Sage Vasishta's Response to Prajnapti's Questions

Sage Vasishta's Response to Prajnapti's Questions
[Yogavaasishta is an authoritative Advaitic scripture of about 32,000 verses divided into six chapters. The last chapter is Nirvana. It comes in two parts – Purva (Book I) and Uttara (Book II).  King Prajnapti, Ruler of the City Ilavati, raises many doubts about Creation and the world that appears to us. These are the sort of questions any one of us would like to ask. Sage Vasishta gives his answers from Sargas 204 to 210 in Book II of the sixth Chapter Nirvana. Presented here is an Extract (adopted with slight modifications) from a forthcoming Book – Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana - Book II by Shri K.V. Krishna Murthy, English Translation by Dr. Vemuri Ramesam. The Questions were posted on 23 Sept 2011.]


Part II: Sage Vasishta's Response to Prajnapti's Questions:


Vasishta:  Oh, King Prajnapti!  These are very interesting questions.  I may not answer your questions sequentially.  However, I shall explain all the points raised by you through a coherent and comprehensive response.  Please follow my presentation attentively.

You have an awareness of a thing ‘being’ present and also a thing ‘not being’ present.   If you carefully look at it, what you have in both cases is awareness.  Awareness is knowledge.

But knowledge has a peculiar quality.  It shows the things in the way it conceives them.  If it strongly feels that a thing ‘is’ there, it will be there.  If it feels strongly it ‘is not’ there, it will not be there.  A good example for this is the dreamscape.  The knowledge within you felt during the period of dreaming that the dream world existed.  Then the dream world attained beingness and showed up.  After a while, the knowledge within you felt that it was not there.  Immediately it disappears.  You call it as waking up.

We can infer from this that ‘is’ and ‘is not’ (a thing being present or not being present) are different forms of knowledge.  What really is in both the cases is knowledge or awareness.

Hence if the knowledge within you feels anywhere anytime that it has a body, there will be a body.  If it feels otherwise, there will not be a body.  When it feels the body is there, the knowledge thinks that it is the body.  It superimposes the qualities of the body on knowledge and the qualities of knowledge on the body.  This is how bodies are generated and maintained.

Your question was on how bodies could be produced in heaven and hell. You can understand that they are born by the process of superimposition by knowledge.

Here is an important point that you may take note of.  When I said knowledge, I do not mean the Supreme Knowledge of Brahman.  Pure Knowledge of Brahman is different from the knowledge that makes aware of your body and senses.  The quality of ‘knowing’ is a property of the knower.  In other words it is his nature.  It exists as an imagination.

Let us consider dreams as an example.  You think at the time of dreaming that you are witnessing some objects which are separate from you.  But the fact is you witness yourself!  That is to say that you are “awaring” yourself.  This sort of ‘knowing’ is your nature.

During your wakeful state also it works the same way.  Certain awareness within you takes the form of your body.  You do not have any body beyond this.  If you understood this clearly, it will answer the first seven of your questions.

In your next question you raised the issue of atheism.  The atheists opine that the body is responsible for awareness.  It implies that consciousness emanates from inert substance.  This is totally unacceptable.  But they come up with a counter question.  If a body is produced from Consciousness as we say, they ask why the body lacks the ability to be aware of things after death.   My answer is as follows:

You are Consciousness-Self.  The dream world originated from you.  Therefore, it has also to be conscious like you.  Why then the inert things like rocks and stones appear in the dream?  The only answer for this question is that you had certain thoughts at the beginning of the dream.  You witness some things that are sentient and some things that are insentient in your dream corresponding to those initial thoughts.  In other words, you yourself appear as inert substance at some places and as conscious substance at other places in the dreamscape based on your initial thoughts.  This is true from your own experience.

Because of the nature of the thought that occurred to Hiranyagarbha at the moment of the beginning of the creation, you find a dead body to be inert.  This is a finding that is only apparently so.  The fact is the entire world is Consciousness just like the total dreamscape is you yourself. What causes your body is also the same thing.  So the argument of the atheist does not stand to reason.  We do not, therefore, support it.

You brought up a new issue of substances with form and without form in your ninth question.  This question does not have a locus.  We have already said that the entire creation was of illusory origin and that there was no solid reason behind creation.

It is in your experience that Consciousness-Self appears as a dream when you are alive. Similarly, after death, Consciousness-Self appears as the higher world.  The unavoidable cycle of wakeful and dream states while living and higher worlds after death go on appearing till one obtains perfect Self-Knowledge.  The effects of good actions, donations, offerings to the dead etc. are also experienced as a part of this illusory cycle.  That is why we declare that scriptures are true only until one is liberated. There is nothing illogical in this proposition. This answers your last question.

The eleventh question of yours concerns the powers of performing miracles by Yogis.  These things happen as per the laws embedded in the initial thought pattern of Hiranyagarbha. That is to say that Hiranyagarbha must have wished for the transformation of things as per the curses and boons of Yogis and a few others.

We do not have to search far from the thought process of Hiranyagarbha to find the cause-effect relationships in the world.  Even the temporary appearance of this non-existent world and its later disappearance is also a part of Hiranyagarbha’s original thoughts.  A poetic way of saying it is: it is creation when Consciousness opens Its eyes; it is dissolution when It closes Its eyes.

King Prajnapti:  Maharishi! If the world appears because of Hiranyagarbha’s thoughts, why would it have to go through periods of dissolution?  When once he thinks of creating, the creation could as well stay put permanently!   

Vasishta:  Dear King!  You yourself conceived the dream world.  But it does not stay permanently.  Why?  It is so because of the nature of your thought.  No purpose is served by looking for the causes of such a thought.  Just as it is your nature in the case of your dreams, it is the nature of Hirnayagarbha’s thoughts to make the worlds disappear during deep sleep, dissolution and Nirvana.  Because of the same reason, fire is hot, water is cool and so on.  This answers your 14^th question too.

