s1va

What is theory to one is experience to another. Your question seems to assume it is all theory to me (and probably others also) and not experiences but just intellectual talk. We tend to analyze others based on where we are and with our framework of understanding. Anyone can claim they have this or that experience based on their understandings, perceptions and tell stories about it. If someone asks those questions sincerely, what results I have directly experienced from Abhinavagupta's teaching and what have I learned, I would be more than happy to eloborately answer those questions and even share some of my experiences directly to demonstrate and show the results. I don't sense such sincerity in this question. I am not really inclined to convince anyone of my experiences, when they have already made up their mind about what is theory and what is direct experience (including for others!!!). If it is just intellectual talk to you then that is what it is to you and I am fine with that. If it is really wearing you out, I suggest you skip such posts. Always our choice and good luck .

Just noticed you are still a Junior Bum. Even if I create a PPD, you will not be able to access until you become a regular member. Every new member that signs up for TDB is a junior bum until they make 15 posts. Junior bums have restricted permissions and access in various areas of the site until their status changes to general membership to show 'The Dao Bums'. Your post count is 4 up until right now as displayed under your profile picture. Please come back and make a request here when your post count is 15 or more.

Creating your PPD right now. Will share the link here shortly.

That is just not true . Even today, RKM and Vedanta societies provide not only free classes but also does outreach programs, feeds people en masse. Agree. I have visited the Belur Math and Dakahineswar Kali Temple near Calcutta where the headquarters of the Ramakrishna mission is located and visited their other temples and offices in places like Chennai numerous times including in the past few years. Poor people cannot afford to be part of, or learn in Ramakrishna mission is entirely wrong. Any earnest/sincere seeker even if he/she is a mendicant can learn from the teachers or go and be part of the programs. RKM is exemplary in this regard compared to other places that are also open to everyone. I have attended numerous programs and volunteered at times in Chinmaya Mission in the past 2 decades. Directly interacted with many Swamis and still do at times. I have attended some lectures and programs in Arya Samaj by Swami Dayananda Saraswati also. Not just study of Vedanta, we used to go out once a month to arrange free medical camps, etc in rural places when I lived in India. Agree with Dwai on this also. There is a small membership fee to those who can afford. But, generally it's open door and anyone can go participate or learn. Edit: Most public lectures on Vedanta, Upanishads, Gita (including multi-day intensive study) and even several classes in Chinmaya Mission are entirely free and open to everyone all over the world. In the traditional Indian gurukula or schooling system, students offered donation to acharya (teacher) only at the completion of their studies generally after several years, and what they offered was voluntary in most cases. Similarly in Chinmaya Mission at the end of the multi-day lectures/teaching those who would like to, can pay their respects directly to the teacher and offer a voluntary guru dakshina (donation). They do this by placing their contribution in a plain sealed envelope and directly present it to the swami/teacher. There is no recommended donation or even expectation from every participant to contribute. The teacher/swami in turn offers blessings and provides a small gift back to the student as a token of gratitude, like a book. In my experience this is how it works in CM to this day in India, America and everywhere else. Some classes that provide boarding and lodging and few other programs have a nominal fee like the one Dwai mentioned.

Perhaps you misunderstood the topic. It is not my intention to cast aspersions on anyone's practice. I agreed with Steve that different practices can be of immense value to different seekers. I want to mention here that I own a copy of the book, 'Tibetan yoga of dream and sleep' and have great respect for the author and practiced certain things from this book in the past. The higher awareness in the sleep state (basically in all states) this book talks about is Turiya and Turiyatita in my view and not about bringing the consciousness into sleep. This particular topic is not about any tradition or practices. The idea of this thread is to investigate and discuss the waking, dream and deep sleep states that we all go through every day, and to show the conscious awareness in the waking state cannot be maintained in the sleep at any stage. As I mentioned in the OP, I read such claims in some places. The 4th state that transcends all 3 is entirely different and not similar to the waking state. I wanted to have a open discussion about this and for everyone to question such claims and decide for themselves from their own experiences. Not just accept such claims of retaining consciousness in sleep at face value and to illustrate such claims have no validity based on certain traditions or scriptures as claimed. There is quite a bit of misunderstanding and confusion surrounding this topic which can be clearly seen from some of the debates in this topic so far. It is best for everyone to decide for themselves when they experience certain thing. Unless and until it is part of our own direct experience (in this case conscious awareness in sleep consistently/permanently, not the fleeting lucid dream states or other temporary conscious awareness states in sleep like nirvikalpa samadhi/clear light states, etc. that can happen for few hours), it is better not to believe and be skeptical about such claims.

