[FairfieldLife] Confusion about Samâdhi and Liberation

[emptyb...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]]

 Lawson sez:
  
 L: In order for perception to be perception, there must be a physical nervous 
system.
  
 This is contradicted by the Vedanta and Yoga darshana-s, which both assert the 
casual priority of the subtle body (sukhma sharira). That means there is 
preservation and continuity of a subtle nervous system of prana-nadis in a 
subtle body in the subtle realms. 
  
 L: Even for universal consciousness to be "aware of" things (even of Itself), 
there must be structure -- some kind of physiology, even if it is "made of" 
Universal Consciousness with no defining characteristics besides being 
Universal Consciousness. 
  
 L: aware of” things (even of itself) 
  
 Shankara follows the Upanishads in defining the Self as self-luminous 
(svayamjyotish) & (âtmâ svayam chaitanya jyotis.svabhâvatâ). “Seeing” is the 
very nature of the Self. It does not require another luminosity to manifest it 
- any more than the Sun requires another light to illuminate it. It is 
awareness itself and doesn’t require reflexivity to make it evident. 
  
 L: … with no defining characteristics 
  
 This means no structure whatsoever and therefore no possible distinction 
between perceiver, perception and perceived. That means there can be no 
functioning  physiology which can produce any experience at all. 
  
 L: Our appreciation of this wholeness without duality is Samadhi  and  Samadhi 
 can occur *because* our nervous system has taken on a certain form (supporting 
PC or CC or GC or UC, depending).
  
 Shankara never says realization of Brahman (Brahmajñâna) or the Self (Atman) 
depends upon or is associated with the cultivation of nirvikalpa samâdhi 
(non-conceptual absorption) in meditative union. In fact, he denies that yogic 
cessation or suspension of mental activity (citta.vritti.nirodha) is or can be 
a means to liberation/moksha. (Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Bhasya 1.4.7)