At the cost of repetition let me say this.  The Ever Existent Pure Consciousness Itself appears as the world.  In other words, what truly exists and what apparently exists is the same.  

That is the nature of Pure Consciousness. You derive the attributes of creation based on this.  This will also bring necessary convergence to the Vedic statements referred by you in your 12^th question.

You had several doubts about the results of performing austerities and meditation in your questions from 15^th to 18^th.  Before going into those issues, you need to know a few basics about piety and impiety. 

Boons and curses, merit and sin and so on work like mutually opposing forces.  The austerities performed by friends and foes also operate on the same principle.  If they are of equal strength, they cancel out each other.  Otherwise their algebraic sum will be the resultant effect.  Sometimes it may so happen that the opposing forces cannot cancel out one another.  Then the individual obtains two bodies in order to experience both the effects simultaneously.  The two bodies may be externally visible or only one of them visible to outsiders and the other visible only to him. 

In a case as described by you where a well-wisher prays for the longevity of an individual’s life and the enemy prays for immediate death, the individual may reap the benefit of his friend’s prayer in his normal body and go through the throes of death in another imaginary body in another imaginary place.

King Prajnapti:  My contention is that it is not possible to get even one body with a definite shape from the formless piety and impiety.  How can you say that not one but even two bodies can be obtained from such conceptual things?

Vasishta: Why two, depending on the situation, even a thousand bodies may be produced!  Are you alone not becoming battalions of armies fighting each other in your dream world?  How can you set any limiting condition of numbers on conceptually generated pure imaginary worlds?

King Prajnapti:  On one hand you argue that the entire world is an illusion.  On the other you argue that the curses and boons, higher worlds etc. are real.  This is very unreasonable!

Vasishta:  If you admit that the world is a mere fantasy, there is no argument!  Not only is this world, the higher world too is an illusion.  Actions, results of actions are also an illusion.  That is in fact the Ultimate Truth!  But your questions are not based on the final Truth.  Your questions are all based on the presumption that the world is real.  Therefore, I respond to you at the same level as if this world, the higher worlds and so on are real. 

Then you counter me saying how can there be so many mutual contradictions within it.  My reply is that the world is like a dream.  It is pure fantasy.  Hence anything may happen within it!  What I said is not untenable.  You will have no confusion if you see things from a correct perspective.

Your 16^th question was whether there would be a dozen moons in the sky if a dozen people meditate successfully wishing to be moons.  Suppose two people look at the moon.  Both of them think that they are seeing one and the same moon.  The entire world functions with such a belief.  This is plainly an unsupported assumption and is not the Truth. 

The fact is each person lives in his private world created by his own imagination.  He does not live in a world created by others.  Each to himself!  Though the worlds seem to merge into one another like a hand into a glove, two worlds are never the same.  Their skies are different and so also the moons.

So if a dozen people wish to become the moon, each will become a moon in his own imaginary world.  One will not appear in the sky of the other.  The dozen of them will thus become moons.  We discussed some of these things in the Story of Indavas.

Depending on the strength of his thoughts, each man would become the Hiranyagarbha of his world.  The Indavas did become like that.  You had asked why there should be only one Hiranyagarbha.  There is no particular significance whether it is one or many.  Each person’s world is his fantasy.  It is equivalent to a dream.  If you can understand this, you need not rise this question at all.

Your 17^th question regarding the beautiful lady or the next question on the indolent king who wanted to rule the seven islands without leaving his home can also be resolved on the above basis.  The lazy man can create the islands in his imagination sitting right in his room. These matters were discussed in detail earlier in the Story of Leela.

My Dear King!  I covered with this all your questions.  As you may have observed, the underpinning argument for all my replies is that the visible world is just an imagined creation of the only One Thing that exists – Pure Consciousness.  This is the final Truth.  You can understand all the remaining things based on this fact.

King Prajnapti:  Great Sage!  I can appreciate very well what you said.  However, I still have a doubt.  According to you, the embodied entity Hiranyagarbha was born at the beginning of creation because of a thought.  But what we normally find in the world is that we need first a body in order that the consciousness in that body can start conceptualizing a world.  We do not find a consciousness without a body imagining things.  If we apply this observation to the first born Hiranyagarbha, he can begin to imagine the world only after he gets a body.  But a body cannot be there unless there is an imagination as you put it.  How does your theory resolve this conundrum?

Vasishta:  It is not valid to say that Consciousness originates from a body.  Consciousness is prior to creation.  Body is a thing created.  Body is a pure imagined entity.  What has come later cannot be the substrate for the first thing.  Hence it is incorrect to hold that Consciousness is dependent on the body.

You say that Consciousness is expressed only where there is a body and not otherwise.  It is not because Consciousness is absent at other places.  It is rather your inability to cognize Consciousness which is everywhere.  You classify certain objects of your dream as conscious and certain others as inert though it is entirely your Consciousness. It is because you are unable to recognize Consciousness in all the dream objects.  Everything that exists in the dream world or wakeful world, whether inert or conscious, is Consciousness.  Brahman is Consciousness. Hence there is no dependency of one over the other as everything is only One Consciousness.

King Prajnapti:  Sir, you hold that the body of the wakeful state is a form of Consciousness and so also the body in the dream state. Why do you then teach us that the wakeful state body is similar to the dream state body?

Vasishta:  It is just an expression used at the initial stages to make things simple for you to understand.   We have to find an illustration to teach you that the body that is seen, though visible, is unreal and it is none other than Brahman in its true substance.  Your dream body fits that example.  Your dream body is unreal even at the time you are able to see it.  From the substrate point of view, it is you yourself.  Thus there is a similarity between the wakeful state body and the dream state body.