In the following statements, Swami Lakshmanjoo explains the waking, dream, deep sleep states and Turiya from the Kashmir Shaivism point of view. His views about the waking, dream and deep sleep states are consistent with my experience and with my views on Turiya. There are states beyond the Turiya which are described as Turiyatita. Some traditions stop at the turiya level and for them awareness may be the end of the road. The vividness of objectivity that is the characteristic of the waking state (described below as jagrat) will never become that of the sleep states (swapna and sushupti) and to claim so is a myth. This is the gist of this entire thread. "The masters of the Pratyabhijñā School say that when you remain in that state where your consciousness is directed towards objectivity (bahirvṛitti) and you are no longer in your own subjective consciousness, that state is to be known as jāgrat. When you remain only in the sphere of impressions and thoughts (saṁkalpa nirmāṇa), that state is to be known as svapna. And when there is the absolute destruction of all impressions, thoughts, and consciousness (pralayopamam), when you are absolutely dead in your own self, that state is to be known as suṣupti. Abhinavagupta, the greatest master of Śaivism and the greatest philosopher the world has ever known, gives the general definition of these states so that the student will know that there is really no difference at all between the Trika Śaivite and the Pratyabhijñā points of view. He explains that when there is vividness of objectivity, that is the state of jāgrat. When the vividness of objectivity is shaky and unstable, that is svapna. When the vividness of objectivity is gone completely that is suṣupti. When super-observation is found by some observing agency, that is turya. And when that objectivity is individually dead and found full of life in totality, that is turyātīta*."

It was not my intention to discuss what Turiya is in this thread, however we seem to keep getting back there. Yes, your post sounds consistent within the scope of the Advaita system. But in Trika, Kashmir Shaivism, Pratyabhijna and other Tantra traditions it is a different state. This consciousness can be appreciated at the purusha+prakriti level without any actual expansion of the individual jiva to become everything in the cosmos. This is what generally happens in most cases and many conclude this is it and stop there!

While I agree with the 'no practice' -- I call it as the state of just 'residing' in the flow or light -- is the real practice, I wouldn't discount the value of conceptual frameworks, practices or methods. You mentioned in the other thread, different practices are valuable in different states and for different practitioners. Like the sleep and dream yoga for instance. Depending on where we are in the journey, some practice or conceptual framework may be immensely helpful for us. Whatever helps or takes a person forward in their current state is the real practice for me. I never did any targeted practice with the intention to open some chakra. It just happened by divine grace. But I see lot of value in the framework for understanding. Also, not everyone is ready to appreciate the 'no practice' or contemplate the meaning of existence or ask fundamental questions about all assumptions. Zen pig mentioned he has to sit down one day and question why he is on this path and gained some insight eventually. This is beautiful and that is how it happens. But we all become ready to sit down and ask such questions when we are ready to, in our own time. I don't feel the need to rush or tell anyone to question the fundamentals. The will sit and question when it is the right thing to do for them. I am also getting an impression from some discussions that it is wiser to ask such fundamental questions and sort of inferior to talk about conceptual frameworks like chakras etc. I don't see it this way at all. When we question whether it is worthwhile to pursue enlightenment, it is also valid to question, whether it is worthwhile to raise questions to others about the value of enlightenment or to engage in lengthy discussions about this! Why do we do any of this? Something to ponder upon! In the meantime I see all of this as part of one game or projection, some see it as one dream. Whether fundamental question or chakra question, or enlightenment question/discussion all are projections of mind. Let's just float on the river and let others float and go in their own natural path. I don't see any point in convincing someone that some question is more valuable or fundamental or trying to inject our insight into their path! These are my thoughts on this subject.

