 20:39,
"kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
wrote:
Aurobind
Padiyatji - PraNAms
Provided a crisp explanation.
vRitti in a general sense can be considered as modification
of the mind, while in particular sense as thought. In deep
sleep state, there is akhandaakaara ajnanaa vRitit - -
unchanging - I do not know - a homogeneous unchanging vRitti
- a modification of mind due to its folded state expressed
as the absence of subject-object duality.
You have taken aptly the mirage water example. Iswara
sRishTi is still there, and the perception of the
plurality and the subject-object duality is still there just
as perception of the so-called waters of the mirage. Yet
there is akhanda jnaana vRitti that there is no waters in
the mirage waters. Thus jagat's mithyaatvam is
understood in spite of vyaavaharically there is an apparent
plurality.
Akhandaakaara jnaana vRitti is constant or continuous
awareness or knowledge that I am sat chit ananda in spite of
apparent plurality at transactional level. In that sense in
contrast to akhandaakaara ajnaana vRitti in the deep sleep
state expressed as I do not know - it is akhanda jnaana
vRitti of swaruupa jnaanam as aham brahmaasmi.
Bhagavana Ramana puts this as - aham aham taya, spurati hRit
swayam, parama puurNa sat. - I am - I am - I am - that
spontaneously raises in the mind but this I am in contrast
to previous I am, paramam and puurNam and Sat swaruupam.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 6/22/15, Aurobind Padiyath via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Difficulty with Akhandakara
Vrtti
To: "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
Cc: "advaita-l at lists advaita-vedanta. org"
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Monday, June 22, 2015, 6:00 AM
Dear Sri
Chandramouliji,
No need to
be confused.
First I said
the word vritti is being used for want of a better
word.
Here
the word vritti is being used as that
which substituted all other vritti
even
though it is not a vritti by itself.
Second I said it is a state and not a vritti
with the above in mind. But as
explained any
state has validity only in vyavaharika level, but this
is
not
a vyavaharika state but a paramarthika
avastha and the word avastha is for
explaining from the vyavaharika point of view.
Because once known there is
no return to
vyavaharika state. Vyavahara seen only by those who are
aspiring to get there, but not who has known
the "to be known". From the
view
point of one who has known the Truth as Sathyam Jnanam
Anantham, there
is nothing more to be known
and he becomes a "krthakrthyah" or one who
has
nothing more to be done. His Vyavahara is not a
Vyavahara from his point of
view but only
from those who see him from Vyavahara. It's called
an
Aabhsam.
So when you mix up
both these views they may appear to contradictory.
For the one who thinks a
mirage is water, he will think that the one who
knows the truth of mirage and warns the others
there is no water it is an
Aabhsam, is not
telling the truth. He is also seeing apparently water
only. But the one who knows it is not water in
spite he also has all the
same appearance of
water, knows the truth and do not get deluded.
Same way when all that appears as many is in
essence only one. For bubble
floating on sea
can see waves, froth and the deep waters, but knows all
are
water including itself and there is
nothing other than that.
I've used some examples for clarity but
they also have limitations.
Pranams,
Aurobind Padiyath
On 22 Jun 2015 14:49,
"H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Dear Sri
Aurobind Padiyath,
>
>
> I am somewhat
surprised. With your current statement
>
>
> << You are right when you say that
a state cannot be beret of both
> thought
and thoughtlessness. For "a state" is valid
only
from the
> vyavaharika point of view and
the very nature of it is built on thoughts
> and intervening absence before the next
one >> ,
>
>
> your statements in the previous mails
>
>
> << "akhandakara
vritti"
> Akhanda meaning unbroken,
Akara meaning (here) Swaroopa, Vritti (here)
> meaning continues, (not thoughts).
> So, that continuous Swaroopa avastha which
displaced the earlier wave like
>
thoughts of vishaya which were arising and subsiding
including that of deep
> sleep like state
where visheshvijnana absence is felt, because even deep
> sleep
> is not
continuous, is the true state of akhandakara vritti.
>>
>
>
> and
>
>
> << Having
explained that, let me try to come to the akandakara
vritti.
> The pramana for that state is
what is told as " Atma vyatirekena nasti
> kinchit". Even thought or
thoughtlessness are not applicable to that state
> where the mind cannot reach nor words can
explain. >> ,
>
>
> both become invalid
because in both “ akhandakara vritti “ is termed
> such a “ state “ only. Kindly
clarify.
