Notes on BSB

[Guest guest]

namaste Sadanandaji

 

1) Besides the notes of Swami Paramarthananda do you follow any other

book on this subject. If yes, can you give us the references. I went

through the adhyaasa bhaashyam translation given in Apte and partly in

Swami Vishwesvarananda. I should say, your notes are much better and

easier to read. I thank you (again) sincerely for that.

 

2) I request you to pause the series for a week or so. I am (and

probably others) still in 3a (even though I have read that twice so

far). I want to make full use of this series. I would be grateful if it

goes slowly and alos if other members come forward and share their

insights.

 

--

 

In 3a - section 3.4 you seem to imply that brahman has a samanya and

vishesha amsha. Am I reading this correct? brahman is nirguNa, it

cannot have any visheshha amsha at all. When we say aananda, we should

take it to mean that it transcends sukha and duHkha. Not that aananda

is an attribute of brahman. In "I am samsarii" what remains is only "I

am".

 

Also one should note that, "I am" in "I am samsaari" has many levels

of adhyaasa in it. When I say "I am fat", I mean that my body is fat.

It means the I the jiiva, who now I identifies itself with this body,

thinks that this body is fat. Even I the jiiva, is something really

mixed up with mind, etc. What I am trying to say, is there are many

levels of super-imposition one on another, built over a long period of

time. They have to peeled away one by one. Then what remains is "is".

brahman being nirguNa cannot say "I am such and such", the "I am" that

says is not brahman but something else.

 

Please correct me.

 

--

Aside

 

a) Also I request the readers to refer to the article "A vedanta

toolkit" and the threads that followed on it. In that subhanu saxenaji

has some points on adhyasa.

 

b) Is there a good book on brahma suutra like the one on giita by

krishna warrier, which gives the sanskrit in a more readable form with

an accurate translation?

 

--

 

Thank you.

 

Sincerely,

Ravi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!

/

[Guest guest]

>"Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii

>

>namaste Sadanandaji

>

>1) Besides the notes of Swami Paramarthananda do you follow any other

>book on this subject. If yes, can you give us the references. I went

>through the adhyaasa bhaashyam translation given in Apte and partly in

>Swami Vishwesvarananda. I should say, your notes are much better and

>easier to read. I thank you (again) sincerely for that.

 

Ravi - I am currently following mostly Swami paramaarthananda's teachings in

the order and sequence - I am also referring to book published by

Ramakrishna Mutt - Do not have reference here in the office - will give you

next time. Besides these two I am also comparing my notes with commentaries

of Vedanta Suutra-s by, I think, Veeraraaghavachar - mostly from

VishishhTaadvaita point and Nyaayasudhaasaara from Madhva point - this is

the essence of Nyaayasudha by Shree Vishvesha Tiirtha of Pejawar Mutt -

English translation of that by my God-son, Shree Gururaj, is getting

published by Pejawar Mutt. I have the initial draft of that in my file. -

These are only to compare how the interpretations differ - But I am not

going to present these here but currently sticking mostly to Shankara

Bhaashhya as taught by Swami Paramaarthananda - putting in a form that I can

understand, taking the ideas from others texts in terms of presentation.

Hopefully after completion, I will present it to Swamiji if he wants to

publish it for the benefit of others.

>2) I request you to pause the series for a week or so. I am (and

>probably others) still in 3a (even though I have read that twice so

>far). I want to make full use of this series. I would be grateful if it

>goes slowly and alos if other members come forward and share their

>insights.

 

It is a very good idea. I am trying to see what is the best combination.

The notes in IIIB are cut to half of its original. Someone suggested

by-weakly postings. But people also forget it too, particularly since the

ideas are interconnected. Let us also hear from others readers.

 

Yes you are right, if other members come forward to share their insights.

That is the purpose of posting on the lists so that it can stimulate

discussions from others and we can all learn together. As the notes are

compiled, I would like, with the permission of the discussers, to add edited

versions of these lively discussions at the end of each chapter so that it

can help those who wants to study later. But let us see how it proceeds.

 

I will be out of town from Sept 17-23 and out of the country Sept 30- Oct

18. There will be gaps at that time to sit back and reflect for sometime. I

will be in Chennai during the later dates and will be meeting Shree Swamiji

and will be discussing with him to see if I can get him on the internet.

That would be a blessing.

>--

>

>In 3a - section 3.4 you seem to imply that brahman has a samanya and

>vishesha amsha. Am I reading this correct? brahman is nirguNa, it

>cannot have any visheshha amsha at all. When we say aananda, we should

>take it to mean that it transcends sukha and duHkha. Not that aananda

>is an attribute of brahman. In "I am samsarii" what remains is only "I

>am".

 

What you say is right - here from Adviata point Brahma JNaanam is not

different from 'aatma JNaanam' - aatma being a subject cannot be objectified

and any visheshhaNa belongs to objects. Here we are just looking at the

analogy of the adhyaasa - The way that is presented is that there is a

partial knowledge of myself right now - we all know we exist and we are

conscious, but we are all searching for happiness, without knowing we are

already that happiness. If we are already that happiness then why are we

searching -- only answer is that we donot know that we are that happiness

that we are searching. Hence there is ignorance of ourselves and that

ignorance part is related to the happiness part or bliss part - hence in the

sat, chit and ananda, the last part is covered - since ananda is the nature

of limitlessness or infiniteness - 'anantameva anandaH', and infiniteness is

the brahman state - in that sense as though a 'particular feature'- our

infinite nature - is covered from us by ignorance. That is aham brahma asmi

- the brahma aspect is covered. That is our day to day experience since we

are all searching for that freedom from the limitations. Shankara uses a

logical explanation to show that there is adhyaasa. 'I am' is not covered

where it refers to sat and chit aspect and 'brahman' part is covered. Yet

aham brahma asmi is not an objective knowledge - it is my own true nature or

status of mine. Hence what you say is right - what remains is only I am.