Each person generally decides for themselves what they want and why. I wouldn't go around questioning others why do you want this or that. It's their choice what they want. And it's your choice if you want to raise such type of patterns of questions in different topics. I am sure you are doing this with the intention to help them by bringing a different perspective. My concern is such questions deviate from the topic or what the OP wants to discuss. Here in this case, it is clear to me that the OP's main question is in regards to Chakras and whether the opening will automatically lead to enlightenment. If we start questioning eloborately why do you want enlightenment, it can steer the conversation off topic and even completely derail certain topics as we see at times. It becomes entirely a conversation about whether enlightenment is worthwhile Perhaps not something intended by the OP or some of us interested in discussing such topics.

Chakras are different from Dan Tiens. We don't build them. Everyone has the 7 basic chakras that are described in the t yogic system. But each person's perception of these Chakras, where exactly they feel them, how they view it, hear it, etc differs from one person to other. Yes, opening of all the 7 bodily chakras does not necessarily lead to the full realization. It brings a person out of their individual shell or bubble and let's them expand to become everything.

I am glad you decided to type and post, rather than composing and deleting this also . It is a truly balanced perspective, thank you. I believe in direct experiences and consider them very important. At the same time, without the openness or emptying the cup, there may be no progress and one could get stuck in a certain state for a very long time.

Want to make this observation since you maintain it's not a commentary. I doubt it is just a translation based on what I read in your quote. If it is a direct translation of Mandukya, the entire translation should at most be a page or two. I am pretty sure Eaknath Easwaran's translation is based out of Gaudapada Karika which itself was commentary added later in the Advaita tradition. Advaita schools consider it as an extension of the original Upanishad. Other traditions do not consider so and they reject the Karika in its entirety. Most modern English translation and commentary on Mandukya by followers of Advaita tradition is actually the translation/commentary of the Karika not the actual Upanishad. I would be very surprised if this is not the case with Eaknath Easwaran. (I did a simple Google search and find an entire book authored by him on Gaudapada Karika of Mandukya Upanishad). I have read this original Karika also and the actual Karika also does not promote any sleep yoga practices either. This was why I was confident in my statements earlier.) I am fine with agreeing to disagree on the actual topic. Best wishes 🙂. .

These are not words of Mandukya Upanishad! If you think Eaknath Easwaran or some person's commentary or book is true Mandukya Upanishad then I don't know what to say. Lot of people write whatever they feel as commentary on Mandukya or other Upanishads. There is Advaita bashyas, Vishidtadvaita bashyas and Dwaita bashyas to almost all major Upanishads, each explaining the Upanishads either from non-dual or qualified non-dual or entirely dual perspectives. On top of these there are Karikas that were added and tons of commentaries written on top of these bashyas. There are commentaries for commentaries. All of them make the claim they are authentic. Many people talk or present themselves as knowledgeable of Upanishads or even write commentaries. I honestly wonder how many truly read the original Upanishads or truly realized what is stated in there. I don't give a lot of value to book knowledge in general, even if it's from scriptures. But, when I say something is from a scripture or has basis in it, I try to ensure that it truly does. 1) Just because some commentary says something, it doesn't mean it is actually from the Upanishad. This is why I requested you to quote directly from the Upanishad. You can find a copy online in several sites including the Sanskrit documents. 2) It is not clear from this quote if it advocates someone to actively practice bringing conscious awareness of waking state (jagrat) into sleep swapna and sushupti. Everyone agrees Turiya is beyond birth, death etc. So, no contention there. Entire Mandukya Upanishad is very small and cryptic. But people write eloborate commentaries in the sizes of large books and add lot of things as per each person's belief system. I trust my inner experience and and see if it fits or tallies with what's mentioned directly in the scriptures. There are very few exceptions to this, certain translations I consider as making sense and tallying with the original. Whatever is stated in the quote is not very clear and does not indicate any sleep yoga practice to me. I am not discounting Eaknath Easwaran, I think he may be a good writer/author. Some of it makes sense, we need to consciouslly apprehend our true nature. That is what realization is about. There is no mind in prajna is debatable and depends on how we define mind. Anyway that's off topic and I don't want to get into that. Thanks for the comments. If this is your belief and you feel this is what Mandukya Upanishad is about, then it's fine with me. I respect your opinion and have no intention to further debate on this. I simply don't see it that way.

