Analysis of Dhyaana and Nidhidhyaasana.

Dhyaana and Nidhidhyaasana.

Dhyaana is a word quite often used in the Gita and Upanishads but this is generally known as a Yoga vakya (yoga darshana of Patanjali). Nidhidhyaasana is a Vedanta word as Vedanta accepts the path to realization as through Sravana-Manana-Nidhidhyaasana as per Yajnavalkya’s statement to Maitreyi in Brhadaranyaha Upanishad that the Atman should be known through Sravana-Manana-Nidhidhyaasana.

Sankaracharya has mentioned sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana as the means to realization or brahma saakshaatkara. This has been accepted by none other than Sacchidanandendra Saraswathi (considered to be one of the most faithful to Sankaracharya).

It is in the works of later advaitins that we find the clear mention and definition of sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana. Even though SS (Sacchidanandendra Saraswathi) and his followers wouldn’t agree to the credibility of these works but the aspect which we are dealing would have to be accepted by SS as well. We also find in the Bhamathi and Vivarana the difference of opinion as to whether the three of sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana follow one another or one is main & other auxiliary. A brief explanation of the same is found in the Vedanta Paribhaasha of Dharmaraja Adhvarindra. Thus not only later acharyas but early acharyas also gave importance to these three as this was the direct path to atma saakshatkara or jnaana prapthi which couldn’t be achieved through any other means.

We would be referring to the following works for analysis of Dhyaana and Nidhidhyaasana:

1.    Yoga Sutras of Patanjali along with a brief look into vyaasa bhashya, bhoja vritti and sadasiva brahmendra’s yoga sudhaakara – for an analysis of Dhyaana

2.    Vedanta Saara of Sadananda Yogindra along with a look into the commentary of Ramatirtha (titiled Vidvanmanoranjani) and Nrsimha saraswathi (titled Subodhini) on the Vedanta Saara.

3.    Vedanta Paribhasha of Dharmaraja Adhvarindra (unfortunately don’t have any commentaries on the same with me now except one of Ananthakrishna Shastri which is too logical to discuss over here) – though Vedanta Paribhasha doesn’t define nidhidhyaasana but does mention difference on the two schools of Bhamathi and vivarana on the same.

4.    Laghu Vaasudeva Mananam – which is a detailed exposition of advaita Vedanta

5.    Panchadashi of Vidyaranya along with the commentary of Ramakrishna on the same.

(There are many rare works like that of vivarana upanyaasa of govindananda, Vedanta tattva viveka of nrsimhasrama etc. which would have thrown more light on the same but unfortunately all those works are not currently with me in US).

Prostrating the ultimate reality in the form of AMMA, let us first define the two words of dhyaana and nidhidhyaasana. The word Dhyaana is properly defined in the Yoga Sutras. Let us see dhyaana through the sutras & the various commentaries on the same:

The yoga Sutras speaks thus about Dhyaana:

“Tatra prathyaya ekathaanathaa dhyaanam” (Yoga Sutras 3.2)

THERE COGNITION BECOMING ONE-POINTED IS CALLED DHYAANA OR MEDITATION.

Here “THERE” means at the place where dhaarana or fixing of the mind has happened. The sutra previous to this sutra explains Dhaarana as fixing the mind unto a particular place which is explained in the vyaasa bhashya as the various chakras and places in the body (dhaarana is translated as concentration whereas dhyaana is meditation).

Herein is the vyaasa bhashya on the two sutras

“Naabhichakre hridayapundarike murdhni jyotishi naasikaagre jihvaagra ithyevamaadishu desheshu baahye vaa vishaye chittasya vrittimaatrena bandha ithi dhaarana”

Fixing the mind through a vritti alone in external objects or the various places like naabhichakra, hridaya, head (the various chakras popularly known as shad aadharas of the body), tip of the nose, tip of the tongue etc. is called dhaarana.

