omhindu: November 2013

Sunday 24 November 2013

Tuesday 19 November 2013

Tat Twam Asi

Mahaa Vaakya of Chhaandogya Upanishad

This article explains the significance of the Mahaa Vaakya "Tat Twam Asi" which is the basis of A-Dwait Philosophy. Hope this message helps us for better understanding. The Knower And The Known Are One. After traveling long distances and trekking difficult terrains, Ayyappa pilgrims reach the Sabaree Hill. On climbing the sacred 18 steps, the first thing they see is the Mahaa Vaakya displayed above: "Tat Twam Asi", "You are That". This indicates that your Self is Parabrahmn, the eternal reality. This teaching which underlines the truth of your oneness or non-dual existence is revealed in the dialog between Sage Uddaalak and his son, Shwetaketu in the Chhaandogya Upanishad. The seeker-son asks. "How can "Tat" which means "Brahm" and "Twam" which means "You", the individual, be one and the same? While Brahm is the universal Self, the knowledge-absolute, the individual self is the limited being, groping in the darkness of ignorance.

The difference lies in your perception. The statement underlines the basic identity of Brahm in both cases. Since Aatmaa or Self is the reflection of Brahm, the all-pervading reality, the individual is asked to find his identity with Brahm. While reminding him that the reality behind the universal Self and the individual Self is the same, the Mahaa Vaakya exhorts the individual to seek his true identity with Brahm, the eternal reality. His liberation lies in realizing this truth.

Despite the Upanishad's assertion, the individual Jeev, who identifies himself with his body and mind, is not convinced. Living in the world of Maayaa or illusion and limited by various Upaadhi or obstacles, he seems to have lost his identity. Unaware of his inherent power, he goes with a begging bowl seeking limited favors. He seems to be rotting in the quagmire of Sansaar while destined to be the embodiment of Sat-Chit-Aanand - knowledge, consciousness and bliss.

The Kathopanishad says: "Arise, awake; reach the learned advice of the Guru and walk the path towards realization. Turn your attention away from the world, the scriptures say "and direct it inward so that you recognize your innate power and realize that you are infinite, perfect and Poornam or complete.

Most problems can be traced to one single cause. It is his eagerness to know everything about the world except about himself. Unless he knows about himself, he cannot know anything about others. Unless he knows the subject first, he cannot know the object. Rather than engaging himself exclusively to gain knowledge of the world or science and technology, he needs to strive for complete knowledge that deals not only with material but also spiritual aspects. Only that knowledge of the Self is complete and self-sufficient by knowing which all the un-knowable can be known.

Uddaalak asked his son Shwetaketu - "What is that one should know beyond which there is nothing else to be known?" When Shwetaketu had no answer, his father asked him to bring the seed of a Peepal tree and then break it. And what did he see inside? When the son said that he found only a small particles, he was asked to break the small particles also, till at last the son said that he could find nothing. Uddaalak then said - "Though you say you could see nothing, understand that it is from nothing that the great Peepal tree formed." Though you see yourself as a mere individual, you have great power within; of Self-knowledge, similar to the power inherent in the seed, to become a great tree. Realize this and your potential to rise up to the level of Brahm."

Modern instruments of knowledge cannot know Brahm because Brahm Gyaan is the knowledge of Self gained from contemplation and experience; there is neither knower nor known. Only he who has discarded his ego, who has come out of his attachments and bondages, can attain the state of Brahmn. Then, "You are That"

In Its Support
Once a simple woman wrote to Maharshi Raman - “I am not learned in the scriptures and I find the method of Self-enquiry too hard for me. I am a woman with seven children and a lot of household cares, and it leaves me little time for meditation. I request Bhagavan to give me some simpler and easier method.”

Sri Ramana gave her the following practical advice - “No learning or knowledge of Scriptures is necessary to know the Self, as no man requires a mirror to see himself. All knowledge is required only to be given up eventually as not-Self. Nor is household work or cares with children necessarily an obstacle. If you can do nothing more, at least continue saying ‘I, I’ to yourself mentally all the time, as advised in "Who am I?", whatever work you may be doing, whether you are sitting, standing or walking. ‘I’ is the name of God. It is the first and greatest of all Mantra. Even OM is second to it."

