Swami Lakshmanjoo, Kashmir Shaivism

[3bob]

Quoted from Swami Lakshmanjoo website (link below)

 

"Moksha in Kashmir Shaivism and Indian Philosophy
The view that ignorance is the cause of bondage, and perfect knowledge
is the cause of freedom (moksha), is commonly accepted by all Indian
philosophers. Yet, in reality, these philosophers have not completely
understood knowledge and ignorance.

 

The Vaishnavites, for example, believe that liberation (moksha)
from repeated births and deaths occurs when you are united with
para-prakriti (that energy of Being that governs and contains all
the activities and conceptions of this universe). And this union
with para-prakriti will take place only when you observe in your
understanding that the apparent differentiation of this universe
is unreal. Then all attachments, pleasures, and pains will come
to an end and you will be established in your own real nature. It
is this establishment which from their point of view is called moksha.

 

The Advaita Vedantins, on the other hand, have concluded
that, in the real sense, moksha is only bliss (ananda) and nothing
else. They say that when you are residing in the field of ignorance
(samsara), you become the victim of the five-fold veils (kleshas);
i.e. avidya (ignorance), asmita (ego), raga (attachment), dvesha (hatred) and abhinivesha (attachment to your own conception). These
coverings, which are the cause of your remaining in samsara, should
be removed by the practice of tattva-jnana. In this practice, you
must mentally negate all that is not your own real nature by thinking,
neti, neti, “I am not this, I am not this.” So here you
practice thinking, “I am not the physical body, I am not the
subtle body, I am not the mind, I am not the life essence (prana).”
You must negate all outside elements. And when you reside completely
in your own nature, which is that which remains after you negate
all outside elements, that knowledge, from their point of view,
is called moksha.

 

The tradition of Buddhist philosophers, who are known as
the Vijnanavadins, accept, that you are liberated only when your
mind is completely detached from all attachments to objectivity,
pleasure, pain, and sorrow. They argue that the mind must remain
only as mind, pure and perfect mind, because for them the mind is
actually pure, filled with light, and detached from all worldly
things. It is when the mind becomes attached to worldly things,
such as thoughts, pleasures, and pains, that you are carried to
samsara. And when these attachments are cancelled and the mind becomes
pure, then you are liberated.

 

The philosophers from the Vaibhashika tradition hold that,
liberation is attained by deleting the chain of thought’s,
just as the flame of a lamp is extinguished. When a lamp is burning,
we experience the existence of the flame. When, however, the flame
is extinguished, it does not go anywhere. It does not go into the
earth or into the ether. When the flame is extinguished, it simply
disappears. And the extinguishing of the flame takes place when
the oil of the lamp is exhausted. In the same way, when a yogi has
crossed over all the pleasures and pains of the world, those pleasures
and pains do not go anywhere, they simply disappear. This yogi,
who has extinguished the flame of the chain of thoughts by exhausting
the wax of the five-fold kleshas, enters into the supreme and perfect
peace which is, from their point of view, liberation.

“From the Shaivite point of view, these philosophical traditions remain either in apavedya-pralayakala or in savedya-pralayakala. They do not go beyond these states.”

Apavedya-pralayakala is that state of pralayakala where there is
no objectivity. Savedya-pralayakala is that state of pralayakala where there is some

impression of objectivity. As an example, take
the state of deep sleep. When you wake up from deep sleep and then
think, “I was sleeping and I didn’t know anything,”
that is the state of apavedya-pralayakala. And when you wake up
from the state of deep sleep and think, “I was sleeping peacefully
without dreaming,” that is the state of savedya-pralayakala,
because you experienced that it was a sweet sleep and so “sweetness”
is the object for you in this state.

Shaiva philosophy does not
recognize the theories of these philosophies concerning liberation
(moksha) because, in fact, the yogins of these traditions do not
move above the pralayakala state and are not, therefore, situated
in real moksha.

 

Our Shaivism explains that jnana (knowledge) is knowing one’s
own nature, which is all Being (sat), all consciousness (cit), and
all bliss (ananda). Ajnana (ignorance) is ignoring this nature,
and this is the cause of the samsara which carries one in the cycle
of repeated births and deaths.

“Kashmir Shaivism explains that
ignorance (ajnana) is of two kinds: paurusha ajnana and bauddha
ajnana.” Paurusha ajnana is that kind of ignorance wherein one is unaware

of realizing one’s own nature in samadhi. This kind of ignorance
is removed by the grace of masters and by meditating upon one’s
own Self. And when this ignorance is removed, you find yourself
in the real knowledge of Shaivism, which is all being, all consciousness,
all bliss. This kind of knowledge is called paurusha jnana. When
you possess paurusha jnana, you realize your nature of Self perfectly...."

 

http://www.lakshmanjoo.org/teachings/secretsupreme/kashmir-shaivism-the-secret-supreme-chapter-14/

Edited July 16, 2014 by 3bob

[gatito]

I really like Lakshman Joo - I've watched some videos of him teaching and they were a real joy to watch.