“Tasmin deshe dhyeya aalambanasya pratyayasya ekathaanathaa sadrishah pravaahah pratyayaantharena aparaamristo dhyaanam”

In those places (where the mind is fixed), having the constant cognition of the dhyeya vasthu alone as if that thought alone exists & untouched by other cognitions is called dhyaana.

Bhoja Vritti on the two sutras is thus:

“tadevam purva uddhistam dhaaranaangatrayam nirnethum samyama sanjnaa vidhaanapoorvakam baahyaabhyantharaadi siddhiprathipaadanaaya lakshayithum upakramathe”

That which was previously hinted and the three antaranga parts of dhaarana (dhyaana and Samadhi) to be defined and through which explanation of samyama etc. which will lead to proposition of the various external and internal siddhis is explained here.

“Tatra tasmindeshe yatra chittam dhritham tatra prathyayasya jnaanasya ekathaanathaa visadrishaparinaamaparihaaradvaarena yadeva dharanayaam aalambaneekritham tadaalambanathayaiva nirantharamutpattih saa dhyaanamuchyathe”

There, in that place where the mind was fixed with a particular cognition and one-pointedness of the thought so that all other thoughts/cognitions are negated, that which alone was cognized through dharana, that alone is concentrated throughout, this is called dhaayana.

There need be no explanation of the commentaries quoted above as they are quite explanative themselves. Here what we have to know is that Patanjali speaks about purification of mind which is removal of the pancha kleshas (of avidya or superimposition as per Patanjali, asmitha or ego, raga or attachment, dvesha or aversion and fear) through yoga anga anushtaanam or performance of the yoga angas or parts of yoga. The yoga angas are eight as we all are familiar with (yama, niyama, asana, pranayama, pratyahara, dharana, dhyana and Samadhi). These eight are split into two – bahirangam and antarangam – external parts & internal parts. The external angas are the five of yama, niyama, asana, pranayama and pratyahara whereas the internal angas are dharana, dhyana and Samadhi. It is quite clear from Patanjali’s words as well through these angas that they are successive. Without stilling the breath through pranayama, it is not possible to concentrate. It is but experience and true that concentration is stronger when the breath is controlled or steady. When the breath is heavy after let’s say running for few miles, it is not possible to concentrate. Thus in order to do dhyaana, it is necessary and essential to have gone through the previous steps of asana, pranayama etc. I do remember reading from vachaspathi mishra’s tattva vaisharadhi commentary on vyaasa bhashya as to that it requires a particular time period of dharana to enter into dhyaana as well a particular time period of dhyaana to enter into Samadhi (sorry that don’t remember now and the book is not with me now).

Thus the dhyaana that we are familiar with can be performed only after asana, pranayama, pratyahara and dharaana. To put it in brief, asana is any comfortable position (preferably sukhasana or padmasana as explained in the various commentaries on the yoga sutras), pranayama is controlling of the prana through breath control, pratyahara is withdrawal of the sense organs from the sense objects (note here that there would be no sense object perception if one achieves perfection of pratyahara and goes to the next step of dharana), dharana and dhyaana being already explained earlier is not being explained here.

Thus it is beyond doubt that the dhyana as per Patanjali’s yoga darshana is something which has lot of pre requisites and cannot be done without the same. It is but interesting to see that Sadasiva Brahmendra (the advaita-yogi that he was) defining the two sutras with respect to Vedanta thus:

“tatra aatmani vaa chittasya bandhah sthaapanam dhaarana ithyuchyathe.

Taduktham yogayaajnavalkye –

Yamaadigunayuktasya manasah sthithiraatmani

Dhaarana ithyuchyathe sadbhiryogashaastravishaaradhaih”

There fixing the mind in the atman is called dhaarana. Thus has been propounded by Yajnavalkya about yoga:

Fixing of that mind which has performed yamaadi (yama and other steps) on the atman is known as dhaarana by saints and knower of the yoga shastra.

Even though this definition in a way harmonizes Vedanta and Yoga through the mention of Atman (against the Purusha of Yoga system), the mention of yaamadigunayuktasya manasah (that mind which has the qualities of yama etc.) emphasizes on the pre requisite processes for dhaarana. Moreover since this definition is quite distinct and different from the traditional yoga commentaries, we cannot take this commentary as such while strictly following the yoga system & their implications.

