Is the Atman within us, is in any way, tortured or affected if we fast or do other bodily harms?

[The Crimson Universe]

In the 17th chapter of the Gita, the Lord says in verse 5 and 6 that those who perform severe austerities (which are not recommended in the scriptures) like continuously fasting for days or weeks, are only torturing their bodily organs and also ME (Vasudeva/Brahman/Paramatma/Atman) which is residing within us.

So, is it really true that if we torture our physical bodies (like by fasting or by commiting suicides) we are also torturing the Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us? ... If yes, then why the Lord said in Gita, that the Atman cannot be burned, wetted, dried, sliced or harmed?

 

[stvdv]

In the 17th chapter of the Gita, the Lord says in verse 5 and 6 that those who perform severe austerities (which are not recommended in the scriptures) like continuously fasting for days or weeks, are only torturing their bodily organs and also ME (Vasudeva/Brahman/Paramatma/Atman) which is residing within us.

So, is it really true that if we torture our physical bodies (like by fasting or by commiting suicides) we are also torturing the Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us? ... If yes, then why the Lord said in Gita, that the Atman cannot be burned, wetted, dried, sliced or harmed?

This is said from the POV of Bhakti Yoga I think, not from Advaitic POV

Example: When I went to India to visit my Master, who claimed to be God incarnate, and also said "whoever comes to me, and fully surrenders to me, I will take care of him". I did not take any vaccination, wanting to surrender and testing out if He is really God. Every time I got hepatitis I trusted my Guru to cure me, and He did. After 3 times having had hepatitis, I got enough proof that He was indeed what He said He was.

And being very sick all the time, was no fun. I got a bit "sick of it" so to speak (but very happy I did it, because now I have first hand proof of God). And I did feel a bit guilty. Because I knew I could take my hepatitis shot and safe Him from taking my karma, which He had to suffer. But then I thought "but IF He is God THEN He will not suffer, that is just my dualistic thinking"

Same in this verse of the Gita. When we practise spirituality, we gradual go from duality towards non-duality. And in the meantime we say sometimes strange things that make no sense when seen from another POV. Gita also goes from duality to non-duality, and even Krishna teaches both teachings; just depends who is the student. A good Teachers knows what is best for whom

 

[sayak83]

This is said from the POV of Bhakti Yoga I think, not from Advaitic POV

Example: When I went to India to visit my Master, who claimed to be God incarnate, and also said "whoever comes to me, and fully surrenders to me, I will take care of him". I did not take any vaccination, wanting to surrender and testing out if He is really God. Every time I got hepatitis I trusted my Guru to cure me, and He did. After 3 times having had hepatitis, I got enough proof that He was indeed what He said He was.

And being very sick all the time, was no fun. I got a bit "sick of it" so to speak (but very happy I did it, because now I have first hand proof of God). And I did feel a bit guilty. Because I knew I could take my hepatitis shot and safe Him from taking my karma, which He had to suffer. But then I thought "but IF He is God THEN He will not suffer, that is just my dualistic thinking"

Same in this verse of the Gita. When we practise spirituality, we gradual go from duality towards non-duality. And in the meantime we say sometimes strange things that make no sense when seen from another POV. Gita also goes from duality to non-duality, and even Krishna teaches both teachings; just depends who is the student. A good Teachers knows what is best for whom

That is a very unwise example in my humble opinion. I would strongly advise everyone to take their prescription shots and not rely on miraculous healings from religious leaders.
From a scriptural pov, unnecessary suffering to oneself or to others creates harmful karna that further enmeshed the being in the net of delusion and rebirth. That creates suffering, not for the ultimate Self Brahman of course, but for the embodied being-self.

 

[stvdv]

That is a very unwise example in my humble opinion

You are free to have your opinion on this of course, although IMO not a wise opinion.

No need to worry, my Master left His body. And usually the cure rate when praying is not 100%, so people won't rely on it. And I did not advise others to do the same, I just shared my personal experience, in which I clearly described that it was not fun getting sick all the time. And that vaccine took care of it.

BUT, I got my proof, and I am happy I did it. But I would not trust any other human alive on earth to repeat this experiment again.

 

[George-ananda]

The jivatman experiences our joys and pains.

Jivatma (from yogapedia) In Indian philosophy, the jiva-atman – also simply called jiva – is the individual soul or self. It is one of two types of souls, the other being the paramatman or atman, which is the universal and eternal Soul. Jiva-atman is trapped in the earthly body until death, when it is reincarnated.

 

[Vinayaka]

In the 17th chapter of the Gita, the Lord says in verse 5 and 6 that those who perform severe austerities (which are not recommended in the scriptures) like continuously fasting for days or weeks, are only torturing their bodily organs and also ME (Vasudeva/Brahman/Paramatma/Atman) which is residing within us.