Not sure what you mean by using trance. Trance is a term used to refer to various states of alerted perceptions people get into. Not something anyone can use as far as I know. You can eloborate if you use it and if it's relevant to this topic.

Everything I have written in this topic such as lucid dreaming, yoga nidra, chakra openings, layers of mind, clear light state, samadhi states such as nirvikalpa and higher samadhi's afterwards where we retain consciousness in samadhi, the transformation into jiva-shiva phase integrating subconscious layers into the conscious mind are all from my experiences. If you have any questions please feel free to ask and I will be happy to answer the best I can. I am not sure if you read the thread entirely from the start to understand the things I stated in proper context. When it is not my experience, I have pointed out clearly like I have not yet reached the 4th state that transcends the other 3. I have also stated earlier, I talk about certain things from the glimpses of temporary states I have been in, though it is not my permanent reality yet. Not sure if you noticed the part where I mentioned that I consider myself to be fortunate to know or be in contact with some who I consider to have reached the fully awakened state of Buddha. I have unconvered certain veils or cloaks (kanchukas as described in KS), to understand their nature and to talk about them confidently. A fully awakened person is not constrained by any of the five kloaks and they are radiant. I have realized that we are all not septate and form is void. This is not fully a Buddha realization yet. For that, I still need to realize the other part, void = form from the heart sutra. I admit that I am open or expanded enough to understand or discern if a person radiates fully in awakened state like Jesus or Buddha, or if they have all their chakras open and reached the light state. I can connect or merge with deities and beings from other realms including Gautam Buddha, Jesus, etc., or connect them to others to help -- if they request me to do so. I don't even have to be in front of that person to determine if they radiate the light or not. Happy to demonstrate in the chat room, if anyone wants me to connect them to any deity or to a realized being like Jesus or Buddha. I generally don't talk about myself and do not see any of this as achievements. All of us are in the image of Shiva. When we unconver the following 5 veils, we are just as him. Which means we are able to create universes or worlds from emptiness at will. To me full Awakening such as Buddha's or Jesus comes with all the magical and mystical abilities of Shiva (or our own true nature). Until this happens, I am not done. I don't even think there is a end goal post like enlightenment or, I am done. I even created a topic about that. kāla - the cloak of time vidyā - the cloak of limited knowledge rāga - the cloak of desire niyati - the cloak of causality kalā - the cloak of being limited