Just as the dream state body in reality is you yourself, the true form of the wakeful state body is Brahman.  The dream body illustrates this point well.  That was all the intent; but it is not to say that the dream state body is different from the wakeful state body.

The Truth is that anything seen appears because of imagination. What appears because of imagination cannot be True.  Hence there is no wakeful state; there is no dream state; there is no deep sleep state; everything is a form of the Consciousness-Space.

If you know Pure Brahman as Pure Brahman, it is Nirvana.  If you do not, it is bondage.  This is the final message!

King Prajnapti:  Maharishi!  My doubts stand cleared by your benevolence!

Prajnapti's Questions on Creation and Appearance of the World

Prajnapti's Questions on Creation and Appearance of the World

[Yogavaasishta is an authoritative Advaitic scripture of about 32,000 verses divided into six chapters. The last chapter is Nirvana. It comes in two parts – Purva (Book I) and Uttara (Book II).  King Prajnapti, Ruler of the City Ilavati, raises many doubts about Creation and the world that appears to us. These are the sort of doubts any one of us would like to ask. Sage Vasishta answers the Questions of the King from Sargas 204 to 210 in Book II of the sixth Chapter Nirvana. Presented here is an Extract (adopted with slight modifications) from a forthcoming Book – Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana - Book II by Shri K.V. Krishna Murthy, English Translation by Dr. Vemuri Ramesam. The Questions are posted here.  The reply of Sage Vasishta will be posted next month.]

Part I: Prajnapti's Questions:


King Prajnapti:  My Lord! The Holiest of saints!  Several doubts have been nagging me for quite some time.  Please listen to my questions and bless me with your answers.

1.            It is said that the Supreme Brahman, inaccessible to the mind and speech alone was present prior to creation.  It is also said that there was nothing else. That being the situation, what was the root cause for triggering the creation? What was the material cause for creation?  What were the enabling causes?  Was there one or more than one material cause?

2.            It is said that there are a multitude of universes.  It is also said that there is a huge variety of them.  Some are said to be in space, some at the center of rocks, some as liquids, some as gas and some as fire.

What is the reason for such diversity? 

3.            Who created these universes, the inhabitants in the universes and the sense organs of the inhabitants?  Who witnesses these worlds?

4.            Vedas speak about both the ritual-oriented action and also Knowledge-oriented pursuit of Brahman.  Therefore it is beholden to us to synthesize both approaches and enunciate a principle.  As per this principle, the cycles of creation and dissolution will go on indefinitely and there is no stopping that. 

Would you agree to that? 

If you agree, we have to accept that the root causation for turning the wheel of creation and dissolution is human thinking because of the famous adage that what you experience follows what you think.

Do you accept it?

5.            If that is granted, such a thought or knowledge can be either permanent or impermanent. If it is impermanent, what is the cause for its impermanency?  We do not have an answer.  If we suppose that the knowledge is permanent, we cannot conceive of changes happening within a permanent thing.

How do you reconcile the two concepts?

6.            Suppose a man is dead.  His body is consigned to flames.  He goes to heaven or hell to reap the fruit of his actions.  He cannot experience the happiness or sorrow unless he is an embodied creature there.  Who will be the parents for the new body in the heaven or hell?   Scriptures are silent on this. 

How could a body be born without any parentage?

7.            We may propose that his sins and merits act as the parents for the new body.  If so it would mean that the formless notions of sin and merit are able to engender physical bodies composed of substances.  But this is impossible.
What then could cause the bodies with a noticeable form?

8.            As a way out of this complication, one can argue that there is really no higher world.  This is the atheistic position.  But there are problems with this concept also.  If we accept that the visible world is real, we may expect a real cause behind it.  That cause could be the higher world.  But from the viewpoint of that world, our world will be the higher world.  Hence one cannot argue against a higher world.  It is also contrary to what the Vedas declare.

9.            I said a while ago that mere concepts having no form could not produce substances having a form.  I am not too sure of it either.  Say a King sits in his capital city.  The people in a remote village under that kingdom are bound by the dictates of the King and suffer the punishment imposed by his orders.  The orders of the King do not have a form.  But the punishment meted out to the people is physically felt by their bodies.  It would mean that the formless order has generated something having a form.

How do you explain this?

10.          The scriptures ordain or prohibit certain things.  Some people faithfully follow the stipulations. Some others do not care. How do these things actually work?

11.          An accomplished Yogi converts a stone column in no time into a golden pillar.

How can that be done?

12.          Vedas contain many mutually contradictory and opposing statements. How do you build a convergence of these diverse declarations?

13.          Sages like you say that the Pure Consciousness changed to Hiranyagarbha first at the beginning of the creation. It is said that the rest of the creation was made by him.  It means that Hiranyagarbha was born from space. Is it your contention that It has such a power because It is not just space but It is Consciousness-Space?
If It has intrinsically such power, why cannot more Hiranyagarbhas be born out of It?

14.          Fire is always hot; water is ever cool and so on within this creation.  We notice such inherent order in all substances.
How did such Laws of Nature get embedded in this creation?

15.          Elders advise that we should perform austerities and meditation to get relieved of such doubts. They speak of austerities and meditation as a means for the fulfillment of any desire.  Suppose a person has a close friend and a sworn enemy.  The friend observes austerities desiring a long life for him.  The enemy performs the austerities with a wish for his immediate death.  Both the friend and enemy are very strong. 

How do their austerities take effect?

16.          In another example, say, a dozen young men of letters are enthralled by the beauty of the moon.  They meditate at the same time with a yearning to become the moon.