So, is it really true that if we torture our physical bodies (like by fasting or by commiting suicides) we are also torturing the Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us? ... If yes, then why the Lord said in Gita, that the Atman cannot be burned, wetted, dried, sliced or harmed?

It's complicated, as different schools have different opinions. In Gaudiya Vaishnavism, bhakti reigns supreme. In more austere schools, like various Saiva ascetic schools, austerities are recommended! So again, it depends on which scripture from which sect you're looking at.

No austerity could possibly damage the Atman, although to compare fasting to suicide is a fallacy, as one would gather or become a negative karma, while the other would accelerate the working out of karma. One reason ascetic schools recommend austerities is to pre-pay karma, so that it's effect is mitigated. But suicide is never recommended. Even then it wouldn't damage the atman, but it would delay moksha considerably.

But as to the thread title, no, the atman remains unharmed. I personally view it very differently, as I don't see the atman as something we have, but rather as who we are, and we have a physical body, a personality, etc. You are the atman.

Best wishes in clearing any confusion you may have.

 

[ajay0]

Fasting in moderation increases prana or chi, which in turn raises our state of consciousness.

I have noticed that my meditation is subsequently of a higher quality when I have fasted and missed a lunch. At the most I have fasted totally for a day. I don't approve of extended fasting.

Fasting at night with salad at the most, ensures that I wake up easily at brahmamuhurtham (4:00 AM TO 6:00 AM). Eating heavily at night, I usually miss this time due to drowsiness.

Fasting is also an austerity which strengthens the mind. Benjamin Franklin in his autobiography creditted it with better mental clarity.

So fasting has its virtues, and can be a tool for Self-realization if used in moderation. But too much of fasting can damage the mind and body and make them unfit instruments for Self-realization.

Committing suicide is considered a heinous sin in Hinduism, as the soul only accumulates greater negative karma within himself instead of eliminating them.

Virtuous conduct and values are considered equivalent to meditation in Hinduism, and consequently vices like weakness and cowardice that embraces suicide is frowned upon.

 

[SalixIncendium]

So, is it really true that if we torture our physical bodies (like by fasting or by commiting suicides) we are also torturing the Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us? ... If yes, then why the Lord said in Gita, that the Atman cannot be burned, wetted, dried, sliced or harmed?

The phrase "Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us" is misleading. At least in Advaita philosophy (possible others as well), one is an appearance in or of Brahman. I'm afraid you're conflating Atman/Brahman to the western or Abrahamic concept of a soul.

In answer to your question, if a scene in a movie portrays torture, how is the screen that the movie is shown upon affected? Or if someone in your dream blackens your eye, do you have a black eye when you awaken?

 

[Cassandra]

In the 17th chapter of the Gita, the Lord says in verse 5 and 6 that those who perform severe austerities (which are not recommended in the scriptures) like continuously fasting for days or weeks, are only torturing their bodily organs and also ME (Vasudeva/Brahman/Paramatma/Atman) which is residing within us.

So, is it really true that if we torture our physical bodies (like by fasting or by commiting suicides) we are also torturing the Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us? ... If yes, then why the Lord said in Gita, that the Atman cannot be burned, wetted, dried, sliced or harmed?

As I understand it,

not in the sense that it harms God, as God can not be harmed. But we also believe that when our heart cries out, God hears us in our total desperation and comes to our rescue. This "com-passion" or german "Mit-leid" (literally with-suffering = suffering together) means to feel the suffering of others, and thus suffer with them. So we should not do that idle. We should not torture ourselves as a means to call God.

We should rather fully direct our mind to God. The irony though is that our compassion for others can be a distraction from doing that. As story in the Srimad Bhagavatam tells about King Bharata that saved a young deer and then became so caring that it distracted his mind when he died, and he was reborn a deer. But for God there are no distractions. God does not need to concentrate on God, Bliss is natural state of God. We should not however awaken God from this by self-torture.

I believe there is a story about a King not believing in Gods help. So on a boat trip a Sage throws a stone wrapped in a blanket in the water. The King, believing it is his child, immediately jumps in the water to save his child. So the Sage asks him what he was thinking? And the King said: Nothing, I just wanted to rescue my child. The Sage said: In the same way God will come to the rescue when a true devotees heart cries out.

But should we throw ourselves in the water to be saved?

 

[Martin]

In the 17th chapter of the Gita, the Lord says in verse 5 and 6 that those who perform severe austerities (which are not recommended in the scriptures) like continuously fasting for days or weeks, are only torturing their bodily organs and also ME (Vasudeva/Brahman/Paramatma/Atman) which is residing within us.

