Question:

[snip] As for myself I am not looking to be in the state of these great masters who can control minute vibrations in the world. I’m not quite sure what you mean by "control minute vibrations in the world". If you mean, maintaining samadhi(according to Yogananda’s defintion), as one goes about their day to day business, that’s the primary diference in a way between sabikalpa and nirbikapa samandhi: one is so "blissed out" in the samadhi state that they literally haven’t learned to move about physically yet; the other they are mobile and can bring the bliss with them. If you mean "control minute vibrations" in some other way, then you’ll need to clarify…..

I was referring to constant mystical experiences. As I progress in my yoga I often find myself pulling back when things get a little weird out there. An example is a process sometimes called witnessing – when I am sleeping with awareness. It is pleasant enough but I just as soon be unconscious when I am sleeping.  Just too weird. Lahiri Mahasaya, guru of Yogananda’s guru(Sri Yukeswarji)was not a monastic and carried out "worldy duties" certainly with no detriment from the samadhi state.

He lived in turn of the century India. I don’t know how well he would have gone over as a highly paid 21st Century Hollywood film editor. This state would be of great detriment to my family and the people who depend on me in my career. I am more concerned about how my yoga [snip] I think there’s a difference between respect AND credibility.I can certainly respect some individuals yet not find their "path" credible.for example, if someone WERE to say that THEIR path was Silva Mind Control, I don’t consider it a spiritual path yet I respect individual taking the training for its psychological benefits. Jim R

So true. But I must say I draw the line of respect at people who listen to Dr. Laura for psychological benefits. ;<)

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is all new to me so I have a few questions: [big snip] This is the state I always thought was simply samadhi. HHS2, If you use Paramhansa Yogananda’s(SRF) definition, then the above is correct. the problem here is partly semantics and partly, that there are a lot of readers in this news group, some new to spiritual development and others who have had a "path" for sometime. Of the ones who have had a path, some will "correct" you if its doesn’t match "their teachers" definition. I for one ,will tell you up front that I’m "biased" and the teacher from whom those biases are based. Secondly, even among the several who have had establised paths in

this (SNIP) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – newsgroup, each may not recognize the other’s teacher to be a spiritual master. for example, Jodyr, a contributor in this group is a "student" of Ramana Maharashi(sp?)who I don’t consider to be any more spiritually developed than "the man on the moon". conversely, Jodyr doesn’t think MY spiritual teacher, Yogananda, to be a spiritual master. and he says that no "human" has ever been omnipresent and omniscient and that the type of yoga practiced doesn’t matter . I of course recogize Yogananda to be a avatar and a juvan mukta, which brings with it those qualities of omnipresent and omniscience. I also recognize that there is a cause and effect link between the practice of certain yogas(i.e Raja/Kriya) and nirvikalpa samadhi. Neither of us is realized(at least I KNOW I’m not, as wonderfull as it would be). so, you get debate based partly on semantics, and partly on who’s teacher is recognized as beng a credible spiritual master. Jim Rapson Houston TX SRF devotee..

(SNIP) Thank you for the explanation. I try to be open to all groups. As I see these contradictions and small distinctions between groups it only bolsters my position to stay independent and serve "the doctrine of no doctrine". I maintain that direct meditation experience is enough to support understanding. You mention how neither of us is realized. As for myself I am not looking to be in the state of these great masters who can control minute vibrations in the world.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by "control minute vibrations in the world". If you mean, maintaining samadhi(according to Yogananda’s defintion), as one goes about their day to day business, that’s the primary diference in a way between sabikalpa and nirbikapa samandhi: one is so "blissed out" in the samadhi state that they literally haven’t learned to move about physically yet; the other they are mobile and can bring the bliss with them. If you mean "control minute vibrations" in some other way, then you’ll need to clarify….. Lahiri Mahasaya, guru of Yogananda’s guru(Sri Yukeswarji)was not a monastic and carried out "worldy duties" certainly with no detriment from the samadhi state.  This state would be of great detriment to my family and the – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – people who depend on me in my career. I am more concerned about how my yoga practice influences my activities in the world. In reading Autobiography of a Yogi I identify with Yogananda’s father, the successful banker and devout familyman. In this way I am realized. Or "realizing" as I really think that realization is a process not an end. That said I have really enjoyed the SRF gardens off Sunset on LA’s westside, The Autobiography of a Yogi. And I must say there is a lot to learn from SRF and I know that Yogananda has inspired many on the path. Why can’t the competing groups respect the differences and celebrate the similarities?

