A non-ideational, mnemonic device for transcending

[Willytex]

A non-ideational, mnemonic device for transcending

A phoneme or a quasi-phoneme?

The Pranava, cited by Sage Patanjali in Yoga Sutras, is a phoneme or a
quasi-phoneme which is first mentioned in Mandukya Upanishad 1.1, and
was commented on by Gaudapadacharya, the author of Mandukhya Karika, and
the root Guru of the Adi Shankaracharya, the author of Mandukhya Bhasya.

Sri Gaudapadacharya postulated a fourth state of unity conciousness
based on this Upanishad, and employed the transcendental meditation
technique of Shakya the Muni as its applied science practicum.

In Chandogya 2.23 the origin of language is attributed to Prajapati,
from whose transcendental meditation came the threefold knowledge, i.e.
the three Vedas; from his transcendental meditation on the three Vedas
came the syllables bhur, bhuva, and svar, indicating earth, atmosphere,
and sky; and from his transcendental meditation on the three syllables
came the Pranava.

The Pranava is that indicator which makes human cognition coherent, and
thus represents the totality of knowledge structured in conciousness.

In Adwaita, the Pranava is the sound-current or Shabd indicating Atman,
as it is written in Maitri Upanishad 6.5., that is, liberation or
Moksha. However, the mantric sounds, or any other bija mantras, are not
found in the Rig Veda.

According to Swami Agenanada Bharati, the syllable 'OM' is a bija
mantra by courtesy only, and becomes a true mantra only when imparted by
one preceptor to one disciple in accordance with a prescribed ritual,
that is, through diksha, initiation. However, I suspect that the reason
why Maharishiji does not prescribe this mantra is because it is not,
strictly, a non-ideational device at all, due to it's association with
conceptual notions of creation and indentification.

This reservation may be justified, because apparently, the entire
Tibetan mantra 'OM Mani Padme Hum', which this fellow once overheard at
a Camp-meet, is nothing more than a pious attempt to formulate a prayer
to the Goddess Laksmi, and is not Buddhist at all, not to mention
non-ideational, and this phrase is not found in any Veda, Buddhist
Pitaka or Sutra.

Thus one can only conclude that tantric bija mantras are non-Vedic in
origin, and probably originated in Bengal during the time of the
Eighty-four Maha-siddhas, adept freelance precursors to the Buddhist
Vajrayana School of 'Conciousness Only' the Yogacara founded by Vasubandhu.

It should be noted that Maharishiji only uses traditional, tantric,
householder bija mantras, with the exception of 'svaha' which as every
Siddha knows, denotes the hit-sound 'crack' as in 'phata phata' of a
three-wheeled motorcycle rickshaw, a common sound heard in Indian cities.

[KuriousGorgeous]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[p***@gmail.com]

It is interesting to note that Advaita Vedanta is non-theisitc in outlook. Of the six systems of Indian philosophy, only one system is based on theism. Advaita Vedanta has been compared to the Vijnanavada Buddhism which is also non-theistic. So, based on this information you can understand why I said there are some informants here that seem to be tilting at windmills.

It has already been established that consciousness is the ultimate reality in Hindu Vedanta and Mahayana Buddhism, and by Sam Harris. So, maybe it's time to review our position. To reiterate:

My position, and the position of most idealistic transcendentalists, is that we infer, from the fact of being conscious, that consciousness itself is the ultimate reality - because without consciousness, we would not exist. And that the material world is a false projection or superimposition upon pure consciousness which is the real.

And, we accept that inference is a valid means of knowledge. Thoughts and ideas, not being material objects, cannot be perceived; they can only be inferred or in some cases, intuited.

This is the Hindu Advaita Vedanta view and to some extent, the view of the Consciousness Only school of Tibetan Buddhism.

Note:

According to Harris, if consciousness means self-consciousness, then it cannot be identified by logic with the human body. Animals also possess a physical body, but not rational consciousness. If consciousness is a property of the body, it must be perceived like other material properties. But consciousness is neither seen, smelt or tasted nor touched nor heard. Consciousness is private and cannot be shared by others - it is the very constructed character of knowing.

