Discussion:
Paroksha to Aparoksha
r***@public.gmane.org
2013-06-17 20:46:23 UTC
Permalink
In performance of action, there is definite result that one can know such as attainment of wealth, heaven etc. In performance of bhakti, there is clear result in terms of seeing and serving bhagavan. Even in paroksha jnana, there is clear knowledge of conclusion of advaita vedanta that can be verified by others. How can one know that one is an aparoksha jnani? After repeated manana and nidhidhyasana, one may delude oneself in to thinking I am a jnani and it is only my mind and body acting out its nature though he may have kama and krodha. Is it not?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
kuntimaddi sadananda
2013-06-17 21:16:41 UTC
Permalink
PraNAms

There are two tests to check if one is jnaani or not.

1. A jnaani is one who does not depend on something other than oneself for his happiness - since he has understood that he is ananda swaruupa. This is a litmus test to check oneself if one is jnaani or not. It is not meant for checking if the other person is jnaani or not - since there is no way one can check that. A student should assume that his teacher is a jnaani (whether the teacher is one or not) so that he has the requisite shraddhaa to gain the knowledge - shaastrasya guruvaakyasya satya budhyaava dhaaraNaa saa shraddhaa - says in VevekachUDAmani.

2. The second test if one wants to take is given in Ch. Up in Sad vidya. For this one has to heat an iron ladle to red hot and if he touches and get burned, he has not realized. If no burning occurs then he has realized! One can this test to insure one is jnaani or not.
Obviously the implication is different. A jnaani is one who does not get burned when makes contact with the hot world.


No jnaani will declare that he is a jnaani since it is a useless statement from the point of others as it depends on their faith in acceptance or rejection of that statement.


Hari Om!
Sadananda
________________________________
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 4:46 PM
Subject: [Advaita-l] Paroksha to Aparoksha
In performance of action, there is definite result that one can know such as attainment of wealth, heaven etc. In performance of bhakti, there is clear result in terms of seeing and serving bhagavan. Even in paroksha jnana, there is clear knowledge of conclusion of advaita vedanta that  can be verified by others. How can one know that one is an aparoksha jnani? After repeated manana and nidhidhyasana, one may delude oneself in to thinking I am a jnani and it is only my mind and body acting out its nature though he may have kama and krodha. Is it not?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-18 06:56:11 UTC
Permalink
praNAms Sri Sadananda prabhuji
Hare Krishna

A jnaani is one who does not depend on something other than oneself for
his happiness - since he has understood that he is ananda swaruupa. This
is a litmus test to check oneself if one is jnaani or not.
I wonder, if one is really a jnAni, whether he has any doubt on his
paramArtha jnAna!!?? If the jnAni wants to 'test' whether the jnAna what
he has is adviteeya and 'Ananda' what he is, is vishayAteeta, that shows
that jnAni is really not a jnAni since still he is entertaining 'doubts'
on his own status !! So, I dont think there arises any need for the jnAni
to 'check' what he has is the result of THAT jnAna. He is samshayAteeta,
bhidyate hrudaya grantiM, chiddhyante 'sarva' samshayAH..is the shruti
verdict on aparOksha jnAni.

It is not meant for checking if the other person is jnaani or not - since
there is no way one can check that.
Yes, for the other person checking is not possible and for the 'real'
jnAni, he hardly has any doubt of his jnAna to check and confirm it to
himself.


Obviously the implication is different. A jnaani is one who does not get
burned when makes contact with the hot world.
Then what would be the reason for 'prachOdana' in a jnAni who is
getting kAma & krOdha due to his avidyA lesha or prArabdha karma?? This
means he is mere jnAni not a jnAna nishTa is it?? I will come back to
this point ( mere jnAni & jnAna nishTa) later, if my time permits.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
kuntimaddi sadananda
2013-06-18 10:45:02 UTC
Permalink
_______________________________
Post by Bhaskar YR
  Yes, for the other person checking is not possible and for the 'real'
jnAni, he hardly has any doubt of his jnAna to check and confirm it to
himself.
----------------
Bhaskarji - True - it is not for doing self-test to declare to somebody. t is for him to continue the nidhidhyaasana since there are still lingering vaasanaas that contribute to raaga-dweshaas. Hence Paramarthanandaji describes jnaani vs Jnaana nishTa in terms of FIR reduction - frequency of perturbation, intensity of perturbation and recovery from perturbation decreases as one get firmly established in the jnaanam. Yagnavalkya story is used to illustrate the point in terms of jnaani vs jnana nishTa. Yagyavalkya felt the current environment was not conducive for his constant contemplation on the truth which  he has clear understood; and therefore he decided to leave the house and go towards higher - as he put it. It is obvious that he was a jnaani as he could teach Matreyi - wife-disciple - the aadhyaatmika vidya. He does not have to leave to go higher if he has already jnaana nishTa. Shankara uses this example to establish that bhoutica sanyaasa is
required for jnaana nishTa.