I think there’s a difference between respect AND credibility.I can certainly respect some individuals yet not find their "path" credible.for example, if someone WERE to say that THEIR path was Silva Mind Control, I don’t consider it a spiritual path yet I respect individual taking the training for its psychological benefits. Jim R Before you buy.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is all new to me so I have a few questions: [big snip] This is the state I always thought was simply samadhi. HHS2, If you use Paramhansa Yogananda’s(SRF) definition, then the above is correct. the problem here is partly semantics and partly, that there are a lot of readers in this news group, some new to spiritual development and others who have had a "path" for sometime. Of the ones who have had a path, some will "correct" you if its doesn’t match "their teachers" definition. I for one ,will tell you up front that I’m "biased" and the teacher from whom those biases are based. Secondly, even among the several who have had establised paths in this newsgroup, each may not recognize the other’s teacher to be a spiritual master. for example, Jodyr, a contributor in this group is a "student" of Ramana Maharashi(sp?)who I don’t consider to be any more spiritually developed than "the man on the moon". conversely, Jodyr doesn’t think MY spiritual teacher, Yogananda, to be a spiritual master. and he says that no "human" has ever been omnipresent and omniscient and that the type of yoga practiced doesn’t matter . I of course recogize Yogananda to be a avatar and a juvan mukta, which brings with it those qualities of omnipresent and omniscience. I also recognize that there is a cause and effect link between the practice of certain yogas(i.e Raja/Kriya) and nirvikalpa samadhi. Neither of us is realized(at least I KNOW I’m not, as wonderfull as it would be). so, you get debate based partly on semantics, and partly on who’s teacher is recognized as beng a credible spiritual master. Jim Rapson Houston TX SRF devotee..

Thank you for the explanation. I try to be open to all groups. As I see these contradictions and small distinctions between groups it only bolsters my position to stay independent and serve "the doctrine of no doctrine". I maintain that direct meditation experience is enough to support understanding. You mention how neither of us is realized. As for myself I am not looking to be in the state of these great masters who can control minute vibrations in the world. This state would be of great detriment to my family and the people who depend on me in my career. I am more concerned about how my yoga practice influences my activities in the world. In reading Autobiography of a Yogi I identify with Yogananda’s father, the successful banker and devout familyman. In this way I am realized. Or "realizing" as I really think that realization is a process not an end. That said I have really enjoyed the SRF gardens off Sunset on LA’s westside, The Autobiography of a Yogi. And I must say there is a lot to learn from SRF and I know that Yogananda has inspired many on the path. Why can’t the competing groups respect the differences and celebrate the similarities?

Response:

This is all new to me so I have a few questions: I have been operating with the understanding that samadhi is a "state in which the aspirent is one with the object of his meditation, the Supreme Spirit governing the universe".  (BKS Iyengar) I have not seen samadhi referred to as an absorption. Where did you learn of this many types of Samadhi’s?  Who is your teacher?

(snip) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I mean this to only find your sources. I ask this question with great respect to your teacher(s). wrote Samadhi is any kind of suspension, absorption  or similar state of mind Eg When mind becomes extremely restless because of crude propensities, then the restless mind tends towards only one object. While tending towards one object, it gets itself concentrated all of a sudden therein. That absorption of mind into that object is transitory. This state is known as Ksipta.

