Buck: > For Me the best sutras I got out of the TM-siddhis > were the ones about the discernment/distinction o > Bhuti a Purusha. > For most TMers, the esoteric teachings are the most important aspects of their practice - the knowledge and the mechanics of the Sri Vidya and the Kashmere Trika theory. These are the ideas most closely associated with MMY and his TM practice. This is not surprising considering that MMY's master, SBS, was a Sri Vidya adherent and that MMY himself visited Kashmere to sit with the Swami Laksmanjoo. Most TMer seem to be more interested in the tantras than in reading about the "mayavada" in the Brahma Sutras.
And why? Because the Advaita "mayavada" does not lend itself easily to the common tasks of everyday householders. Kashmere Saivism contends that there is only one reality, but it has two aspects; therefore the manifestation is real. This is based on the argument that the effect cannot be different from its cause. The world of matter is only another form of consciousness. Sri Vidya is based on the Kashmir Shaivism's absolute idealist monism (abhedha, non dualism) where Cit - consciousness - is the one reality and matter is not separated from consciousness, but is identical to it. On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 7:39 AM, <dhamiltony...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Empty, really a great concise roadmap here that you write here. > FFL-post-of- the- year thus far amongst all the athletic supporters > flash-flooding this forum as place of high mind spirituality otherwise. > Thanks. For Me the best sutras I got out of the TM-siddhis were the ones > about the discernment/distinction o Bhuti a Purusha. That is what popped > things for me and I am most grateful for. > > Om Jai Adi Shankara, > > -Buck in the Dome > > > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > emptybill, thanks for your clarity here. This brings to my mind > Maharishi's teaching that knowledge is different in different states of > consciousness. Purusha Prakriti realization seems to be a GC experience to > me whereas the experience of moksha as one's basic nature seems more like > Unity. > > A friend is on a retreat where they are discussing three stages of > Brahman: basic, refined and Wholeness or holiness. Mind boggling to me! > > > > On Sunday, January 19, 2014 4:35 PM, "emptybill@..." <emptybill@...> > wrote: > > A popular view of Advaita Vedanta (sometimes an accusation) is that it > is Maya-vada ... the doctrine that everything is mere Maya. > > This is a classical misrepresentation that began with Ramanuja (11th > Century head of the Sri Vaishnava-s) and continues down to today. Probably > one reason for the misunderstanding is that different teachers presented > alternate explanations of the Brahma Sutras. In essence, they held contrary > preconceptions. Another reason is that discussions about the nature of Maya > became continuous in debates between Advaita scholars. This led to the > belief that “Maya talk” was the core of Advaita. The reality is that > Advaita is more accurately call Brahma-vada, the teaching about Brahman. It > uses the principal Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita as a > threefold authoritative Vedic source. > > However, leading up to the 14th Century, the Yoga Sutras became an > alternate source for understanding the *path* to realize Brahman. By the > middle of the 14th-15th Century, this view so infiltrated Advaita Vedanta > that the works of Shankaracharya Swami Vidyâranya (who wrote Pañchadâši and > Jivanmuktiviveka) presumed that students of Advaita followed a yogic path > to realize Brahman. > > The modern proponent of this view was Swami Vivekananda. MMY just > continued that mode – which included the division of the Bhagavad Gita into > three topical sections, a theme also found in Sri Aurobindo Ghose. Scholars > now call this interpretation “Yogic Advaita” - an interpretation that is > more about yoga and less about Advaita Vedanta. > > Perhaps more perplexing for those studying Advaita, the concept of > “enlightenment” (so over-popularized) was borrowed from the Buddhists – and > is neither Yogic nor Vedantic. The Yoga Sutras, in fact, do not even > propose yoga as a goal but rather discuss the necessity for “vi-yoga” … > separating, dis-uniting, dis-joining. Thus the question … “separating > *what* from *what*”? In this case, separating the apparent con-fusion > (fusing together) between awareness (purusha) and the field of experience > (i.e. body, senses, mind). > > Contrary to this Yogic assumption of two orders of reality (purusha and > prakriti), Shankara’s Vedanta teaches the inherent unity of Reality > (Brahman). Rather than chitta-vritti-nirodha, nirvikalpa-samâdhi or > Buddhist dhyana-samâpatti, Advaita points to the direct ascertainment of > one’s own true nature. The purpose of such recognition is seeing directly > that moksha (freedom) is *already* the inherent nature of human beings. > It also recognizes that moksha is freedom from *any* experience, while > realizing that like waves moving across the ocean, experience is itself > nothing but Brahman. > > > >