---------------------
Post by Bhaskar YR
Obviously the implication is different. A jnaani is one who does not get
burned when makes contact with the hot world.
  Then what would be the reason for 'prachOdana' in a jnAni who is
getting kAma & krOdha due to his avidyA lesha or prArabdha karma??  This
means he is mere jnAni not a jnAna nishTa is it??  I will come back to
this point ( mere jnAni & jnAna nishTa) later, if my time permits. 
-------------
The reason is lack of complete chitta suddhi - First, mind is what it is - a product of karma - 100% purity is even thermodynamically impossible. Hence Jnaana nishTa is not discrete event and nidhidhyaasana should, in principle, continue until the body drops as FIR reduction takes place slowly and steadily. Nachiketas may not need nidhidhyaasana but many who approach the Vedantic study without having complete chitta suddhi, do not have to go back to karma-upaasana yoga - nidhidhyaasana on the teaching received will be sufficient to eliminate slowly the lingering vaasanaas. kAma and krodha that was mentioned which are due to lingering vaasanas slowly get reduced as one abides in that knowledge.


Anyway this is my understanding.


Hari Om!
Sadananda
Venkata sriram P
2013-06-18 04:58:17 UTC
Permalink
mahAkavi kALidAsa in raghuvaMsha writes a beautiful sloka while describes the
traits of raghu dynasty.
 
jnAnE maunaM kSamA shaktau tyAgE shlAghAviparyayaH /
guNA guNAnubandhitvAttasya saprasavA iva //
 
So, mauna lakSaNa is the guNa of true jnAni.
 
regs,
sriram
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-18 05:23:45 UTC
Permalink
So, mauna lakSaNa is the guNa of true jnAni.

praNAms
Hare Krishna

this also reminds me the dakshiNAmurthy stOtra, gurOstu mouna vyAkhyAnaM
shishyAstu chinna saMshayaH...but the question is how capable we are, with
our conditioned mind to understand this sublime silence of the jnAni?? I
wonder if at all there is absolute silence from the sages like ramaNa, it
would have been difficult to recognize him as a paramArtha jnAni....I
think amidst thick silence of jnAni-s, there needs to be sporadic talks
from them, otherwise it would be difficult for us to make out the
difference between ajnAni's mouna due to ignorance and jnAni's serene
mouna, which is the result of ekatva jnAna.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Venkata sriram P
2013-06-18 06:13:27 UTC
Permalink
Namaste,
 
//
I wonder if at all there is absolute silence from the sages like ramaNa
//
 
1) mounaM charati iti muniH
2) mananAt muniH uchyatE
3) mounaM mantrArtha chintanaM
 
So, mouna is muni-lakSaNa; then what is mouna? The answer is obvious that
it is nirantara-manana lakSaNa of muni.  So, mouna is not put blank faces and staring at guru.  This is not the method of learning.
 
It is "taila-dhArAvat upaniSad mantrArtha chintanaM" which results in nidhidhyAsana. This teaching was imparted through chinmudra of dakshinamurty.  The crux is to understand
this mudra and hence Sankara says "bhadrayA mudrayA".
 
regs,
sriram
 
 
 
 
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-18 07:06:01 UTC
Permalink
So, mouna is not put blank faces and staring at guru. This is not the
method of learning.

praNAms Sri Sriram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Yes, this is what I meant too, guru's mouna here is not wearing the
graphite face and staring at shishya..A shrotreeya, brahmanishTa guru has
to sometimes vocally describe the 'real' meaning of this mouna, then only
aviveki-s like me would understand what is the 'mouna' of the guru!!

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-18 07:28:41 UTC
Permalink
praNAms Sri Rajaram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

How can one know that one is an aparoksha jnani?
For us it is really not possible to determine who is aparOksha jnAni.
It is only our shraddha in certain noble personalities force us to believe
he is jnAni or otherwise. And can we use shAstra pramANa to decide
whether one 'satpurusha' is jnAni?? I dont think that is also possible,
because even genuine jnAni too sometimes would act like an ordinary mortal
due to his prArabdha /avidyA lesha.