So, is it really true that if we torture our physical bodies (like by fasting or by commiting suicides) we are also torturing the Atman/Paramatma/Brahman within us? ... If yes, then why the Lord said in Gita, that the Atman cannot be burned, wetted, dried, sliced or harmed?

To me this looks like an a discouragement of severe austerity, rather than a metaphysical statement.
Anyway, the koshas ("sheaths") would be involved in austerity, but Atman would remain uninvolved and unaffected.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

Thank you all for your valuable opinions. I get it, that our true nature is spirit or consciousness which is Atman or Brahman and that we're not the sheaths. Its the sheaths that are harmed or destroyed but not Atman / Brahman that remains in the background simply as a witness.
Now many of you in the past couple of years have already explained me that in order to know this Atman / Brahman (which is our true Self), mere scriptural knowledge is not sufficient for self realization but one needs to meditate on IT. Now the question that arises in my mind is that, if Atman / Brahman is nirakara or formless then how do i meditate on IT? ... In other words, what does a yogi beholds or sees when he attains self realization? I posted this question a few days ago on another thread but did not get satisfactory replies ... When Swami Ramakrishna went into samadhi or trance, did he get a glimpse of his true Self (Atman / Brahman) and if so, did he describe IT in detail when he came out of trance?
I have also read in a few articles that when we are absorbed in our true Self (i.e. when we attain self realization or jivan mukti) all sorts of duality vanishes and so nobody has yet able to describle what the Self really looks like.

The ISKCONITES (dualists) on the other hand describe this Atman /Brahman as being like a brahmaJYOTI or effulgence? Is it really so? Is it really like an effulgence / jyoti or is IT completely nirakara (devoid of forms)?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Now the question that arises in my mind is that, if Atman / Brahman is nirakara or formless then how do i meditate on IT?

One does not meditate on Brahman. One drops identification with everything that is not Brahman.

Don't draw a draw a dichotomy between I/other...between you and Brahman. Tat tvam asi.

In other words, what does a yogi beholds or sees when he attains self realization?

There is nothing to "behold" or "see." It's a complete shift in perception in identification as "I." It's no longer identification as "this body" or "this mind" as "I," but as pure awareness without attachment. The witness. The experiencer. Pure consciousness.

When Swami Ramakrishna went into samadhi or trance, did he get a glimpse of his true Self (Atman / Brahman) and if so, did he describe IT in detail when he came out of trance?

My advice to you would be to read the Gospel of Sri Ramakrisha if you are interested in what he experienced in Samadhi.

That said, I wouldn't worry too much about what Sri Ramakrisha experienced. If you do, you will be trying to experience what he did in meditation only create an obstacle for your own realization.

I have also read in a few articles that when we are absorbed in our true Self (i.e. when we attain self realization or jivan mukti) all sorts of duality vanishes and so nobody has yet able to describle what the Self really looks like.

In vyavakarika, there is no answer to "What does the Self 'look like'." In Paramartika, there is no question.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

Thanks Salix

 

[The Crimson Universe]

One does not meditate on Brahman. One drops identification with everything that is not Brahman.

I just found this on the web, where Shankaracharya says, one actually meditates on Brahman.

Atma bodha, Sri Shankara says


विविक्तदेश आसीनो विरागो विजितेन्द्रियः । भावयेदेकमात्मानं तमनन्तमनन्यधीः ॥ ३८॥


One should sit in a solitary place with a mind free from desires and controlling the sense organs, meditate with unswerving attention on the formless Atma which is infinite and one without a second.

Your thoughts on this one please.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I just found this on the web, where Shankaracharya says, one actually meditates on Brahman.

Atma bodha, Sri Shankara says


विविक्तदेश आसीनो विरागो विजितेन्द्रियः । भावयेदेकमात्मानं तमनन्तमनन्यधीः ॥ ३८॥


One should sit in a solitary place with a mind free from desires and controlling the sense organs, meditate with unswerving attention on the formless Atma which is infinite and one without a second.

Your thoughts on this one please.

Atma bodha translates to English as "Self-knowledge" or knowledge of one's true nature as Atman. One should meditate as the formless Atma as described in the Atma bodha.

If Nirguna Brahman, which is one's true nature, is formless and without qualities or attributes; the infinite one without a second, what is that one would meditate on?

 

[Aupmanyav]

This is said from the POV of Bhakti Yoga I think, not from Advaitic POV.