(snip)SCROLL down to HHS2 salutation……. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You might have noticed in your personal life that if you come in clash with a person or if you become angry with him, throughout the day the picture of that individual repeatedly comes to your mind and you fail to concentrate your mind on any object other than that individual. This state of mind is Ks’ipta Samadhi. I understand this state. I would think that an agitated state would take one away from samadhi. In order to get in this agitated state don’t you have to operating from ego? Then another is Murha. Where there is attachment to or fear from some object (judged minutely fear is included in attachment ), the object even in that case repeatedly creeps into mind. As for instance, a man of Gazipur working in Bombay is repeatedly haunted with the idea that he should have his office just like the one at Gazipur. Gazipur all the time haunts his mind. It means that the object comes to mind very easily, This state is called Murha. Again through my journey *detachment* was been my greatest friend, especially in incidences of office politics. On this road to samadhi isn’t attachment an obstacle?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Another one is Viksipta. Viksipta is Abhavatmika Samadhi. Suppose the mind is absorbed in one object. The next moment it shifts to another object, then to the next one and so on and so forth till the mind gets exhausted and ceases to function. This is known as Viks’ipta Samadhi. You know that in a lullaby the baby is given one picture, the next moment another picture and so on and so forth, till the child’s mind is exhausted and it takes recourse to sleep. This is Viks’ipta Samadhi. Next is Ekagra. Because of the ideation of a particular object, the mind is concentrated at a particular point. This is known as Ekagra Samadhi. Eka =1- Graha = to grab. Then Nirodha means to withdraw the vibrations (Gati or the propensities of mind) and to direct them to the objectless ( Avisaya ) i.e., to withdraw the mind from the objectivities. This is Nirodha. From my understanding this is pratyahara. The fifth stage of yoga. Thus Yoga is Yogash citta vrtti Nirodhah i.e., the Nirodha (channelisation) of all the Vrttis (propensities of mind). Or, to put it simply: controlling the Vrtti’s of citta, i.e. the thinking. That is what yoga is about: gaining control. Perhaps gaining control by letting go? Also, after continued spiritual practice when I feeling gets metamorphosed into Macrocosmic I-feeling, the Citta (objective mind) of the microcosmic mind merges in its cause and so, when in the introversive momentum the Citta merges, the state of all-pervasiveness constitutes the State of Transcendentality or Savikalpa Samadhi (The trance of determinate absorption). After the merger of the sense of ego (I-feeling) in the Citishakti (Consciousness), this in the State of objectlessness or Nirvikalpa Samadhi (The trance of indeterminate absorption or total suspension of the mind). This is the state I always thought was simply samadhi.

HHS2, If you use Paramhansa Yogananda’s(SRF) definition, then the above is correct. the problem here is partly semantics and partly, that there are a lot of readers in this news group, some new to spiritual development and others who have had a "path" for sometime. Of the ones who have had a path, some will "correct" you if its doesn’t match "their teachers" definition. I for one ,will tell you up front that I’m "biased" and the teacher from whom those biases are based. Secondly, even among the several who have had establised paths in this newsgroup, each may not recognize the other’s teacher to be a spiritual master. for example, Jodyr, a contributor in this group is a "student" of Ramana Maharashi(sp?)who I don’t consider to be any more spiritually developed than "the man on the moon". conversely, Jodyr doesn’t think MY spiritual teacher, Yogananda, to be a spiritual master. and he says that no "human" has ever been omnipresent and omniscient and that the type of yoga practiced doesn’t matter . I of course recogize Yogananda to be a avatar and a juvan mukta, which brings with it those qualities of omnipresent and omniscience. I also recognize that there is a cause and effect link between the practice of certain yogas(i.e Raja/Kriya) and nirvikalpa samadhi. Neither of us is realized(at least I KNOW I’m not, as wonderfull as it would be). so, you get debate based partly on semantics, and partly on who’s teacher is recognized as beng a credible spiritual master. Jim Rapson Houston TX SRF devotee.. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Due to the absence of any guna or binding principle this state is called the state of Objectlessness. This state is verbally inexpressible because…. Basic and classic yoga. Yes. Words cannot describe it because of its innate nature. Nice and detailed explanation, but that was not the issue… Nowadays I only explain when directly asked about something. Only very few seem really interested, or capable of understanding, from direct experience. OM Shanti I am always open to learning what mythologies others ascribe to their experience. It furthers my intellectual appreciation of the state.

Before you buy.

Response:

This is all new to me so I have a few questions: I have been operating with the understanding that samadhi is a "state in which the aspirent is one with the object of his meditation, the Supreme Spirit governing the universe".  (BKS Iyengar)

Hmm. Yes. I know Iyengars words about it…. Basically he is right. A detailed explanation can be found in the Patanjali Sutra’s. In this book the states <ahem of Samadhi being described are different stages on the way to complete Union, where there is no more movement, not of the mind, not of the body. This is referred to as Nirbija samadhi. (without even a seed of thought) Other stages being called different sabija samadhi’s, still have traces of thought or seed. This is when there still is the idea of the I that is in samadhi and of the Subject of the samadhi and of the Samadhi itself. When those 3 finally cease to exist . . . I have not seen samadhi referred to as an absorption.

Well it could be. Where did you learn of this many types of Samadhi’s?

At the yogaschool where we were learning about Raja yoga, among others. One of the textbooks we used is the Sutra’s from Patanjali. Also the Hatha Yoga Pradipika sheds some light on it. Who is your teacher?

Is that important? His name is Ajita I mean this to only find your sources. I ask this question with great respect to your teacher(s).

