Kaivalya Upanishad

[old3bob]

 

 

Not by work, nor by progeny, nor by wealth, but by devotion to him and by indifference to the world, does a man reach immortality.

Retire into solitude. Seat yourself on a clean spot and in erect posture, with the head and neck in a straight line. Be indifferent to the world. Control all the sense organs. Bow down in devotion to your Guru.

Then enter the lotus of the heart and there meditate on the presence of Brahman—the pure, the infinite, the blissful.

Unmanifest to the senses, beyond all thought, infinite in form, is God.
The seers meditate on him and reach the source of all beings, the witness of all.

He who knows him conquers death. There is no other way to liberation.

The mind may be compared to a fire-stick, the syllable OM to another. Rub the two sticks together by repeating the sacred word and meditating on Brahman, and the flame of knowledge will be kindled in your heart and all impurities will be burnt away.

He, as the Self, resides in all forms, but is veiled by ignorance. When he is in the state of dream that men call waking, he becomes the individual self… he is happy or miserable because of the creations of his mind.

In the three states of consciousness, whatever appears as the enjoyer or the object of enjoyment, I am the witness thereof, separate from all. I am pure consciousness. I am the eternal Shiva.

I am the knower…. I was not born; I have neither body, nor senses, nor mind, I, the Supreme Self, dwell in the lotus of the heart. I am pure. I am One without a second.

Om Tat Sat

Kaivalya Upanishad

 

[old3bob]

... in the first sentence above where it advocates "indifference" I have some reservations about that or at least with that word usage and its general meaning.   If it means indifference to the temptations of worldly things and being lost in identification with same as later implied then fine...anyway does this upanishad from a long ago time period and culture assume that that is how the reader should or does interpret the first sentence?  (for no spiritual or most any kind of practice can succeed through indifference in the general meaning of the word)

 

I also have reservations with the words,  "separate from all" near the end of this quote.  If "separate from all" means unbound by and thus transcendent to all although also witness of all then fine...adding that per non-duality there can really be no separate from per-se, or no separation between Siva and Shakti and all of Shakti's permutations as mentioned earlier in this upanishad as, "Self residing in all forms". 

 

thus words and their meanings are important, more so since every one of us may read something slightly or very different into them.

 

Comments?

Edited January 23, 2020 by old3bob

[dwai]

3 hours ago, old3bob said:

... in the first sentence above where it advocates "indifference" I have some reservations about that or at least with that word usage and its general meaning.   If it means indifference to the temptations of worldly things and being lost in identification with same as later implied then fine...anyway does this upanishad from a long ago time period and culture assume that that is how the reader should or does interpret the first sentence?  (for no spiritual or most any kind of practice can succeed through indifference in the general meaning of the word)

 

I also have reservations with the words,  "separate from all" near the end of this quote.  If "separate from all" means unbound by and thus transcendent to all although also witness of all then fine...adding that per non-duality there can really be no separate from per-se, or no separation between Siva and Shakti and all of Shakti's permutations as mentioned earlier in this upanishad as, "Self residing in all forms". 

 

thus words and their meanings are important, more so since every one of us may read something slightly or very different into them.

 

Comments?

WRT indifference -- It is referring to the condition of detachment, where one doesn't experience 'rāga' or 'dvésha', i.e., craving or aversion for anything. This is the condition which Ramana Maharshi describes in his counsel - "let what comes come, let what goes go". 

 

WRT "Separate from all" is an initial step required to shift the identification from the states that appear as waker, dreamer and deep sleeper, to the underlying awareness in which these states arise and fall. As maturity of realization develops, the seeker points out, just like you did - nothing is apart from you, the real Self. 

[old3bob]

21 minutes ago, dwai said:

WRT indifference -- It is referring to the condition of detachment, where one doesn't experience 'rāga' or 'dvésha', i.e., craving or aversion for anything. This is the condition which Ramana Maharshi describes in his counsel - "let what comes come, let what goes go". 