“Tatra yathokthadeshe pratyayasya ekathaanathaa ekavishayapravaahah, sah cha vicchidhya jaayamaano dhyaanam bhavathi. Taduktham –

Vilaapya vikrithim kritsnaam sambhavavyatyayakramaat

Parishistam cha sanmaatram chidaanandam vichintayet’ ithi”

There, in that previously mentioned place, cognition becoming one-pointed or one vishaya alone passing by, that is achieved through removal of other thoughts and is called as dhyaana. It has thus been explained – “renouncing all other thoughts through all means, whatever remains behind as the atman of the nature of sat, chit and ananda – thinking about it is dhyaana”.

Thus even if we see Sadasiva Brahmendra’s commentary on the yoga sutras, we find that Dhyaana has pre requisite activities without which it cannot be performed. This is quite contrary to the nidhidhyaasana accepted by Vedanta. Before entering into the nidhidhyaasana analysis, let us see dhyaana as interpreted by none other than Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita through a few slokas in the sixth chapter of dhyaana yoga.

The Lord starts the topic of yoga by propounding about asana thus:

Shuchau deshe prathistaapya sthiramaatmaanam aatmanah

Naatyuchritham naathineecham chailaajinakushottaram

A person should sit in a pure place placing the body as stable – the place shouldn’t be too high or too low.

Tatra ekaagryam manah krithvaa yatha chittendriyakriyah

Upavishya aasane yunjyaat yogam aatma vishudhaye

There he should fix the mind by controlling the mind totally after having sat in a particular position – this yoga leads to purity of the atman (from ajnaana).

Samam kaayashirogreevam dhaarayan achalam sthirah

Samprekshya naasikaagram svam dishascha anavalokayan

Having fixed the body & the head, he should avoid movement and be stable (bodily) – then he should see the tip of the nose & shouldn’t see anything else (sankara in this commentary says that the Lord doesn’t mean seeing of the tip of the nose but concentration similar to seeing the tip of the nose).

If we see the above slokas, it is quite clear that the Lord is propounding asana, pratyahara and dhaarana. This seems to be in sync with Patanjali’s definition of the respective yoga angas.

The Lord thus here is propounding the yoga angas in sync with the yoga system. But the Lord at the end of these slokas explains sama bhaavana as if it is dhyaana to be implemented in life & once sama bhavaana becomes natural, it is Samadhi.

Sarva bhootastham aatmaanam sarva bhootaani cha aatmani

Ikshathe yogayuktaatma sarvatra samadarshanah

The yogi, whose mind is controlled, is a samadarshi (one who sees everything as one) as he sees all the beings in the Self and the Self in all beings.

Sarvabhootasthitham yo maam bhajathi ekatvamaasthitah

Sarvathaa varthamaano api sa yogi mayi varthathe

He who sees and worships me in all beings and is established in this oneness, always he is in the present & such a yogi resides in me (as the ultimate reality).

From the above slokas, it is quite clear as to the Dhyaana and samaadhi which the Lord propounds. Dhyaana is nothing but seeing oneness everywhere & the Lord mentions this as “seeing everything in the Lord & the Lord in everything”. This dhyaana is quite different from Patanjali’s Dhyaana as that requires a person to close his eyes and fix his mind in a particular entity. Similarly Samadhi here is knowing everything as being in essence the Lord alone which leads the yogi to be always residing in the Lord. This residing in the Lord is samadhi or absorption which is quite different from what Patanjali says. Patanjali’s Samadhi is not possible while the eyes are opened whereas in Vedantic Samadhi, eyes can be open.

To conclude the discussion about dhyaana, the dhyaana which Patanjali propounds is quite different from Vedantic dhyaana which is termed in Vedanta as nidhidhyaasana (instead of dhyaana). Let us now try to see sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana as defined in some of the basic works of Vedanta.