There are examples of others who disagreed with the topic and did respectfully and it turned out to be a very interesting discussion. You were the only person to call someone juvenile and imply what is mentioned in this thread as crack-pot theory. I sent a friendly note objecting to those and requesting you to remove the link. Which you flatly denied. When a moderator's request to remove certain content is denied, I could have automatically suspended you for 3 days initially before we discussed the issue. Neither me nor the rest of the team took any such action. Just because Alan Wats called something or someone crack-pot in some context, it does not justify to use that as an insult against someone or some idea here when convenient. Everyone knows of some teacher calling someone jackass in some article in some context. If I use that article to imply some member here or their theory is jackass, then that is an issue. In my post, I mentioned as long as you follow the terms of the site, you should be fine. This applies to all including the staff. Not sure why it would upset someone to go off as you did, talking about some group and the banning of others, which I have no clue about. You may think you are clever and you know how to intelligently insult others and get away with it, use another teacher's quote to call someone or their post as crack-pot. There is a thing called walking the ropes and getting away with things. When confronted, to challenge and say show me where I broke the rule, give excuses, "I never mentioned that insult myself, it is not against anyone", "it's the article I called juvenile", etc. But, it's mostly clear to everyone here that such comments here are not made in good spirit. Please don't join others into your side. Everyone else, though they argued vehemently, never once engaged in condescending insults to others like you. You have discounted the teachings of masters like Swami Lakahmanjoo (anyone that does not confirm to your idea of Advaita) of Kashmir Shaivism in multiple posts before. Calling them amateurish and using your "clever" techniques like using quotes or other intelligent second hand methods to insult. In communication to me, you have openly insulted others members here as having no clue or expertise like you in topics, claiming you know more than everyone here! Most people try to get along with others. They agree to disagree on certain topics and be respectful towards each other. Steve and I agreed to disagree on this topic, which I see as a decent and respectful thing to do. Let me illustrate your actions in the recent times with an example like a story. Let's say someone or a set of people believes in God and someone else or another set doesn't and they believe only in nature. They both participate in same spiritual forum. Those that believe in nature start discussions or posts to share their feelings and thoughts. They want to discuss the beauty of nature, but they don't believe in a God person. But, a person that believes in God, comes and argues in their topics stating God is the ultimate truth for everyone, nature is not the final truth, etc. These people that love nature disagree. Both parties realize that they have irreconcilable difference of opinions. They need to agree to disagree on this to co-exist in the same place. Supposing, the believer of the God, comes to every topic created by the nature lovers about nature, and posts repeatedly, this is all not true, you people don't know the ultimate truth. I have realized it as God. These people try to tell him, we respect your beliefs and thoughts, we won't interfere in your practice, but this is what we believe. But this God believing person cannot give up, he argues nature is also God and wants the other party to accept this. Doesn't matter who is right, but he has to butt into every discussion or post that is in this topic. To prove he is right. The othe side tries to reason, says let's not get into the same arguments we have done 1000 times in every single thread. But this person cannot help and keep bringing up the same thing in every single discussion and at times becomes condescending and starts to insult others. If confronted, he says this is a public place, I would like up do whatever I like. Instead of believing in God, substitute it with Advaita. You are doing exactly what I mentioned above as the person believing in God does. Every single topic that we create about KS or Abhinavagupta's thoughts, some of us can't have an open discussion without you barging in every single thread to say we are wrong. Pushing your ideas of Advaita on others claiming it is the only final truth. Some of us believe in Kashmir Shaivism and other systems that are different from Advaita. There is room for everyone to co-exist and have decent discussion. If we treat each other with respect and not barging into every discussion or topic that is against our principles.

Based on our prior discussions, it is clear that we don't agree in certain areas. I consider it a pleasure to engage in discussions or debates with mature adults who have respect for each other, irrespective of the differences they might have. Not with those that are mostly condescending towards others with different perspectives, insulting teachers from other systems as juvenile or imply the differing perspective as a crack-pot theory or stoops to any low levels to prove they are superior and 'awakened'. A level of person's awakening should reflect in their actions, how they interact with the world, in humility, in compassion, etc, and not by the claims they make as their own experiences! I have made it very clear to you here and in PM that I don't want to engage in repeat discussions on the same topics with you again and again with no end in sight. But, since it is a public forum, you can continue with your ways as long as they don't break the terms of the site. Only I don't see any need to respond to your posts henceforth, unless they are sincere and truly adds to the discussion, instead of just beating the same old drum to show you know more than others as you openly claim.

I will write more about Turiya and some of the things that are unveiled to a person that has reached that state. The 5 cloaks such as time, space, limitations, etc does not limit a person who has transcended to 4th state. In Daoist terms, I would call such a person as Ruler Immortal. The state described transcends the sleep, but not bypasses it. One in sleep during turiya does not hear to external sounds through senses. The sensory mind, out of the 4 I described earlier with sense perceptions and sense organs are off, since they are in sushupti or deep sleep state. Also, it is possible for a person in Turiya to dream from time to time. Gautam Buddha had dreams from time to time, this is mentioned by him and well documented in some sutras. Generally their sleep is devoid of dreams. I am not sure about the state you describe, but I don't think it is similar to what I described as Turiya. Perhaps you are describing some semi-awake state where the sense organs still operate and provide input to the mind.

I am trying to show this retaining consciousness in sleep is not something from Hindu scriptures like Upanishads, or from the teachings of great masters like Ramana Maharishi. My arguments are to the point and with regards to this topic. It's not a debate about the greatness of the Ramana Maharishi or traditions. I agree with some of what you say, but feel it's just generic and all over the place. Quoting is important when we make certain claims or connect our experiences to masters, traditions or scriptures. It is very easy to misunderstand our own experience many times and think it is something, while it may entirely be something else, which we discover later! Appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts. I stand firmly by the OP and with the explanations I gave in subsequent posts. Reattaining Consciousness (jagrat state) in sleep is a myth, except for the temporary states of lucid dreaming. Awakened sleep or Turiya is an entirely different topic which many seem to ignore and just favor this new age 'consciousness in sleep', which has been debunked by many traditions. In my view Tibetan yoga refers to the awakened sleep or Turiya in their teachings, certainly not this retaining consciousness. Only in lucid dreaming they try to bring the conscious awareness into dream. This happens temporarily and only in certain stages.