Same in this verse of the Gita. When we practise spirituality, we gradual go from duality towards non-duality. And in the meantime we say sometimes strange things that make no sense when seen from another POV. Gita also goes from duality to non-duality, and even Krishna teaches both teachings; just depends who is the student. A good Teachers knows what is best for whom

^^^ Like that but not some other things, like someone being or claiming to be not what he was.

Thank you all for your valuable opinions. I get it, that our true nature is spirit or consciousness which is Atman or Brahman and that we're not the sheaths.

Well, nobody talked about consciousness. That is your bias.

 

[Aupmanyav]

One does not meditate on Brahman. One drops identification with everything that is not Brahman.
Don't draw a draw a dichotomy between I/other...between you and Brahman. Tat tvam asi.

In vyavakarika, there is no answer to "What does the Self 'look like'." In Paramartika, there is no question.

Salix, you are turning out to be a 'pundit' on 'advaita'. In Vyavaharika, Self has as many forms as you observe, a grain of sand or Queen Elizabeth or Donald Trump.

Atman: This self or That.

 

[ajay0]

Thank you all for your valuable opinions. I get it, that our true nature is spirit or consciousness which is Atman or Brahman and that we're not the sheaths. Its the sheaths that are harmed or destroyed but not Atman / Brahman that remains in the background simply as a witness.

To attain this understanding is itself a major step forward on the path.

The Upanishads talk about the deluded Virochana who falsely identified the body or matter with Brahman, and points out this case study to warn genuine seekers from being misled from truth to falsehood.

Upanishads

Now many of you in the past couple of years have already explained me that in order to know this Atman / Brahman (which is our true Self), mere scriptural knowledge is not sufficient for self realization but one needs to meditate on IT. Now the question that arises in my mind is that, if Atman / Brahman is nirakara or formless then how do i meditate on IT? .

Brahman or the Self is pure consciousness or awareness or Being which is within you.

Your question is tantamount to asking how you can meditate on yourself.

Here there is a distinction between the false self or ego (created by identification with thoughts and emotions) and the higher Self.

The Atman or Self is subtler than the ever-changing thoughts and emotions. Most people identify with their thoughts and emotions compulsively rather than the subtler Self which is blissful by nature.

This is why people find meditation joyful and blissful, because by slowing their thoughts and emotions, they are reaching out to their true Self or Atman which is blissful by nature. The agitated mind on the other hand is miserable by nature.

The mind, which is essentially our thoughts ,emotions and desires, is ever-turbulent and agitated like a lake in a storm. It is hard to see the base of the lake due to its muddy waters and waves.

However when the storm ceases, the lake calms down, displaying clearly its base.

This is the same with respect to meditation. The mind made turbulent by its numerous cravings and aversions effectively blurs the Self. But when the mind is made equanimous by spiritual practice and meditation, the Self within is clearly revealed, along with corresponing feelings of peace and joy.

 

[stvdv]

^^^ Like that but not some other things, like someone being or claiming to be not what he was.

I don't see how this relates to what I said about Krishna.

Or do you claim to know what Krishna actually said (instead of admitting that your knowledge about Krishna is just hearsay, as in read/hear and believe in that)?

Or do you claim to know that Krishna claimed to be someone He was not?

 

[The Crimson Universe]

To attain this understanding is itself a major step forward on the path.

The Upanishads talk about the deluded Virochana who falsely identified the body or matter with Brahman, and points out this case study to warn genuine seekers from being misled from truth to falsehood.

Upanishads




Brahman or the Self is pure consciousness or awareness or Being which is within you.

Your question is tantamount to asking how you can meditate on yourself.

Here there is a distinction between the false self or ego (created by identification with thoughts and emotions) and the higher Self.

The Atman or Self is subtler than the ever-changing thoughts and emotions. Most people identify with their thoughts and emotions compulsively rather than the subtler Self which is blissful by nature.

This is why people find meditation joyful and blissful, because by slowing their thoughts and emotions, they are reaching out to their true Self or Atman which is blissful by nature. The agitated mind on the other hand is miserable by nature.

The mind, which is essentially our thoughts ,emotions and desires, is ever-turbulent and agitated like a lake in a storm. It is hard to see the base of the lake due to its muddy waters and waves.

However when the storm ceases, the lake calms down, displaying clearly its base.

This is the same with respect to meditation. The mind made turbulent by its numerous cravings and aversions effectively blurs the Self. But when the mind is made equanimous by spiritual practice and meditation, the Self within is clearly revealed, along with corresponing feelings of peace and joy.

So true. We have to still the mind. I completely forgot about this part. lol.
Your comment just reminded me of a line from Patanjali's Yoga Sutras, "yogas chitta vritti nirodha" which refers to stilling the mind in order to experience the Ultimate Reality.