If their desire gets fulfilled, do we then see a dozen moons simultaneously in the sky?

17.          Here is another more complex problem.  I know a very beautiful lady.  She practices detachment.  She deserted her house when she was young.  She commenced performance of austerities with a wish to remain unmarried for life.  But a handful eligible youth were captivated by her beauty and fell in love with her.  Each of them began austerities and meditation longing to marry and keep her as his wife.

How will their meditation take effect?

18.          A smart guy meditated rigorously.  His personal God was pleased with the meditation and manifested in front of him.  He requested the God to grant him a boon so that he would be the Emperor for the seven islands till the time of Great Dissolution without having to budge out of his house.

How can the God grant a boon like that?

19.          People make offerings and donations.  They observe the annual death ceremonies.  It is said that such acts yield the fruits in the higher world.  The rationale behind it is given to be that an “invisible” thing is born here and the same invisible thing bestows the rewards in the higher worlds.  The “invisible” thing has no form.  This formless substance is supposed to be admixed with an embodied being having a form and show the result in a different place at a different time in different ways.  Somehow this does not appeal very much.

How do you justify that expectation?

'DEEP SLEEP KNOWINGLY' - THE KEY TO BRAHMAN

'DEEP SLEEP KNOWINGLY' - THE KEY TO BRAHMAN

[A young and learned Seeker raised a question on the experience of Deep Sleep and its significance in knowing the natural state.  I have given a response based on my understanding. Rupert Spira has been extremely kind and gracious to vet the text for correctness of expression. Please feel free to let me know if any part is not clear.
I have slightly edited the write up on 31 Dec 2011 for greater clarity -- ramesam.]

Question:  Deep sleep is considered to be a natural state (swabhAva) -- ATMA SWARUPA which we experience daily. Taittariya Upanishad also says so, can you explain a little more?

ramesam:  Thanks for the question. I realize that you already know the answer. But such questions and consequent recapitulations (manana) as a part of mutual discussions between co-seekers are a form of nidhidhyaasana and are very much encouraged by scriptures. 
I shall spell out here my understanding in simple words devoid of the dense layers of 'mystique' we come across in the ancient texts.

Every person (whether Realized or not) has an ID (unique name, an identity for functioning in the world). The ID is a sum of the autobiographical memories and the current sensations received through the five senses. The autobiographical memories tell me that I am so and so, my name is such and such, I am a human being, I am a professional, I am trained in a specialty, I aspire for some particular goal etc. The current sensations are interpreted by mental processes to give me a feel of the presence of a body for me 'here' and a world 'out there' for transactions by 'my' body.

The combination of autobiographical memories and the unconscious processing (i.e. processing that goes on without 'my' conscious awareness) of the worldly sensations is usually called 'mind'.  By 'processing' I mean to refer to the interpretation that goes behind every sensation to give a meaning to the sensation.  Without the mental processing, the sensations will have no meaning.  They just remain as some nameless tingling. For example a perception by the eye is seen. The eye does not know what it perceived. A 'color' is ascribed with a name to it (as green/red/blue), a shape is assigned (round, jagged), a fragrance is identified (pleasing or some kind) and finally an identification is done that "I see a flower." Thus the mind is always actively interpreting the sensations from the five senses when we think we are "conscious" and see a world.  We often equate our ‘being aware’ to the presence of such an active mind. 

Now is there a time when the presence of the mind is missed or in other words is there a time when the mind is absent? What happens when the mind is absent? Who or what remains there when the mind and mental processes are not going on?

A time does exist in the day when we do not feel the worldly sensations. It happens during our dreaming (it can be daydreaming or night dreaming - makes no difference). We are not aware of the normal wakeful world external to us and we are lost in our own imaginary dream world. This is the state of "dreaming." During dreaming, sensations from the body or the  external world are not received but the mind is active and the mental processes keep going on.

[If I close my eyes now, all the sights go away and to that extent the mental processes connected with vision are absent.  (Of course, it is not totally true because the mind still sees ‘darkness’). Similarly I may shut down my ears, sense of touch etc.  Even then, the knowledge that I have purposely shut down my senses is present and a stream of thoughts continue to arise as it  happens with deaf, blind etc. people. Therefore, such a shutting down of one or more senses can happen in the wakeful state.  But it is not dreaming.] 

There is another state that occurs naturally when the sensory organs are not active and also the mental processes do not take place. This is the "deep sleep" state that all of us go through. This state comes on its own without any of our effort. I cannot pre-decide that I will be in 'deep sleep' right now or at a specified place or time. I do not have to spend energy or practice any technique to get into 'deep sleep state.' In this 'deep sleep state', my "mind" (= autobiographical memories + mental processes)  is not present. What is there then?

Because the mind is absent, I have no perception of any "object" or a memory of perceiving any object during the deep sleep state.  Even the time factor in statements like "I had a deep sleep from so and so time to so and so time" is a later 'thought'.  The thought about time duration (how long) concerning 'deep sleep' arises now in the current moment of making that statement in a wakeful state. Actual time lapse is not experienced during deep sleep by me. Hence time and space as well are absent during deep sleep. Though autobiographical memories (of a 'me') and mental processes of giving a name and form to the worldly sensations received by my senses are absent, something is alive and continuing all through because after I get up from sleep I say I am happy, I slept soundly. This statement about happiness and having slept soundly has not come from a memory of the experience we had during the deep sleep state.  Who is then making this statement?

