Guest guest Posted July 21, 2001 Report Share Posted July 21, 2001 ------------------ advaitin wrote: To:advaitin advaitin Date:21 Jul 2001 07:33:22 -0000 Digest Number 1034 Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages ------ There are 19 messages in this issue. Topics in this digest: 1. AW: Re: Hindu Names and meanings "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava 2. Re: Intro to Advaitha. "K. Sadananda" <sada 3. Re: Hindu Names and meanings sunderh 4. Re: Hindu Names and meanings "Ram Chandran" <rchandran 5. Shankar's web pages umbada 6. Thank You "Ranjani Narayanan" <ranjanin 7. AW: Shankar's web pages "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava 8. Apology; Re: I had a dream in 1970 egodust 9. Vivekachudamani Notes Krishna Prasad <rkrishp99 10. Re: Intro to Advaitha. "sidha" <sidha 11. Re: jnAnam, moksha "sidha" <sidha 12. Re: jnAnam, moksha "sidha" <sidha 13. Re: Re: Hindu Names and meanings "sidha" <sidha 14. Apology; Re: I had a dream in 1970 sunderh 15. Re: Intro to Advaitha. Anand Natarajan <harihara.geo 16. Article sent from The Hindu thehindu 17. Re: jnAnam, moksha "R. Viswanathan" <drvis 18. Re: jnAnam, moksha "R. Viswanathan" <drvis 19. Re: Intro to Advaitha. "R. Viswanathan" <drvis ______________________ ______________________ Message: 1 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:32:19 +0200 "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava AW: Re: Hindu Names and meanings Dear Ramji, Hari Om! The sites you have pointed out are commercial. Besides, they do not really give out the meaning of any name. Instead, what they are doing is attributing some qualities to that name and commercializing them! I wonder what made them arrive to certain personality conclusions just by the first name. I personally belive these are not good sites to search for a good name. There is a book called "Puranic Encyclopedia" where they have compiled more than 200000 names and their *real* meanings, and the characters of puranic people who lived by assuming those names. Unfortunately, I can't find the reference on the Internet. However, there is another book which I personally have a copy with me. It is really of great help and there are lots of names in it. It is available from Amazon. It is really a good book. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140128417/qid=995617925/sr=1-1/ref=s c_b_1/102-2016288-1169717 Penguin Book of Hindu Names by Maneka Gandhi Regards, Madhava -- Madhava K Turumella IT Manager FORSA gmbH Max-Beer-Str.2 10119 Berlin Germany Telephone: +49-30-628 82-433 (Office Direct) Telephone: +49-1-7254-72-0-72 (Mobile) Telefax: +49-30-628 82 444 email: madhava -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: Ram Chandran [rchandran] Gesendet: Thursday, July 19, 2001 5:24 PM An: advaitin Betreff: Re: Hindu Names and meanings Hari Om! Sanskrit baby names are available in the Internet: Male and Female Names are respectively at the following two Sites: http://www.kabalarians.com/male/sanskr-m.htm http://www.kabalarians.com/female/sanskr-f.htm You can get the meanings by accessing the on-line Sanskrit Dictionary. regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "sidha" <sidha@d...> wrote: > I would like to enquire if there is a web site which has compiled > hindu names and meanings (male and female). > > Regards, Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Your use of is subject to ______________________ ______________________ Message: 2 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 06:39:44 -0400 "K. Sadananda" <sada Re: Intro to Advaitha. >Om Nama Shivaya > >Dear Friends: > >My introduction into the advaitha philosophy started one day with a >discussion I had with a relative of mine. Till then, I knew that my >family adhered to the advaitha way. But I did not understand its >meaning. But in that discussion, I got this brief preliminary >understanding of advaitha. > >I was told that an atma takes birth with a goal of not letting the >worldly experiences get recorded in it. By not allowing these >worldly experiences get recorded, the atma can successfully become >one with the Paramatma. But in most cases, the worldly experiences >creep in and start recording themselves into the atma. The atma gets >so immersed in the worldly experiences that it is unable to break >free, to reach Paramatma. At the end, when the time comes for the >atma to leave the body in which it has been residing for this period >of journey, the atma has not fulfilled its purpose of life itself - >to attain mukthi. So what happens? The cycle begins all over again. >Rebirth takes place. The atma comes back into this world, trying to >achieve its purpose. Ranjani - Greetings! Welcome to the Vedantic inquiry. Your