VEDANTA SAARA OF SADANANDA YOGINDRA

Evam bhoothasvasvaroopachaitanyasaakshaatkaara paryantham sravana manana nidhidhyaasana saamadhyanushtaanasya apekshitattvaat te api pradarshayanthe |

After propounding the nature of entities in the world, since it requires following of sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana-samadhi, therefore they are being explained here.

SRAVANA

Sravanam naama shadvidhalingaih asheshavedantaanaam adviteeya vasthuni tatparya avadhaaranam |

Sravana is determining the essence/import of all scriptures through the shad lingas (six lingas) as adviteeya Brahman.

Lingaani tu upakrama upasamhaara abhyaasa apoorvathaa phalam arthavaada upapatti aakhyaani |

The six lingas are thus:

1. Upakrama and upasamhaara – beginning and end
2. abhyaasa – repetition
3. apoorvatha – newly mentioned or not mentioned elsewhere
4. phalam – fruit
5. arthavaada – praising through mentioning of good obtained by following or bad obtained by not-doing.
6. Upapatti – analogies and logic

The above six have been dealt in other threads & in order to keep the work short, those are not being dealt over here.

MANANA

Mananam tu sruthasya adviteeyavasthuno Vedanta anugunayukthibhih anavaratham anuchinthanam

Manana is using logic accepted by Vedanta again and again to confirm the presence/tenability of the adviteeya vasthu which has been heard through sravana.

NIDHIDHYAASANA

Vijaatheeyadehaadipratyaya rahitha adviteeyavasthu sajaatheeya pratyayapravaaho nidhidhyaasanam

Devoid of the cognitions of the distinct body and other objects & having a flow of constant cognition of the adviteeya vasthu (non-dual reality of Brahman).

SAMAADHI

Samadhirdvividhah savikalpako nirvikalpaschethi

Samadhi is of two types – savikalpa and nirvikalpa.

Tatra savikalpako naama jnaatrajnaaanadivikalpalayaanapekshayaa adviteeya vasthuni tadaakaara aakaarithayaah chitta vritteh avasthaanam

Savikalpa is wherein the mind is contemplating on the adviteeya vasthu by having the vritti of adviteeya Brahman & wherein the differences of triputi is not there (is there but known as unreal).

Tadaa mrinmayagajaadhibhaane api mridbhaanavad dvaita bhaane advaitam vasthu bhaasathe |

There even as in an elephant made of mud, mud alone shines & is seen, similarly even though dvaita may be perceived, advaita vasthu alone shines (advaita alone is seen).

Nirvikalpakasthu Jnaatrajnaanadivikalpalayaapekshayaa adviteeya vasthuni tadaakaara aakaarithyaah chittavritteh athitharaam ekibhaavena avasthaanam |

Nirvakalpa is wherein there is no difference of knower & knowing, chitta vritti is removed & merging of the seeker unto the adviteeya vasthu happens (adviteeya vasthu alone exists).

Tadaa tu jalaakaarakaritha lavana anavabhaasena jalamaatravabhaasavad adviteeya vasthu aakaarakaaritha chittavritti anavabhaasena adviteeyavasthu maatram avabhaasathe |

There even as when salt merges in water, salt doesn’t exist & water alone exists – similarly when adviteeya vasthu vritti is not there, adviteeya vasthu alone shines (when even the thought or contemplation of the non-dual reality vanishes).

EXPLANATION

If we see the example of mud-elephant given by Sadaananda, it is quite clear that the Samadhi which Vedanta accepts is not the same as Patanjali’s Samadhi. In order to go beyond the dvaita or in order to see advaita in dvaita, what is required is nidhidhyaasana in the form of seeing everything as one. Thus the nidhidhyaasana which he propounded as constant flow of the thought of the ultimate reality is in fact not the same as dhyaana as here it is not essential to not indulge in the worldly activities. It is but a fact and matter of experience that there can be one constant thought maintained in the mind even while worldly activities are performed. This is seen in the case of a lover who does all activities but always thinks about his love. The same is the case with a drama artist who performs all activities but still remains a mere witness to all those activities. Thus following nidhidhyaasana is in fact becoming a sakshi to all activities. This (sakshi or kutastha or witness-hood) has been explained in depth through logic by Vidyaranya in Chitra Deepa and Kutastha Deepa of Panchadashi.

