Guest guest Posted January 31, 2001 Report Share Posted January 31, 2001 Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all the way up to my own teacher. vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .| shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h || Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source of purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree Chinmayaananda, to his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate. --------- samanvaya adhyaaya - I spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya paada- i janmaadi adhikaraNam 2 suutra 1 : janmaadyasya yataH | Now the conclusion of the Second suutra. First the technical presentation of this adhikaraNam : For this adhikaraNa vishhayaH : The subject matter is brahma lakshaNam , the definition of Brahman. sa.nshayaH : The doubt - Since we are asked to inquire into Brahman, who is Brahman or what is Brahman in order to begin the inquiry - Is Brahman defined, if so, what is the definition? These are the doubts. puurvapaksha : - There is no definition for Brahman and hence no inquiry can be done. This is because a definition has to be such that it has to be through a unique feature that identifies that object from the rest of the objects in the world. Otherwise it cannot be a valid definition. asaadhaaraNa dharmaH lakshaNam - Unique feature of object forms the definition. Since Vedantin says Brahman is featureless, puurvapakshii asks how featureless Brahman can have unique feature to have a definition that distinguishes Him from everything else. Upanishads in fact declare that Brahman is undefinable. yato vaacho nivartante apraapya manasaa saha - na tatra chakshur gachchhati na vaak gachchhati - Since scriptures themselves declare that Brahman cannot be defined, puurvapakshii says brahman lakshaNam naasti - there cannot a definition for Brahman. siddhaanta: brahma lakshaNam asti - there is a definition for Brahman. Even though Brahman is really featureless, we can define Brahman through superimposed features, adhyasta dharma satvaat , through mithyaa features. It is just like defining our rope as the substratum for our snake, even though the rope is snake-less. Similarly through the superimposed jagat or the world, Brahman can be defined as jagat kaaraNam, even though Brahman is beyond kaaraNa -kaarya sambandha , cause-effect relationship. Hence lakshaNam asti is the siddhaanta. sa~Ngati : This concerns the connection between this and the previous topic. The previous topic relates to the fact that one should inquire into the Brahman. The connection between this and the previous topic technically is called ' aakshepa sa~NgatiH '. It means the first topic leads to an objection, which is answered in this second topic. Since Brahman inquiry is required and without proving the existence of the Brahman one cannot do such an inquiry and to prove the existence we need - lakshaNa and pramaaNa . Hence to prove the existence of Brahman the second suutra fulfils the lakshaNa requirement. That ends the technical part of the format. Some additional important points will be considered now: 1. It was mentioned before that the suutra - janmaad yasya yataH primarily refers to taTastha lakshaNam rather than swaruupa lakshaNam. In the same upanishhad, where the statement - yato vaa imaani bhuutani jaayante .... which forms the vishhaya vaakyam for this suutra, there is also a statement that can provide the swaruupa lakshaNam for Brahman - satyam j~naanam anantam brahman. A question can be raised as to why Vyasacharya choose taTastha lakshaNa for the definition of Brahman in this suutra rather than swaruupa lakshaNam since both are available in the same upanishhad. The answer lies in the fact that in the case of Brahman, it is easier to understand Brahman initially through the taTastha lakshaNam than swaruupa lakshaNam. The reason is that in the taTastha lakshaNam we are using an external features which are easily available and perceptible and which are known to every one. Thus one transcends from the known to the unknown. When we use swaruupa lakshaNam , satyam j~naanam anantam , the very intrinsic feature of satyam (pure existence) or j~naanam ( nirvisheshha chaitanyam , objectless consciousness) is not easily perceptible or available or known to the inquirer. It will be like defining one unknown thing using another unknown. Hence Vyasacharya chose taTastha lakshaNam for Brahman. 2. The suutra 2 provides the definition of Brahman primarily as the upaadaana kaaraNam or the material cause of the universe. In upanishhads the Brahman is often said to be the material cause of the universe. But at times we find maayaa or prakR^iti was presented as the material cause of the universe. maayaa.n tu prakR^itim viddhi maayinaa.n tu maheswaram - swetasvatara upanishhad - maaya is the prakR^iti, which is the material cause. In the Mahanarayana Upanishad there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: ajaam ekaa.n lohita shukla-kR^ishhNaaM bahvii.n prajaa.n janayantii saruupaam.h | ajo hyeko jushhaamaaNo.anusheto jahaatyenaa.n bhuktabhogaamajo.anyaH || This mantra is going to be elaborately analyzed later - for the time being it will suffice to know that it describes maayaa (unborn female) endowed with sattva , rajas and tamo guNa -s as the material cause. It is associated with two types of jiiva -s – one, the unrealized souls who are fascinated by her and are attached to her, and two, the realized souls who, having enjoyed her, reject her by getting detached from her. In Bhaagavat Giita (13-19) says: prakR^itiM purusham chaiva viddhyanaadii ubhaavapi | vikaaraa.nshcha guNaa.nshchaiva viddhi prakR^itisambhavaan.h || prakR^iti and purushha are the two beginningless principles and the creation has come out of prakR^iti. Thus sometimes the upanishhads say Brahman is the material cause and sometimes the prakR^iti as the material cause. Now of the two which is really the material cause. There is a big difference if one says Brahman or purushha is the material cause then the chetana vastu or conscious entity is pointed out as the cause. But if prakR^iti is the cause then it is achetana vastu or inert entity is pointed as the cause. Question boils down to ' chetanam kaaraNam vaa achetanam kaaraNam vaa ". Here Vyasacharya has chosen Brahman as the material cause and does not mention about the prakR^iti. This choice of Vyasacharya has got lot of significance. Because of this aspect only this suutra has a great significance. We will present here few arguments why Vyasacharya chose chetana brahman as the material cause for the world. 