questions are very fundamental. My suggestion to you and others who think there are beginners, is to study the first three chapters of the notes on Brahmasuutra that is available in the archives, particularly Ch. III that discusses the adhyaasa or error of superimposition. That explains most of your questions. The rest of the chapters are mostly an elaboration of this. Shree Dennis Waite also has provided an abridged version of this notes, removing the Sanskrit terms involved. This can also downloaded from archives of advaitin. Vedanta recognizes that individual is not a bundle of matter, which is inert or jadam. One can call it as soul or the very life principle, the presence of which make the matter enliven. Science cannot identify what that life principle is since the tools available for inquiry - which are called pramaaNa - are not subtle enough to zero-in on the subject of inquiry namely the aatma or soul or the very life principle. All that a doctor can say that is one is alive or not by its expression through the matter - whether he is breathing or heart functioning etc. But what tickles the heart to function is not known. Logically (which in Vedanta is called anumaana pramaaNa) one can not establish the aatma either since logic ultimately rests on the perceptions as the proof of logic and since one cannot percieve aatama, logically also one can not establish. Only Shabda pramaana or shaastra pramaaNa is the valid means for knowing aatma. Yet we all feel without even knowing shaastra that we are not matter and we are different from matter. If one dies we call - mar gayaa - dead and gone - that is matter is left behind and he has gone - he being separate from matter. Where does he go? where did he come from? why did he come from where he was? How did it all started? and what is the very purpose of this life cycles? - These are fundamental questions and one need to learn from Shaastra-s since as stated above, the answers cannot be deduced by experimentation or logical analysis. Your questions cover the entire Vedanta. The answers are very methodically provided for the seekers by Vedanta. These need to be studies under the guidance of a proper teacher - This advaitin list provides many vehicles through discussions and personal study answers to many of your questions. We learn from one another through discussions and this has been a time-honored method that is recommended from the days of the yore. Hence my advise for you is to study the notes carefully and methodically until the concepts are clear. Information about the notes is provided below. God bless you in your studies. Hari Om! Sadananda Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at <advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/>http://grou\ ps.advaitinNotes+on+Brahmasuutra/ for personal study. > >I have some questions at this point. Why, in the first place, does >the atma have to go through this journey till it realises the >Paramatma? We say that the atma started from the Paramatma. Why >start at all? It was with the Paramatma in the first place. Why >should each and every single unit of the Paramatma, otherwise known >as the atma, go through this exercise of birth and rebirth to >acchieve Mukti? > >I really feel very ignorant about this. I humbly request you all, >dear friends, to help me understand this. > >Humble Pranams. >Ranjani > >_ -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 ______________________ ______________________ Message: 3 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:34:41 -0000 sunderh Re: Hindu Names and meanings Namaste, You must be referring to Puranic Encyclopedia by Vetta Mani [922 pages, $80[ avilable from Vedanta Press [1-800-816-2242]. There is also one by Integral Yoga Institute, [Yogaville, Virginia], with good descriptions, meanings, cross references. Regards, s. advaitin, "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava@f...> wrote: > Dear Ramji, > > Hari Om! The sites you have pointed out are commercial. Besides, they do > not really give out the meaning of any name. ______________________ ______________________ Message: 4 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:39:36 -0000 "Ram Chandran" <rchandran Re: Hindu Names and meanings Hari Om Madhavaji: Namaste, You have raised some valid points regarding the choice of names using the Internet Sites or books. I agree with your contention and those who look for good names for their babies can find them if they read and research Ramayana, Mahabharat and major puranas. Vishnu Sahasranamam, Lalitha Sahasranamam, puja and bhajan book. A recent article written by Swami Atmanandaji on 'Role Model' contains many insights on naming the babies. This may explain why our parents and grand parents have