He is one of the very, very few who earned and deserved respect. I found that (at least for me) he is a very good Teacher. OM Shanti

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is all new to me so I have a few questions: I have been operating with the understanding that samadhi is a "state in which the aspirent is one with the object of his meditation, the Supreme Spirit governing the universe".  (BKS Iyengar) Hmm. Yes. I know Iyengars words about it…. Basically he is right. A detailed explanation can be found in the Patanjali Sutra’s. In this book the states <ahem of Samadhi being described are different stages on the way to complete Union, where there is no more movement, not of the mind, not of the body. This is referred to as Nirbija samadhi. (without even a seed of thought) Other stages being called different sabija samadhi’s, still have traces of thought or seed. This is when there still is the idea of the I that is in samadhi and of the Subject of the samadhi and of the Samadhi itself. When those 3 finally cease to exist . . . I have not seen samadhi referred to as an absorption. Well it could be. Where did you learn of this many types of Samadhi’s? At the yogaschool where we were learning about Raja yoga, among others. One of the textbooks we used is the Sutra’s from Patanjali. Also the Hatha Yoga Pradipika sheds some light on it. Who is your teacher? Is that important? His name is Ajita I mean this to only find your sources. I ask this question with great respect to your teacher(s). He is one of the very, very few who earned and deserved respect. I found that (at least for me) he is a very good Teacher. OM Shanti

Thank you. I see now that it is time to poke my nose once again into the great books. Every time we draw something new.

Response:

This is all new to me so I have a few questions: I have been operating with the understanding that samadhi is a "state in which the aspirent is one with the object of his meditation, the Supreme Spirit governing the universe".  (BKS Iyengar) I have not seen samadhi referred to as an absorption. Where did you learn of this many types of Samadhi’s?  Who is your teacher? I mean this to only find your sources. I ask this question with great respect to your teacher(s). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Samadhi is any kind of suspension, absorption  or similar state of mind Eg When mind becomes extremely restless because of crude propensities, then the restless mind tends towards only one object. While tending towards one object, it gets itself concentrated all of a sudden therein. That absorption of mind into that object is transitory. This state is known as Ksipta. You might have noticed in your personal life that if you come in clash with a person or if you become angry with him, throughout the day the picture of that individual repeatedly comes to your mind and you fail to concentrate your mind on any object other than that individual. This state of mind is Ks’ipta Samadhi.

I understand this state. I would think that an agitated state would take one away from samadhi. In order to get in this agitated state don’t you have to operating from ego? Then another is Murha. Where there is attachment to or fear from some object (judged minutely fear is included in attachment ), the object even in that case repeatedly creeps into mind. As for instance, a man of Gazipur working in Bombay is repeatedly haunted with the idea that he should have his office just like the one at Gazipur. Gazipur all the time haunts his mind. It means that the object comes to mind very easily, This state is called Murha.

Again through my journey *detachment* was been my greatest friend, especially in incidences of office politics. On this road to samadhi isn’t attachment an obstacle? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Another one is Viksipta. Viksipta is Abhavatmika Samadhi. Suppose the mind is absorbed in one object. The next moment it shifts to another object, then to the next one and so on and so forth till the mind gets exhausted and ceases to function. This is known as Viks’ipta Samadhi. You know that in a lullaby the baby is given one picture, the next moment another picture and so on and so forth, till the child’s mind is exhausted and it takes recourse to sleep. This is Viks’ipta Samadhi. Next is Ekagra. Because of the ideation of a particular object, the mind is concentrated at a particular point. This is known as Ekagra Samadhi. Eka =1- Graha = to grab. Then Nirodha means to withdraw the vibrations (Gati or the propensities of mind) and to direct them to the objectless ( Avisaya ) i.e., to withdraw the mind from the objectivities. This is Nirodha.

From my understanding this is pratyahara. The fifth stage of yoga. Thus Yoga is Yogash citta vrtti Nirodhah i.e., the Nirodha (channelisation) of all the Vrttis (propensities of mind). Or, to put it simply: controlling the Vrtti’s of citta, i.e. the thinking. That is what yoga is about: gaining control.

Perhaps gaining control by letting go? Also, after continued spiritual practice when I feeling gets metamorphosed into Macrocosmic I-feeling, the Citta (objective mind) of the microcosmic mind merges in its cause and so, when in the introversive momentum the Citta merges, the state of all-pervasiveness constitutes the State of Transcendentality or Savikalpa Samadhi (The trance of determinate absorption). After the merger of the sense of ego (I-feeling) in the Citishakti (Consciousness), this in the State of objectlessness or Nirvikalpa Samadhi (The trance of indeterminate absorption or total suspension of the mind).