Mandukya is a simple (yet profound) Upanishad with very few words. No one is debating it's power or usefulness in certain contexts. I haven't heard anything about your interpretation, or any quote to back up the statements you made about conscious sleep and practices! We can praise Mandukya all day. But that doesn't prove that this Upanishad proposes jagrat consciousness in sleep. Because I know for a fact it doesn't! I am just trying to avoid unnecessary mixups and confusions.

Yes, it's better to agree to disagree on this. Agreed on different strokes. Appreciate you taking the time to expand and explain the benefits from your perspective. I agree with many things you explained about the specifics of the benefits and yet believe it to be limited in scope. That's just my thoughts and my experience on the subject. I don't expect anyone to agree if their personal experience or if the tradition or the teacher they follow explain otherwise. Agree on more untangling and release as a continuous ongoing process. But, instead of patterns keep returning, I feel that we continue to untangle and release in deeper and deeper layers, as we grow and integrate more of the subconscious layers into the conscious layer. Once we clear and untangle issues in a certain layer, that layer is complete and we proceed on to work with the issues in a next or further deeper layers. One same issue in a certain area could go very deep into the subconscious layers. When one layer is cleared, it feels like the pattern or issue is entirely gone. But we may discover it is still present in the deeper layers and there is more untangling and releasing to do before we can completely release the issue. I never said any of these practices are of no value (entirely) to me and/or others. I am not discouraging any practice such as sleep or dream yoga entirely. But retaining consciousness during sleep is something I cannot agree as a fixed state or result (besides lucid dreaming) based on my personal experiences and from the systems I follow. Agree entirely with the highlighted part above. This is also why I would argue no single practice is a must/essential for everyone since all of us are different and are in different stages of our journey. What works for one may not work for another or even possibly can be harmful.

As far as I know, Ramana Maharishi never taught, advocated or advised anyone ever to 'practice conscious sleep'. He never gave any methods or practices to get into such states! If you claim so, please provide the appropriate reference where RM advocated or taught such practices. If it is your assertion to practice conscious sleep and if you think it will reveal the truth in Ramana's words, then please explain that appropriately. As I mentioned in the previous post, none of the major Upanishads, Brahma Sutra or Gita propose or teach anything like conscious sleep or provide any methods/practices for it. If you disagree with this, please quote from the relevant upanishad and explain. If it is from your own experience, you are describing this 'consciousness in sleep', it's fine with me, I would respect it as your opinion. But trying to equate that up with Ramana Maharishi's teachings or Upanishads is not appropriate unless you can substantiate it with proper quotes. I have explained the difference between awakened sleep (Turiya) and retaining consciousness in sleep. As explained earlier, I don't agree with retaining consciousness in sleep and consider it a myth. Turiya is described as a state that transcends all the other 3 (jagrat, swapna and sushupti). None of the scriptures or traditional masters ever proclaimed that after a certain state, the jagrat avasta (waking conscious state) continues non-stop, into the swapna (dream state) and the sushupti (deep sleep) states. If as you explain, the conscious awareness is always retained through the sleep state, then it is jagrat all around and not Turiya. There is no need for a 4th state that transcends the other 3 states. If someone is not able to get into the sleep state and retain the conscious awareness as in waking state all time (the Yogi example you gave who never lies down or goes into sleep), in my opinion something is wrong and the person better get some medical help or reach out to someone like BKS Iyengar or a qigong healer. I am saying this with good intentions.