mostly chosen the names of the Gods, semigods and the good characters of Puranas and Ithicasas. When the children know the meaning of their names and their respective roles, they are likely to imitate. This is why we have plenty of names such Ram, Krishna, Madhava, Govinda, Kesava, Shiva, Shankara, Kartikeya, Ganesa, Arjun, Lakshmana, Bharat, Lakshimi, Saraswati, Paravati and others. We seldom see the names such as Ravana, Dhroyadhana, Kamsa, etc. as Hindu names because parents want to avoid those characters that represent evil. Here is a noncommercial Hindu Site with baby names: http://www.hindunet.org/baby_names/ Once again, be careful in your selection of the names and please double check with a Sanskrit scholar and/or other elders and make sure for their appropriateness. Finally, two names can be carefully combined (eg. ramkrishna, gopalkrishna, shivsankar, etc.) for creating additional names. regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava@f...> wrote: > Dear Ramji, > > Hari Om! The sites you have pointed out are commercial. Besides, they do > not really give out the meaning of any name. Instead, what they are doing > is attributing some qualities to that name and commercializing them! I > wonder what made them arrive to certain personality conclusions just by the > first name. ______________________ ______________________ Message: 5 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:22:56 -0300 umbada Shankar's web pages Shankar's web pages have been updated: http://www.nonduality.com/1126sh.htm http://www.nonduality.com/shankar1.htm I am also preparing-for-web-publication further translations by Shankar of his Guru's writings. Jerry Katz ______________________ ______________________ Message: 6 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 07:54:52 -0700 "Ranjani Narayanan" <ranjanin Thank You Om Nama Shivaya. Thank you very much Sri Sadananda, for your links to the basic texts. I will study them first and I am sure that all the new comers will benefit greatly from this. Also, thanks to Sri Shreekant and Sri Varma for your imputs. Thank you very much, friends. Humble Pranams. Ranjani _________________________ Visit http://www.visto.com. Find out how companies are linking mobile users to the enterprise with Visto. ______________________ ______________________ Message: 7 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:05:52 +0200 "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava AW: Shankar's web pages Dear Shankarji, Heart felt thank you for your beautiful work. I know what a relentless spiritual worker you are! You are really blessed to be at the service of Lord. Jerryji: Thank you for keeping such wonderful information on your website. All the best. Yours, Madhava -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: umbada [umbada] Gesendet: Friday, July 20, 2001 4:23 PM An: nds; hs; iam; allspirit; advaitin Betreff: Shankar's web pages Shankar's web pages have been updated: http://www.nonduality.com/1126sh.htm http://www.nonduality.com/shankar1.htm I am also preparing-for-web-publication further translations by Shankar of his Guru's writings. Jerry Katz Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Your use of is subject to ______________________ ______________________ Message: 8 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:13:55 -0000 egodust Apology; Re: I had a dream in 1970 hariH OM! sunderji- namaste. i saw this guy (sw beyondananda) on tv i recall in the early 70's, and concluded he was "nuts," in a harmless kind of way..nevertheless, absurd i thought then. how wrong we can be sometimes, huh? wow. a good lesson for me re judgments on others.. or, judgments period! peace.love.peace frank ___________________ sunder wrote: > > Guidelines for Enlightenment > by Swami Beyondananda ______________________ ______________________ Message: 9 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 14:56:10 -0700 (PDT) Krishna Prasad <rkrishp99 Vivekachudamani Notes Hari OM! Narayana Smrithis, Blessed Ramchandraji & Sadanandaji, Can I write some notes on the book Vivekachudamani, in this mail group for the benefit of all of us. Like Atma Bodh is done by Vivekanand Ganesan. With Prem & OM! Krishna Prasad --- Ram Chandran <rchandran wrote: > Hari Om Madhavaji: > > Namaste, > > You have raised some valid points regarding the choice of names > using > the Internet Sites or books. I agree with your contention and those > > who look for good names for their babies can find them if they read > > and research Ramayana, Mahabharat and major puranas. Vishnu > Sahasranamam, Lalitha Sahasranamam, puja and bhajan book. > > A recent article written by Swami Atmanandaji on 'Role Model' > contains > many insights on naming the babies. This may