After repeated manana and nidhidhyasana, one may delude oneself in to
thinking I am a jnani and it is only my mind and body acting out its
nature though he may have kama and krodha. Is it not?
I regret to say that, this is the latest development to argue that
paramArtha adviteeya jnAni too has the kAma-krOdhAdi vipareeta pratyaya
due to avidyAlesha. For that matter I doubt whether the previous
propagators of avidyAlesha theory in the jnAni would admit the kAma-krOdha
in the jnAni!! As far as shankara is concerned, he is clear muktAvasthA
is nothing but realizing that he is brahman...and it is
'ekarUpa'..muktAvasthA hi sarvavedAnteshu ekarupaiva avadhAryate,
brahmaivacha muktAvasthA. If the jnAni after this jnAni would still
subject to kAma krOdha means in muktAvastha though jnAni becomes brahman,
his brahmAtmabhAva is temporary and it may undergo the change due to
influence of prArabdha karma. No need to mention this would go against
bhAshya vAkya that clearly says : muktAvasthA eka rUpaiva avadhAryate.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
V Subrahmanian
2013-06-18 11:04:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@public.gmane.org
In performance of action, there is definite result that one can know such
as attainment of wealth, heaven etc. In performance of bhakti, there is
clear result in terms of seeing and serving bhagavan. Even in paroksha
jnana, there is clear knowledge of conclusion of advaita vedanta that can
be verified by others. How can one know that one is an aparoksha jnani?
After repeated manana and nidhidhyasana, one may delude oneself in to
thinking I am a jnani and it is only my mind and body acting out its nature
though he may have kama and krodha. Is it not?
Sri Vidyaranya (I think) has said in the Panchadashi that certain things
like the presence of jnAna, ajnAna, hunger, thirst, joy, sorrow in oneself
are all directly known (aparokSha) to oneself (and not to others). For
others it is only inferentially (parokSha) known.

Having said this, there is an episode in the Mahabharatha where a bhikShukI
named 'sulabhA' (Shankara refers to her in the BSB) shAntiparvan
(MokShadharma) 12-320-7 onwards therein where she engages a king who
thought he was enlightened and finally establishes the contrary.

regards
vs
Post by r***@public.gmane.org
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-18 12:10:34 UTC
Permalink
praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Sri Vidyaranya (I think) has said in the Panchadashi that certain things
like the presence of jnAna, ajnAna, hunger, thirst, joy, sorrow in oneself
are all directly known (aparokSha) to oneself (and not to others).
Yes, this reminds me shankara bhAshya vAkya taThA sarvOpyanyO
vyavahAraH Atmana eva vidushaH..But it is not like in sAkshi bhAva like I
am witness and witnessing this world objects apart from me. His
realization is that ahamannaM, ahamannAdaH, ahaM shlOkakrut etc. i.e.
sarvAtmabhAva.

For others it is only inferentially (parokSha) known.
Yes, that is why jnAni's socalled vyavahAra, his attachment, his
suffering etc. is from the drushti of avidyAvanta. We only infer that
jnAni has the deha, he has the bedha buddhi, resultant kAma krOdha etc.
and we just do the katrutva ArOpa on jnAni as we cannot think beyond the
BMI complex. But in reality he is akatru, abhOktru only and that is what
shankara too says in geeta bhAshya 4.22.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
V Subrahmanian
2013-06-19 01:33:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhaskar YR
praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
Hare Krishna
Sri Vidyaranya (I think) has said in the Panchadashi that certain things
like the presence of jnAna, ajnAna, hunger, thirst, joy, sorrow in oneself
are all directly known (aparokSha) to oneself (and not to others).
Yes, this reminds me shankara bhAshya vAkya taThA sarvOpyanyO
vyavahAraH Atmana eva vidushaH..But it is not like in sAkshi bhAva like I
am witness and witnessing this world objects apart from me. His
realization is that ahamannaM, ahamannAdaH, ahaM shlOkakrut etc. i.e.
sarvAtmabhAva.
I am unable to understand that vAkya: sarvOpyanyO vyavahAraH Atmana eva
vidushaH. Where does this sentence occur? As it is, my objection to it
is: 'AtmanA' is in the tRtIyA, instrumental. Atman cannot be an instrument
as It is niShkriya and akhaNDa. How can the Jnani 'use' the Atman for his
vyavahAra? If it is said: 'the jnani knows that all vyavahAra 'happens' in
the substratum that is Atman', then it is agreeable.