 

Nonetheless, I can't see that there is any possibility of there being any difference between the nonduality of the Shaivists, the Vedantins, the Buddhists, the Taoists, the Sufis and the Christian mystics.

[3bob]

One ocean of never ending joyful light is wonderful,

but to then go inside that light is that which no man can really say...

Edited July 16, 2014 by 3bob

[3bob]

To follow a school and its lineage holder to find out 100% about same would take a 100% commitment, thus and for instance 20% interest in for 5 different schools and or teachers will never result in anything 100%. (which doesn't mean one should not have appreciation for the diversity of different schools or teachers in passing, but at some point one will have to choose beyond all the comparative ifs, ands, or buts if a complete summation about one in particular is to be reached)

 

A situation for many of us that have been exposed to so much (often in a westernized media way) may never come to full terms with....

Edited July 17, 2014 by 3bob

[gatito]

To follow a school and its lineage holder to find out 100% about same would take a 100% commitment, thus and for instance 20% interest in for 5 different schools and or teachers will never result in anything 100%.  (which doesn't mean one should not have appreciation for the diversity of different schools or teachers in passing, but at some point one will have to choose beyond all the comparative ifs, ands, or buts if a complete summation about one in particular is to be reached)

 

A situation for many of us that have been exposed to so much (often in a westernized media way) may never come to full terms with....

 

Well 3bob, if I understand you correctly, I find myself disagreeing again.

 

Some of us have had a glimpse of ultimate reality and are able to look at at least 6 apparently different schools (the Shaivists, the Vedantins, the Buddhists, the Taoists, the Sufis and the Christian mystics) and see the common thread, based on direct, first-hand knowledge.

[3bob]

looking at 5-6 different schools is something many can do, what many of us can not do is follow more than one all the way...

[gatito]

looking at 5-6 different schools is something many can do, what many of us can not do is follow more than one all the way...

 

Yes.

 

That's blatantly obvious...

 

[RigdzinTrinley]

Did anyone here read odiers translation of the yoga spandakarika?

 

I love this book

[gatito]

Did anyone here read odiers translation of the yoga spandakarika?

 

I love this book

 

I find it very nteresting and unusual that you (as a Tibetan Buddhist) recognise the value of the Spandakarika...

[RigdzinTrinley]

I'm one of the Tibetan Buddhists (there are more then you think, specially among westerners) that see Tantra as neither Buddhist nor Hindu

 

Being from the West makes it a bit easier to look beyond the Tibetan or Indian cultural dress of tantra without "loosing face"

 

Of course on many levels Buddhist and Hindu lineages of tantricism are different - no doubt about that, the teachings also differ but there are several similarities in both lineages, even some lineage masters are the same

 

F.e.: Tilopa appears to be a lineage master of Kashmir shivaism and source of the kagyu lineages simultaneously

 

Goraknath one of the shaivaite natha masters also is cited as one of the "Buddhist" 84mahasiddhas by the Tibetan Jonangpa Taranatha

 

Also baffling are certain places in Nepal like Pharping - there Guru Padmas cave is right next to the lotus feet of goraknath, both masters practiced tantric sadhana there

 

(Nepal was always strongly connected with the Nathas, and Indian/Tibetan Buddhist Siddhas- Goraknath is said to have founded Nepal, many Nepalis even say the country is in such big shit because after the assassination of the king+family the bond with the nathas was almost extinguished)

 

So for me Tantra is really its own transmission and I think that transmission is much older then Buddhism or Hinduism as we know them today

 

I also read Dr. Svobodas books on Aghora and you know its so similar it would be outright weird to not think there is something beyond Hinduism/Buddhism going on in India etc.

 

Also in the books Vimalananda reportetly said that the nathas are nothing other then aghoris

 

And aghoris look a lot like some Buddhist Siddhas to me - naked living in charnel grounds - eating out of kapalas, preferably with some fresh brain in there etc.

 

Remember tsangyong heruka? Reportedly the reincarnation of milarepa - he ran around dressed in human flesh...

 

I don't say to be a proper tantrika you need to behave like that, I mean I guess for me its better to be a baby tantrika who isn't to concerned with dualistic ideas like filthy/clean. I hope I don't cause misunderstandings when sharing these weird things, anyway its part of high end tantra to be totally beyond worldly conventions (that's reserved for the siddhas of course who have that kind of realization)

 

Anyway there are still some people on both sides that say tantra is either Shaivism or Buddhism but that's fine with me, also it doesn't really alter the power of the transmission

[forestofclarity]

I think he's comparing them from the POV of concepts rather than non-conceptual experience. Once we get into concepts, we're already at least two steps down from the ultimate on the 5 kosha model. 

 

In addition, I find that Hindus and Buddhists are generally terrible at actually understanding what the other is saying.

[3bob]

yea and if all the Buddhists were only of the Zen school then they could better understand what each other is saying... (without  all the different schools and their particular jargons) Anyway, first there is the jargon, then there is no jargon then there is...