 

(ok, then one might wonder why the modern translator did not use the word detachment?  As for the Maharishi quote imo more detail wouldn't hurt being that it is so general)

 

WRT "Separate from all" is an initial step required to shift the identification from the states that appear as waker, dreamer and deep sleeper, to the underlying awareness in which these states arise and fall. As maturity of realization develops, the seeker points out, just like you did - nothing is apart from you, the real Self.   (agreed )

 

[dwai]

 

42 minutes ago, old3bob said:

(ok, then one might wonder why the modern translator did not use the word detachment?  As for the Maharishi quote imo more detail wouldn't hurt being that it is so general)

 

Good question. I'm not sure why. I think the problem with translating sanskrit to English is that there are a lot of untranslatable words. No one single english word can explain what vairāgya means. 

 

WRT Ramana Maharshi's statement -- it is advice for the seeker to stay unperturbed by whatever happens in life. Neither get attached to anything (Let what goes go), nor avoid anything (let what comes come). By being this way, the seeker develops 'vairāgya'  (which can loosely be translated to detachment or indifference even). 

[old3bob]

it could be a slippery slope from detachment to apathy or even nihilism is what I was getting at...

[gatito]

A better translation is benevolent indifference.

 

[dwai]

47 minutes ago, gatito said:

A better translation is benevolent indifference.

 

That’s an interesting combination. How about using “unperturbed” or “undisturbed” ? 
 

OTOH, Wikipedia has a good explanation of the term —

 

Spoiler

Vairāgya is an abstract noun derived from the word virāga (joining vi meaning "without" + rāga meaning "passion, feeling, emotion, interest"). This gives vairāgya a general meaning of "ascetic disinterest" in things that would cause attachment in most people. It is a "dis-passionate" stance on life. An ascetic who has subdued all passions and desires is called a vairāgika.^[1] Further etymological definition indicates the root rańj, referring to colour: Vi – rańj + ghaiṋ = virága. The state of virága is vaerágya. Virága means "to go beyond colour" or "to be uncoloured". To remain completely engaged in the world yet uncoloured by the world is called vaerágya.

 

[silent thunder]

For me, detachment is 'not taking the universe personally'.

Forms, emotions, thoughts arise and pass away...  awareness witnesses.

awareness is one with what unfolds in form and non...

 

Life unfolds as life... Ultimate Reality is not happening 'to' me... but through me as all is one in Brahman.

 

I'm creeping a bit closer to living what has up to now been solely a head knowledge, intelligence thing.

Edited January 24, 2020 by silent thunder
added the italicized bit

[old3bob]

speaking of unfolding...there is unfolding per chaos and unfolding per dharma and such per dharma takes will, thus divine will and order has to be more than a standing-off or just witnessing.  

[neti neti]

.

Edited August 30, 2020 by neti neti

[rideforever]

Indifference means "retire into solitude" and isolate yourself fully from the mania of the world which is insincere or a total illusion. "Separate from all" means the same thing.

However he also says that one should devote fully to Brahman, in other words "attach" yourself fully and completely to Brahman.

How can "separate from all" be compatible with the strict concept of "nonduality"?

Well it cannot.

So you either say to yourself "although I cannot use the toilet properly and am part of a mad species I reason that I am already enlightened".  One kind of person says this to himself.

 

Another kind of person simply follows the instructions, retires into seclusion and does the work indicated.

 

If in doubt it is best to try both approaches sincerely and wholeheartedly and then choose.

Edited January 27, 2020 by rideforever

[neti neti]

Not all have the opportunity to actually live in solitude. Many learn to simply detach from mundane existence, others may fully engage experiences syphoning meaning from every interplay of life. Wherever one may find oneself though, yes, to know sleep one must actually sleep. To know seclusion one must be alone. To know the work is to do it. Once fearless enough to cross the threshold from knowing to being, it's realized you are beyond even the witness. One must be Reality in human form.

 

That lens through which one's light shines like a telescope must be realized. Receding back into an infinitesimal point above and behind the head, a perspective from where the function of perception itself is observed. One realizes the I of i's and sees oneself in the eyes of the other. Being oneself is the greatest sadhana, that which all religion truly worships. Devotion to Brahman is being Brahman.

 

Edited January 27, 2020 by neti neti

[old3bob]

It is so simple that It is shocking for a moment, a shocking Joy that springs forth in the truth of simplicity that consumes (or strips away) all convoluted and binding complexity yet does no harm.

