Turiya = Brahman?

[ajay0]

So if Brahman is pure consciousness, then everything we experience is an appearance to that? Maya?

Brahman is pure consciousness. Prakriti as in matter, energy, space, time and causation are the diverse manifestation of this unitary consciousness or Brahman.

Attachment to sensory objects for pleasure instead of Brahman or Self within, results in Prakriti becoming the inauspicious Maya.

Worship or reverence of nature (prakriti) results in it becoming the auspicious Divine mother who frees the devotee from the entanglement and bondage of karma, and enables him to realize Brahman or Self within.

 

[Martin]

Brahman is pure consciousness. Prakriti as in matter, energy, space, time and causation are the diverse manifestation of this unitary consciousness or Brahman.

Attachment to sensory objects for pleasure instead of Brahman or Self within, results in Prakriti becoming the inauspicious Maya.

Worship or reverence of nature (prakriti) results in it becoming the auspicious Divine mother who frees the devotee from the entanglement and bondage of karma, and enables him to realize Brahman or Self within.

Is the prakriti concept exclusive to Samkhya, or do other schools use it?

 

[ajay0]

Is the prakriti concept exclusive to Samkhya, or do other schools use it?

Prakriti obviously is also a part of Shaktaism and dualistic philosophies in Hinduism. In the Shakta oriented Puranas, the Goddess is described as "the supramental Prakriti" to whom the world owes its origin, while she does not owe her origin to anything."

The yoga philosophy and Patanjali's Yoga Sutra is also based on Sankhya.Yoga takes the Samkhya philosophy into the realm of experience, through gradual and systematic progression, as per Dr. Swami Shankardev Saraswati.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So if Brahman is pure consciousness, then everything we experience is an appearance to that? Maya?

People believe that. I don't understand the term. Someone who does not understand trying to mystify things, so that he escapes explanation. Of course, whatever we experience with our sense organs is an appearance, maya. Brahman behind can be understood, realized, but what we see would be a projection of Brahman by our mind - as our mind sees it under the influence of maya.
Consciousness is erased with our death. We are no more, then the consciousness also is no more. I believe that.
I concur with Valjian that Turiya is a state of consciousness wherein we have realized Brahman, also with Shivasomashekhar.

Along with Samkhya, Yoga philosophy uses Prakriti (but other people may know better, Vinayaka, Shivasomashekhar for example). Samkhya-Yoga are spoken in combination like Nyaya-Vaisheshika and Purva and Uttara Mimamsa (Vedanta), Purva means the earlier and Uttara the later mimamsa (deliberation, reflection, critical-investigation).

"The metaphysics of Yoga is built on the same dualist foundation as the Samkhya school. The universe is conceptualized as composed of two realities in the Samhkya-Yoga schools: Puruṣa (consciousness) and prakriti (matter)."
Yoga (philosophy) - Wikipedia

There is no Sanskrit word in these Upanishads that translates to the english word experience. It is something to be known - not directly, but indirectly, by negating everything.

Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit

 

[ajay0]

Can either turiya or Brahman be experienced directly?

Yes, the experiential realization of the peak of Turiya or Brahman is the aspiration of the yogic mountain climber.

This is understood through practice of meditation resulting in samadhi, when the nondual perception is revealed obliterating duality.

In Nirvikalpa samadhi, this perception becomes of a permanent nature.

The state of pure conciousness in Nirvikala samadhi is devoid of all vasanas and raag-dvesh, intense desires in the form of cravings and aversions that project duality.

Without meditation , verbal speculation with respect to Brahman and turiya is bound to result in delusion as warned by the Upanishadic sages and enlightened masters from time to time.

The demonic character Virochana is considered as an example and case study in Upanishadic philosophy as grossly misinterpreting Brahman as the body and teaching the same to others and spreading ignorance.

Upanishads

Such guides are provided in Upanishadic philosopy to ensure that students are lead forward in the right path and not lead astray by fraud and delusion to falsehood and inauspiciousness.

 

[Martin]

Yes, the experiential realization of the peak of Turiya or Brahman is the aspiration of the yogic mountain climber.

This is understood through practice of meditation resulting in samadhi, when the nondual perception is revealed obliterating duality.

In Nirvikalpa samadhi, this perception becomes of a permanent nature.

The state of pure conciousness in Nirvikala samadhi is devoid of all vasanas and raag-dvesh, intense desires in the form of cravings and aversions that project duality.

Without meditation , verbal speculation with respect to Brahman and turiya is bound to result in delusion as warned by the Upanishadic sages and enlightened masters from time to time.

The demonic character Virochana is considered as an example and case study in Upanishadic philosophy as grossly misinterpreting Brahman as the body and teaching the same to others and spreading ignorance.

Upanishads

Such guides are provided in Upanishadic philosopy to ensure that students are lead forward in the right path and not lead astray by fraud and delusion to falsehood and inauspiciousness.

Thanks. Can you think of any other scriptural passages which relate directly to the relationship between turiya and Brahman? I've been reading the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita mostly.

 

[atanu]

We experience lots of things. Waking-state is an experience of illusion (maya). It's a Dream state. If you're in a more expanded state you'd begin experiencing Brahman. At the highest level you'd be indistinguishable from Brahman.

Tuiya is not Brahman. Brahman is not a state of consciousness.

Actually neither is Turiya a state.

 

[Valjean]

Actually neither is Turiya a state.