Thursday 7 November 2013

Brahma Satyam Jagat Mithya

brahman Satyam, Jagat Mithyä

The philosophy of Advaita Vedänta has been briefed in the following sloka attributed to Äcärya Sankara:

slokärdhena pravakshyämi yad-uktam granthakotibhih |

brahma satyam jagan-mithyä jivo brahmaiva näparah ||

- meaning - ‘In half of a sloka I state what has been stated by millions of texts; that is, Brahman alone is real and this jagat is mithyä, and the jiva is non-different from Brahman.’ From this statement, the Advaita philosophy can be divided into three distinct areas of analysis – i) Brahman is Satyam, ii) Jagat is Mithyä and iii) Relationship between the jiva and Brahman. We try below to analyse the above.

1. Brahman alone is Satyam/Real:
As per Sankara’s interpretation, Brahman is the only reality- Satyam. The word Brahman is derived from the Sanskrit root √brhi, meaning - vrddhau, - meaning growing, and the suffix man, added to it, signifies an absence of limitation (in expanse). So, Brahman derivatively means, that which is limitlessly big. One has to understand that, the root meaning of the word Brahman indicates its nitya-suddha-buddha-mukta-satya-svabhäva and its sarvajnatvam and sarva-saktimatvam. This Brahman is the intelligent and material cause of the jagat’s origin, existence, and dissolution. In explaining the meaning of the sütra - janmädyasya yatah - Br.Sü. I.1.2, Sankara says, from that Omniscient Omnipotent cause has come this jagat, comprising various names and forms, various doers and enjoyers, dependent on specific time and space and result of their actions, of incomprehensible varied forms and is sustained and dissolved by Him. One has to remember here that, as per Sankara, Brahman is represented from two points of view.

i) One is vyävahärika or empirical point of view,
ii) the other is päramärthika or absolute point of view.

From the vyävahärika point of view, Brahman is regarded as the cause of this jagat’s origin, existence, and dissolution, because this jagat indeed has an empirical reality. However, from absolute point of view, since this jagat is asat or mithyä, the question of its origin, existence and dissolution does not arise, much less Brahman being its cause. Again, from vyävahärika point of view, Brahman is sarvajna, sarva-saktimän, of varied attributes and of nitya-suddha-buddha-mukta-svabhäva. As per Sankara, this description belongs to Saguna-Brahman or Éçvara. One can worship and meditate upon this Isvara. However, Saguna-Brahman has only a vyävahärika reality.

From päramärthika point of view, one has to understand Brahman is neither the cause of this jagat, nor is omniscient or omnipotent. The origin of the jagat is not the intrinsic feature - svarüpa-laksana of Brahman. This phenomenon is his incidental feature - tatastha-lakshana. Therefore, from absolute point of view, Brahman is not the creator, sustainer, or dissolver of this jagat. He is devoid of any form or attribute. From absolute point of view, Brahman is Satyam-Jnänam-Anantam. This is the essential feature - svarüpa-laksana of Brahman.

Brahman does not have any kind of difference. Differences are of three kinds: i) difference from another class (vijätiya) ii) difference of one member of the same class (sajätiya), and iii) internal differentiation (svagata). Brahman is free from any of these three differences - vijätiya, sajätiya, or svagata bheda. This undifferentiated Brahman without any kind of distinction is the only Satyam - Reality, and except Him, everything else is to be understood as asat (vyävahärika, prätibhäshika or tuccham) - unreal. However, one has to understand here that, although Brahman is devoid of any attribute, He is not sunya - void. Otherwise one can get caught by the Buddhistic understanding. It is not possible for bhäva - something to come out of abhäva or sunya - nothing. Therefore, one has to notice that Sankara’s establishment of an attributeless Brahman, completely swallows Buddhistic theory of sunyaväda.