Edited January 27, 2020 by old3bob

[dwai]

And upon initial recognition of the truth,  one may give in to wave after wave of paroxysmal laughter  

Edited January 27, 2020 by dwai

[welkin]

6 hours ago, GSmaster said:

 

I have yet to see someone with bigger attachment and delusion on this board, than old3bob.

That is only because you can't see yourself. duhh

[welkin]

26 minutes ago, GSmaster said:

 

You should name the attachments and delusions I have.

 

Why should I?

[welkin]

I have no idea why you think anything you say has any value or empowers you.

[welkin]

2 minutes ago, GSmaster said:

 

That is how you perceive reality through your little ego.

It is obvious who has experience and who just read some book, listened to idiotic lectures and talks out of his ass

You can't see it only if you lack experience yourself, which is the case with people in this thread.

 

Those who never reached freedom and only study "freedom" from books and lectures are ignorant in the "true" nature of freedom.

It is one thing to listen and learn theories, it is another thing to regain consciousness upon rebirth and to be aware of oneself after death.

 

Same as with friends, I would rather trade 10.000 people connections, who have "freed" themselves through upanishads and oneness with global consciousness, towards 1 adept who has full memory of his past life and can sustain "self" without physical body.

 

 

 

oh you know me so well 'master'. You definitely don't have your third eye open. If you only knew what i knew, if you only understood what i understood, if you could only decipher what i could decipher since i've been 5 years old. Trust me, you don't know anything about me. And you most definitely can't do anything that you say you can do. I know it. Maybe some here can't read you. I can read you like an open book.

 

Goodbye

 

[welkin]

5 minutes ago, GSmaster said:

 

I knew about you even before I read any of your posts or saw you on the forum.

 

Several practitioners (not one) reported that you are mentally deranged person with lack of braincells.

 

Now seeing myself, I can confirm their diagnosis.

 

i wanted proof of noise coming out of your face. Unfortunately i didn't get any. Nor did anyone vouch for you. you're not worth my time any longer. best of luck

 

[neti neti]

7 hours ago, GSmaster said:

 

That is how you perceive reality through your little ego.

It is obvious who has experience and who just read some book, listened to idiotic lectures and talks out of his ass

You can't see it only if you lack experience yourself, which is the case with people in this thread.

 

Those who never reached freedom and only study "freedom" from books and lectures are ignorant in the "true" nature of freedom. Freedom is not the end, it is the first step.

It is one thing to listen and learn theories, it is another thing to regain consciousness upon rebirth and to be aware of oneself after death.

 

Same as with friends, I would rather trade 10.000 people connections, who have "freed" themselves through upanishads and oneness with global consciousness, towards 1 adept who has full memory of his past life and can sustain "self" without physical body.

 

 

It seems you've awoken from one dream, yet remain deep in slumber within the next. Experience is the proverbial snake in a rope.

 

Watch out all you little egos, the big boy is here. 

 

And there are those that never touched pages or heard teachings, yet spontaneously abide "freely" without so much as a guru's glance.

It is one thing to have self-knowledge, and it is quite another to presume one has known others without self-knowledge. The latter characterizes the epitome of ignorance.

 

The Adept is self-shining and ever present. He knows nothing of profit or loss, remembering or forgetting,  birth or death. And He certainly finds no difference between himself and the 10,000.

[neti neti]

3 hours ago, GSmaster said:

Pages and teachings are not the way of self development.

 

13 hours ago, GSmaster said:

If you were a talented genious with extremely high potential and powerful previous reincarnations, I would recruit you into my school.

It would still not be free, atleast 20.000 euro for level 1 training.

 

LOL 

 

3 hours ago, GSmaster said:

Ignorance is to have third eye closed, when you cant see ghosts or spirits with your eyes open, and believe you know something of real world, that is the epitome if ignorance.

 

One is rarely discerned and unseen by most. 

 

 

3 hours ago, GSmaster said:

Awakening and consciousness, directly depends on mental field power / energy.

 

You are like a blind frog in the well, who does not realize the immensity of heaven and earth. Yet talks big after listening to online lectures or hearing some 3rd rate teaching.