"Knowledge is structured in consciousness." - MMY

Excerpt from mANDUkya kArikA IV by gauDapAda:

"Duality is only an appearance; non-duality is
the real truth. The object exists as an object
for the knowing subject; but it does not exist
outside of consciousness because the distinction
of subject and object is within consciousness."

Post by KuriousGorgeous

Post by Willytex
According to Swami Agenanada Bharati, the syllable 'OM' is a bija
mantra by courtesy only, and becomes a true mantra only when imparted by
one preceptor to one disciple in accordance with a prescribed ritual,
that is, through diksha, initiation. However, I suspect that the reason
why Maharishiji does not prescribe this mantra is because it is not,
strictly, a non-ideational device at all, due to it's association with
conceptual notions of creation and indentification.
This reservation may be justified, because apparently, the entire
Tibetan mantra 'OM Mani Padme Hum', which this fellow once overheard at
a Camp-meet, is nothing more than a pious attempt to formulate a prayer
to the Goddess Laksmi, and is not Buddhist at all, not to mention
non-ideational, and this phrase is not found in any Veda, Buddhist
Pitaka or Sutra.

The word "mani" has several definitions, including first-man,
higher-mind, jewell. Brahma seeks the answer to original causation
within himself. Finding himself floating in darkness, he shouts Ka?!?
(Who/Where/What/When am I?). Seeing a tunnel of light within his
mind, he traces this root, proceeding until he finds a golden flower
in the darkness and can go no further. Where is there left to go? He
is everywhere at once! So this he realizes is Shiva-mind. He himself
is not in his body anymore, but has delved within himself and found
the entirety of creation,,, carrying this entirety within his own body
like an ark. As such he is Mani/Manu -- first-man. And since he is
no longer bound to his body, as first-man he has connected with the
higher-mindedness of the All-- Mani as well. And since he sees all
around him that _everything_ is mani/mind, he begins to understand the
Shiva-Flower. It is gem-like, with intersecting lines of force.
Each nodality represents a paragateway from Nirvana into corporeality,
through a sleeping beings _mind_. Altogether this sight can appear as
a peacock feather-- metaphorically held by Shiva, or the Asgardian
Rainbow Bridge, or (if one's inner-vision is not yet up to snuff) as a
shimmering inner sun, newly arisen within the darkness of ego. Each
nodality is equidistantly spaced in all directions to infinity,
resembling what Siddhartha Guatama the Buddha called the "Diamond
Path" (Diamond Sutra) and Jesus the Christ called the "Cross of Light"
(Mystic Cross Gospel). Looking at a diamond, one can clearly see the
beveled shape lends itself to the cross metaphor. "Take up your cross
and follow ME" Jesus said, where the ego-crucifixion takes place
within and not without, and self unites with the SELF-Atman
(everything else, aka "ME"). The Sumer's (Watchers) called everything
a "ME" -- shovel = ME, dirt = ME, seeds = ME, knowledge of how to
sow/reap = ME.
Brahma/Mani realizes that all form is emptyness and that he is just
mind/Mani. When he sees this inner light appearing as both flower and
jewell (Mani), he is seeing him-SELF. IT. THAT. THIS. ONE.
Inevitabely he reverently praises the entirety of the all, in effect
praising himself as well for having persevered in discovering his own
true self-nature---
OM MANI PADME HUM
PRAISE THE JEWELL IN THE LOTUS!
Mantra's are basically self-help tools, a form of self-hypnosis. One
can easily create their own personal meditative mantra. All are forms
of the same thought--- 'I am this inner light. I am everything.
Everything is ME.' Make up your own if you wish! Using archaic
terminology may be encumbering, like using a Xian preacher saying
THEE, THY, THOU instead of modern English. Or, since the old mantra's
have been passed down for millenia, using the same age-old mantra
while meditating on Nirvana may just help one find the inner sound
current of PRAISE and trace it back to source.
Ommmmmm.
Epistemology and Etymology are concerns for some, and rightly so. But
long before san (perfected) skrit (script) was written down, these
root language-forms were using these sounds to indicate these
ideational concepts. For instance, how far back can one trace the core
idea of "The Way"? Rumi refers to secret Gospels of Jesus. Jesus
learned from the Essenes. The Naasinii Therapeutics were recognized
by the Buddhist King Ashoka as being a western branch of Theravedic
Buddhists. Siddhartha Guatama may have learned The Way from Lao Tzu--
a very old teacher when Siddh was a young royal student of such
masters. Lao Tzu claims to have first encountered the idea of The Way
from Shang Dynasty documents created around 1950 BC or so. And on and
on it goes. These ideas have been in existance long before the dawn
of humanity, and will be in existence long after any possible
collective human demise.
"Consider others as yourself" -- Dhammapada 10.1
Praise ME!-- the Mind-Jewell in the Lotus!
Om Mani Padme Huuuuuuu-ooooooooM.

