11-10-2004, 10:45 PM
>With all due respects Gangajal ji, is this a trick question? [smile.gif] "All advaitists" is an oxymoron. All >'sadhakas' do not necessarily reach the goal in just one try. Nonetheless, with effort, and by >understanding the scriptural teachings, and with viveka & abhyasa-vairagya the false notion of >identity with the body will cease. In Absolute Advaita, there is no Union because there is no separation >to begin with. This is Kaivalyam. Thanks for saying that it is 'notoriously difficult', as it only suggests >that it is not 'impossible'.
Sundar ji,
I meant by Advaitists sadhakas who accept Advaita as the highest experience. A sadhaka who follows Vishistadvaita would of course deny the existence of Nirguna Brahman.
What you have stated here is theory. In practice, sadhaka keeps on trying to activate sahasrara chakra (assuming she has pierced all the other chakras) . From the practical point of view, whether there is a union or whether there is no separation is not a relevant question. The question about union
or separation is only of academic interest.
>I have a question, is Swami Swahananda the same one who translated Panchadasi? If so please do >convey him my humble bowings. He may not have seen anyone in samadhi because sadakas (while on >the way to the goal) do not advertise it. They may share their thoughts *after* the fact when it is safe, >but never brag about it when they are still trying for it as it is counter productive. Nonetheless, trust >me that the type of experiences as mentioned in the Gospel is quite common in history, and is >documented.
Yes, Swami Swahananda is the one who translated Panchadasi. It is not a question about him not seeing anyone in samadhi. I suspect (I am not sure) that Swami Swahananda has himself reached at least the lower stage of Nirvikalpa Samadhi. What I was saying is that in the Kathamrita, Sri Ramakrishna would go into Samadhi as soon as someone mentions about God. Then sometimes Sri Ramakrishna's samadhi would be so deep that he would not be able to come out of it without someone repeating the mantra at his ears. Sadhakas who have reached such high stage are very rare. I must disagree with you that these higher experiences are common.
>Yes, desire to realize itself is an impediment. Desires by itself has no significance other than acting as a >distraction for the Dhrashta (Seer.) It's like the desire to thrive on beer & nachos and not exercise >being a deterrent to having six-pack abs. Once the desire is given up, and the prescribed exercise is >done, you get results.
>Please refer to my link mentioning meditation to be SAMVADI BHRAMA. I hope you agree with this >point. The desire to serve Ishwara for Eternity is also a leading error (Samvadi Bhrama.) The question >iis, is the desiring jeeva completely different from the object - i.e. Paramatma?
Again you are giving theoretical arguments. I am approaching it from the practical point of view. For example, you say,"Once desire is given up". The difficulty is that it is not easy to give up desire. The sadhaka may think that she has no desire but she has some desire unwittingly. Once some of us were talking with a RKM monk. He suddenly asked us to tell him about his defect. Clearly he was stuck at a point and wanted us to tell him about his defects. This particular monk has been practicing meditation for more than 30 years and still has not reached perfection.
You have read the Kathamrita. You know that Sri Ramakrishna talks of three kinds of aspirants. The
first kind completely merge with the Divine like salt in water, the second kind are half soaked but do not
completely merge while the third kind remains different. This is the practical experience. Krishna also mentions the three kinds of worshippers in the Gita. Sri Ramakrishna also mentions that Brahman remains eternally frozen for some kinds of sadhakas. So while I know that from the point of view of Advaita you are right, from the practical point of view there are sadhakas who maintain difference.
>Wrt kundalini, did you have any experiences with it? Or do you know of anyone who has succeeded in >raising it?
You know that no practitioner will discuss their experience. Swami Swahananda told me not to tell even him my experiences if I have them. I believe that the Swami has certainly succeeded in raising Kundalini. There is a person in my family who has certainly riased Kundalini and actually even gone past Savikalpa Samadhi. She does not know too much theory but she told me that she did ask her Ishta Devata to show where he lives. Her Ishta Devata told her that she would not be able to live if she is shown that.
Sundar ji,
I meant by Advaitists sadhakas who accept Advaita as the highest experience. A sadhaka who follows Vishistadvaita would of course deny the existence of Nirguna Brahman.
What you have stated here is theory. In practice, sadhaka keeps on trying to activate sahasrara chakra (assuming she has pierced all the other chakras) . From the practical point of view, whether there is a union or whether there is no separation is not a relevant question. The question about union
or separation is only of academic interest.
>I have a question, is Swami Swahananda the same one who translated Panchadasi? If so please do >convey him my humble bowings. He may not have seen anyone in samadhi because sadakas (while on >the way to the goal) do not advertise it. They may share their thoughts *after* the fact when it is safe, >but never brag about it when they are still trying for it as it is counter productive. Nonetheless, trust >me that the type of experiences as mentioned in the Gospel is quite common in history, and is >documented.
Yes, Swami Swahananda is the one who translated Panchadasi. It is not a question about him not seeing anyone in samadhi. I suspect (I am not sure) that Swami Swahananda has himself reached at least the lower stage of Nirvikalpa Samadhi. What I was saying is that in the Kathamrita, Sri Ramakrishna would go into Samadhi as soon as someone mentions about God. Then sometimes Sri Ramakrishna's samadhi would be so deep that he would not be able to come out of it without someone repeating the mantra at his ears. Sadhakas who have reached such high stage are very rare. I must disagree with you that these higher experiences are common.
>Yes, desire to realize itself is an impediment. Desires by itself has no significance other than acting as a >distraction for the Dhrashta (Seer.) It's like the desire to thrive on beer & nachos and not exercise >being a deterrent to having six-pack abs. Once the desire is given up, and the prescribed exercise is >done, you get results.
>Please refer to my link mentioning meditation to be SAMVADI BHRAMA. I hope you agree with this >point. The desire to serve Ishwara for Eternity is also a leading error (Samvadi Bhrama.) The question >iis, is the desiring jeeva completely different from the object - i.e. Paramatma?
Again you are giving theoretical arguments. I am approaching it from the practical point of view. For example, you say,"Once desire is given up". The difficulty is that it is not easy to give up desire. The sadhaka may think that she has no desire but she has some desire unwittingly. Once some of us were talking with a RKM monk. He suddenly asked us to tell him about his defect. Clearly he was stuck at a point and wanted us to tell him about his defects. This particular monk has been practicing meditation for more than 30 years and still has not reached perfection.
You have read the Kathamrita. You know that Sri Ramakrishna talks of three kinds of aspirants. The
first kind completely merge with the Divine like salt in water, the second kind are half soaked but do not
completely merge while the third kind remains different. This is the practical experience. Krishna also mentions the three kinds of worshippers in the Gita. Sri Ramakrishna also mentions that Brahman remains eternally frozen for some kinds of sadhakas. So while I know that from the point of view of Advaita you are right, from the practical point of view there are sadhakas who maintain difference.
>Wrt kundalini, did you have any experiences with it? Or do you know of anyone who has succeeded in >raising it?
You know that no practitioner will discuss their experience. Swami Swahananda told me not to tell even him my experiences if I have them. I believe that the Swami has certainly succeeded in raising Kundalini. There is a person in my family who has certainly riased Kundalini and actually even gone past Savikalpa Samadhi. She does not know too much theory but she told me that she did ask her Ishta Devata to show where he lives. Her Ishta Devata told her that she would not be able to live if she is shown that.