1. Vyasacharya wants to clearly distinguish Vedantic teaching from Sankhya philosophy. Emphasis of the distinction between the two was felt important for (a) Sankhya was prevalent at that time and (b) many of the words are common between the two philosophies. In Sankhya philosophy they use the word ' purushhaH ' meaning chaitanya aatma or conscious self. In vedanta also the word purushha is used extensively. Gita 13-19 the example above uses the word ' purushha '. In kaThopanishhad also - ' avyaktaat tu paraH purushhaH purushaanna param ki.nchit ' - The word prakR^riti is also used in Sankhya and Vedanta as triguNaatmika achetana vastu , unconscious matter has three guNa -s. More than that the very word Sankhya is used to indicate Vedantic teaching. In Bhagavatam the Sankhya teaching is given by Kapila who is incarnate of the Lord Vishnu to his mother, Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is different from Vedanta. To provide distinction between the two, Vyasacharya chose the particular suutra. Sankhya philosophy says achetana prakR^iti is the material cause of the universe. Vyasacharya uses this as a key suutra to differentiate Vedanta from Sankhya philosophy by stating clearly that chetana brahman is the material cause of the universe. 2. In all the systems of philosophy the fundamental question is about the material cause of the universe. From where did the universe come? Even science is trying to address this issue either in terms of the Unified Principle or some Big Bang Theory. Almost all philosophies arrived at achetana tattvam as the basic material cause for the universe. For example, for Sankhya and Yoga philosophies, achetana prakR^iti is the basic material cause. Nyaaya and Vaisheshika claim that atoms or paramaaNu as the basic material cause. They are called paramaaNu vaadaH , may be close to modern science. paramaaNu -s join together under appropriate conditions to form grosser and grosser matter leading to the formation of jagat or the universe. paramaaNu -s are also achetanam and hence their theory also falls under achetana kaaraNa vaadaH. Even the naastika systems of philosophies they to achetana kaaraNa vaada each with different names; pa~ncha skandha -s in Buddhism, astikaaya -s in Jainism etc. Modern science also assumes matter (or energy) alone is fundamental, no life at the time of Big Bang - particles or sub-atomic particles agglomerate to form bigger molecules and life (conscious entity) originated more recently out of matter that too accidentally when the conditions became conducive for it. Thus in most of the philosophies, consciousness is either existing parallel to the matter, or a product of matter. Even the Vedic philosophies such as - vishishhTaadvaita and dwaita to the theory that achetana and chetana padaartham existing parallel but independent of each other eternally. Interestingly in nyaaya vaisheshhika philosophies even aatmaa is considered as one of the nine types of matter. Consciousness is a property of aatmaa . Hence in principle almost all philosophies are achetana kaaraNa vaadaH , whereas advaita vedaanta stands out as the most unique philosophy which presents chetana kaaraNa vaadaH where the consciousness is the superior to matter as the primary cause or the universe of matter. ( vishishhTadvaita and dvaita vedanta -s differ from advaita in the sense that they achetana tattva , prakR^iti , as the material cause while chetana tattva , iishwara , as the instrumental cause. iishwara being all pervading He pervades the acetana tattva as well as the chetana jiiva -s - jiiva satyam , jagat satyam and paramaatma satyam . The first two are not independent but depend on paramaatmaa who pervades both, yet remaining separate). Uniqueness of the advaita vedaanta is its chetana kaaraNa vaadaH, consciousness is the very essence of the universe. That means it is the very substratum or content of the universe and there is no matter other than chaitanyam . Hence the second suutra presents, Brahman, chetana swaruuupa as the material cause. Through this suutra Vyasacharya distinguishes Vedanta from all other systems of philosophies not only Sankhya but also Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Bouddha, Jaina, Charvaka, etc. as well as modern science etc. 3. No doubt upanishhads point at some places Brahman as the material cause, at other places prakR^iti as the material cause. Vyasacharya as the basis for the very first chapter as samanvaya or consistency establishes starting with suutra 2 that upanishhads declare predominantly that Brahman is the material cause of the universe. This in fact may be considered as the essence of the first chapter of the Brahmasutras. 4. The question then arises how can upanishhads teaching contradict itself by declaring at one side Brahman as the material cause and other places prakR^iti is the material cause. Actually there is no contradiction. According to upanishhads, prakR^iti does exist independent of purusha (it is a-swatantram or para-tantram and not swa-tantram ). Since maayaa is non-separate from brahman , whatever is attributed to maayaa or prakR^iti can be attributed to Brahman also. (As noted before in the context of creation we are using Brahman and Iswara are synonymous). Technically we say in Vedanta, prakR^iti is the pariNaamii upadaana kaaraNam but brahman is vivarta upaadaana kaaraNam . The definition of vivarta upaadana kaaraNam is that which lends its existence to the pariNaama kaaraNam , parinaamii upaadaana kaaraNa adhishhTaanam vivarta upaadaanam . Likewise the definition of achetana vastu is anyaadhiina satvam and anyaadhiina prakaashhatvam tat jadam - whose existence and illumination depends on the other (conscious) entity. In contrast, the definition of chetana vastu is swayam prakaashhatvam or swayam chaitanyatvam , self-existent and self-conscious entity. Hence there is no self-contradiction in the upanishhads since prakR^iti does not exist separate from purushha. In contrast in Sankhya philosophy prakR^iti is independent of purushha. This is the basic difference between the two philosophies. In Vedanta purushha and prakR^iti are inseparable like ardhanaariishwara, half shiva and half paarvatii together as one, or like naarayaNa with lakshmii always carrying her on his chest). Since prakR^iti is a-swatantram or dependent in Vedanta, hence at places where prakR^iti is mentioned as the material cause upanishhads ultimately imply only that Brahman is the material cause. This aspect Vyasacharya emphasizes in this suutra by declaring that Brahman is indeed the material cause. 5. In MunDaka and Chandogya one important topic is discussed and that relates to - eka vij~naanena sarva vij~naanam - by knowing one, one can know everything. This is possible because upaadaana kaaraNa vij~naanena sarva kaarya vij~naanam bhavati - by knowing one material cause all the products are known. This is because the products do not exist separate from its material cause just as bangle cannot exist separate from gold. And in the process, the upanishhads for gaining sarva vij~naanam teach the student the brahma j~naanam or the knowledge of Brahman. In Gita Krishna says: j~naanam te.aha.n savij~naanam idam vakshyaamyasheshhataH | yaj j~naatvaa neha bhuuyo.anyat j~naatavyam avashishhyate || I am going to teach you (Arjuna) brahmaj~naanam completely. Knowing this there will be nothing else left for you to know. If suppose prakR^iti is the material cause then knowing prakR^iti, sarva vij~naanam will not come. But if Brahman is the material cause then knowing Brahman, sarvavij~naanam will come. Since the first one does not result in sarva vij~naanam , it follows that Brahman has to be the material cause knowing which everything should be known. (when naarayaNa comes lakshmii also comes with Him, but if one goes after only Lakshmi alone one gets ruined just as it happened to raavaNa ). Hence brahma j~naanena sarva vij~naanaM bhavati is essential truth discussed both in Mundaka and Chandogya. This is possible only if Brahman is the material cause of the universe. This is indirectly implied by Vyasacharya by the emphasis of Brahman as the material cause of the universe in this suutra. Hence the second suutra is a very significant suutra which presents the chetana kaaraNa vaadaH , which is the uniqueness of the vedaanta shaastram. It is not there in any of the aastika as well as naastika darshanam -s and is unique to Vedanta, particularly to Advaita Vedanta. With this discussion of the second suutra is over. Next we take the third suutra that belongs to third adhikaraNa. Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ for personal study. Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2001 Report Share Posted February 1, 2001 Notes on BSB I-i-2-1ERevered Sadanandji POSTINGS ON BRAHMASUTRA I am (and I am sure most others who are getting this) are enjoying the excellent material you are presenting. It is a privilage to come across such a humble and scholarly personality producing such brilliant work. The interpretation of Vedanta by Acharyas Vyas and Shankracharya are excellent but there are some interesting facets to examine. Do we think that the interpretation by any acharya (however exalted) is exhaustive enough even to portray 1 pct of what Brahman is? Do we think that human psyche does not continue to evolve and is capable of becoming even more sharply focused in trying to come to terms with the question --"What is this all about?" Or is this faculty frozen in time? Do we think that only the acharyas of the past Golden age of Vedanta really understood, experienced and elaborated on this 'Brahman' vibrantly and their interpretation cannot be improved on? Made more contemporary and relvant to the findings of science of today? Does a person today need to know how Shankaracharya's interpretation was able to deal with the doubts and objections of the Purvapakshi or the Nyaya Vaishishika schools? Or is it more important to examine how the Vedantic teachings relate to the findings of 'highly rational reductionist scientists' of today. You have passed some comments about how 'science with its big bang theory is .....somehow achetanvad..' THIS IS NOT TRUE. Science of today is anything but 'achetanvaad'. of the old type (Nyaya Vaishishika or Newtonian physics). Hence Shankracharyas negation of 'parmanuvaad etc... are now not really that relevant. We need a 'Brahma jnani of today to take on the challenges of today (and science of today) and not of yesteryear. I have the highest regard for your scholarly abilities and have been reading your postings on the Brahmasutra with great interest and admiration. I felt that I should draw your attention to the "changed status of physics of today" and how it perhaps is far more spiritual in content than what most people realise. pranams jay Vivekananda Centre London - K. Sadananda advaitin ; ADVAITA-L ; SIDHAYE ; vsadanan ; Sohini.Paldey ; editor ; kuntimm ; Ketanskingdom ; pkrishna ; Manjari_Kuntimaddi ; kuntimaddi ; jay.lakhani ; asangaha ; raghavakaluri ; SimhaRao ; kskumar108 ; ramesh ; abdulla ; NARAINS ; btasagar ; NeilB3712 ; DPotti ; msadananda Wednesday, January 31, 2001 03:10 Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all the way up to my own teacher. vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .| shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h || Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source of purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree Chinmayaananda, to his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate. --------- samanvaya adhyaaya - I spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya paada- i janmaadi adhikaraNam 2 suutra 1 : janmaadyasya yataH | Now the conclusion of the Second suutra. First the technical presentation of this adhikaraNam : For this adhikaraNa vishhayaH : The subject matter is brahma lakshaNam , the definition of Brahman. sa.nshayaH : The doubt - Since we are asked to inquire into Brahman, who is Brahman or what is Brahman in order to begin the inquiry - Is Brahman defined, if so, what is the definition? These are the doubts. puurvapaksha : - There is no definition for Brahman and hence no inquiry can be done. This is because a definition has to be such that it has to be through a unique feature that identifies that object from the rest of the objects in the world. Otherwise it cannot be a valid definition. asaadhaaraNa dharmaH lakshaNam - Unique feature of object forms the definition. Since Vedantin says Brahman is featureless, puurvapakshii asks how featureless Brahman can have unique feature to have a definition that distinguishes Him from everything else. Upanishads in fact declare that Brahman is undefinable. yato vaacho nivartante apraapya manasaa saha - na tatra chakshur gachchhati na vaak gachchhati - Since scriptures themselves declare that Brahman cannot be defined, puurvapakshii says brahman lakshaNam naasti - there cannot a definition for Brahman. siddhaanta: brahma lakshaNam asti - there is a definition for Brahman. Even though Brahman is really featureless, we can define Brahman through superimposed features, adhyasta dharma satvaat , through mithyaa features. It is just like defining our rope as the substratum for our snake, even though the rope is snake-less. Similarly through the superimposed jagat or the world, Brahman can be defined as jagat kaaraNam, even though Brahman is beyond kaaraNa -kaarya sambandha , cause-effect relationship. Hence lakshaNam asti is the siddhaanta. sa~Ngati : This concerns the connection between this and the previous topic. The previous topic relates to the fact that one should inquire into the Brahman. The connection between this and the previous topic technically is called ' aakshepa sa~NgatiH '. It means the first topic leads to an objection, which is answered in this second topic. Since Brahman inquiry is required and without proving the existence of the Brahman one cannot do such an inquiry and to prove the existence we need - lakshaNa and pramaaNa . Hence to prove the existence of Brahman the second suutra fulfils the lakshaNa requirement. That ends the technical part of the format. Some additional important points will be considered now: 1. It was mentioned before that the suutra - janmaad yasya yataH primarily refers to taTastha lakshaNam rather than swaruupa lakshaNam. In the same upanishhad, where the statement - yato vaa imaani bhuutani jaayante .... which forms the vishhaya vaakyam for this suutra, there is also a statement that can provide the swaruupa lakshaNam for Brahman - satyam j~naanam anantam brahman. A question can be raised as to why Vyasacharya choose taTastha lakshaNa for the definition of Brahman in this suutra rather than swaruupa lakshaNam since both are available in the same upanishhad. The answer lies in the fact that in the case of Brahman, it is easier to understand Brahman initially through the taTastha lakshaNam than swaruupa lakshaNam. The reason is that in the taTastha lakshaNam we are using an external features which are easily available and perceptible and which are known to every one. Thus one transcends from the known to the unknown. When we use swaruupa lakshaNam , satyam j~naanam anantam , the very intrinsic feature of satyam (pure existence) or j~naanam ( nirvisheshha chaitanyam , objectless consciousness) is not easily perceptible or available or known to the inquirer. It will be like defining one unknown thing using another unknown. Hence Vyasacharya chose taTastha lakshaNam for Brahman. 