This is the state I always thought was simply samadhi. Due to the absence of any guna or binding principle this state is called the state of Objectlessness. This state is verbally inexpressible because…. Basic and classic yoga. Yes. Words cannot describe it because of its innate nature. Nice and detailed explanation, but that was not the issue… Nowadays I only explain when directly asked about something. Only very few seem really interested, or capable of understanding, from direct experience. OM Shanti

I am always open to learning what mythologies others ascribe to their experience. It furthers my intellectual appreciation of the state.

Response:

Samadhi is any kind of suspension, absorption  or similar state of mind Eg When mind becomes extremely restless because of crude propensities, then the restless mind tends towards only one object. While tending towards one object, it gets itself concentrated all of a sudden therein. That absorption of mind into that object is transitory. This state is known as Ksipta. You might have noticed in your personal life that if you come in clash with a person or if you become angry with him, throughout the day the picture of that individual repeatedly comes to your mind and you fail to concentrate your mind on any object other than that individual. This state of mind is Ks’ipta Samadhi. Then another is Murha. Where there is attachment to or fear from some object (judged minutely fear is included in attachment ), the object even in that case repeatedly creeps into mind. As for instance, a man of Gazipur working in Bombay is repeatedly haunted with the idea that he should have his office just like the one at Gazipur. Gazipur all the time haunts his mind. It means that the object comes to mind very easily, This state is called Murha. Another one is Viksipta. Viksipta is Abhavatmika Samadhi. Suppose the mind is absorbed in one object. The next moment it shifts to another object, then to the next one and so on and so forth till the mind gets exhausted and ceases to function. This is known as Viks’ipta Samadhi. You know that in a lullaby the baby is given one picture, the next moment another picture and so on and so forth, till the child’s mind is exhausted and it takes recourse to sleep. This is Viks’ipta Samadhi. Next is Ekagra. Because of the ideation of a particular object, the mind is concentrated at a particular point. This is known as Ekagra Samadhi. Eka =1- Graha = to grab. Then Nirodha means to withdraw the vibrations (Gati or the propensities of mind) and to direct them to the objectless ( Avisaya ) i.e., to withdraw the mind from the objectivities. This is Nirodha. Thus Yoga is Yogash citta vrtti Nirodhah i.e., the Nirodha (channelisation) of all the Vrttis (propensities of mind). Or, to put it simply: controlling the Vrtti’s of citta, i.e. the thinking. That is what yoga is about: gaining control. Also, after continued spiritual practice when I feeling gets metamorphosed into Macrocosmic I-feeling, the Citta (objective mind) of the microcosmic mind merges in its cause and so, when in the introversive momentum the Citta merges, the state of all-pervasiveness constitutes the State of Transcendentality or Savikalpa Samadhi (The trance of determinate absorption). After the merger of the sense of ego (I-feeling) in the Citishakti (Consciousness), this in the State of objectlessness or Nirvikalpa Samadhi (The trance of indeterminate absorption or total suspension of the mind). Due to the absence of any guna or binding principle this state is called the state of Objectlessness. This state is verbally inexpressible because…. Basic and classic yoga. Yes. Words cannot describe it because of its innate nature. Nice and detailed explanation, but that was not the issue… Nowadays I only explain when directly asked about something. Only very few seem really interested, or capable of understanding, from direct experience. OM Shanti

Response:

"Dharmadeva"  , well explained. Tell me , do you think that these states of the mind are curious properties of the mind or have a deeper meaning to them?

LOL — Sat Nam – Hari Har Singh Kundalini Yoga: http://3ho.home.pages.de/ alt.yoga FAQ:    http://members.xoom.com/altyoga/

Response:

HHS: Now that sounds strange to me, to have different levels of Samadhi – like if there would be different levels of truth. Obviously you do not understand the meaning of samadhi.