Ramateertha doesn’t comment in depth on nidhidhyaasana but does give few comments on Samadhi which are more or less explanations of the analogies. Even though Ramateertha mentions that savikapa and nirvikalpa is what sampradaaya mentions as samprajnaata and asamprajnaata (both terms are terms used by Patanjali), it is but true that Patanjali’s yoga system also bases itself on the scriptures. The scriptures do speak about a Samadhi wherein triputi is still there & a Samadhi where triputi vanishes (the former being samprajnaata and the later being asamprajnaatha). Thus there is no scope of doubt regarding the difference between yoga and Vedanta in this case.

Rama teertha comments thus about the analogy of mud-elephant:

Yathaa mridvikaare gaje kumbhakaaraadinirmithe gajoyamithi asyaam buddhau gajaakaara ullekho api mrinmaatrameva satyam bhaasathe gajaakaarasya mithyaatvanischayaat evam brahmaakaaram vritthau jnaatraadhyaakaare ullikhyamaane api brahmaiva satyam bhaasathe na jnaatradivikalpo ithyarthah

As in the modification of mud which is an elephant, the elephant is made out of mud etc. is known & thereby even if it is mentioned that this is an elephant-form of mud, it is known that mud alone exists as real because of knowing the elephant-form as an illusion – similarly in the modification of the mind with Brahman-thought, the various differences of triputi (knower, knowledge and known object) is mentioned, it is known that brahman alone really exists as no triputi exists at all.

From the above explanation as well as the words of Sadananda Yogindra, it is quite clear that the nidhidhyaasana which Vedanta accepts is not the same as dhyaana of Yoga system.

LAGHU VAASUDEVA MANANAM

Let’s now see sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana as defined by Laghu Vasudeva Mananam (we will see the entire explanation of sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana which is quite exhaustive).

Evam aatmasvaroope prasiddhe gurunaa upadishyamaane api prathibandhakatrayena na nischayo bhavathi |

Thus even though the nature of the Atman is well-known (famous), still due to the three obstacles (which will be mentioned) the nature is not clearly known.

Prathibandhakatrayam cha samshayabhaavana asambhaavana vipareethabhaavana chethi |

The three obstacles are: samshaya (doubt), asambhaavana (impossibility) and vipareethabhaavana (contrary thoughts).

Rigaadishaakhaasu upadishyamaanam upanayaadikarma yathaa anekavidham tathaa rigaadishaakasu upadhishyamaanam aatmatattvam api anekaprakaaram vaa na vaa ithi samshayah samshayabhaavana |

Samshayabhaavana is having doubts as to whether the Self is one or different in the various shaakhas of the scriptures even as the ritualistic karmas like upanaya etc. are different in the different shaakhas (recension of a particular Veda is called shaakha).

Saa sakalavedanta taatparya avadhaarana roopasravanena nashyathi |

Samshaya bhaavana is removed through sravana which is knowing the essence/import of all scriptures.

Evam sarveshaam vedanthaanaam advaitabrahmani eva taatparyamithi sravanena pramaanavishaye samsheye nashte api, idam dvaitam katham sambhaavyathe satyatvena pratheeyamaaneshu jeeveshwarajagatsu bhinneshu satsvapi buddhih asambhaavana |

Even though the doubts regarding the praamana vishaya (object of the scriptural knowledge) and knowing through sravana that advaita Brahman alone is the import of all scriptures, this duality which is perceived as the difference between ishwara, jeeva and jagat, how this can be wrong as it is experienced as real – this is asambhaavana (impossibility).

Iyam svapna dristaanthaadiroopayukthyaatmaka mananena nashyathi |

Asambhaavana is removed through manana which is usage of various yukthis like svapna dristhaantha (analogy of svapna) etc.