2. Doctrine of jagat being mithyä:
Sankara has established the reality of this jagat as mithyä. However, by mithyä here, one is not to understand the reality of the jagat as that of the reality of vandhyä-putra or sasa-srnga. Here, what is mithyä as per Sankara needs to be clear. That this jagat is not non-existent like the vandhyä-putra or sasa-srnga is clear from the fact that the jagat is evident to us. However, this jagat is not päramärthika or absolute real like Ätmä or Brahman, because it is subject to time, subject to change and can be negated, therefore asat (here asat means vyävaharika reality). So the jagat is not sat like Brahman-Ätmä, nor asat (here asat means tuccham - absolute non-existent) like the vandhyä-putra. It is anirvacaniya, i.e. neither sat nor asat. This is what is meant by his - jagat mithyä.

The Three Orders of Reality:
Sankara has used three orders of realities in his explanation of Advaita-Vedänta - i) prätibhäshika (ii) vyävahärika (iii) päramärthika. This has already been discussed. The appearance of the snake on the rope, or the objects seen in the dream-state, which is negated in waking-state, belongs to prätibhäshika - subjective reality. Before knowledge of Brahman/Ätmä, whatever appears as real, and wherein transaction is possible, is vyävahärika - objective reality. And Nirguna-Brahman from whom Ätmä is non-different, that can never be negated is päramärthika - absolute reality.

Thus, the jagat has some kind of reality that is neither prätibhäshika, nor päramärthika. Therefore, while trying to understand the mithyätvam of the jagat, one should not lose sight of this vyävahärika reality. That this jagat is not real, is the purport of the doctrine of jagat-mithyä.

After this explanation, it becomes imperative to explain the Mäyäväda of Sankara. That this jagat is because of mäyä or avidyä, has been presented in many places of his bhäshyam. Many contenders of Sankara call him a Mäyävädi, whether deliberately, or innocently and have severely criticized him.

Now its time to discuss the essence of Sankara’s doctrine of Mäyä.

***

Swämini Ätmaprajnänanda Saraswati is a Vedäntäcäryä and Vyäkaranäcäryä. She teaches Vedänta and Pänini in Ärsha Vidyä Vikäs Kendra at Bhubaneswar. She is the author of two published books - Nomenclature of the Vedas and Rshikäs of the Rgveda

Wednesday 6 November 2013

KENA UPANISAD ===SRI ADI SANKARACARYA 1.3 = 1.4

KENA UPANISAD | 1.3 & 1.4 | SRI ADI SANKARACARYA

KENA UPANISAD | 1.3 | SRI ADI SANKARACARYA
na tatra caksuh gacchati na vak gacchati no manah
na vidmah na vijanimah yatha etat anusisyat || 1.3 ||

3 . The eye does not go there , nor speech , nor mind . We do not know ( Brahman to be such and such ) ; hence we are not aware of an any process of instructing about IT .

|| BHASYA || : Since Brahman , as the Ear etc of the ear etc , is the Self of those organs , therefore , tatra , there , to that Brahman ; caksuh , the eye ; na gacchati , does not go ; for it is not possible to go to oneself .

Similarly , na vak gacchati , speech does not go . When a word , as expressed by the organ of speech , reveals its own idea , speech is said to go to its object .

But Brahman is the Self of that word , as also of the organ that utters it ; therefore speech does not go .

Just as fire , which burns and illumines , does not burn or illumine itself , similarly is this so .

No manah , nor the mind . Though the mind thinks and determines other things , it does not think or determine itself ; for of it , too , Brahman is the Self .

A thing is cognized only by the mind and the senses . As Brahman is not an object of perception to these , therefore , na vidmah , we do not know , " That Brahman is of this kind " .

Hence na vijanimah , we are not aware of ; yatha , the process by which ; etat , this Brahman ; anusisyat , should be taught , instructed to a disciple — this is the significance .

For , a thing that is perceived by the senses can be taught to another through categories denoting class , quality , and action .

Brahman is not possessed of these categories , viz class etc ; hence it is very difficult to convince the disciples about IT through instruction .

In this way the Upanisad shows the necessity of putting forth great effort in the matter of imparting instruction and comprehending its meaning .

The contingency of the total denial of any process of instruction having arisen from the text ,

" We do not know Brahman , and hence we are not aware of any process of instructing about IT "

, an exception to this is being stated in the next verse . True it is that one cannot impart knowledge about the Highest with the help of such means of valid knowledge as the evidence of the senses ; but the knowledge can be produced with the help of traditional authority * .