The "i" which we normally assume we are, is the symbol or shorthand for our ID - the summation of our autobiographical memories and body sensations. So this "i" which is not the true "I" usurps the property of the ever-existing Awareness and makes a claim for the "happiness" of the deep sleep. So the little “i” says : “i had a good sleep.” In fact the true "I" and 'happiness' are not two different things. It is one and the same.  But the "i" thinks it is different from "I" and feels it has experienced 'happiness' imagining itself to be a separate entity different from happiness. “i” could as well have said that “i” experienced "I" (“I” is another name for Happiness).   But it cannot say so because “i” (a thought) is not outside “I” (= Happiness)!   In other words, there is only (unadulterated) Happiness when “i” is absent. Another name for “i” is ego.  ("I" is called Brahman and "i" is chidabhaasa in the Vednata lingo).  "i" gets generated the moment a thought of a  "me" being separate arises.

Expressing it differently, mind is absent in deep sleep. Therefore, there is no world (because a world arises only when a thought arises and thoughts are what the mind is made up of).  As mind is absent, the small “i” (which is also a thought) is also absent and whatever is there in deep sleep is merely nameless natural state. In other words, a distinct experiencer, the act of experiencing and a separate object to be experienced do not exist. That is to say that there are no multiple things and whatever is present is I which is the same thing as Happiness, the atmaswarupa.  

The so called Direct Path approach asks you to understand this clearly about deep sleep where only Experiencing (or Consciousness = Happiness) exists without any objects or the small "i" and asks you to make an effort to stay in that position as Consciousness. So the key is “deep sleep knowingly.” Atmananda Krishna Menon says that this Direct Path approach is adopted from Aitareya Upanishad. 

Is deep sleep then the be all and end all?:

Mandukya Karika of Gaudapada and traditional advaitins follow a different logic.  They consider 'deep sleep' as one of the transitory states and an unbroken abidance in Consciousness (Brahman) is beyond the deep sleep state.

They point out that deep sleep is also time dependent and hence it is also a state like the dream and wakeful states.  Moreover, they maintain that we continue to non-apprehend Brahman in the deep sleep state.  In the wakeful and dream states we not only non-apprehend Brahman (i.e. do not realize what It Truly Is) but also mis-apprehend (i.e. understand It to be something other than what It really is).  Hence, only the component of taking Brahman to be something other than what It is truly stops during deep sleep but our inability to know the Truth (non-apprehension) continues.  The traditional advaita says that mind is not annihilated in deep sleep but remains dormant and it rises again when we wake up. Some others say that mind sees ‘darkness’ (= ignorance) in deep sleep and therefore, a perceiver continues to exist with ‘ignorance’ being the separate 'object' that is perceived.  Instead of various ‘objects’ veiling the truth as it happens during wakeful state, it is ‘ignorance’ that veils the Truth during deep sleep.  We may appreciate that there is no fundamental difference in these expressions and they say the same thing from different viewpoints about "veiling" the Truth.

Traditional Advaita says that the three states of awake, dream and deep sleep occur as passing phases over an ever existent unchanging background of Consciousness (Reality = Truth) and is called as Turiya. Advaita urges the seeker to understand this Turiya and meld into It his  imaginary "ego." To abide in Turiya unceasingly  is Liberation. If 'A' represents the wakeful state, 'U' represents dream state and 'M' represents deep sleep, the half tone following 'M' and the silence stand for the everlasting Turiya as depicted in Mandukya Upanishad. 

Greg Goode explains well these differences in a recent interview. 

I am quoting Greg below:

Atmananda Krishna Menon regarded deep sleep as a ‘key to the ultimate’ and said that if a student is ready and able to seriously contemplate and investigate deep sleep, then this alone is enough without the need of having to experience or to spend years cultivating Nirvikalpa Samadhi. 

Traditional Advaita Vedanta (of which the Tripura Rahasya is an expression) treats deep sleep as a very subtle covering, but a covering nonetheless. The direct path treats deep sleep as your nature - witnessing awareness with no objects.
These approaches differ, but there are reasons relating to the assumptions in the two sets of teachings.
Tripura Rahasya seeks to posit the mind as the site of awakening - traditional Advaita Vedanta speaks of the "akhanda akara vritti," which is said to be the mental modification that causes awakening. Awakening is definitely said to happen in the mind, being a modification of the mind. So the mind must be active for this to happen.
The direct path is different - awakening is spoken of inspirationally and rhetorically - but it is not seen as a true biographical event, especially one that requires explanation. An awakening event, like any event, would be a phenomenal event. But as such it is a mere appearance in awareness, so it can't be a real, functioning portal through which you transcend phenomenality. From the beginning there was no such need.

Rupert Spira (who also follows direct path approach) explained thus:

We can look at deep sleep from two points of view: 1) from the perspective of the waking state, that is, ‘on waking up,’ and 2) from the point of view of the experience itself.

From the perspective of the waking state, deep sleep appears as a vague memory of a blank nothingness, which apparently lasts for an undetermined period of time. This memory, like all memories, comes in the form of a thought, which, like all thoughts, irrespective of whether they are about the past, present or future, takes place in the ‘now.’

The ‘deep sleep,’ to which the ‘memorising-thought’ refers, is utterly non-existent at the time of the occurrence of the memorising thought. In other words, the only evidence, in the waking state, for the existence of an experience called ‘deep sleep’ comes in the form of a thought.

Thought first imagines deep sleep and, in order to conceive of it in its own language of apparent objectivity, it superimposes onto it the qualities of blankness and duration.

From the point of view of experience itself, which is the only valid point of view, what is known as deep sleep, is simply the presence of Consciousness without the appearance of mind (taking mind here to include all thinking, imagining, sensing and perceiving).

But from the point of view of experience, which means from the point of view of Consciousness, there is no experience of a dark, blank nothingness. Rather, there is only the ‘experience’ of itself, which means only the presence or being of itself. This is neither deep, dark, blank or asleep. It is dimensionless, present, luminous, alive and awake.