Google it.

 

[Martin]

Actually neither is Turiya a state.

How would you describe it?

 

[ajay0]

Thanks. Can you think of any other scriptural passages which relate directly to the relationship between turiya and Brahman? I've been reading the Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita mostly.

These sayings by Swami and Ramana Maharshi may shed more light on it...

Brahman, Turiya, Aum and the Three States of Consciousness

" Turiya cannot be described by any instrument of empirical knowledge, because of its unique characteristics, specific or generic, being one without second. Being actionless, it cannot be described by any activity, such as creation, preservation, etc.... When a person realizes his Self to be Turiya, he is freed from craving for outer objects. .... The realization of the self as Turiya destroys ignorance, desire, attachment and, aversion, etc.... The gist of the teachings of the Upanishads is the identity of the self as Turiya." ~ Swami Nikhilananda

Sri Ramana Maharshi describes Turiya as : There are three states only, the waking, the dream and the sleep, Turiya is not a fourth one; it is what underlies these three. But people do not readily understand it. Therefore it is said that this is the fourth state and the only Reality. In fact it is not apart from anything, for it forms the substratum of all happenings; it is the only Truth; it is your very Being. The three states appear as fleeting phenomena on it and then sink into it alone. Therefore they are unreal."

 

[atanu]

Google it.

Hey. Google?

Turiya from the perspective of three states of waking, dreaming and sleeping is another state.

But Turiya in itself is non dual without a second. It is not a state. It is the Atman that is Brahman, unassociated with any second.

Mandukya Upanishad
VII
Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three states, It is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized.

XII
The Fourth (Turiya) is without parts and without relationship; It is the cessation of phenomena; It is all good and non—dual. This AUM is verily Atman. He who knows this merges his self in Atman—yea, he who knows this.
...

It is non dual Self that is Brahman.
...

If you still have doubt, kindly read from say Ramana Maharshi about the Turiya. Or if you wish I can cite more explanatory material.

 

[atanu]

Google it.

Okay.

From Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talk 353:

Questioner: What is turiya?

Ramana Maharshi: There are three states only, the waking, dream and sleep. Turiya is not a fourth one; it is what underlies these three. But people do not readily understand it. Therefore it is said that this is the fourth state and the only Reality. In fact it is not apart from anything, for it forms the substratum of all happenings; it is the only Truth; it is your very Being. The three states appear as fleeting phenomena on it and then sink into it alone. Therefore they are unreal.

...

 

[Martin]

Hey. Google?

Turiya from the perspective of three states of waking, dreaming and sleeping is another state.

But Turiya in itself is non dual without a second. It is not a state. It is the Atman that is Brahman, unassociated with any second.

Mandukya Upanishad
VII
Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three states, It is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized.

XII
The Fourth (Turiya) is without parts and without relationship; It is the cessation of phenomena; It is all good and non—dual. This AUM is verily Atman. He who knows this merges his self in Atman—yea, he who knows this.
...

It is non dual Self that is Brahman.
...

If you still have doubt, kindly read from say Ramana Maharshi about the Turiya. Or if you wish I can cite more explanatory material.

Thanks. That looks like a clearer translation of the Mandukya passage than the one I used in the OP. Is it online, and if so, do you have a link for it?

 

[Valjean]

Hey. Google?

Turiya from the perspective of three states of waking, dreaming and sleeping is another state.

But Turiya in itself is non dual without a second. It is not a state. It is the Atman that is Brahman, unassociated with any second.

Exactly. It's a non-dual level of consciousness; a unity with Brahman.

 

[Valjean]

Okay.

From Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talk 353:

Questioner: What is turiya?

Ramana Maharshi: There are three states only, the waking, dream and sleep. Turiya is not a fourth one; it is what underlies these three. But people do not readily understand it. Therefore it is said that this is the fourth state and the only Reality. In fact it is not apart from anything, for it forms the substratum of all happenings; it is the only Truth; it is your very Being. The three states appear as fleeting phenomena on it and then sink into it alone. Therefore they are unreal.

Remember this is Hinduism. There is no 'official' doctrine. You can find advocates of any conceivable interpretation, but in general, "the forth" is called the forth because it's one of a series of four cognitive levels. This is the usual understanding.
See links, post #17.

Consider: there's waking state/the third, and there's the material world we perceive. The third is the state of consciousness, the world is the observed reality in that state.
The same relationship between level-of-consciousness and observed reality obtains between the forth and Brahman, and the second and dreams.

 

[atanu]

Exactly. It's a non-dual level of consciousness; a unity with Brahman.

Unity of what with what?

Please note the words. It is the non dual self that is Brahman. There are no two to unite. Nope.

 

[Valjean]

Unity of what with what?

Please note the words. It is the non dual self that is Brahman. There are no two to unite. Nope.

As you said: unity of (illusory) self with Brahman.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Exactly. It's a non-dual level of consciousness; a unity with Brahman.

Unity? But there is no separation (as Atanu said). I am that (whose praises you were singing , you because you do not understand (not pointing to you Valjian. You understand) but to the fictitious person who does not understand.

 

[atanu]

As you said: unity of (illusory) self with Brahman.

Okay.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

As you said: unity of (illusory) self with Brahman.

So, a non-existent self unites with Brahman. Such a unity would be non-existent too.

Like you said, there are any number of different views in Hinduism, but a non-existent/illusory self is not one of them. That would be Buddhism.