2. The suutra 2 provides the definition of Brahman primarily as the upaadaana kaaraNam or the material cause of the universe. In upanishhads the Brahman is often said to be the material cause of the universe. But at times we find maayaa or prakR^iti was presented as the material cause of the universe. maayaa.n tu prakR^itim viddhi maayinaa.n tu maheswaram - swetasvatara upanishhad - maaya is the prakR^iti, which is the material cause. In the Mahanarayana Upanishad there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: ajaam ekaa.n lohita shukla-kR^ishhNaaM bahvii.n prajaa.n janayantii saruupaam.h | ajo hyeko jushhaamaaNo.anusheto jahaatyenaa.n bhuktabhogaamajo.anyaH || This mantra is going to be elaborately analyzed later - for the time being it will suffice to know that it describes maayaa (unborn female) endowed with sattva , rajas and tamo guNa -s as the material cause. It is associated with two types of jiiva -s - one, the unrealized souls who are fascinated by her and are attached to her, and two, the realized souls who, having enjoyed her, reject her by getting detached from her. In Bhaagavat Giita (13-19) says: prakR^itiM purusham chaiva viddhyanaadii ubhaavapi | vikaaraa.nshcha guNaa.nshchaiva viddhi prakR^itisambhavaan.h || prakR^iti and purushha are the two beginningless principles and the creation has come out of prakR^iti. Thus sometimes the upanishhads say Brahman is the material cause and sometimes the prakR^iti as the material cause. Now of the two which is really the material cause. There is a big difference if one says Brahman or purushha is the material cause then the chetana vastu or conscious entity is pointed out as the cause. But if prakR^iti is the cause then it is achetana vastu or inert entity is pointed as the cause. Question boils down to ' chetanam kaaraNam vaa achetanam kaaraNam vaa ". Here Vyasacharya has chosen Brahman as the material cause and does not mention about the prakR^iti. This choice of Vyasacharya has got lot of significance. Because of this aspect only this suutra has a great significance. We will present here few arguments why Vyasacharya chose chetana brahman as the material cause for the world. 1. Vyasacharya wants to clearly distinguish Vedantic teaching from Sankhya philosophy. Emphasis of the distinction between the two was felt important for (a) Sankhya was prevalent at that time and (b) many of the words are common between the two philosophies. In Sankhya philosophy they use the word ' purushhaH ' meaning chaitanya aatma or conscious self. In vedanta also the word purushha is used extensively. Gita 13-19 the example above uses the word ' purushha '. In kaThopanishhad also - ' avyaktaat tu paraH purushhaH purushaanna param ki.nchit ' - The word prakR^riti is also used in Sankhya and Vedanta as triguNaatmika achetana vastu , unconscious matter has three guNa -s. More than that the very word Sankhya is used to indicate Vedantic teaching. In Bhagavatam the Sankhya teaching is given by Kapila who is incarnate of the Lord Vishnu to his mother, Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is different from Vedanta. To provide distinction between the two, Vyasacharya chose the particular suutra. Sankhya philosophy says achetana prakR^iti is the material cause of the universe. Vyasacharya uses this as a key suutra to differentiate Vedanta from Sankhya philosophy by stating clearly that chetana brahman is the material cause of the universe. 2. In all the systems of philosophy the fundamental question is about the material cause of the universe. From where did the universe come? Even science is trying to address this issue either in terms of the Unified Principle or some Big Bang Theory. Almost all philosophies arrived at achetana tattvam as the basic material cause for the universe. For example, for Sankhya and Yoga philosophies, achetana prakR^iti is the basic material cause. Nyaaya and Vaisheshika claim that atoms or paramaaNu as the basic material cause. They are called paramaaNu vaadaH , may be close to modern science. paramaaNu -s join together under appropriate conditions to form grosser and grosser matter leading to the formation of jagat or the universe. paramaaNu -s are also achetanam and hence their theory also falls under achetana kaaraNa vaadaH. Even the naastika systems of philosophies they to achetana kaaraNa vaada each with different names; pa~ncha skandha -s in Buddhism, astikaaya -s in Jainism etc. Modern science also assumes matter (or energy) alone is fundamental, no life at the time of Big Bang - particles or sub-atomic particles agglomerate to form bigger molecules and life (conscious entity) originated more recently out of matter that too accidentally when the conditions became conducive for it. Thus in most of the philosophies, consciousness is either existing parallel to the matter, or a product of matter. Even the Vedic philosophies such as - vishishhTaadvaita and dwaita to the theory that achetana and chetana padaartham existing parallel but independent of each other eternally. Interestingly in nyaaya vaisheshhika philosophies even aatmaa is considered as one of the nine types of matter. Consciousness is a property of aatmaa . Hence in principle almost all philosophies are achetana kaaraNa vaadaH , whereas advaita vedaanta stands out as the most unique philosophy which presents chetana kaaraNa vaadaH where the consciousness is the superior to matter as the primary cause or the universe of matter. ( vishishhTadvaita and dvaita vedanta -s differ from advaita in the sense that they achetana tattva , prakR^iti , as the material cause while chetana tattva , iishwara , as the instrumental cause. iishwara being all pervading He pervades the acetana tattva as well as the chetana jiiva -s - jiiva satyam , jagat satyam and paramaatma satyam . The first two are not independent but depend on paramaatmaa who pervades both, yet remaining separate). Uniqueness of the advaita vedaanta is its chetana kaaraNa vaadaH, consciousness is the very essence of the universe. That means it is the very substratum or content of the universe and there is no matter other than chaitanyam . Hence the second suutra presents, Brahman, chetana swaruuupa as the material cause. Through this suutra Vyasacharya distinguishes Vedanta from all other systems of philosophies not only Sankhya but also Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Bouddha, Jaina, Charvaka, etc. as well as modern science etc. 3. No doubt upanishhads point at some places Brahman as the material cause, at other places prakR^iti as the material cause. Vyasacharya as the basis for the very first chapter as samanvaya or consistency establishes starting with suutra 2 that upanishhads declare predominantly that Brahman is the material cause of the universe. This in fact may be considered as the essence of the first chapter of the Brahmasutras. 