On the contrary, it is only based on the sAkshi bhAva can there be any
understanding about the jnAni's attitude. Shankara brings this out in the
last sentence of the BGB 2.16: 'You too, Arjuna, by following the
Tattvadarshi-s, view the transformations (like sukha/duHkha, sheeta, uShNa,
mAna, apamAna, etc.) as mere appearances like mirage water and maintain
titikShA.' This attitude is impossible without the sAkshi bhAva. 'duHkeShu
anudvignamanAH sukheShu vigataspRhaH' ['in the wake of joy and sorrow, the
sthitaprajna is not subjected to elation or dejection'] is impossible
unless one remains in the sAkshi bhAva. Even the 'indriyAni indriyArtheShu
vartante, naiva kinchit karomi'['I do nothing; it is only the interaction
between the sense/motor organs and their respective objects'] is the
perfect articulation of the sAkshi bhAva alone.
Post by Bhaskar YR
For others it is only inferentially (parokSha) known.
Yes, that is why jnAni's socalled vyavahAra, his attachment, his
suffering etc. is from the drushti of avidyAvanta. We only infer that
jnAni has the deha, he has the bedha buddhi, resultant kAma krOdha etc.
and we just do the katrutva ArOpa on jnAni as we cannot think beyond the
BMI complex. But in reality he is akatru, abhOktru only and that is what
shankara too says in geeta bhAshya 4.22.
That Atman is akartR, abhoktR is the conviction of the jnAni. But the
jnAni is not just the Atman; as long as a person called a jnani is alive,
there is this distinction that is inevitable. 'brahmavit is brahmaiva' but
the brahmavit is also a person who continues to live in the prakrtic
body/mind complex for a destined period. Till such fall of the body/mind
all the happenings are only sAkShi bhAsya for the person called jnani. He
does not have the 'I am the doer' buddhi. The others, who are not exposed
to the vedanta shAstra, however, think that 'he is the doer'. They have no
understanding that the Atman does not doe anything but only the organs
act. This distinction was very nicely brought out in the famous dialogue
between the foreigner and HH Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati of Sringeri.
What the foreigner saw was the HH doing the Chandramoulishwara puja. He
could not discern that the Atman did not do the puja but only the organs of
the Holiness did the puja. He had to be explained this by HH Himself, much
to the joyful acknowledgement of the foreigner. It is only in this sense
that it is said that the ajnani-s/onlookers superimpose kartRtvam on the
jnani where the jnani himself does not appropriate kartRtvam/bhoktRtvam for
the Atman.

regards
vs
Post by Bhaskar YR
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-20 09:49:51 UTC
Permalink
praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
Hare Krishna

I am unable to understand that vAkya: sarvOpyanyO vyavahAraH Atmana eva
vidushaH. Where does this sentence occur?
I dont exactly remember, perhaps you would be the best person to pick
an appropriate vAkya like this from shankara's prasthAna traya bhAshya
since you are having the reference library of all works on advaita vedAnta
on your desk at home :-)) I read it in some upanishad shankara bhAshya
only, most probably on taitireeya where the maNtra occurs yadidaM
kiMcha...but anyway not sure...In the meanwhile I too search the above
bhAshya vAkya reference..But anyway, you can be rest assured the above
statement is shankara bhAshya vAkya only and it is not my composition to
find out the grammatical errors in it :-))


As it is, my objection to it is: 'AtmanA' is in the tRtIyA, instrumental.
Atman cannot be an instrument
as It is niShkriya and akhaNDa.
but according to you what has become all this is not nishkriya &
akhanda brahma, it is saguNa brahma is it not:-)) Anyway, this is not my
stand :-))

How can the Jnani 'use' the Atman for his vyavahAra?
vyavahAra can happen through kArya kAraNa tAdAtmya saMbhandhaH,
brahmavAdinaH kathaM iti chet?? na, tasya tAdAtmyalakshNa
saMbandOpapateH...And this tadAymya saMbandha not only restricted to only
nAma & rUpa, for the nAmarUpa vyavahAra too it is equally applicable,
because kArya what we call is nothing but kAraNa's vishesha darshana (vide
sUtra bhAshya). sadAtmanA satyatvAbhyupagamAt.....sarvavyavahArANAM
sarvavikArANAM cha satyatvaM...