Therefore traditional authority is being quoted for the sake of imparting instruction about IT :

KENA UPANISAD | 1.4 | SRI ADI SANKARACARYA

Anyat eva tat viditat athah aviditat adhi iti shushruma purvesham ye nah tat vyachachakshire || 1.4 ||

4 . " That ( Brahman ) is surely different from the known ; and again , IT is above the unknown " — such was ( the utterance ) we heard of the ancient ( teachers ) who explained IT to us .

|| BHASYA || : Anyat eva , different indeed ; is tat , that which is the topic under discussion and which has been spoken of as the Ear etc , of the ear etc , and as beyond their reach .

IT is , indeed , different from the known . The known is very much within the grasp of the act of knowing , that which is the object of the verb , " to know " . Inasmuch as everything is known somewhere by somebody , all that is manifested is certainly known . The idea is that , IT ( Brahman ) is different from that .

Lest , in that case , IT should be unknown , the text says , ( IT is , ) atho , again ; different aviditat , from the unknown , from what is opposed to the known , from that which consists of the unmanifested ignorance , which is the seed of the manifested .

The word adhi , used in the sense of " above " , means " different " by a figure of speech ; for it is well-known that anything that exists above another is different from that other . Whatever is known is limited , mortal , and full of misery ; and hence it is to be rejected .

So when it is said that Brahman is different from the known , it amounts to asserting that IT is not to be rejected . Similarly , when it is affirmed that IT is different from the unknown , it amounts to saying that IT is not a thing to be obtained .

It is for the sake of getting an effect , indeed , that somebody different from it acquires some other thing to serve as a cause . For this reason , too , nothing different ( from the Self ) need be acquired to serve any purpose distinct from the knower ( Self ) .

Thus the statement , that Brahman is different from the known and the unknown , having amounted to Brahman being denied as an object to be acquired or rejected , the desire of the disciple to know Brahman ( objectively ) comes to an end , for Brahman is non-different from the Self . ( Or , according to a different reading — the desire of the disciple to know a Brahman different from the Self , comes to an end ) * .

For nothing other than one’s own Self can possibly be different from the known and the unknown .

Thus it follows that the meaning of the sentence is that the Self is Brahman .

And this also follows from such Vedic texts as :

" This Self is Brahman " ( Ma . 2 ; Br . II . v . 19 , IV . iv . 5 ) ,

" that Self which is untouched by sin " ( Ch . VIII . vii . 1 ) ,

" the Brahman that is immediate and direct — the Self that is within all " ( Br . III . iv . 1 ) , etc .

In this way , the text , " Thus we heard " etc , states how through a succession of preceptors and disciples , was derived the purport of the sentence which establishes as Brahman that Self of all which is devoid of all distinguishing features , and is the light of pure consciousness .

Moreover , Brahman is to be known only through such a traditional instruction of preceptors and not through argumentation , nor by study ( or exposition , intelligence , great learning , austerity , sacrifices , etc — iti , such ( was what ) ; susruma , we heard ; purvesam , of the ancient teachers ; the teachers ye , who ; vyacacaksire , explained , taught clearly ; nah , to us ; tat , that Brahman .

The idea that the Self is Brahman having been established through the sentence ,

" That is surely different from the known , and again , that is above the unknown "

, the hearer has this doubt :

" How can the Self be Brahman ? For the Self is familiarly known to be that which is entitled to undertake rites and meditation and which , being subject to birth and death , seeks to attain either the gods headed by Brahma ( Creator ) or heaven by undertaking the practice of rites or meditation .

Therefore some adorable being other than that ( Self ) , eg Visnu , Isvara ( Siva ) , Indra , or Prana ( vital force or Hiranyagarbha ) may well be Brahman , but not so the Self ; for this is opposed to common sense . Just as other logicians say that the Self is different from the Lord , so also the ritualists worship other gods saying ,

' Sacrifice to that one ' , ' Sacrifice to that one ' .

Therefore it is reasonable that , that should be Brahman which is known and adorable ; and the worshipper should be one who is different from this " .

