The Shining One

Spirituality
#1

[B]Tripura Tapini - The Shining One who Lives in the Three Cities[/B]

Tripura Tapini is the title of one of the Upanishads. Tri means three. Pura is a city. The word “Tapini” comes from the root “Tap”, which has the principal meanings: (a) To shine, blaze (as fire or sun), and (b) to be hot or warm, to give out heat. To translate this as “The Shining One” does not really give it the full force of meaning. It is not merely shining, it is a blazing hot fire that shines like the sun.

The Upanishad describes the three cities as “the three abodes – the earth, the atmosphere and the heavens, OR the heavens, the earth and the nether world. “ Apparently even the writers of the Upanishads weren’t exactly sure of the meaning. In fact there are many interpretations of the three abodes. Some have interpreted them as the states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. Others have said it is the conscious, the subconscious, and the unconscious. Still others have said it represents the three divisions of knower, knowing, and knowable.

What is beyond the knowable? Only the unknowable. The knowable consists of the world of experience. Of the unknowable, there can be no experience. Truth is of the knowable. Of the unknowable, there can be neither truth nor untruth.

The only way that the unknowable can be understood is by understanding what it is not. That is the reason why we study Samkhya, which is the science of the self. By understanding the principles of the knowable, we also understand that it is not the unknowable. Early man did not understand the forces of nature. The rumble of thunder could only be explained as the voice or the anger of the gods. By understanding the nature of thunder, we also understand that it is not the voice of the gods.

It is a big problem that people do not understand the nature of the self. Many people identify the self with the Ahamkara, that is to say, the ego. This is why we study Samkhya, because by understanding the nature of the ego, we also understand that it is not the self. Many people identify the the buddhi (the power of discernment or intellect), with the self. This again is why we study Samkhya. Because by undestanding the power of intellect, we also understand that it is not the self. It is only after we have stripped away everything that the self is not, that we finally begin to recognize the real self, the Shining One Who Lives in the Three Cities.

#2

The Upanishad describes the three cities as “the three abodes – the earth, the atmosphere and the heavens, OR the heavens, the earth and the nether world. “ Apparently even the writers of the Upanishads weren’t exactly sure of the meaning. In fact there are many interpretations of the three abodes. Some have interpreted them as the states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. Others have said it is the conscious, the subconscious, and the unconscious. Still others have said it represents the three divisions of knower, knowing, and knowable.

The Vedic triloka classification of bhu, bhuva and swaha do not mean earth, atmosphere and heaven. It means the gross physical plane, the subtle mental plane and the causal spiritual plane. These indeed correspond to waking, dream and dreamless sleep, knownable, knowing and knower. The classification of things into three’s is a very old Aryan tradition: triguna, triloka, triveda.

What is beyond the knowable? Only the unknowable. The knowable consists of the world of experience. Of the unknowable, there can be no experience. Truth is of the knowable. Of the unknowable, there can be neither truth nor untruth.

The only way that the unknowable can be understood is by understanding what it is not. That is the reason why we study Samkhya, which is the science of the self. By understanding the principles of the knowable, we also understand that it is not the unknowable. Early man did not understand the forces of nature. The rumble of thunder could only be explained as the voice or the anger of the gods. By understanding the nature of thunder, we also understand that it is not the voice of the gods.

This is debatable whether the ultimate reality is unknowable. It might not be knowable in the classical sense of the word where knowledge requires a knower, knowing and a knowable(subject, object, instrument) but it is knowable in the sense that it has been reported by the risis. They generally agree that words cannot describe this ultimate reality, but they do agree that this reality is pure consciousness, pure being, pure bliss(saitchitananda) Then clearly it is possible to know this ultimate reality in some sense.