If it is said: 'the jnani knows that all vyavahAra 'happens' in the
substratum that is Atman', then it is agreeable.
that is your interpretation of the most of the unambiguous bhAshya
vAkya to bring in saguNa brahman...As per shankara vedAnta, brahman (
absolute) is abhinnanimittOpAdana kAraNa for this jagat..He is adhishtAna
(antaryAmi) as well as 'sarvaM'. Hence shruti says satyanchAnrutancha
satyamabhavat..sa cha bAhyalOkO nAstyasmAkaM AtmavyatiriktaH, 'sarvaM' hi
asmAkaM AtmabhUtameva sarvasya cha vayaM Atma bhUtaH says bruhat
shruti...Let this be aside, how can you say vyavahAra happens in the
substratum i.e. Atman when you yourself said that Atman is nishkriya &
nirvishesha??

On the contrary, it is only based on the sAkshi bhAva can there be any
understanding about the jnAni's attitude.
jnAni's attitude is based on sarvAtma bhAva...samOhaM sarva bhUteshu,
brAhmaNe gavi hastini, shunishchaiva shvapakecha paNditAH samadarshinaH,
confirms lord in geeta.

Shankara brings this out in the
last sentence of the BGB 2.16: 'You too, Arjuna, by following the
Tattvadarshi-s, view the transformations (like sukha/duHkha, sheeta,
uShNa,
mAna, apamAna, etc.) as mere appearances like mirage water and maintain
titikShA.' This attitude is impossible without the sAkshi bhAva.
'duHkeShu
anudvignamanAH sukheShu vigataspRhaH' ['in the wake of joy and sorrow, the
sthitaprajna is not subjected to elation or dejection'] is impossible
unless one remains in the sAkshi bhAva. Even the 'indriyAni
indriyArtheShu
vartante, naiva kinchit karomi'['I do nothing; it is only the interaction
between the sense/motor organs and their respective objects'] is the
perfect articulation of the sAkshi bhAva alone.
Yes, it is better for the sAdhaka-s to practice the sAkshi bhAva later
to realize that sarvAtma bhAva, that he is that adviteeya..and which is
also sarvabhUteshu gUdaH, sAkshi bhUta & kevalO nirguNa..vide
shvetAshvatara.


That Atman is akartR, abhoktR is the conviction of the jnAni. But the
jnAni is not just the Atman;
he is just the Atman and nothing else..brahmaiva bhavati..after this
realization he looks like shAreeri..dehavAniva lakshyate clarifies
shankara.

as long as a person called a jnani is alive, there is this distinction
that is inevitable.
That we, the ajnAni-s, are calling, jarA maraNa is not for the jnAni
because he has already attained that state which is beyond that birth and
death cycle.

'brahmavit is brahmaiva' but
the brahmavit is also a person who continues to live in the prakrtic
body/mind complex for a destined period.
Yes, we are still seeing jnAni's BMI, because we, the ajnAni-s cannot
think beyond BMI of the jnAni.


Till such fall of the body/mind all the happenings are only sAkShi bhAsya
for the person called jnani.
please see above..and also yattu sarvAtmabhAvAt arvAk vAlAgramAtramapi
anyatvena drushyate nAhamasmeeti tadavasthA avidyA...The sAkshi jnAna or
sAkshmi bhAva what you are articulating here suffers from bedha drushti
i.e. I am sAkshi, and I am seeing the world and its suffering as
witness..this is avidyA because shankara says even tip of hair of anyatva
bhAva is avidyA...But when it comes to avasthAtraya prakriya where tureeya
is sAkshi to three avasthA it is something different..More on this later
leisurely :-))