The three states of awake, dream and deep sleep could be likened to a film, a document and a screen-saver appearing on a computer screen. The differences are not for the screen, they are for the mind.

Consciousness ‘never’ ceases to be this ‘wide-awakeness.’ The term ‘deep sleep’ is a misinterpretation of the reality of experience from the ignorant point of view of thought, that is, from the point of view that ignores the reality of experience.

The ‘dream’ and ‘waking’ states are two other interpretations or names that the mind gives to the reality of Consciousness, when it (Consciousness or experience) is imagined through the limiting and distorting lens of thought.

When we watch television we say that we are seeing a ‘film,’ the ‘news’ or a ‘documentary.’ Each of these labels is only a different name for the same screen, just as the waking, dreaming and deep sleep states are different names that thought gives to the reality of Consciousness.

For the screen there is always only itself, just as for Consciousness there is only 'knowing-being' itself.

It takes something outside the screen, one who imagines they are not the screen, to see the ‘film,’ the ‘news’ and the ‘documentary,’ just as it takes an imaginary entity who has seemingly separated itself from the seamless totality of experience to apparently see something other than Consciousness.

A Model for Nirvana: (adopted from an article written by me in 2004 at indology.net)

Body is the ensemble of all the organs and limbs.

Mind is the ensemble of all our thoughts, feelings, ideas, images, emotions, qualia etc.  

[Let us assume mind–body duality in building this model, though neuroscientifically it is not correct because mind is considered to be none other than what the brain does. Still this assumption of mind and body to be different entities does not invalidate the point to be made here by this model.  Please see the figure below.]

There are two entities viz. mind and body.  They can be either in alert or active state or in inert or restful state.  The two entities and the two states can give rise to only four outcomes by combination. 

The four outcomes are:

I – Wakeful State when both mind and body are present and active: 13 - 40 Hz Beta and Gamma waves of the brain in EEG, gives raise to what we call conscious state, interpreting the neural firings in conjunction with sensory inputs to give a meaning to our perception.

II – Dream State when the body is at rest and mind is active:  Dreams happens mostly in REM sleep, Brain as active as in wakeful state, but does not have the benefit of sensory inputs.  Memory reorganization takes place.

III – Deep Sleep when both mind and body are at rest: 0.3 – 3 Hz, Delta waves of the brain in EEG, Neural firing occurs in a few disconnected islands, synaptic activity is reduced, and also reduction in free radical generation. Hence a feeling of rest comes. Toxic material disposed.

IV – What is this possible fourth outcome when body is present and active but mind is not active or totally at rest? 

Does this fourth position also occur as easily as the other three without any special effort on our part?  In this outcome, when the mind and thoughts are absent, a sense of a distinct “individuating me-thought” will be absent and hence no ego will be there.  How does the body then function and what primes its activity? What is it that is present and guiding the body in its activity when the mind is not there?

                   Fig:  The Four Outcomes

MIND ALERT + BODY ALERT (I)	MIND ACTIVE + BODY AT REST (II)
MIND AT REST + BODY AT REST (III)	MIND AT REST + BODY ACTIVE (IV)

[Note: For recent comments (July 2012) on expanding this model to include "sleepwalking" etc., please see:

http://www.advaita-vision.org/anesthesia-deep-sleep-death-and-consciousness-part-23/
and: http://www.advaita-vision.org/anesthesia-deep-sleep-death-and-consciousness-part-13/

Further a Series of 17 articles with the title, "The Enigma of Deep Sleep" were posted by me at the Advaita Academy between Nov 2013 to Nov 20154

Sensory Deprivation Tank And Induced Samadhi by John LeKay

Sensory Deprivation Tank And Induced Samadhi 

By John LeKay 

[John LeKay is a professional artist and an accomplished Non-dualist. He arrived at the realization of Oneness following several methods of meditation and yogic practices like 40 days rigorous starvation and contemplation in Desensitization Chamber.  He, however, discovered on realization that the induced Samadhi, the effect of these practices, was not very different from deep sleep state and the meditation he did was not what one would really call the effortless Non-dual meditation.  Non-dual understanding, he says, is a transformation of the mind from its habitual thinking of being a separate entity. An inexpressible ‘Life’ lives by itself once such an understanding dawns. John lives in New York with his family and hopes to publish a book soon spelling out the diverse experiments he carried out and his findings. He also edits a well-structured online Journal reflecting various facets of Non-dualism. He can be reached at info@nondualitymagazine.org 

I am grateful to John for contributing this Post on the techniques of desensitization of the senses and induced Samadhi and their usefulness to a seeker – ramesam.]

Sensory Deprivation Tank And Induced Samadhi 

By John LeKay

Thank you for visiting. Because there was scope to misunderstand the content of the article, open access to the article has been denied from Nov 2011.  Interested readers may please contact the author at his e-mail address given above -- ramesam Nov 12, 2011.

Please see the New Article at: http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/2013/12/my-experiments-on-sensory-deprivation.html

***********

Added on 24 Jan 2013:

Neurologist Dr. Oliver Sacks in his latest Book "Hallucinations" (Alfred A. Knopf, 2012, pp: 323 ISBN 978-0-307-40217-2) writes about "sensory deprivation" research studies carried out during the decades of the 50s and 60s in the 2nd Chapter, p: 34-46. Almost all the research carried out showed that the subjects suffered from hallucinations.

Dr. Sacks mentions that a 1969 book edited by John Zubek entitled "Sensory Deprivation: Fifteen Years of Research" listed 1300 references.  However, the scientific interest in the subject later petered out   A 1984 paper pointed out that the hallucinations derived from sensory deprived conditions "can be magnified sometimes to madness, especially when combined with social isolation, sleep deprivation, hunger, thirst, torture, or the threat of death."  More recently, Alvaro Pascual-Leone and his colleagues reported on their work on pure visual deprivation. Ten of the 13 subjects experienced hallucinations during the first hours of blindfolding, but always by the second day, whether their eyes remained open or shut behind the blindfolds. -- ramesam.