[p***@gmail.com]

Vasubandhu's most original and philosophically interesting treatise is his Twenty Verses (Vimsatika). In it he defends Yogacara from objections by Realists. Yogacara claims that what we think are external objects are nothing more than mental projections.

This has been mistaken for an Idealist position because interpreters focus on the word "object" instead of "external". Vasubandhu does not deny that cognitive objects (vinaya, alambana, etc.) exist; what he denies is that they appear anywhere else than in the very act of consciousness which apprehends them.

He denies that such cognitive objects have external referents (bahya-artha). What Vasubandhu means is that cognition never takes place anywhere except in consciousness.

Everything we know we have acquired through sensory experience (in Buddhism the mind is considered a special type of sense). We are fooled by consciousness into believing that those things which we perceive and appropriate within consciousness are actually outside our cognitive sphere.

Put another way, we mistake our interpretations of things for the things themselves. Consciousness is driven by karmic intentionalities (the habitual tendencies produced by past actions), and how we perceive is shaped by that conditioning. The goal of Yogacara is to break out of this cognitive narcissism and finally wake up to things as they are, devoid of erroneous conceptual projections.

http://www.acmuller.net/yogacara/thinkers/vasubandhu-bio-asc.htm

Post by p***@gmail.com
It is interesting to note that Advaita Vedanta is non-theisitc in outlook. Of the six systems of Indian philosophy, only one system is based on theism. Advaita Vedanta has been compared to the Vijnanavada Buddhism which is also non-theistic. So, based on this information you can understand why I said there are some informants here that seem to be tilting at windmills.
My position, and the position of most idealistic transcendentalists, is that we infer, from the fact of being conscious, that consciousness itself is the ultimate reality - because without consciousness, we would not exist. And that the material world is a false projection or superimposition upon pure consciousness which is the real.
And, we accept that inference is a valid means of knowledge. Thoughts and ideas, not being material objects, cannot be perceived; they can only be inferred or in some cases, intuited.
This is the Hindu Advaita Vedanta view and to some extent, the view of the Consciousness Only school of Tibetan Buddhism.
According to Harris, if consciousness means self-consciousness, then it cannot be identified by logic with the human body. Animals also possess a physical body, but not rational consciousness. If consciousness is a property of the body, it must be perceived like other material properties. But consciousness is neither seen, smelt or tasted nor touched nor heard. Consciousness is private and cannot be shared by others - it is the very constructed character of knowing.
"Knowledge is structured in consciousness." - MMY
"Duality is only an appearance; non-duality is
the real truth. The object exists as an object
for the knowing subject; but it does not exist
outside of consciousness because the distinction
of subject and object is within consciousness."

Post by KuriousGorgeous

Post by Willytex
According to Swami Agenanada Bharati, the syllable 'OM' is a bija
mantra by courtesy only, and becomes a true mantra only when imparted by
one preceptor to one disciple in accordance with a prescribed ritual,
that is, through diksha, initiation. However, I suspect that the reason
why Maharishiji does not prescribe this mantra is because it is not,
strictly, a non-ideational device at all, due to it's association with
conceptual notions of creation and indentification.
This reservation may be justified, because apparently, the entire
Tibetan mantra 'OM Mani Padme Hum', which this fellow once overheard at
a Camp-meet, is nothing more than a pious attempt to formulate a prayer
to the Goddess Laksmi, and is not Buddhist at all, not to mention
non-ideational, and this phrase is not found in any Veda, Buddhist
Pitaka or Sutra.