Having noticed this doubt either from the looks or the words of the disciple , the teacher said , " Don’t be in doubt thus " ; —

" That which is not uttered by speech , that by which speech is revealed , know that alone to be Brahman , and not what people worship as an object . || 1.5 || "

( NOTE : * The word used by Sankara is agama , which literally means traditional knowledge which has come down through the line of teachers and pupils . By quoting traditional teaching one does not expose oneself to the charge of speaking about something that defies speech . | * The expression concerned is svatmano'nanyatvat brahmavisaya jijnasa , or svatmano'nyabrahmavisaya jijnasa . )

Saturday 2 November 2013

knowledge of Self :: Who am I ??

From the Atma Bodha by Shri Adi Shankaracharya
Lets find out the knowledge of Self is that which is ever present but still forgotten due to the ignorance

Avirodhitayaa Karma, Navidyaam Vinivartayet
Vidya-Avidyaam Nihantyeva, Tejashtimira-sanghavat||

Atma Bodha - 3

Translation::

Action cannot destroy ignorance, for it is not in conflict with or opposed to ignorance. Knowledge does verily destroy ignorance as light destroys deep darkness.

Comments::

Knowledge alone is the one direct means of liberation through a very simple example.

The knowledge that is here being discussed of is not something that can be gained new, but it is verily inherent in us. It is one’s own nature and hence this knowledge of Self which is ever present can never be got as a result of any action. Hence no divine actions in the sense of direct cause and effect can lead to knowledge of the self.

Supposing that there is darkness in a room, then no amount of sweeping or cleaning or any such actions will remove the darkness but it can only be done by light. However thick the darkness is, it disappears in an instant by light. Similarly, it is only the knowledge that can negate the illusory ignorance. Also actions are but a result of ignorance, that which is a result can never remove its cause. Action is done only when one perceives duality as there is always a distinction of doer, instrument and the result in any actions. And this duality is perceived only due to ignorance. Hence actions can never liberate one from ignorance, but it is only knowledge that can remove all miseries.

Just as light is opposed to darkness, knowledge opposed to ignorance can only negate it. This darkness doesn’t disappear anywhere nor goes anywhere but is only negated by the light. Similarly, the illusory ignorance is negated by the light of the Self knowledge.

Thus all the actions can only prepare a seeker for the revelation of this ever present knowledge but can never by themselves remove the ignorance.
Photo: :: knowledge of Self :: Who am I ?? From the Atma Bodha by Shri Adi Shankaracharya :: Lets find out the knowledge of Self is that which is ever present but still forgotten due to the ignorance Avirodhitayaa Karma, Navidyaam Vinivartayet Vidya-Avidyaam Nihantyeva, Tejashtimira-sanghavat|| Atma Bodha - 3 Translation:: Action cannot destroy ignorance, for it is not in conflict with or opposed to ignorance. Knowledge does verily destroy ignorance as light destroys deep darkness. Comments:: Knowledge alone is the one direct means of liberation through a very simple example. The knowledge that is here being discussed of is not something that can be gained new, but it is verily inherent in us. It is one’s own nature and hence this knowledge of Self which is ever present can never be got as a result of any action. Hence no divine actions in the sense of direct cause and effect can lead to knowledge of the self. Supposing that there is darkness in a room, then no amount of sweeping or cleaning or any such actions will remove the darkness but it can only be done by light. However thick the darkness is, it disappears in an instant by light. Similarly, it is only the knowledge that can negate the illusory ignorance. Also actions are but a result of ignorance, that which is a result can never remove its cause. Action is done only when one perceives duality as there is always a distinction of doer, instrument and the result in any actions. And this duality is perceived only due to ignorance. Hence actions can never liberate one from ignorance, but it is only knowledge that can remove all miseries. Just as light is opposed to darkness, knowledge opposed to ignorance can only negate it. This darkness doesn’t disappear anywhere nor goes anywhere but is only negated by the light. Similarly, the illusory ignorance is negated by the light of the Self knowledge. Thus all the actions can only prepare a seeker for the revelation of this ever present knowledge but can never by themselves remove the ignorance