LIFE AFTER NIRVANA -- I

LIFE AFTER NIRVANA -- I
(Excerpts from Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana - Book II)

[Maybe out of curiosity or to make sure that we correctly understood Advaita or perhaps to calibrate ourselves, we would like to know how a liberated man functions in the world. Passionate discussions are often held at many philosophical fora citing diverse authorities regarding the mind of a liberated man and how he could function within the phantasmagorical world albeit abiding in Brahman. Yogavaasishta is an ancient authoritative Advaitic scripture of about 32,000 verses divided into six chapters. The last chapter is Nirvana. It comes in two parts – Purva and Uttara. The philosophic teaching by Sage Vasishta till the end of the Purva part was primarily addressed to a seeker striving for Enlightenment. The most qualified and mature student Rama attains Self-realization by the end of the Purva part. But the author, Sage Valmiki, doesn’t end the text at that point. He continues the discourse of Sage Vasishta into a voluminous Uttara part where Rama’s questions are treated in a new light – befitting a Self-realized student. The second part of the Chapter Nirvana is thus a gold mine of information about the life after Self-realization.
Presented here are Excerpts from a forthcoming Book – Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana - Book II by Shri K.V. Krishna Murthy, English Translation by Dr. Vemuri Ramesam to be published by Datta Peetham, Mysore, India – ramesam]

LIFE AFTER NIRVANA -- I
(Excerpts from Yogavaasishta, Chapter VI: Nirvana - Book II)

1. Functioning in the World without a “me”:

Rama: Revered Teacher! Your instruction is to forego ego. You say that the ideas of ‘me’ and ‘mine’ should be given up. If we get rid of the me-mine concepts, the body and senses together with life itself may collapse having lost their relevance. In effect it is the death of the seeker. Liberation has a meaning only if the man is alive. Has the individual to be dead in order to attain liberation?

Vasishta: Rama! You seem to say that the body will be lost if mentation ends. What exactly is mentation? The idea that “I am the body” over this lump of the skin, bones and flesh is by itself a mentation. To abide in infinite Consciousness forsaking such contracted perspective is the abandonment of mentation. The notion that all the appearances including the body are real is an imagination. Considering everything that is perceived as a form of the Supreme Consciousness is abandonment of mentation. Another way to express the same is that cognition of objects is conceptualization and non-cognition is giving up of the conceptualization.

Rama: Well then Sir, who causes the body to come about and what sustains it?

Vasishta: That is called Praarabdha (Current Sufferage). It is the effect of past actions. It brings about the body. It sustains it. When once the Current Sufferage is expended away, the body will collapse irrespective of the fact whether you gave up on mentation or not. As long as the Current Sufferage lasts, nothing happens to the body even if you relinquish mentation. Also remember that mentation can be given up only by a living individual. A dead man cannot do it. As a matter of fact mind becomes placid when once you abandon conceptualization. The life span of such a Yogi will increase but will not diminish. Hence Rama, do give up all mentation without any reservation. Let no new innate tendencies (sanskaras) settle in you. Go ahead and perform fearlessly all actions that come upon you because of the effects of past actions. I say this with all my force. I said this in the past too.

Concisely expressed, conceptualization is bondage. Conceptualization implies imagination. Getting rid of imagination is liberation.

Rama: How does one do it?

Vasishta: No specific action needs to be carried out for this. Nor is there any ‘thing’ to be eschewed. Just be as you are. Consider what all you do as inaction. Inaction means non-doership, an absence of agency for action. Perform only the most essential and obligatory works as inaction. Acting thus, abide forever peacefully and happily in pristine Supreme Consciousness.   (Sarga 1).

2. Knower of Truth and Expert on Truth:

Rama: Sir! Who is a Knower of Truth and who is an Expert on Truth? Please explain the benefits that accrue from attaining the Knowledge of Truth.

Vasishta: A man may study spiritual scriptures for gainful employment just as another may learn several of the worldly trades like sculpture etc. As he is undoubtedly scholarly, he may be able to explicate and analyze well what is Truth but hardly ever would try to practice what he knows. Such a person is an Expert on Truth. He has a good grip on the Knowledge of Truth. His behavior and attitude do not, however, show any effect of his knowing the Truth. Just like the experts in other fields, he will be concerned with his name and income. Let me tell you, the only true knowledge is the Knowledge of Truth. All other subjects of study are imaginary accretions (unreal mirror reflections of Truth).

Rama: Do you mean to suggest that only a perfect Knower of Truth is truly knowledgeable and the rest of the seekers are lowly Experts on Truth?

Vasishta: Seekers are mere experts of Truth but they are not lowly. What I talked was about the pretentious and scholarly lot who never even aspire for liberation. It is such people who are morons. They are the inferior ones who really qualify to be called as the Experts of Truth. There is another type of Experts of Truth. They are the ones who implement what was learnt from the scriptures. They struggle sometimes achieving success and sometimes facing failure. They are the pious Experts of Truth. The term “Expert of Truth” connotes a different meaning in their case. It indicates their condition of being attached to Truth. They will not remain as ignorant persons, though they may not be true Knowers of Truth either, because of their bondage to Truth. Such people are not afflicted by temptation for enjoyment. Hence, a seeker should be first a pious Expert of Truth. (Sarga 21)

3. The Happiness of Liberation and The Happiness of Object Experience:

Rama: Why should we call the happiness from Liberation as self-luminous? Why can’t it be an experiential thing like the happiness from objects?