The word "mani" has several definitions, including first-man,
higher-mind, jewell. Brahma seeks the answer to original causation
within himself. Finding himself floating in darkness, he shouts Ka?!?
(Who/Where/What/When am I?). Seeing a tunnel of light within his
mind, he traces this root, proceeding until he finds a golden flower
in the darkness and can go no further. Where is there left to go? He
is everywhere at once! So this he realizes is Shiva-mind. He himself
is not in his body anymore, but has delved within himself and found
the entirety of creation,,, carrying this entirety within his own body
like an ark. As such he is Mani/Manu -- first-man. And since he is
no longer bound to his body, as first-man he has connected with the
higher-mindedness of the All-- Mani as well. And since he sees all
around him that _everything_ is mani/mind, he begins to understand the
Shiva-Flower. It is gem-like, with intersecting lines of force.
Each nodality represents a paragateway from Nirvana into corporeality,
through a sleeping beings _mind_. Altogether this sight can appear as
a peacock feather-- metaphorically held by Shiva, or the Asgardian
Rainbow Bridge, or (if one's inner-vision is not yet up to snuff) as a
shimmering inner sun, newly arisen within the darkness of ego. Each
nodality is equidistantly spaced in all directions to infinity,
resembling what Siddhartha Guatama the Buddha called the "Diamond
Path" (Diamond Sutra) and Jesus the Christ called the "Cross of Light"
(Mystic Cross Gospel). Looking at a diamond, one can clearly see the
beveled shape lends itself to the cross metaphor. "Take up your cross
and follow ME" Jesus said, where the ego-crucifixion takes place
within and not without, and self unites with the SELF-Atman
(everything else, aka "ME"). The Sumer's (Watchers) called everything
a "ME" -- shovel = ME, dirt = ME, seeds = ME, knowledge of how to
sow/reap = ME.
Brahma/Mani realizes that all form is emptyness and that he is just
mind/Mani. When he sees this inner light appearing as both flower and
jewell (Mani), he is seeing him-SELF. IT. THAT. THIS. ONE.
Inevitabely he reverently praises the entirety of the all, in effect
praising himself as well for having persevered in discovering his own
true self-nature---
OM MANI PADME HUM
PRAISE THE JEWELL IN THE LOTUS!
Mantra's are basically self-help tools, a form of self-hypnosis. One
can easily create their own personal meditative mantra. All are forms
of the same thought--- 'I am this inner light. I am everything.
Everything is ME.' Make up your own if you wish! Using archaic
terminology may be encumbering, like using a Xian preacher saying
THEE, THY, THOU instead of modern English. Or, since the old mantra's
have been passed down for millenia, using the same age-old mantra
while meditating on Nirvana may just help one find the inner sound
current of PRAISE and trace it back to source.
Ommmmmm.
Epistemology and Etymology are concerns for some, and rightly so. But
long before san (perfected) skrit (script) was written down, these
root language-forms were using these sounds to indicate these
ideational concepts. For instance, how far back can one trace the core
idea of "The Way"? Rumi refers to secret Gospels of Jesus. Jesus
learned from the Essenes. The Naasinii Therapeutics were recognized
by the Buddhist King Ashoka as being a western branch of Theravedic
Buddhists. Siddhartha Guatama may have learned The Way from Lao Tzu--
a very old teacher when Siddh was a young royal student of such
masters. Lao Tzu claims to have first encountered the idea of The Way
from Shang Dynasty documents created around 1950 BC or so. And on and
on it goes. These ideas have been in existance long before the dawn
of humanity, and will be in existence long after any possible
collective human demise.
"Consider others as yourself" -- Dhammapada 10.1
Praise ME!-- the Mind-Jewell in the Lotus!
Om Mani Padme Huuuuuuu-ooooooooM.