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
V Subrahmanian
2013-06-20 10:33:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhaskar YR
praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
Hare Krishna
How can the Jnani 'use' the Atman for his vyavahAra?
vyavahAra can happen through kArya kAraNa tAdAtmya saMbhandhaH,
brahmavAdinaH kathaM iti chet?? na, tasya tAdAtmyalakshNa
saMbandOpapateH...And this tadAymya saMbandha not only restricted to only
nAma & rUpa, for the nAmarUpa vyavahAra too it is equally applicable,
because kArya what we call is nothing but kAraNa's vishesha darshana (vide
sUtra bhAshya). sadAtmanA satyatvAbhyupagamAt.....sarvavyavahArANAM
sarvavikArANAM cha satyatvaM...
This satyatvam is only upon negating the nAmarUpa dvandva, kriya, kAraka,
etc. The basis for this is mRttiketyEva satyam, vAchArambhaNam nAmadheyam.
It does not answer the question above.
Post by Bhaskar YR
If it is said: 'the jnani knows that all vyavahAra 'happens' in the
substratum that is Atman', then it is agreeable.
that is your interpretation of the most of the unambiguous bhAshya
vAkya to bring in saguNa brahman...
Why should I make any efforts to 'bring in' saguNa brahman; the bhAShya is
replete with references to saguNa brahman (eg. the third adhyAya and fourth
adhyAya of the brahmasutra).
Post by Bhaskar YR
As per shankara vedAnta, brahman (
absolute) is abhinnanimittOpAdana kAraNa for this jagat..He is adhishtAna
(antaryAmi) as well as 'sarvaM'. Hence shruti says satyanchAnrutancha
satyamabhavat..sa cha bAhyalOkO nAstyasmAkaM AtmavyatiriktaH, 'sarvaM' hi
asmAkaM AtmabhUtameva sarvasya cha vayaM Atma bhUtaH says bruhat
shruti...Let this be aside, how can you say vyavahAra happens in the
substratum i.e. Atman when you yourself said that Atman is nishkriya &
nirvishesha??
Simple; it is adhyasta in the substratum brahman. The adhyAsa bhAshya
emphatically says:

*//tatraivam sati yatra yadadhyAsaH, tatkRtena doSheNa guNena vaa
aNumAtreNApi sa na sambadhyate…// [‘This being so, the locus
(Atman/Brahman) is not affected in any way either by the merits or demerits
of the things superimposed.’]

*
Post by Bhaskar YR
On the contrary, it is only based on the sAkshi bhAva can there be any
understanding about the jnAni's attitude.
jnAni's attitude is based on sarvAtma bhAva...samOhaM sarva bhUteshu,
brAhmaNe gavi hastini, shunishchaiva shvapakecha paNditAH samadarshinaH,
confirms lord in geeta.
sarvAtmabhAva is for his anusandhAna and the Atmapratipatti. But his
vyavahAra will not be possible with that bhAva. So, the dehAdi will have
to be used by him for vyavahAra. He can't go to bhikShA with the
sarvAtmabhAva knowledge. Unless kalpita, buddhipUrvaka bheda is employed
by him no vyavahAra will take place. When Shankara averred 'ato jyeShAmi
sarvAn' ('Therefore, I shall conquer all') in the Taittiriya bhashya, he
'sarvAn' are all those opponents to Advaita/vedanta dharshana. With just
sarvAtmabhAva no debate or disputation will be possible. Only samAdhi will
be possible.
Post by Bhaskar YR
Shankara brings this out in the
last sentence of the BGB 2.16: 'You too, Arjuna, by following the
Tattvadarshi-s, view the transformations (like sukha/duHkha, sheeta, uShNa,
mAna, apamAna, etc.) as mere appearances like mirage water and maintain
titikShA.' This attitude is impossible without the sAkshi bhAva. 'duHkeShu
anudvignamanAH sukheShu vigataspRhaH' ['in the wake of joy and sorrow, the
sthitaprajna is not subjected to elation or dejection'] is impossible
unless one remains in the sAkshi bhAva. Even the 'indriyAni
indriyArtheShu
vartante, naiva kinchit karomi'['I do nothing; it is only the interaction
between the sense/motor organs and their respective objects'] is the
perfect articulation of the sAkshi bhAva alone.
Yes, it is better for the sAdhaka-s to practice the sAkshi bhAva later
to realize that sarvAtma bhAva, that he is that adviteeya..and which is
also sarvabhUteshu gUdaH, sAkshi bhUta & kevalO nirguNa..vide
shvetAshvatara.
No. TattvadarshI of the 2.16 is not a sAdhaka.
Post by Bhaskar YR
That Atman is akartR, abhoktR is the conviction of the jnAni. But the
jnAni is not just the Atman;
he is just the Atman and nothing else..brahmaiva bhavati..after this
realization he looks like shAreeri..dehavAniva lakshyate clarifies
shankara.
as long as a person called a jnani is alive, there is this distinction
that is inevitable.
That we, the ajnAni-s, are calling, jarA maraNa is not for the jnAni
because he has already attained that state which is beyond that birth and
death cycle.
Then Shankara is also an ajnAni. The Upanishads talk of the death of the
jnani. Is it ajnAni?
Post by Bhaskar YR
'brahmavit is brahmaiva' but
the brahmavit is also a person who continues to live in the prakrtic
body/mind complex for a destined period.
Yes, we are still seeing jnAni's BMI, because we, the ajnAni-s cannot
think beyond BMI of the jnAni.
The objection applies to Shankara and the upanishads.
Post by Bhaskar YR
Till such fall of the body/mind all the happenings are only sAkShi bhAsya
for the person called jnani.
please see above..and also yattu sarvAtmabhAvAt arvAk vAlAgramAtramapi
anyatvena drushyate nAhamasmeeti tadavasthA avidyA...The sAkshi jnAna or
sAkshmi bhAva what you are articulating here suffers from bedha drushti
i.e. I am sAkshi, and I am seeing the world and its suffering as
witness..this is avidyA because shankara says even tip of hair of anyatva
bhAva is avidyA...But when it comes to avasthAtraya prakriya where tureeya
is sAkshi to three avasthA it is something different..More on this later
leisurely :-))
The above is not the correct depiction/understanding of the sAkshi of the
Vedanta. The bhAShya vAkya you cited is about the entertaining of notion
of real difference. But the jnAni's vyavahAra is based on kalpita
vyavahAra. Otherwise the jnani acharya can't even teach the disciple.