The science of Samkhya also gives us clues on what this ultimate reality is. The purpose of Samkhya is not to, as you claim negate everything that the ultimate reality is not(this is the neti neti practice of Vedanta) but rather to discern betweeen the ultimate reality which is purusha and temporal reality of prakriti, in order to understand purusha without the conditioning of prakriti. The purusha is therefore not unknowable, because the purusha is a reality we experience every moment of our life. So rather than one day just negating everything and realising purusha, rather we increasingly become more and more like purusha through negating the conditioning of prakriti. To become more and more like purusha means we become more and more alive. Like the sun becomes more and more brighter when the clouds obscuring it start to part.

It is a big problem that people do not understand the nature of the self. Many people identify the self with the Ahamkara, that is to say, the ego. This is why we study Samkhya, because by understanding the nature of the ego, we also understand that it is not the self. Many people identify the the buddhi (the power of discernment or intellect), with the self. This again is why we study Samkhya. Because by undestanding the power of intellect, we also understand that it is not the self. It is only after we have stripped away everything that the self is not, that we finally begin to recognize the real self, the Shining One Who Lives in the Three Cities.

Yep, this is correct. Samkhya is about discerning prakriti from purusha and deconditioning purusha from prakriti from all her levels of illusion: gross, subtle and causal so that prakriti is resolved back to her state of nothingness and void and only purusha remains. What is the nature of purusha? Pure consciousness, pure being and pure bliss.
Now, once you have resolved prakriti back to her state of nothingness and void, no world remains, no elements, no time, no space, no senses, no mind, no ego, no intellect. Then how can there be any duality at all? Indeed, there can be no duality because the conditions that lead to the duality are absent. Therefore all that remains is purusha and nothing else.

In the beginning there was only purusha and nothing else. The purusha breathed by its own impulse. The divine will arose within the purusha, which was the germ of creation. The wise sages who have looked deep into their hearts have discovered this.

Aham Brahmasmi.

#3

Apparently you did not notice the quotation marks. “the three abodes – the earth, the atmosphere and the heavens, OR the heavens, the earth and the nether world" is quoted directly from the translation of Dr. A.G Krishna Warrior, published by the Theosophical Publishing House in Chennai. In the future I suggest that you look at an actual text before rendering an opinion of someone else’s work.

#4

Only for you. For everybody else, the world remains as it has always been.

#5

SPS 2.5: And when (it is established that bondage, creativeness, etc.) really belong to Prakriti, proof (is thereby obtained) of their being fictitious attributes of Purusa.

#6

Only for you. For everybody else, the world remains as it has always been.

Yep. Then you are liberated from the illusion of the world, while others are still in bondage.

#7

Then you are liberated from the illusion of the world, while others are still in bondage.

I believe that is why they cal it [I]kaivalya[/I].

Kaivalya: कैवल्यम् 1 Perfect isolation, sole- ness, exclusiveness; “aloneness”

#8

[QUOTE=Asuri;51500]I believe that is why they cal it [I]kaivalya[/I].

Kaivalya: कैवल्यम् 1 Perfect isolation, sole- ness, exclusiveness; “aloneness”[/QUOTE]

Actually its better to translate it as absoluteness…nondual…kevala
Eg. Kevala advaita of shankara

#9

"Originally Posted by SD
Now, once you have resolved prakriti back to her state of nothingness and void, no world remains, no elements, no time, no space, no senses, no mind, no ego, no intellect.

Only for you. For everybody else, the world remains as it has always been"

In a sense, it is both. You are both correct in your own ways. The world, with all of it’s shapes and forms, continues - and yet you can also remain centered and balance in that which is beyond the dualities of existence. And to be beyond the dualities of existence does not mean that they have become annihilated. The workings of the mind - with all of their business, is still there, and yet at the same time they do not leave even a single mark upon one’s being, one can remain in the mind and yet not of the mind.

Liberation accepts everything and rejects nothing. All too often, those who have yet to complete their work have reduced it to a dead thing, without any life in it. The world with all of it’s shapes and forms is just as much a part of existence as the source of existence. If you are to remain absorbed in “oneness”, you will remain blind to one part of existence. If you are to remain absorbed in the dualities, then too you will remain blind to the source from which these dualities spring forth. And one who is awake can experience both together as one whole without even a hint of contradiction.