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.4.6

ब्रह्म तं परादाद्यो2न्यत्रात्मनो ब्रह्म वेद क्षत्रं तं परादाद्यो2न्यत्रात्मनः क्षत्रं वेद लोकास्तं परादुर्योन्यत्रात्मनो लोकान्वेद देवास्तं परादुर्यो2न्यत्रात्मनो देवान्वेद भूतानि तं परादुर्यो2न्यत्रात्मनो भूतानि वेद सर्वं तं परादाद्योन्यत्रात्मनः सर्वं वेद इदं ब्रह्म इदं क्ष्त्रम् इमे लोकाः इमे देवाः इमानि भूतानि इदं सर्वं यदयमात्मा ॥

(Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.4.6)

The brahmana rejects one who knows him as different from the Atman. The kshatriya rejects one who knows him as different from the Atman. The worlds reject one who knows them as different from the Atman. The gods reject one who knows them as different from the Atman. Beings reject one who knows them as different from the Atman. All rejects one who knows all as different from the Atman. This brahmana, this kshatriya, these worlds, these gods, these beings, and this All are the Atman.

The Universe Is In Your Body

'As above, so below' is a fundamental axiom in the field of metaphysics. It has been incorporated into a variety of religions and philosophies from around the world, particularly in India. One of the most unique concepts found within general Sanatan vedic Dharma is the belief that the entire universe, in fact EVERYTHING that exists outside our bodies also exists inside our bodies too (in both a figurative AND a literal sense). The reason why this is believed is because the Vedic conception of the universe is comparable to that of a fractal. A fractal is known for its self-repeating nature and the universe as described in the Vedas is mentioned as having the same patterns reproduced in all levels of the cosmos.

Thus, the Upanishads boldly declare "Yatha pinde tatha brahmande, yatha brahmande tatha pinde"---"As is the individual, so is the universe, as is the universe, so is the individual".

The microcosm is oneself and the macrocosm is the universe. The macrocosm is as the microcosm and vice versa; within each lies the other and through understanding one (usually the microcosm), you can understand the other. The jiva (individual soul) is nothing but a kind of mirror of the universal soul (Brahman) - each individual soul contains the cosmos as a whole. Ayurveda says: "Purushoyam loka sannidah"---"Man is an epitome of the universe." When you know man, you know the universe. Yajur Veda reveals the same truth: "Yatha pinde tatha brahmande, yatha brahmande tatha pinde"---"As is the individual, so is the universe, as is the universe, so is the individual". In Vedic cosmology, there are 14 lokas (planetary systems) within this universal egg or sphere. 7 of them are usually classed as 'lower' planetary systems and their names, in descending order, are as follows: Atala,
Vitala, Sutala, Talatala, Mahatala, Rasatala and Patala.

In much the same vein, there are another 7 lokas which are classed as 'higher' planetary systems and their names, in ascending order, are as follows: Bhuloka, Bhuvarloka, Svargaloka, Maharloka, Janaloka, Tapoloka and Satyaloka.
Bhuloka is often known as the 'earthly planetary system' because it's the planetary system that contains the Earth (but is not limited to the Earth by any means). Bhuvarloka exists in-between Bhuloka and Svargaloka ('svarga' means 'heaven' and is referring to the greater cosmos). According to Vedic cosmology, only three planetary systems are visible to the naked human eye: Bhuloka, Bhuvarloka and Svargaloka.

Everything in the cosmos that has been mapped by our telescopes fits neatly into these three planetary systems. Bhuloka is the grossest system in terms of the physical nature of beings and objects. Bhuvarloka and Svargaloka are equally gross as far as matter is concerned, but they are interpenetrated by more subtle dimensions as well. These subtle dimensions cannot be perceived by our regular senses. Also, the higher one progressively travels along the planetary systems, the subtler the planetary systems or lokas become. In any case, I digress. As the title of this thread suggests, one need not travel outwardly to go from one loka to another. It can be an inward journey. There are 7 major chakras that belong to our astral bodies and each of these 7 chakras corresponds to certain plexuses along the spinal cords of our physical bodies. Furthermore, each of these 7 chakras corresponds to one of the 7 higher lokas.