Some ordinary people from all over the world don't sleep at all for years in their life. This is even medically documented. Absence of normal sleep is not an achievement. B.K.S. Iyengar (founder of Iyengar yoga), the Hatha yoga master has described how he has helped some people with such condition and are not able to sleep for years or decades. This is not the Turiya mentioned in the scriptures, not even close. There are people who never ate anything. There are approved types of siddhis. Swami Vivekananda writes about a sadhu who he meets called Bavahari Swami (meaning - the swami that consumes only air). This person did not even drink water or consume any food ever. He was not considered realized or enlightened! Tons of such phenomenon have been documented in numerous traditional and new texts. One such example is the Autobiography of a Yogi. What does such phenomenon prove? Just some extraordinary abilities which normal people don't possess. These are not indicators of true realization. If we use such indicators to measure a person's progress or realization, it may produce misleading and crazy results! None of the Upanishads including Mandukya promote retaining full conciousness such as the jagrat avasta in either swapna and sushupti phases, or teach practices geared towards retaining conciousness in sleep. If anyone claims so, I request them to quote the relevant verses directly from the Upanishad.

I would agree that the subconscious and the conscious layers make up the mind. I will try to explain my view on this from my personal experience. But I am going to borrow some helpful definitions from Kashmir Shaivism and from Vedanta (Hindu Upanishads), where some of these concepts are defined and explained already. What we call as Mind is made up of 4 components. 1) The Sensory Mind (Manas) - It is composed of the sense perceptions (tanmatras - form/vision, sound, smell, taste and touch) and brings about the sensation of world through 5 sense organs and with the 5 gross elements. 2) Intellect (Buddhi) - that which discerns. 3) The ego (ahamkara) - the arising sense of individuality or 'I' and 4) Chitta - I mentioned it is similar to subconscious in an earlier post. But Chitta is much more than that. It consists of all our latent impressions (vasanas), habit energies and mental formations. The Chitta is the part of the mind that is active all the time -- during the sleep and waking state. I borrowed the following diagram from the site Integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo to explain. The waking state is called 'Jagrat' or the conscious awareness state, the dream state is called 'swapna' and the deep sleep is called 'sushupti'. The subconscious layer is still very much active in the waking state (also). The subconscious layer dictates many of our actions in the waking state. For instance, our likes and dislikes, what each person considers pleasant or unpleasant (feeling of aversion) comes from this layer during the waking state. Majority of most people's actions during the waking state are the result of the subconscious mind, basically auto-pilot actions driven or dictated by the underlying habit-energy or impressions collected from the past (vasanas). As shows in the following picture, the conscious awareness or the jagrat chitta is active during the waking state. During the sleep phase it is the Vasana chitta or the subconscious layer that is active and functions. This is the same for everyone. It is not possible to have the jagrat chitta or conscious awareness during the sleep phase. There is an exception, which is the lucid dreaming. During lucid dreaming we get something like the jagrad chitta or conscious awareness during the dream phase of the sleep, the intellect seems to be active during the lucid dreaming, but the sensory mind is still absent. Lucid dreaming is of limited value as I explained earlier in this thread, this is in my experience and also explained by various other sources. The sensory mind layer (manas) is absent during the sleep. The buddhi or the intellect layer is also predominantly off during the regular sleep but it can come on. I have given a very brief explanation of the parts and the working of the mind as explained in KS. Anyone interested can search and refer to other resources available online or also to books or other traditional texts. For instance, the Integral Yoga of Aurobindo, some texts from Kashmir Shaivism & Vedanta explain the inner workings of the 4 layers of the mind in detail. I came across an article by Satguru from Isha where he explains the components of mind in brief detail and how chitta is the only layer that is active 24/7 during the waking state and sleep. As per dream yoga, I think it has benefits but they are limited in my opinion. It may help in cultivating certain good sleeping habits and may be of some limited value in helping to understand that everything arises from the mind. The subconscious impressions do get untangled and released to certain extent even during regular sleep. This untangling and the release of the latent impressions is what is perceived by the mind as dreams during the sleep. I would like to respectfully disagree once again. As I explained earlier, it is my view and experience one becomes conscious only in lucid dreams. Practicing mindfulness or trying to reside in the present movement during the waking state consistently eventually carries over into the sleep states also. From my experience, a separate practice to cultivate awareness especially in deep sleep or during dream phase is not needed or essential. As the article that I linked in the OP states, it is better to just let go, relax and sleep instead of trying to bring awareness, or pictures of characters into dreams, etc.

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. Is any of this related to this topic of concious awareness or the absence of it in sleep by any means?