4. The question then arises how can upanishhads teaching contradict itself by declaring at one side Brahman as the material cause and other places prakR^iti is the material cause. Actually there is no contradiction. According to upanishhads, prakR^iti does exist independent of purusha (it is a-swatantram or para-tantram and not swa-tantram ). Since maayaa is non-separate from brahman , whatever is attributed to maayaa or prakR^iti can be attributed to Brahman also. (As noted before in the context of creation we are using Brahman and Iswara are synonymous). Technically we say in Vedanta, prakR^iti is the pariNaamii upadaana kaaraNam but brahman is vivarta upaadaana kaaraNam . The definition of vivarta upaadana kaaraNam is that which lends its existence to the pariNaama kaaraNam , parinaamii upaadaana kaaraNa adhishhTaanam vivarta upaadaanam . Likewise the definition of achetana vastu is anyaadhiina satvam and anyaadhiina prakaashhatvam tat jadam - whose existence and illumination depends on the other (conscious) entity. In contrast, the definition of chetana vastu is swayam prakaashhatvam or swayam chaitanyatvam , self-existent and self-conscious entity. Hence there is no self-contradiction in the upanishhads since prakR^iti does not exist separate from purushha. In contrast in Sankhya philosophy prakR^iti is independent of purushha. This is the basic difference between the two philosophies. In Vedanta purushha and prakR^iti are inseparable like ardhanaariishwara, half shiva and half paarvatii together as one, or like naarayaNa with lakshmii always carrying her on his chest). Since prakR^iti is a-swatantram or dependent in Vedanta, hence at places where prakR^iti is mentioned as the material cause upanishhads ultimately imply only that Brahman is the material cause. This aspect Vyasacharya emphasizes in this suutra by declaring that Brahman is indeed the material cause. 5. In MunDaka and Chandogya one important topic is discussed and that relates to - eka vij~naanena sarva vij~naanam - by knowing one, one can know everything. This is possible because upaadaana kaaraNa vij~naanena sarva kaarya vij~naanam bhavati - by knowing one material cause all the products are known. This is because the products do not exist separate from its material cause just as bangle cannot exist separate from gold. And in the process, the upanishhads for gaining sarva vij~naanam teach the student the brahma j~naanam or the knowledge of Brahman. In Gita Krishna says: j~naanam te.aha.n savij~naanam idam vakshyaamyasheshhataH | yaj j~naatvaa neha bhuuyo.anyat j~naatavyam avashishhyate || I am going to teach you (Arjuna) brahmaj~naanam completely. Knowing this there will be nothing else left for you to know. If suppose prakR^iti is the material cause then knowing prakR^iti, sarva vij~naanam will not come. But if Brahman is the material cause then knowing Brahman, sarvavij~naanam will come. Since the first one does not result in sarva vij~naanam , it follows that Brahman has to be the material cause knowing which everything should be known. (when naarayaNa comes lakshmii also comes with Him, but if one goes after only Lakshmi alone one gets ruined just as it happened to raavaNa ). Hence brahma j~naanena sarva vij~naanaM bhavati is essential truth discussed both in Mundaka and Chandogya. This is possible only if Brahman is the material cause of the universe. This is indirectly implied by Vyasacharya by the emphasis of Brahman as the material cause of the universe in this suutra. Hence the second suutra is a very significant suutra which presents the chetana kaaraNa vaadaH , which is the uniqueness of the vedaanta shaastram. It is not there in any of the aastika as well as naastika darshanam -s and is unique to Vedanta, particularly to Advaita Vedanta. With this discussion of the second suutra is over. Next we take the third suutra that belongs to third adhikaraNa. Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ for personal study. Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2001 Report Share Posted February 1, 2001 Jay - thanks for your kind e-amil. I am sure you know answers to most the questions you have raised. Shravanam, mananam and nidhidhyaasanam are the established methods to follow for the purification of the mind and for contemplation. mananam involves churning of the mind to inquire into the nature of oneself or Brahman. Mind is involved and mind needs a field to inquire. Who am I - who am I - cannot just lead unless one has that maturity of the mind. Mind should be free from doubts - and all these analyses etc are there to make sure one clearly understands the nature of the goal and means. As stated in the very introduction - understanding of Brahmasuutra is not necessary for saadhana but it helps to consolidate ones understanding of the nature of the problem. For those who want to teach, Vedanta, I feel the study of Brahmasuutra is very helpful - because it raises lot of puurvapaksha's and siddhaata-s that help in the analysis of the problem. Anyway it is my opinion and as well as my teachers. One does not have to for that opinion. I think one should study at least once brahmasuutra with the help of a teacher to see the extent of analysis our achaarya-s have done to unravel the truth. It is said that one has three R^iNa-s or obligations - 1. pitR^i R^iNa, 2. achaarya R^iNa and 3. deva R^iNa. 1. pitR^i R^iNa is obligation to parents and fore-fathers who brought us up - It is family traditions and culture that one has inherited and is passed on to the next generation without spoiling their name. 2. achaarya R^iNa is the obligation to the teacher - what one has learned freely from his teacher, he has an obligation to pass on to others . That is how guruparampara is established. The study of the scriptures and passing it on to the next generation comes under this. The extent of logic and analyses that has been done our sages and saints are incredible and we do not have the scholarship even to study these - how can we we pass this on then to next generation? These are treasures that we have inherited and it becomes our obligation to hand it over to next. >Revered Sadanandji > >POSTINGS ON BRAHMASUTRA > >I am (and I am sure most others who are getting this) are enjoying >the excellent >material you are presenting. It is a privilage to come across such a humble >and scholarly personality producing such brilliant work. > >The interpretation of Vedanta by Acharyas Vyas and Shankracharya are >excellent but >there are some interesting facets to examine. > >Do we think that the interpretation by any acharya (however exalted) >is exhaustive enough even to portray 1 pct of what Brahman is? First we need to know what aachaarya's have discussed. These are only the tools to go beyond. Contemplation in the direction pointed out is what aachaarya's recommend - not just to become a scholar of what Shankara said or Ramanuja said. The study of their interpretations only help to resolve in onces mind the direction to follow. But if we do not study we will try to reinvent the wheel but without the scholarship or skills acquired. > >Do we think that human psyche does not continue to evolve >and is capable of becoming even more sharply focused in trying to >come to terms >with the question --"What is this all about?" Or is this faculty >frozen in time? > The analysis helps to focus the issue only. These are not intended to blindly follow that aachaarya's have said and accept on their face value. In science as you are aware we review the field before we venture into new theories. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. Even if one is capable of, it will be considered as stupidity at best. Faculty is never frozen but first we have to analyze what has been taught so far and then take it beyond. But lots of time people get bogged down and loose the objectivity required. This you find even in scientific research. To tell you a fact and not give the impression of boasting - There have been theories developed for the past 30 years so in fracture mechanics in fatigue area and there are close 3000 papers in the area. When I got involved six or seven years ago, I found the theories are fundamentally wrong. I am revamping the whole field but in the process fighting with everybody in the field. Only new generation of scientists are able to appreciate quickly but older generation most of them are glued to their concepts. They are in a situation now they cannot find fault with my theory nor accept it- millions of dollars are at stake since they loose funding if their sponsors find their theories are wrong. I am using their own data to disprove that they are wrong and that irritates them even more. Scientists are supposed to be objective but many of the peer reviews I receive do not reflect that. The point I am making is one has to be razor sharp to examine very objectively and for that understanding of prior analysis is essential. But I cannot forget the fact that understanding their theory only helped me to develop the new one. I thank them dearly for providing very good data for my analysis too. Any science grows or evolves - this include adhyaatmika science. - Since it is not objective science, we take time tested Veda-s as pramaaNa - and why it is so is also analyzed in the suutra-s. >Do we think that only the acharyas of the past Golden age of Vedanta >really understood, experienced and elaborated on this 'Brahman' >vibrantly and their interpretation cannot be improved on? Made >more contemporary and relvant to the findings of science of today? > Definitely not. One can improve and make it contemporary as one wants. But before one does one has to look into what has been done before and then build on that. There is no reason to repeat the past mistakes. This is accepted method of study. Before I study quantum model , I was taught, Rutherford model and Bore model etc although we know they are not correct. Yet we need to see the development of thought. >Does a person today need to know how Shankaracharya's interpretation >was able to deal with the doubts and objections of the Purvapakshi or the >Nyaya Vaishishika schools? Or is it more important to examine >how the Vedantic teachings relate to the findings of 'highly rational >reductionist scientists' of today. You have passed some comments about >how 'science with its big bang theory is .....somehow achetanvad..' >THIS IS NOT TRUE. Science of today is anything but 'achetanvaad'. >of the old type (Nyaya Vaishishika or Newtonian physics). Hence >Shankracharyas negation of 'parmanuvaad etc... are now not really that >relevant. We need a 'Brahma jnani of today to take on the challenges >of today (and science of today) and not of yesteryear. Jay - be my guest. I am not sure science as of today s to consciousness independent of matter. As my knowledge goes the life is understood as accidently formed when the environment is conducive - I am not sure any later theories for the origin or life. I do not think in the big bang model - consciousness was assumed to be there or life existed at that time. Correct me if I am wrong. We have lot of physicists in the group - perhaps they can address the issue. To analyze the problem in the way you want - we need not only Brahma j~naani but also shaastra j~naani too. >I have the highest regard for your scholarly abilities and have been >reading your postings on the Brahmasutra with great interest and admiration. >I felt that I should draw your attention to the "changed status of physics >of today" and how it perhaps is far more spiritual in content than what >most people realise. While I thank you for your kind comments. I cannot take any credits for it. The teachings belong to Shree Paramaarthanandaji and I am sure if you ask him he will pass the credit to his teacher etc. Hence I titled as notes on BSB. The complete notes will be passed on to Shree Swamiji if he want to publish it for the benefit of others. Jay - I am taking the liberty to post this to list so that they can also get benefit from these discussions. Pranaams to you too. Sadananda > >pranams >jay >Vivekananda Centre London > > -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2001 Report Share Posted February 1, 2001 namaste. I have followed with interest shri Vivekanandacentre's and shri Sadananda's views re the relevancy to the modern times or otherwise of the analysis of brahmasUtra and other vedantic subjects. The difficulty in both the question and the answer, as I see, is the vedanta was treated - as an intellectual science. Yes, there is technological and scientific progress and man knows much more about matter now than what our ancestors knew. Based on this, Vivekanandacentre asks "Do we think that only the acharyas of the past Golden age of Vedanta really understood, experienced and elaborated on this 'Brahman' vibrantly and their interpretation cannot be improved on? Made more contemporary and relvant to the findings of science of today?" The answer to that from my perspective is yes, vedanta and its analysis is as relevant today as well as at shri shankara's time. shri shankara's analysis of brahmasUtrAs and the upanishads and what the sages saw in the upanishads is complete. There is nothing that need to be added to it. If we understand it, we will also be complete. So, rather than treating It as a scientific investigation, it should be viewed as analysis of the SELF, AtmavidyA. SELF includes everything, including the science of modern or ancient times. When the SELF is known, everything is known. Once everything is known, there is nothing else to know. Thus the modern scientists cannot improve on the knowledge of the seers of the upanishads, because the ancient sages had known the SELF. Modern science deals with details tinkering on the outside while AtmavidyA deals with the deepest part of the Self. It is this deepest part of the Self that includes the whole jagat, the universe. If we have a feel for that deepest part of the Self, we have known the universe. I respect the modern scientists and their endeavours. However, upanishadic seers and the Knowers of the SELF are in a class by themselves. Regards Gummuluru Murthy - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2001 Report Share Posted February 2, 2001 Hello, Could you gives us more information on the Mahanarayana Upanishads. You quote this book, and I had not hear or read about it. Is it a minor Upanishad? Regards, ztierra On Wed, 31 January 2001, "K. Sadananda" wrote: > > Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E > > sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | > asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || > > I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who > is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all > the way up to my own teacher. > ........ > .. > In the Mahanarayana Upanishad > there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: > > Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is > different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is > different from Vedanta. > > Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at > advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ > for personal study. > > Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. > -- > K. Sadananda > Code 6323 > Naval Research Laboratory > Washington D.C. 20375 > Voice (202)767-2117 > Fax:(202)767-2623 > ____ 123India.com - India's Premier Portal Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2001 Report Share Posted February 2, 2001 Hello, Could you gives us more information on the Mahanarayana Upanishads. You quote this book, and I had not hear or read about it. Is it a minor Upanishad? Regards, ztierra On Wed, 31 January 2001, "K. Sadananda" wrote: > > Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E > > sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | > asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || > > I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who > is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all > the way up to my own teacher. > ........ > .. > In the Mahanarayana Upanishad > there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: > > Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is > different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is > different from Vedanta. > > Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at > advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ > for personal study. > > Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. > -- > K. Sadananda > Code 6323 > Naval Research Laboratory > Washington D.C. 20375 > Voice (202)767-2117 > Fax:(202)767-2623 > ____ 123India.com - India's Premier Portal Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2001 Report Share Posted February 3, 2001 ztierra wrote: > Hello, > > Could you gives us more information on the Mahanarayana Upanishads. You quote this book, and I had not hear or read about it. Is it a minor Upanishad? Yes. MahaanaaraayaNa Upanishhat is one of the 108 upanishhads. I believe it is also known as yaajnikii upanishhat and occurs in the taittiriiya araNyaka of kR^ishhNa yajurveda. This mantra also occurs at 4.5 of the shvetaashvatara upanishhat. There is a slight difference between the two versions, but the meaning is essentially the same in both cases. --- V.M.Sundaram > > Regards, > ztierra > > > On Wed, 31 January 2001, "K. Sadananda" wrote: > > > > > Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E > > > > sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | > > asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || > > > > I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who > > is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all > > the way up to my own teacher. > > > ....... > > > > . > > > In the Mahanarayana Upanishad > > there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: > > > > > Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is > > different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is > > different from Vedanta. > > > > > Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at > > advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ > > for personal study. > > > > Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. > > -- > > K. Sadananda > > Code 6323 > > Naval Research Laboratory > > Washington D.C. 20375 > > Voice (202)767-2117 > > Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > ____ > 123India.com - India's Premier Portal > Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server > For details, visit: /local/news.html > Post message: advaitin > Subscribe: advaitin- > Un: advaitin > URL to Advaitin: advaitin > File folder: advaitin > Link Folder: advaitin/links > Messages Folder: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2001 Report Share Posted February 4, 2001 Namaste, The Mahanarayana Upanishad is on line, [along with 108] at URL: http://sanskrit.bhaarat.com/Doc_Project/doc_upanishhat/doc_upanishhat. html The Upanishad is also available as a separate book, with snaskrit and english translations by Sw. Vimalananda, publ. by Ramakkrishna Math, 2nd. ed. 1968. The introduction has a fairly lengthy section describing it. This upanishad has a number of Gayatri -s, as well as the trisuparaNa mantra chanted during initiation into Sanyas [virajaa homa]. Regards, s. advaitin, "V.M.Sundaram" <venkataraman@p...> wrote: > > > ztierra@1... wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Could you gives us more information on the Mahanarayana Upanishads. You quote this book, and I had not hear or read about it. Is it a minor Upanishad? > > Yes. MahaanaaraayaNa Upanishhat is one of the 108 upanishhads. I believe it is also known as yaajnikii upanishhat and occurs in the taittiriiya araNyaka > of kR^ishhNa yajurveda. > > This mantra also occurs at 4.5 of the shvetaashvatara upanishhat. There is a slight difference between the two versions, but the meaning is > essentially the same in both cases. > > --- V.M.Sundaram > > > > > Regards, > > ztierra@1... > > > > > > > On Wed, 31 January 2001, "K. Sadananda" wrote: > > > > > > > > Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E > > > > > > sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | > > > asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || > > > > > > I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who > > > is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all > > > the way up to my own teacher. > > > > > ....... > > > > > > > . > > > > > In the Mahanarayana Upanishad > > > there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: > > > > > > > > Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is > > > different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is > > > different from Vedanta. > > > > > > > > Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at > > > advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ > > > for personal study. > > > > > > Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. > > > -- > > > K. Sadananda > > > Code 6323 > > > Naval Research Laboratory > > > Washington D.C. 20375 > > > Voice (202)767-2117 > > > Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > > > > ____ > > 123India.com - India's Premier Portal > > Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com > > > > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > > Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server > > For details, visit: /local/news.html > > Post message: advaitin > > Subscribe: advaitin- > > Un: advaitin- > > URL to Advaitin: advaitin > > File folder: advaitin > > Link Folder: advaitin/links > > Messages Folder: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2001 Report Share Posted February 4, 2001 Namaste, The URL got truncated on two lines, and the link will not work. Pl. type html at the end in the URL address bar or copy & paste the URL, which will appear on one line in the address bar. Regards, s. advaitin, sunderh@h... wrote: > Namaste, > > The Mahanarayana Upanishad is on line, [along with 108] at URL: > > http://sanskrit.bhaarat.com/Doc_Project/doc_upanishhat/doc_upanishhat. > html > > The Upanishad is also available as a separate book, with snaskrit and > english translations by Sw. Vimalananda, publ. by Ramakkrishna Math, > 2nd. ed. 1968. > > The introduction has a fairly lengthy section describing it. > > This upanishad has a number of Gayatri -s, as well as the trisuparaNa > mantra chanted during initiation into Sanyas [virajaa homa]. > > Regards, > > s. > > > advaitin, "V.M.Sundaram" <venkataraman@p...> wrote: > > > > > > ztierra@1... wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > Could you gives us more information on the Mahanarayana > Upanishads. You quote this book, and I had not hear or read about it. > Is it a minor Upanishad? > > > > Yes. MahaanaaraayaNa Upanishhat is one of the 108 upanishhads. I > believe it is also known as yaajnikii upanishhat and occurs in the > taittiriiya araNyaka > > of kR^ishhNa yajurveda. > > > > This mantra also occurs at 4.5 of the shvetaashvatara > upanishhat. There is a slight difference between the two versions, > but the meaning is > > essentially the same in both cases. > > > > --- V.M.Sundaram > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > ztierra@1... > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 31 January 2001, "K. Sadananda" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E > > > > > > > > sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | > > > > asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || > > > > > > > > I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva > who > > > > is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle > and all > > > > the way up to my own teacher. > > > > > > > ....... > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > In the Mahanarayana Upanishad > > > > there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: > > > > > > > > > > > Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is > > > > different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is > > > > different from Vedanta. > > > > > > > > > > > Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be > accessed at > > > > > advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ > > > > for personal study. > > > > > > > > Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. > > > > -- > > > > K. Sadananda > > > > Code 6323 > > > > Naval Research Laboratory > > > > Washington D.C. 20375 > > > > Voice (202)767-2117 > > > > Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > > > > > > > ____ > > > 123India.com - India's Premier Portal > > > Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com > > > > > > > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of > nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > > > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > > > Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server > > > For details, visit: /local/news.html > > > Post message: advaitin > > > Subscribe: advaitin- > > > Un: advaitin- > > > URL to Advaitin: advaitin > > > File folder: advaitin > > > Link Folder: advaitin/links > > > Messages Folder: advaitin/messages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2001 Report Share Posted February 9, 2001 Dear members, I am new to the list. I am generally intrested in Vedic Culture and Advaitin is new to me, yet enlightning. Thanks for your response and for kindly providing links to the Upanishads. Thanks again, ztierra On Sat, 03 February 2001, "V.M.Sundaram" wrote: > > ztierra wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Could you gives us more information on the Mahanarayana Upanishads. You quote this book, and I had not hear or read about it. Is it a minor Upanishad? > > Yes. MahaanaaraayaNa Upanishhat is one of the 108 upanishhads. I believe it is also known as yaajnikii upanishhat and occurs in the taittiriiya araNyaka > of kR^ishhNa yajurveda. > > This mantra also occurs at 4.5 of the shvetaashvatara upanishhat. There is a slight difference between the two versions, but the meaning is > essentially the same in both cases. > > --- V.M.Sundaram > > > > > Regards, > > ztierra > > > > > > > On Wed, 31 January 2001, "K. Sadananda" wrote: > > > > > > > > Notes on BSB I-i-2-1E > > > > > > sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h | > > > asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h || > > > > > > I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who > > > is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all > > > the way up to my own teacher. > > > > > ....... > > > > > > > . > > > > > In the Mahanarayana Upanishad > > > there is a famous sloka (12-5) that says: > > > > > > > > Devabhuti. Sankhya philosophy is also expounded by Kapila who is > > > different from Bhagavatam Kapila and this Sankhya philosophy is > > > different from Vedanta. > > > > > > > > Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at > > > advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ > > > for personal study. > > > > > > Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected. > > > -- > > > K. Sadananda > > > Code 6323 > > > Naval Research Laboratory > > > Washington D.C. 20375 > > > Voice (202)767-2117 > > > Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > > > > ____ > > 123India.com - India's Premier Portal > > Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com > > > > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > > Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server > > For details, visit: /local/news.html > > Post message: advaitin > > Subscribe: advaitin- > > Un: advaitin > > URL to Advaitin: advaitin > > File folder: advaitin > > Link Folder: advaitin/links > > Messages Folder: advaitin/messages > > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server > For details, visit: /local/news.html > Post message: advaitin > Subscribe: advaitin- > Un: advaitin > URL to Advaitin: advaitin > File folder: advaitin > Link Folder: advaitin/links > Messages Folder: advaitin/messages ____ 123India.com - India's Premier Portal Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.