Evam sravane manane cha krithe api anaadhyavidhyaavaasanayaa sarvasyaapi jagatho yathaapoorvam satyatvaprathithih vipareetha bhaavana |

Even after sravana and manana, the experience of the world as real due to the vasanas caused by beginningless ignorance is called vipareetha bhavana.

Saa brahmaikaakaara prathyayapravaaharoopa nidhidhyaasanena nashyathi |

Vipareetha bhaavana is removed through constant cognition in the form of one Brahman at all times which is nidhidhyaasana.

If we see the explanation of nidhidhyaasana above, it is brahma eka aakaara prathyaya which means cognition in the form of Brahman alone. This means that there can be other cognitions but that also has to be cognized as Brahman alone or brahma aakaara alone even as the elephant-mud analogy was explained.

Thus laghu vasudeva manana also clearly shows nidhidhyaasana as not the dhyaana of Patanjali.

PANCHADASI OF VIDYARANYA

Let us lastly see vidyaranya’s Panchadasi regarding sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana.

Vidyaranya thus says in the tattvaviveka prakaranam (1.53):

Ittham vaakyaih tadartha anusandhaanam sravanam bhaveth |

Yukthyaa sambhaavithatva anusandhaanam mananam tu tat ||

Thus knowing the mahavakyas like ‘tat tvam asi’ through contemplation of their meaning is sravana or listening.

Reflecting or manana is contemplation of the “possibility” of the mahavakya through logic.

Taabhyaam nirvichikitse arthe chethasah sthaapithasya yat |

Ekathaanatvam etat hi nidhidhyaasanam uchyathe ||

Fixing the mind unto the meaning of the mahavakyas beyond doubt is called nidhidhyaasana characterized by one-pointed concentration.

Ramakrishna while commenting on the above says thus:

Vaaikyaihi tattvamasyaadivaakyaih tadartha anusandhaanam teshaam vaakyaanaam arthasya jeevabrahmanorekatvalakshanasya anusandhaanam sravanam bhaveth |

Of the words like tattvamasi, contemplation on their meaning which is knowing the words as having the characteristics of identity of jeeva and Brahman is sravanam.

Yukthyaa granthasandarbhena ukthaprakaarena sambhaavithatva anusandhaanam sruthasya arthasya upapapadhyamaanatvajnaanam yadasthi tattu mananam ithi uchyathe |

Through logic, of whatever has been explained till now, contemplation of the possibility of whatever has been heard till now & logicality of the same – is achieved through which knowledge that is known as manana or reflection.

Taabhyaam sravanamananaabhyaam nirvichikitse nirgathaa vichikithsaa samshayo yasmaadasau nirvichikitsah, tasmin arthe vishaye sthaapithasya dhaaranaavathah chethasah ‘desha bandhaschittasya dhaaranaa’ ithi patanjalinokthatvaadi ekathaanatvam ekaakaaravritti pravaahatvam etat nidhidhyaasanam uchyathe |

hi prasiddham yogashaastre ‘tatra prathyaya ekathaanathaa dhyaanam’ ithi |

Of those two words, which has been heard & reflected, which is without any doubts, contemplation on their meaning or the vishaya put forth by them by fixing the mind unto them even as patanjali has explained and having a one-pointed concentration or constant flow of one thought alone is nidhidhyaasana or contemplation.

The word ‘hi’ used is to show that this is quite famous in the yoga shaastra as dhyaanam.

Even though the words of Vidyaranya and the commentary of his disciple Ramakrishna on the same point towards the yoga system of Patanjali but still it is only a comparison to the similarity between dhyaana and nidhidhyaasana. The similarity between both is that they include constant flow of a single thought. If we analyze directly as to the dhyeya (object of meditation) of Yoga and Vedanta, the difference can be easily understood. Yoga emphasizes on dhyaana of any entity as such which will in turn lead to Samadhi. Samadhi which is divided into Samadhi of gross objects & subtle thoughts leads finally to nirbheeja Samadhi or that Samadhi wherein there is no thought or vasana left. On the other hand, Vedanta emphasizes on the dhyeya of brahma-atma aikya. As Vidyaranya explains dhyaana as contemplating on the confusion-less meaning of the mahavakya which is brahma-atma aikya, the difference between dhyaana of yoga and nidhidhyaasana of Vedanta is quite evident.