explain why our > parents > and grand parents have mostly chosen the names of the Gods, > semigods > and the good characters of Puranas and Ithicasas. When the children > > know the meaning of their names and their respective roles, they > are > likely to imitate. This is why we have plenty of names such Ram, > Krishna, Madhava, Govinda, Kesava, Shiva, Shankara, Kartikeya, > Ganesa, Arjun, Lakshmana, Bharat, Lakshimi, Saraswati, Paravati and > > others. We seldom see the names such as Ravana, Dhroyadhana, Kamsa, > > etc. as Hindu names because parents want to avoid those characters > that represent evil. > > Here is a noncommercial Hindu Site with baby names: > http://www.hindunet.org/baby_names/ > Once again, be careful in your selection of the names and please > double check with a Sanskrit scholar and/or other elders and make > sure > for their appropriateness. Finally, two names can be carefully > combined (eg. ramkrishna, gopalkrishna, shivsankar, etc.) for > creating > additional names. > > regards, > > Ram Chandran > > > advaitin, "Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava@f...> wrote: > > Dear Ramji, > > > > Hari Om! The sites you have pointed out are commercial. > Besides, > they do > > not really give out the meaning of any name. Instead, what they > are > doing > > is attributing some qualities to that name and commercializing > them! > I > > wonder what made them arrive to certain personality conclusions > just > by the > > first name. > > Get personalized email addresses from Mail http://personal.mail./ ______________________ ______________________ Message: 10 Sat, 21 Jul 2001 04:38:34 +0530 "sidha" <sidha Re: Intro to Advaitha. Dear Ranjani Ji, >>>>>I have some questions at this point. Why, in the first place, does the atma have to go through this journey till it realises the Paramatma? We say that the atma started from the Paramatma. Why start at all? It was with the Paramatma in the first place. Why should each and every single unit of the Paramatma, otherwise known as the atma, go through this exercise of birth and rebirth to acchieve Mukti? I totally agree with Respected Sadananda Ji's statements about your questions. To me it seems, the answer to these problems can only be provided from the point of view of Ajativada of Gaudapadacharya (the grand master of Shankara). na nirodho no chotpattirna baddho na ca sadhakah. The fact is that neither this world was born, neither any Jivatman, neither there is any sadhaka nor there is any bondage nor there is any moksha. Everything is just a game of ignorance. Its like the game of a magician. We are dispelled by the magical contents. ______________________ ______________________ Message: 11 Sat, 21 Jul 2001 04:02:53 +0530 "sidha" <sidha Re: jnAnam, moksha Respected Sadananda Ji, >>>>>>>May be you can tell us from your studies if you found discussions of adhyaasa by previous Vedantins before Shankara and Goudapaada- not that it matters but out of curiosity. The problem is that we don't find many texts of previous Vedantins and those text who contain some of Adhyasa-like portions, are not accepted to be pre-shankaran, but they are accepted as to have a shankaracharyan-influence in them, and thus post-shankaran (like many of the Upanishads). But still I would like to point out to some conclusions which I can draw out for now: 1. The Vedic saying "Indro Mayabhih pururupa Iyate" (Indra takes many forms by the help of Maya) is a clear indication to Adhyasa. Indra, in Vedic terms is the equivalent of Atman (because Atman is mainly used in the Vedas in the meaning of Prana, or middle part of the body in the Brahmanas). In this context, please dwell upon the word "Indriya" (senses), which, according to Maharshi Durga (the Great Commentator of Nirukta), means "those who transfer knowledge to Indra, i.e. Atman". 2. We don't have the teachings of Bhagavan Dakshinamurti at hand. But, if seen at the Dakshinamurti Stotram of Shankaracharya with the Vartikas of Sureshwara, it seems very clear that Bhagavan Dakshinamurti (Bhagavan Shiva's incarnation, who gave teachings of Brahmavidya in the age of 5) himself was a great Master of Adhyasa Vada. 3. We don't know, who is the author of Hastamalakiyam. If we accept the available commentary of Shankaracharya on it to be genuine (as does Shringeri Matha), then Hastamalakiyam would be a good example. 4. I don't know if the word Adhyasa did exist before Shankaracharya? Though still, seeing different definitions of the word by different schools of philosophy in the Adhyasa Bhashya, it seems like the word must have existed before Shakaracharya. Indeed, the definition is new and invented by Shankara to fit the theory. Though his concept of "anirvachaniya khyati" seems a new invention, I would really like to dwell up on it and may be I can search some indication in the scriptures, in the same way like I have found indications of the three Gunas in Rig-veda, though most of the scholars keep saying that it is an invention of Kapila. 