#10

I’ve had many discussions onthis subject with buddhists taoists, hindus (oretty practitionrs of all dharmic paths)

The common theme in all nondualist traditions is that there are two levels of reality – the relative or vyavaharika aka samvritti in buddhist parlance and absolute or paramarthika

Relative reality is conditioned, dependently originated ie follows the rules of duality

Absolute is self existent and infinite, eternal and there is no duality…no object, only subject. A realization that all is one and one is all is reached in absolute nondual state. It is neither nihilstic nor world negating…because all intellectual understanding is always after the fact in this case

Nondual state is empty of nama rupa but it is the source of all eperience nd existence. It contains within itself potentiality for everything.

Those who have not eperienced turiya tend to understand this ony intellectually and therefore eithe misunrstand it as a lifeless void or dislike it intensely, not accept it as possible becaus it challenges their reality which is dualistic.

Those who find the gap between thoughts and can elongate it know via prajna that this is active, dynamic, infinite and eternal. Also they realize how everyday reality is an object in this ocean and also is ephemeral…rises and dissolves from and into it

#11

So what you’re saying is that you superhumans experience reality in a way that is different from we mere mortals. The problem with this idealist point of view is that there is no evidence for it found anywhere in nature. We “know” of this only through scriptures. Believe what you will, but as they say, talk is cheap.

#12

What makes you think that this is a superhuman feat?
You can access this if you have a little patience and know how to sit in silence
The proof of the pudding is in eating not reading about it
T heproblem with these discussions is that people assume that their personal beliefs and practices are challenged…but that isn’t necessarily the case

there’s no need to prove anything to anyone except your own self

#13

Nothing you said is objectionable to me Dwai. It is pretty much what the vast majority of the Hindu gurus say. Indeed, there is evidence for these states of oneness which many people have experienced, from masters to long time mediators. Now, evidence comes indirectly from quantum physics, proving no such thing as time and space exist, therefore everything would therefore have to be one. Meditation, in a way, is a means of accessing the quantum and experiencing a completely different level of reality to one that we are accustomed to.(Which by the way is a fake reality according to quantum physics, a representation by our senses and mind)

Try not to get frustrated with those people who do not listen. It is their loss in the end. Another life time for them :wink:

#14

@Dwai

This actually reinforces my point. You claim to experience reality in a way that I (and most other people) do not, and thereby assume a stance of superiority. This is typical of Vedanta thinkers. Surya Deva and others claim that quantum physics supports their point of view, knowing that there are few who have the ability to challenge them on it. Sankara did the same type of thing. In my view, it’s just intellectual trickery.

It’s true that the Hindus and the Buddhists both accept the doctrine of non-duality. But the undeniable fact of life is that we all experience the world as subject and object. What practical purpose does it serve to claim to experience subject and object as one, except to elevate oneself above the mass of humanity? Does it make you a better doctor, or engineer,or carpenter or mechanic or friend? I don’t think so.

#15

“proving no such thing as time and space exist”

They do and they do not. If one says that they do not, one immediately falls into error. If one says that they do, one immediately falls into error. Time and space, and the universe with all of it’s shapes and forms are just as much a part of this existence as their original nature. In fact, they cannot be separated, nor are they separate - everythign in existence is the same energy manifesting in differnet forms. The moment you start dividing between the “relative” and the “absolute”, you immediately start dividing the whole existence into fragments.

There are those who cling to “Oneness”, and fail to recognize it’s one thousand hands and legs. There are those who cling to the one thousand hands and legs, and fail to recognize Oneness. And one who has seen clearly into this can see both Oneness and multiplicity, the “relative” and the “absolute” together without even a spark of contradiction.