Vasishta: If a thing is to be experienced, I-consciousness has to exist prior to the experience. But liberation is obtained only after the eradication of I-consciousness. In view of the absence of I-consciousness, the experiencer, it cannot be like experiencing an object.

Rama: Will a liberated man be able to experience the world or not? If he sees the world, there is no difference between an ordinary person and the liberated individual. If he is unable to sense the world, he will be equivalent to an insentient stone. In that case, we have to admit that all stones have been liberated. Will you comment on this please?

Vasishta: A liberated individual does see the world. But he does not differentiate it (look at it to be different from himself) as does an ordinary person. The world appears to him as Brahman. Hence both the shortcomings that you mention do not hold.

Rama: If the world appears to him as Brahman, how can it be untrue then?

Vasishta: I never said that the Consciousness from which the liberated individual witnesses the world to be unreal. I said that the name and form superimposed on it were untrue. I also said that the first and foremost superimposition was I-consciousness. That, in fact, is nescience (ignorance). ( Sarga 29.)

4. Even desire is Brahman:

Rama: If everything is Brahman, even desire is Brahman. Why should then one abjure wanting?

Vasishta: It is true that desire too is Brahman. But the moment you have this awareness, no desires generate in you! After all, Brahman does not arise or set! A sure sign of Self-Realization is a noticeable reduction in desires.

Please consider, who experiences the illusory world? Only a ‘person’ who is himself non-existent is deluded and feels he sees a world! The uncanny and weird thing in the illusion of the world is that there is no real one who truly experiences the phantasm of the world. In other words, the miasma takes place without any one being really existing there. It is obvious from this that the world is non-existent in Truth.

Everything is Brahman in one view. Upending the logic, we say nothing exists. Thus even desire is Brahman in one sense. There is also another view. It says, ‘Non-origination of desires is much better in order to attain the Bliss of Self.’ But what is desire? Self-Consciousness flowing outwards through the sensory spheres is desire. That is the mind. And that is the world. Countering the outward flow is desirelessness which is nothing but liberation! (Sarga 37)

A person in whom desires are annihilated is like a lamp that is extinguished. The ideas of ‘me or mine’ do not arise in him at all. (Sarga 38)

5. Can A Jivanmukta Teach:

Vasishta: You may now wonder how I am able to teach you if there is no I-consciousness in me because an individual with a sense of ‘me and mine’ cannot be a Self-realized man.

The assembled audience here imagines that I am delivering a sermon. That’s their view. But I am least concerned by their perception. From my stance, no-thing is happening here. There’s no Vasishta-body around. This body you see in front of you is a superimposition (illusory visualization by you) on the Supreme Brahman. The speech you hear too is like that. The entire world that has come about owing to nescience slowly disintegrates as you progress on the Path of Knowledge. Neither you will be there nor me at the end. Nor will this business of ongoing discourses. Only the Self-effulgence of the Supreme Brahman would be the remnant permeating everywhere. ( Sarga 39).

The strange thing here is that one who is himself Brahman does not notice any world. A person within the world cannot notice Brahman. A Jivanmukta sees both. But as the Jivanmukta progresses further on the Path, he leaves out duality completely and merges in the ineffable Brahman. ( Sarga 40).

6. The Ego of a Liberated Man:

Vasishta: The natural state of every individual is to have the Knowledge that he is Brahman. Forgetfulness of that natural state is ignorance which is not his intrinsic characteristic. People who are ignorant are swooshed into the drama of the three worlds. The mad drama ceases when they are brought back to their natural state. (Sarga 41).

Rama: How can the ego take hold of a liberated man?

Vasishta: A gross body cannot be sustained in the absence of an ego whether it is a liberated individual or an ignorant person. No super structure can stand without a support. The point to be noted, however, is that the I-consciousness troubles an ignorant person but is harmless to a liberated individual. For a liberated man like me, the experiential feeling is the same when I let go the ego in deep meditation or when I accept it in the wakeful state for transacting in the empirical world. This is a distinguishing feature of the liberated individual. (Sarga 57).

7. Why does the World Continue Even After the First Man got Liberated?

Rama: Revered Sir, if everything is Consciousness, we have to admit that the Supreme Brahman who is Consciousness appears as the individual in the world. That individual gets liberated on the realization of Truth. The first individual created was Hiranyagarbha. When he got liberated after realization of the Truth, all the individuals conceived by him should also be liberated simultaneously along with him. No ignorant people would have remained behind. Then there is no scope for further creation to take place. But we still witness creation. How does this happen?

Vasishta: Rama, say you had a dream when you were asleep. As soon as you wake up, the entire dream world of yours is liberated. But there are certain remnant tendencies in your mind. Hence you get another dream the following night when you sleep. Neither the previous night’s dream nor the new dream is real from your viewpoint. Nevertheless, the ongoing dream is real for the dream character ‘you’ in the later dream. In the same way, the world exists in a latent form as a ‘tendency’ inside Pure Consciousness.

For a person of this world, the world is real. A liberated individual says that the world is unreal; but the person of the world does not believe him. Say there are two friends who observe the full moon in the sky. They find it to be of about 20 cm diameter. One of the friends, say, has the yogic power to fly in space. He flies to the lunar body, examines up close and returns to the earth. He tells his friend that the moon is not just 20 cm in diameter but is in fact a much much larger sphere. Still, the impression in the mind of his friend that the moon is of 20 cm dia will not get erased. The friend who traveled in space and returned to earth too still sees the moon to be only of 20 cm dia but will not agree that the moon is really so small. The difference between a person in bondage and a liberated individual is about the same. Thus, Rama, Hiranyagarbha may have attained liberation; but creation seemingly continues to go on for the person in bondage. (Sarga 61).

[To be continued ….]