>
>
> Pranams and Regards
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015
at 2:18 PM, Aurobind Padiyath <
> aurobind.padiyath at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> Dear
Sri Chandramouliji,
>> You are right
when you say that a state cannot be beret of both
thought
>> and thoughtlessness. For "a
state" is valid only from the vyavaharika point
>> of view and the very nature of it is
built on thoughts and intervening
>>
absence before the next one. In Paramarthata "Atma
vyatirekena kinchit
>> naasti
".
>> Neither the original
Upanishads nor the Bhashya ever mentions the term
>> "akandakara vritti". This
has crept in from later commentators attempt to
>> explain the inexplicable.
>> Even though the word akandakara is not
mentioned you can get a clarity if
>>
you can go thru the Bhashya on Brhadaranyaka where
detailed
explanation of
>> " Brahmaivedam
sarvam" is being discussed in the beginning.
>> Pranams,
>>
Aurobind Padiyath
>> On 22 Jun 2015
13:58, "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Sri Aurobind Padiyath Ji,
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the clarification
that you are not referring to nirvikalpa.
>>> It removes a major impediment in
progressing the discussion. A great
>>> relief.
>>>
>>>
>>> Once we talk of “ akhandakara
vritti “ and “ a state “ , we are in the
>>> Vyavaharika plane only and not in
Paramarthika plane. But the rest of your
>>> note mostly pertain to the
Paramarthika plane. It cannot be maintained <<
Even
>>> thought or thoughtlessness are not
applicable to that state >> . A “
>>> state “ must necessarily be
either with thought ( as in jagrat or svapna )
>>> or without thought ( as in
sushupti or samadhai ) . A “ state “ cannot be
>>> bereft of both. Kindly clarify.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also please give a reference to
where this concept of “ akhandakara
>>> vritti “ is explained so that I
can study and better understand the context
>>> in which it has been explained.
>>>
>>>
>>> Pranans and Regards
>>>
>>> On
Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Aurobind Padiyath <
>>> aurobind.padiyath at gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sri Chandramouliji,
>>>> Hari Om!!!
>>>> Nirvikapla stage is not
culminating one and hence cannot be Brahma
>>>> Jnana avastha. Just because
you have no vikalpa does not mean you have
>>>> knowledge. You have no vikalpa
even during deep sleep. The difference
>>>> between the two is one is
involuntary and the other is a result of forced
>>>> control of mind.
>>>> Having explained that, let me
try to come to the akandakara vritti.
>>>> The pramana for that state is
what is told as " Atma vyatirekena nasti
>>>> kinchit". Even thought or
thoughtlessness are not applicable to that state
>>>> where the mind cannot reach
nor words can explain. But it is not
>>>> nothingness. It or that state
is simply an "Is" or what we call in Sanskrit
>>>> as asti. To what or whom can
that state explain when there is none other
>>>> than just itself in a state of
being?
>>>> I do not know if I
can ever explain it in words. It is where all
>>>> thoughts become knowledge just
as where all ingredients of a yagna becomes
>>>> only fire in the yagnakund.
>>>> Hari Om!!!
>>>>
>>>> Aurobind Padiyath
>>>> On 21 Jun 2015 21:08, "H
S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Sri Aurobind Padiyath
Ji,
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you kindly clarify if
this state you are mentioning is a '
>>>>> thoughtless state "
or a " thought with unitary knowledge " . The
question
>>>>> is genuine as
many interpret nirvikalpa samadhi ( thoughtless state )
also
>>>>> as Brahma
Jnana.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Chandramouli
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at
6:05 PM, Aurobind Padiyath via Advaita-l <
>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hari Om,
>>>>>> "akhandakara
vritti"
>>>>>>
Akhanda meaning unbroken, Akara meaning (here)
Swaroopa,
Vritti
>>>>>> (here)
>>>>>> meaning continues,
(not thoughts).
>>>>>> So,
that continuous Swaroopa avastha which displaced the
earlier
wave
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> thoughts of vishaya
which were arising and subsiding including that
>>>>>> of deep
>>>>>> sleep like state where
visheshvijnana absence is felt, because even
>>>>>> deep sleep
>>>>>> is not continuous, is
the true state of akhandakara vritti. It is
>>>>>> called a
>>>>>> vritti as a misnomer
due to the absence of a better word.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hari om!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aurobind Padiyath
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>>>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To unsubscribe or
change your options:
>>>>>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For assistance,
contact:
>>>>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
To unsubscribe or change your
options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list