You are adressing the wrong person. I was having a conversation with HHS (Hari Har Singh), about the different names of Samadhi representing the different "stages" on the path to Union. Do not jump to conclusions before reading carefully my friend. OM shanti

Response:

"Dharmadeva"  , well explained. Tell me , do you think that these states of the mind are curious properties of the mind or have a deeper meaning to them? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – HHS: Now that sounds strange to me, to have different levels of Samadhi – like if there would be different levels of truth. Obviously you do not understand the meaning of samadhi. Samadhi is any kind of suspension, absorption  or similar state of mind Eg When mind becomes extremely restless because of crude propensities, then the restless mind tends towards only one object. While tending towards one object, it gets itself concentrated all of a sudden therein. That absorption of mind into that object is transitory. This state is known as Ks’ipta. You might have noticed in your personal life that if you come in clash with a person or if you become angry with him, throughout the day the picture of that individual repeatedly comes to your mind and you fail to concentrate your mind on any object other than that individual. This state of mind is Ks’ipta Sama’dhi.      Then another is Mu’r'ha. Where there is attachment to or fear from some object (judged minutely fear is included in attachment ), the object even in that case repeatedly creeps into mind. As for instance, a man of Gazipur working in Bombay is repeatedly haunted with the idea that he should have his office just like the one at Gazipur. Gazipur all the time haunts his mind. It means that the object comes to mind very easily, This state is called Mu’r'ha. Another one is Viks’ipta. Viks’ipta is Abha’va’tmika’ Sama’dhi. Suppose the mind is absorbed in one object. The next moment it shifts to another object, then to the next one and so on and so forth till the mind gets exhausted and ceases to function. This is known as Viks’ipta Sama’dhi. You know that in a lullaby the baby is given one picture, the next moment another picture and so on and so forth, till the child’s mind is exhausted and it takes recourse to sleep. This is Viks’ipta Sama’dhi. Next is Eka’gra. Because of the ideation of a particular object, the mind is concentrated at a particular point. This is known as Eka’gra Sama’dhi. Then Nirodha means to withdraw the vibrations (Gati or the propensities of mind) and to direct them to the objectless ( Avis’aya ) i.e., to withdraw the mind from the objectivities. This is Nirodha.      Thus Yoga is ‘Yogashcittavrtti Nirodhah’ i.e., the Nirodha (channelisation) of all the Vrttis (propensities of mind). Also, after continued spiritual practice when I feeling gets metamorphosed into Macrocosmic I-feeling, the Citta (objective mind) of the microcosmic mind merges in its cause and so, when in the introversive momentum the Citta merges, the state of all-pervasiveness constitutes the State of Transcendentality or Savikalpa Samadhi (The trance of determinate absorption). After the merger of the sense of ego (I-feeling) in the Citishakti (Consciousness), this in the State of Objectlessness or Nirvikalpa Samadhi (The trance of indeterminate absorption or total suspension of the mind). Due to the absence of any guna or binding principle this state is called the state of Objectlessness. This state is verbally inexpressible because…. Basic and classic yoga.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … The ‘highest’ Samadhi is Nirbija Samadhi. "This truth is truer than that truth". But there is only 1. Everything else, mind + Ego-, competition-stuff. ….Yashna called – had to change nappies So let me finish about samadhi

LOL You do this between the nappies changing? Very good! That too belongs to Life! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Patanjali Sutra’s give information about that in Part III sutra 1,2,3 & 4 from meditation to samadhi part I sutra 17, 18 (a)samprajnata samadhi part I-41 — 51 part III 9,10,11 & 12 To be brief: From Dharana (concentration) you enter Dhyana (meditation) and from there you could find yourself in samprajnata:- savitarka / nirvitarka samadhi vicara: savicara / nirvicara Sananda Sasmita These are all states where a certain ‘feeling’ still remains: (and remember that whatener *word* is used, it cannot correctly describe it, because this matter is beyond words…) a subtle feeling of the world (vitarka) with seed or without, a subtle feeling of  (vicara) with seed or without, a subtle feeling of complete Bliss, (sananda), a subtle feeling of ‘to BE’. Just being. Still there is the ‘I’ and the ‘outside’ (seed represents this) When even this ceases to exist, it is nirbija… OM Shanti

Ah, ok Paul thank you for describing it – I think I do now understand. It’s about the process the consciousness goes through on it’s way to Samadhi – right? Yes. All ’stages’ exept the last one still have some way of duality in it; there is the one who experiences, the subject of exoeriene and the experiencing… Once that too vanishes there are no more traces of duality or ego or duality… It’s not about different truths but about the different stages of receptioning the truth. As Ken Wilber said – "das Spektrum des Bewu

Related Posts

• My feet hurt!
• What do you think makes a good yoga instructor?
• yoga?
• Concentration/Meditation/Hatha Yoga/Subconscious-karma/Yogic metaphysics/brain spheres
• Inexpensive Stress relief needed
• food dreams-why?!?!
• White tantric yoga this weekend - nervous!
• DON"T FOOL YOURSELF
• no walk today
• stuck out at work