#16

[QUOTE=Asuri;53272]@Dwai

This actually reinforces my point. You claim to experience reality in a way that I (and most other people) do not, and thereby assume a stance of superiority. This is typical of Vedanta thinkers. Surya Deva and others claim that quantum physics supports their point of view, knowing that there are few who have the ability to challenge them on it. Sankara did the same type of thing. In my view, it’s just intellectual trickery.

It’s true that the Hindus and the Buddhists both accept the doctrine of non-duality. But the undeniable fact of life is that we all experience the world as subject and object. What practical purpose does it serve to claim to experience subject and object as one, except to elevate oneself above the mass of humanity? Does it make you a better doctor, or engineer,or carpenter or mechanic or friend? I don’t think so.[/QUOTE]

Actually it does. Once one realizes the unity of all existence, there is automatically infinite, pragmatic love for all things. So a doctor, engineer, carpenter etc all will work from a place of compassion and empathy unsurpassed.

Like i pointed out, people can choose to see intellectual trickery or profound wisdom depending on whether they choose to be satsfied with merely intellectual gratification or direct experiential knowledge respectively.

#17

’

This is what you call idealism. What you’re really saying is, wouldn’t it be great if everybody thought like me. Then we would have this utopian world full of infinitely compassionate and loving people working for the benefit of mankind. But the only thing you’re really concerned with is how to establish the superiority of your alleged direct experience. Unless one accepts the profound wisdom of your claimed experience, he is relegated to the lowly status of those who choose to be satisfied with mere intellectual gratification. But as I pointed out, you have not really presented any evidence that you have experience beyond the knowable, just your assertion that things would be great if everybody did, and your continued denigration of those who challenge you.

#18

“This is what you call idealism.”

Asuri,

What Dwai has said, if it has been said with a sense of attachment, then it may be idealistic. Otherwise, it is simply a natural consequence of enlightenment - compassion is inevitable. That is why it has never been a coincidence that every Buddha who has come to one’s awakening has always awakened a compassionate intelligence. Because The moment one comes to a direct perception of one’s true nature, one will immediately realize the same nature pervades all. Out of this, compassion becomes as natural as one’s own breath, one realizes that whatever appears to be different from oneself are just appearances - everything is of the same sound of one hand clapping. And it is not that to live in this state of being is somehow superior, it is just that it brings contentment to your being and a certain freedom. And everybody, knowingly or unknowingly, is just seeking this - to come to a state of unbounded psychological freedom.

#19

[QUOTE=Asuri;53350]’

This is what you call idealism. What you’re really saying is, wouldn’t it be great if everybody thought like me. Then we would have this utopian world full of infinitely compassionate and loving people working for the benefit of mankind. But the only thing you’re really concerned with is how to establish the superiority of your alleged direct experience. Unless one accepts the profound wisdom of your claimed experience, he is relegated to the lowly status of those who choose to be satisfied with mere intellectual gratification. But as I pointed out, you have not really presented any evidence that you have experience beyond the knowable, just your assertion that things would be great if everybody did, and your continued denigration of those who challenge you.[/QUOTE]

Are you certain that there is an attempt at denigration going on here? Could there be a (sub)conscious defensiveness in your responses?

Like I said before, the proof of the pudding is in the eating not reading about it. There is nothing I can say or do to “show” you or anybody else for that matter what it is I have directly experienced, because as soon as try to express it in words, it is not the real thing, it is merely a representation.

Let’s assume you had a wonderful cup of tea this morning. Nothing you can say can make anyone else enjoy the taste of that tea…only the act of drinking the same cup of tea will be real…your description of it will be unreal.

That’s why Shankara said – “brahman is silence” and Lao Tzu said “the tao that can be named is not the real tao”…
That’s why the Buddha refused to talk about Nirvana.

#20

You guys need to go back and read the original post. You keep trying to tell me how great your tea is, what I said is, we study Samkhya to learn how to make the tea. I stated in another post that my intention is to move away from this type of discussion. Frankly, I’ve had enough of you guys.