5. Bhagavan Shankara points out very clearly in the Bashya of the 13th chapter of Gita, "he who doesn't know the Sampradaya (Guru-shishya tradition), even if he is the scholar of all the scriptures, should be treated as a fool". Thus, I'm sure that Bhagavan Himself expended all these things, which were in fact existing in the Sampradaya and which he got from his master, Shri Govinda Bhagavatpada, a great Yogi and presumably a form of Bhagavan Patanjali. Apart from this I don't know more. >>>>>>>>Your input to the discussion is very much appreciated. Please feel free to comment on the Brahmasuutra notes in terms of clarifications and corrections. Thank you very much for the invitation. Loving Regards, Siddhartha ______________________ ______________________ Message: 12 Sat, 21 Jul 2001 04:24:51 +0530 "sidha" <sidha Re: jnAnam, moksha Respected Gummuluru Murthy Ji, >>>>>I am going by the context of adhyAsa and brahmasUtrAbhAShyA-s. No ill-will is intended towards the vedA-s. Sorry for misunderstanding! In fact it is the same with me. I have a great devotion to BhagavatPada and because of some of my difficult situation, there were many difficult scriptures, which I couldn't learn from somebody, as it was difficult to get a teacher, like of Nirukta or Patanjali's Mahabhashya along with the commentary of Kaiyata and Nagesh. But thinking "better than nothing" I started to learn them by my self, every time when there came a difficult step I just prayed to BhagavatPada, and sooner or later that difficult part of the scripture became clear to me. Once or twice he even came in to my dreams and explained it to me. Thus I always keep a Murti of Him. But, still he was a person who would die for the Vedas, and thus in the entire History he was among the chosen few, to whom the Vedas revealed themselves. Like Rig-veda says, "some see the Vedas, but still are not able to perceive it; some hear the Vedas, but still don't hear it (because they don't understand it); it is only a chosen one to whom the Veda reveals Himself". Indeed, Bhagavan Shankaracharya was one of them, and every person with the Grace of the Great Acharya can become one of them. Let me tell you one thing, if we revere Bhagavan Bhashyakara so much, we should try to study the SadhanaPanchakam, and try to follow his instructions. I just keep one teaching always in my mind "vedo nityamadhiyatam" (study the Vedas everyday) and that is what I try to do every day by studying the Rig-veda, trying to understand it with an Adhyatmika Interpretation. And now it seems to me, like Upanishads are nothing more then an Adhyatmika interpretation of the Rig-veda (and many Upanishads, like Prashna and Katha etc. clearly quote Rig-veda Mantras). Yes, that is what I was referring to. That (the third kind of knowledge which you stated) is inherently there in every jIvA, irrespective of what the intellect gains of the first two types of knowledge which you referred. With this (the third kind of knowledge) being the inherent core of the jIvA, the presence or absence of other intellectual knowledge is not very relevant, I feel. >>>>I would restate my question from the previous post in the words of your post: How important are the first two kinds of knowledge? The first kind of knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of worldly things, is there with everybody. The moment you see something with your eyes, it happens. But, indeed it is not essential for self-enlightenment. On the contrary, it is an obstacle to self-realization, thus Katha says very clearly "aavrittacakshuh", he who has changed the direction of his eyes etc. Now, coming to the second state of knowledge, it seems to be impossible to realize the presence of the third sort of knowledge, without obtaining the second sort of knowledge. The motto of all moksha-shastras is to give this second type of knowledge, and if the third type of knowledge can be obtained without this sort of knowledge, all the Moksha Shastra's, including Upanishads and Gita, would loose their importance. >>>>>Can a jIvanmukta be a jIvanmukta with only the third knowledge and not the first two (intellectual) types of knowledge? The answer is not. Even, though people like Ramana Maharshi and Ramakrishna did not studied the Shastras, they had the knowledge of Unity (the second sort of knowledge), which they got from their masters. I think it is impossible to be a Jivanmukta without the second sort of knowledge. >>>>>May well be so. However, this person is not a five-year