 

Knowing of or about, and Knowingness, are not synonymous. Consciousness depends on nothing. What powers can be spoken of with straight face in light of the grand miracle that you are? All power is me, all energy is me, all fields are myself. I am, an open fact without words, prior to one's projective capacity.

 

Mind is a tool at best. The essence of its mantra is nothing more than a relentless, unceasing, "i !"

Before you ever thought you recognized Casper, consciousness rushed in to meet his form immediately. Impossible to analyze, imperceivable, the most-ignored but well-known and least realized.

 

Being oneself requires no mediator. Direct apperception has 0 use for the faculty of intellect or any supposed power one manages to amass. I hope your head doesn't explode, and may all your dreams come true.

 

Didn't you know? They can only hear me louder from down here in the well. You're too kind. 

 

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by neti neti

[neti neti]

9 minutes ago, GSmaster said:

Third Eye is very obvious and visible for any cultivator.

 

Eyes don't apply here, although transcendent perception may have its place in passing the time. The highest level cultivators release notions of choice and control. All is as it must be. The mind's grip on the imagined individual's perception must be loosened as a prerequisite to encountering elements outside physical definition. Surrendering to life's spontaneity by abandoning one's sense of control is, of course, not without a measure of discomfort for one intent upon power and influence.

 

A man feebly motions toward the so obvious it need not be mentioned, but overlooked because it's invisible. 

[neti neti]

1 hour ago, GSmaster said:

Forget the highest level, even the lowest level is something you will never ever attain.

 

And nobody of this tradition has ever became a cultivator. 

 

...

 

Quote

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj was part of the Navnath Sampradaya, the lineage of the nine gurus.  Maharaj himself did not stress his lineage with most of his western devotees. However, he does speak about it in I Am That, Page 271 Part II, chapter 97:

Question: I see here picture of several saints and I am told that they are your spiritual ancestors. Who are they and how did it all begin?

Maharaj: We are called collectively the “Nine Masters”. The legend says that our first teacher was the Rishi Dattatreya, the great incarnation of the trinity of Brahman, Vishnu and Shiva. Even the ‘Nine Masters” are mythological.

Question: What is the peculiarity of their teaching? 

Maharaj: Its simplicity, both in theory and in practice..

Question: How does one become a Navnath? By initiation or by succession?

Maharaj: Neither. the Nine Masters’ tradition (Navnath Parampara) is like a river—it flows into the ocean of reality and whoever enters it is carried along...

 

 

Quote

"As the first of the siddhas, the Tibetan sources mention Luhi-pa (Luyi-pada) who is most probably identical with Matsyendranatha, the teacher of the famous Gorakshanatha...The natha-siddhas...deserve to be singled out for separate treatment by virtue of their enormous influence on the development of Yoga.

This is most interesting because the siddha tradition, being Tantric in orientation has both renunciate aand householder practitioners.

 

“Matsyendranatha, the Lord of fish, probably lived in the early part of the tenth century A.D. He is regarded as the first human teacher of Hatha Yoga and may have been the originator of the Yogini branch of the Kaula School and the Nathapanth (sect.). Nath means master or lord and refers to a Yogi who enjoys both, liberation (mukti) and supernatural power (siddhi).

Matsyendranatha is considered as one of the eighty-four great adepts (maha-siddhas) and is known also as Minanatha or Luipa. Luipa can be a short form of Lohipada. He is also venerated as the guardian deity of Nepal in the form of the transcendental bodhi sattva Avalokiteshwara” - Matsyendranatha

 

Avalokiteshvara is the Bodhisattva of Compassion, the world protector. As we can see here, there are many perspectives as to who exactly Matchinendranath or Matsyendranath was, but we can see that he was pivotal in Tantra, Yoga, and the Natha traditions. How these practices are viewed depends on the perspective of the commentator. From the perspective of my translator friend, Mr. Mullarpattan, Matsyendranath (Matchindranath), his venture into the world of Tantra needed rescuing, but it seems evident to me, that the transmutational aspect of Tantra was transmitted through the Navnath lineage, even if the sexual aspects were purged.

 

~Textbook of Yoga, George Feurerstein

 

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by neti neti

[gendao]

On 1/23/2020 at 10:11 AM, old3bob said:

... in the first sentence above where it advocates "indifference"