Thus Vidyaranya’s words and Ramakrishna’s explanation using Yoga sutras of Patanjali should be understood to point out the similarity between the basic essence of dhyaana of Yoga and nidhidhyaasana of Vedanta – it is wrong to consider this as equating dhyaana and nidhidhyaasana.

Thus all the Vedanta acharyas explain nidhidhyaasana or rather the Vedantic means of sravana-manana-nidhidhyaasana as different & distinct from the Yoga means of ashta anga (eight limbs of yama, niyama, asana etc.).

Dhyaana of Yoga and Nidhidhyaasana of Vedanta - Differentiated

Last but not the least let us see in brief the reasons as to why dhyaana and nidhidhyaasana cannot be one and the same.

1.    Dhyaana of the Yoga system has prerequisites which include asana, pranayama etc. whereas nidhidhyaasana or contemplation has no restrictions/prerequisites – thus dhyaana has to be done in a flat surface on a piece of cloth with back straight etc. whereas nidhidhyaasana can be done at any time, at any place, in any particular way.

2.    Dhyaana has its own bad effects if the person is disturbed from it (it can even lead to death) whereas nidhidhyaasana has no bad effects because it has no limitations. We have to consider this in the same case as with jnaana which has no limitations and karma (rituals) which has n-number of limitations.

3.    Dhyaana leads to Samadhi which is finally nirbheeja samaadhi (similar to Nirvikalpa Samadhi of advaita) whereas nidhidhyaasana leads to Sahaja Samadhi (natural-absorption state which is the real Samadhi beyond all distinctions – jeevan mukthi as per advaita).

4.    Dhyaana doesn’t remove bhedha or duality which is the cause of all sorrows but only leads to isolation of the jeeva (purusha as per Yoga system) from the prakrithi (which includes its effects of the world in general). Nidhidhyaasana is following of oneness everywhere through the knowledge that everything is but Brahman alone, thus nidhidhyaasana removes duality (negates duality through the knowledge that duality is not real but only illusory).

5.    Dhyaana is karma whereas nidhidhyaasana is jnaana. Karma is karthutantra (as Sankara puts it in his Brahma Sutra Bhashya) whereas jnaana is vasthutantra. Karthutantra is that which has the option of “karthum, akarthum and anyathakarthum” (doing, non-doing and doing in a different way respectively) whereas vasthutantra is knowledge of an entity which is either known or unknown. A person who has a pot in front of him perceives the pot – he doesn’t have an option of whether to perceive or not. A person has control over whether to do dhyaana or not to do – he also can decide as to how it can be done which has led to n-number of dhyaana sadhanas propagated by different saints (art of living, kriya yoga of paramahamsa yogananda etc.). A person doesn’t have any control over nidhidhyaasana because once a person goes through reflection, then by default nidhidhyaasana happens – he cannot decide on it. Once a person hears about the reality, reflects it and becomes clear about it, nidhidhyaasana automatically happens whether he wants or not.

6.    Modes of dhyaana are many whereas nidhidhyaasana is one alone as per Advaita.

There can be more reasons pointed out to prove that dhyaana is not the same as nidhidhyaasana but in order to keep it short and not confusing, we will stop over here.

CONCLUSION

Thus it can be concluded beyond doubt that dhyaana is not the same as nidhidhyaasana. Dhyaana is only considered a sadhana for a spiritual seeker whereas nidhidhyaasana is not a sadhana but an inevitable step to realization. Thus wherever Sankara or any of the advaita acharyas use the word dhyaana, we have to understand it not as the dhyaana of yoga system but as nidhidhyaasana alone unless the context is such that dhyaana of yoga system alone is pointed out.