old but is in the twenties, is intelligent and well past development of subtle impressions. I understand "naive-ness" as lack of worldly tact. Exploitation by the world of such "innocent" behaving people says more about the world than the person. Wouldn't you agree? I do agree, but now it becomes very difficult for me to comment, as I don't know the person. But please don't take any offence, just for the sake of discussion, how do you think the person would behave when she is confronted with physical temptations? >>>>>>I wonder if you can expand on this saying "a saint is a saint, till he doesn't know that he is one" and also give a source reference to this saying. I have difficulty understanding "... till he doesn't know". I thought, in the intellectual frame, ignorance (of anything) is supreseded in time by knowledge. The saying "till he doesn't know" seems to put the sequence knowledge followed by ignorance, which, for intellectual knowledge, is an impossibility. You see, it is an English proverb. But, still I think, as soon as a person gets the impression that he is a saint, or he thinks "I'm a saint" (and not Brahman, I still have a quality), that means he has not yet transcended the qualities and is still a subject of ego. Apart from this, he would also realize that others are not saints, and thus he would obtain a superiority complex, which would make him fall, because where is then "sama darshana" (nirdosham hi samam brahma, sama means brahman)? Even Shankaracharya after all his scholarship was a subject of this complex, and thus came Bhgavan Shankara in the form of Chandala to remove this complex from his mind. And then see, what has happened, Shankara has bowed in to the feet of the Chandala, chandalostu dvijostu gururityesha manisha mama (manisha panchakam). Warmest Regards, Siddhartha ______________________ ______________________ Message: 13 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 18:30:09 +0530 "sidha" <sidha Re: Re: Hindu Names and meanings My special thanks to Ram Chandran Ji, Madhava Ji and Sunder Ji, for providing very useful information about children's names. Regards, Siddhartha ______________________ ______________________ Message: 14 Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:51:11 -0000 sunderh Apology; Re: I had a dream in 1970 Namaste Frankji, Concur fully! In 'duality' judgments are 'natural'; where one errs is in underestimating the capacity and speed of another's ripeness! Regards, s. advaitin, egodust@d... wrote: > hariH OM! sunderji- > namaste. > > i saw this guy (sw beyondananda) on > tv i recall in the early 70's, and > concluded he was "nuts," in a harmless > kind of way..nevertheless, absurd > i thought then. > > how wrong we can be sometimes, huh? > > wow. a good lesson for me re judgments > on others.. or, judgments period! > > peace.love.peace > frank > > ___________________ > > sunder wrote: > > > > Guidelines for Enlightenment > > by Swami Beyondananda > > ______________________ ______________________ Message: 15 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 18:07:26 -0700 (PDT) Anand Natarajan <harihara.geo Re: Intro to Advaitha. Namaste, There are different answers given to the question of how did ignorance come about. Sri Ramana Maharshi had once replied to this question with a counter question, Can the eye see itself ? When the devotee asked Him to explain, Bhagavan replied, that just as it takes a mirror to see the eye, the infinite is seemingly reflected in many finite bodies so that It can see itself. This is quite an original explanation since it brilliantly explains two points of Maya, 1) The myriad reflections exist just like the image in the mirror also exists. 2) Due to our lack of enquiry, we are unable to see the reflection as ourselves. Just like a monkey seeing its reflection in a mirror gets agitated and thinks it is another monkey, so also we see so many animate and inanimate beings and think they are different from us. The only reason the Supreme is seemingly ignorant and wants realization is because that was Its desire. The infinite wanted to enjoy itself and hence the Leela. However when we forget the Leela and take it seriously, we become bound. It takes only an instant to be bound. This very short time it takes to fall from a state of Yoga or some spiritual attainment is the reason there is this seeming struggle for liberation. Our mind is not able to grasp the falling process. Before we know it we are bound. Regards, Anand > To me it seems, the answer to these problems can > only be provided from the > point of view of Ajativada of Gaudapadacharya (the > grand master of > Shankara). > na nirodho no chotpattirna baddho na ca sadhakah. > The fact is that neither > this world was born, neither