subrahmanian.v
Post by Bhaskar YR
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
Bhaskar YR
2013-06-20 10:58:25 UTC
Permalink
praNAms
Hare Krishna


This satyatvam is only upon negating the nAmarUpa dvandva, kriya, kAraka,
etc. The basis for this is mRttiketyEva satyam, vAchArambhaNam nAmadheyam.
It does not answer the question above.
It does answer the question in a more emphatic way...nAma, rUpa,
vyavahAra everything is THAT only and there is nothing apart from THAT,
nehanAnAsti kiMchana..if you want to realize the satyatva of mruttike
which is adhishtAna, you have to see the 'mruttike' in all its nAma rUpa
and those who realize this satyatva would know that kArya what they are
seeing is nothing but 'veshesha' darshana of that kAraNa. bramArpaNam,
brahmahaviH, brahmAgnau, brahmaNAhutaM too says this.

Why should I make any efforts to 'bring in' saguNa brahman; the bhAShya is
replete with references to saguNa brahman (eg. the third adhyAya and
fourth
adhyAya of the brahmasutra).
I too have quoted plenty of bhAshya vAkya-s to prove that jeeva attains
brahma in sushupti and that brahman is not upAsya adheena kArya / saguNa
brahma but parabrahman...I have quoted explicitly where shankara says
pareNa brahma, svamapeeto bhavati etc. but you comfortably said neglected
it by holding one bhAshya vAkya as the big RULE to interpret all these
unambiguous bhAshya quotes!! BTW, have you checked this basic RULE what
you are trying to impose on most of the bhAshya vAkya-s is acceptable to
all scholars in advaita vedAnta??

*//tatraivam sati yatra yadadhyAsaH, tatkRtena doSheNa guNena vaa
aNumAtreNApi sa na sambadhyate…// [‘This being so, the locus
(Atman/Brahman) is not affected in any way either by the merits or
demerits
of the things superimposed.’]
I am not asking you whether Atman is effected by this or not...I am
just asking you how can vyavahAra is possible in nishkriya & nirvishesha
brahman possible??

sarvAtmabhAva is for his anusandhAna and the Atmapratipatti. But his
vyavahAra will not be possible with that bhAva.
with the sarvAtmabhAva only vyavahAra possible without any 'bedha
buddhi', whereas if you sit in sAkshi and say OK I am sAkshi to other
person's suffering and I'll sit and watch it from a comfortable distance
means it is sheer entertainment of beda buddhi..And due to this beda
buddhi that sAkshi jnAni would always remains separate entity and seeing
objective world apart from him..


The above is not the correct depiction/understanding of the sAkshi of the
Vedanta.
Oh O !! Arguments like, this is not correct interpretation, this is
not traditional view point, this is not brahman, selective quoting of one
bhAshya vAkya forms the RULE for all other bhAshya vAkya interpretation
etc. etc. I too can do any no. of days with you without much use...So,
let us remember the golden rule ' Agree to disagree ' and leave this
thread :-)) Thanks for your time.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
***@advaita-vedanta.

Loading...