But in contrast to the current status of I am where only sat and chit are

involved , in the new I am - my understanding of I am is complete that

includes sat, chit and ananda aspects as well. Hence there is no more

search for happiness since now I have the full understanding of myself and

not partial understanding. Bhagavan Ramana puts this beautifully in his

Updesha Saara;

 

ahami naashabaagjyahamaham taya

spurati hRitswayam parama puurNasat.

 

When the 'i am' the little 'i' drops out in that place 'I AM, I AM, .."

swayam spurati - raises spontaneously in the heart or ones very core of

individuality and unlike the previous 'i am' this new ' I AM' is paramam,

supreme that is there is nothing beyond that, PuurNam, it is full or

infinite and Sat swaruupam, eternal, meaning that understanding will not

leave you any more. That is the ultimate.

 

Hence I am samsaaraii - the samsaaraii part is only the adhyaasa part and I

am part involves currently in complete understanding of myself. With the

inquiry of myself using the light of Vedanta, I learn that I am brahman -

that limitlessness. Limitlessness is unqualified since qualifications

belong to limiting things. It is only I am but this new status of myself as

'I AM' is paramam, puurNam in addition to sat chit swaruupam.

 

>Also one should note that, "I am" in "I am samsaari" has many levels

>of adhyaasa in it. When I say "I am fat", I mean that my body is fat.

>It means the I the jiiva, who now I identifies itself with this body,

>thinks that this body is fat. Even I the jiiva, is something really

>mixed up with mind, etc. What I am trying to say, is there are many

>levels of super-imposition one on another, built over a long period of

>time. They have to peeled away one by one. Then what remains is "is".

>brahman being nirguNa cannot say "I am such and such", the "I am" that

>says is not brahman but something else.

>

>Please correct me.

 

Yes - Shankara himself will clarify these aspects in his adhyaasa

bhaashhyam. Some of your questions will get clarified by the time we

complete the adhyaasa section. I am a jiiva is the basic adhyaasa and with

that jiiva-hood identification with body, mind and intellect occurs at

different levels - all can be dumped into a single unit as dehaatma buddhi -

where deha includes sthuula, sukshma and kaaraNa shariira. These levels of

superpositions - etc are all in a way trying to explain the nature of the

snake. Ultimately all are notions at the thought level constituting 'the

ego', constituting the part of antaH karaNa. Once we recognize that it is

error, then solution is to look for how to gain the true knowledge, which

can eliminate the error. Hence Vedanta vichaara for Brahma JNaanam.

>

>--

>Aside

>

>a) Also I request the readers to refer to the article "A vedanta

>toolkit" and the threads that followed on it. In that subhanu saxenaji

>has some points on adhyasa.

 

I have not see these. I will look in the article. We can request Shree

Saxenaji to provide his input on these notes - adding or subtracting and his

perspective - that will be beneficial.

>

>b) Is there a good book on brahma suutra like the one on giita by

>krishna warrier, which gives the sanskrit in a more readable form with

>an accurate translation?

 

It is difficult to read a book and understand - at least that is my

experience. I tried to follow a few but they always put me to sleep in no

time. Hence these notes in a form that I can understand and follow the

logic of the analysis.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

 

>Thank you.

>

>Sincerely,

>Ravi

>

>

_______________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

 

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.

[Guest guest]

>Thanks to Sadananda for a great series. Regarding adhyAsa of the

>nonSelf (anAtman) on the Self (Atman), I wish to make one point

>at this time and later write more on it. This point struck

>me as I glanced through the commentary of GovindAnanda and VAchaspati

>(bhAmatI) on the first few sentences of Shankara's bhAShya.

 

Thanks Anand - It may be a good idea to discuss all these aspects related

to adhyaasa before we enter into the suutra-s. I propose to take a break

(since I will be on travel anyway during the first two weeks of October)

and would give us enough time to catch up on this very important aspect of

Shankara Bhaashhya. We will be awaiting for your write-up.

 

It may be a very good idea if someone traslates the Shankara's original

text - Shree Ravi suggested Saxenaji and we can request him to do so.

>In the case of an illusion such as the snake on rope or silver

>in nacre, the illusion can be explained, analyzed, and shown to be

>possible due to some phenomena, physical/biological processes, etc.

>Even a magician makes use of illusions in his show to impress the

>audience. But then, the magician knows that each illusion that he

>creates can be analyzed, dissected step by step. When analyzed this

>way, the illusion ceases to amaze us. The illusion of the blue sky

>can be explained by scientists using physical processes. In school,

>we learnt how refraction of light causes things to appear bent.

>Many more examples can be given.

>

>Now consider the adhyAsa of the nonSelf and the Self. No such

>explanation can be given! The only thing we can say about this

>adhyAsa is that its cause cannot be analyzed! By analysis, we

>can explain how the illusory thing is a "transformation" of

>something else. But in the case of nonSelf and Self, we cannot

>come up with any transformation that happens to the nonSelf that

>makes it appear as the Self. Shankara says that this adhyAsa

>is mithyA (mithyeti bhavituM yuktam.h).

 

Very important point. Hence Shaastra pramaaNa is the only available

means. This aspect will be discussed in the next few notes.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

 

>Anand

>

 

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

All the postings on the 1st adhikarana of Brahmasutra have been

uploaded to: [8 files A to H]

 

advaitin/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/

 

 

Regards,

 

s.

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin , "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> Namaste Sunderji:

>

Please upload them by accessing:

>

> advaitin/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/

>

> After uploading we should inform the members that the notes are

> available for quick reference. Also Sadaji should include the site

> address:

advaitin/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/

> at the bottom of his postings.

>