There is a specific character from the Sanskrit alphabet associated with each of the chakras. The chakra at the lowest point of the body is called the muladhara chakra and it corresponds with Bhuloka. The chakra above that is called the swadhisthana chakra and corresponds with Bhuvarloka. Above that is the manipura chakra and corresponds with Svargaloka. Above that is the anahata chakra and corresponds with Maharlok

a. Above that is the vishuddha chakra and corresponds with Janaloka. Above that is the ajna chakra and corresponds with Tapoloka. And finally, above that is the sahasra chakra and corresponds with Satyaloka.

There is a particular grade of consciousness and a certain distinct degree of bliss that is associated with each of these 7 chakras and is experienced when those chakras are completely opened. There are a lot of claims of people who believe to have fully opened all of the 7 major chakras, but factually very few people have ever achieved more than completely opening even the muladhara chakra (what to speak of the 6 higher chakras!). It is not an easy feat. It is typically the attainment of an accumulation of many, many lifetimes worth of yoga practices done specifically with the intention of completely opening all of the chakras. The chakras are poetically compared to lotuses and they normally exist in a dormant or 'sleeping' state when the astral body is joined together with the physical body. The buds of the chakra lotuses are closed and, as a result, the petals are hidden inwards when the chakra is inactive and hasn't opened up to fully blossom. As one progressively opens and makes active each of the 7 dormant chakras that run along the spine of the subtle body, the quality of one's consciousness becomes more and more refined. Veil after veil of illusion is pierced and the aspirant becomes fit to understand the essential nature of things. Also, the aspirant feels peculiar degrees of bliss that are noticeable through various symptoms (shivering, hair standing on end, the body seems to be emitting rays of light etc.). As each of the 7 chakras are progressively 'switched on' (so to speak), the quality of the bliss increases and the aspirant becomes less conscious of his or her physical body. When the sahasra chakra is finally opened to its fullest extent, the aspirant experiences the same level of bliss experienced by the inhabitants of Satyaloka (the highest, largest and subtlest planetary system in this entire universe).

So, to recap everything I've just said, it is believed by some people (myself included, to a certain extent) that the astral body of an individual's soul contains the cosmos within it. This is reflected in our physical bodies. As I've already mentioned, Bhuloka is situated in the feet, Bhuvarloka in the genitals, Svargaloka in the navel, Maharloka in the heart, Janaloka in the throat, Tapoloka in the brow centre and Satyaloka above the head. These are called the upper lokas and they are all situated in the body of man. The lower lokas are situated in the body of man too. Atala is situated in the soles of the feet, Vitala on the nails, Sutala in the heels, Talatala in the hip, Rasatala in the knees, Mahatala in the thighs and Patala in the anus. The body is thus like a miniature reproduction of the universe. As long as the physical body is alive, the 33 primary devas exist within the body in a subtle form and perform their respective functions to keep the body running smoothly. For example, Agni (fire god) resides in the mouth as the voice, Vayu (air god) resides in the nostrils as inhalation and exhalation and Surya (heat and light god) resides in the eyes as sight. This should not be taken literally as though there are deities with gross bodies existing within our own bodies. The devas in this context are merely forces (living forces) that empower our bodies. They are personified forces. There is a lot more that can be said, but it actually gets much more complex. In any case, I'll close this post by quoting what a wise man known as Ralph Waldo Emerson had to say:

"The universe is an externalisation of the soul."

It's High Time to Return Home, It's time To Revive what has been Forgotten, It's Time to Re-Write the Legacy of Aaryas, It's Time to come Back. Come back to Vedas.

omhindu

Sunday 24 November 2013

Upanishad ?

Tuesday 19 November 2013

I am Brahma

All Avtar Of Lord Shiva

Tat Twam Asi

Thursday 7 November 2013

Brahma Satyam Jagat Mithya

Wednesday 6 November 2013

KENA UPANISAD ===SRI ADI SANKARACARYA 1.3 = 1.4

Saturday 2 November 2013

knowledge of Self :: Who am I ??

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.4.6

The Universe Is In Your Body

ROHIT KUMAR

Translate

Popular Posts

Followers