any Jivatman, neither > there is any sadhaka nor > there is any bondage nor there is any moksha. > Everything is just a game of > ignorance. Its like the game of a magician. We are > dispelled by the magical > contents. > > > Get personalized email addresses from Mail http://personal.mail./ ______________________ ______________________ Message: 16 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:18:38 -0400 thehindu Article sent from The Hindu ============================================================= This article is emailed to you by Ram Chandran ( rchadnran ) ============================================================= Source: The Hindu (http://www.hinduonnet.com) Prithu, the righteous ruler of yore CHENNAI, JULY. 21. If a hypothetical question is posed as to how will men react should God choose to appear before them, it can be surmised that those who are ever immersed in worldly pleasures will seek from Him only material benefits while those who have been resorting to spiritual exercises will express a desire to get rid of re-births and wish to enter the Divine Kingdom. ``We want You only and we will hold to Your feet'' will be their prayers. These attitudes make all the difference between laymen and those who are God-centred, who rely on God forever. Several episodes, interspersed in our religious literature, bring out the moral that our duty is to adopt righteous steps in our activities and seek divine grace in our endeavour. When tough situations arise, we should throw ourselves before God who makes the Sun and Moon rise, cause wind and other elements of Nature to perform their duties. The Bhagavatam presents the story of an emperor who administered his kingdom, always maintaining discipline and keeping welfare of his citizens in mind. Because of his righteous rule, the universe came to be named after him and it is called ``Prithvi''. He ``tamed'' the earth by ``commanding'' it to shower prosperity on people as on one occasion, it caused misery amongst them. Prithu, as he was known, was aware that the crown was not made of roses. He earned the affection of everyone. He performed 99 horse- sacrifices (Aswametha Yagna) and as he was conducting the final (100th) one, the chief of celestials, upset at his progress and presuming that his gains may result in his losing his own throne, created obstacles. Realising that Prithu's intentions were noble and his act was not to disturb anyone, sages interfered and with powerful incantations, brought the chief of the celestials and arranged for the maintenance of good relation between the two, said Sri P. M. Vijayaraghava Sastrigal in a discourse. Making His appearance before Prithu, Lord Vishnu explained the duties of a king on the basis of Dharma. In his hymn to the Lord, the ruler said a man of intelligence would not ask for boon from Him. ``If a favour of any choice is to be bestowed, grant me 10,000 ears with which I may support my soul in the boundless joy that listening to the words of great visionaries on Your excellences alone can impart. I shall not ask any boon other than to be devoted to You and eternal absorption in the contemplation of Your endless merits and glories. It is for You to protect us as You alone know what is good for us''. Copyrights: 1995 - 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the consent of The Hindu ______________________ ______________________ Message: 17 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 21:08:30 -0700 "R. Viswanathan" <drvis Re: jnAnam, moksha Dear Siddha and Gurumuluru, Great postings. Is Malachi a JivanMukta? Is Muktananda JivanMukta? Is Nityananda JivanMukta? Is Shridi Sai JivanMukta? Is Chinamayananada JivanMukta? and on and on. And why and how? Clarification will be valuable for me (sorry, I have to use my "I")! -- Vis ------------------------------ - "sidha" <sidha <advaitin> Friday, July 20, 2001 3:54 PM Re: jnAnam, moksha > Respected Gummuluru Murthy Ji, > >>>>>I am going by the context of adhyAsa and > brahmasUtrAbhAShyA-s. No ill-will is intended towards the vedA-s. > > Sorry for misunderstanding! > In fact it is the same with me. I have a great devotion to BhagavatPada and > because of some of my difficult situation, there were many difficult > scriptures, which I couldn't learn from somebody, as it was difficult to get > a teacher, like of Nirukta or Patanjali's Mahabhashya along with the > commentary of Kaiyata and Nagesh. But thinking "better than nothing" I > started to learn them by my self, every time when there came a difficult > step I just prayed to BhagavatPada, and sooner or later that difficult part > of the scripture became clear to me. Once or twice he even came in to my > dreams and explained it to me. Thus I always keep a Murti of Him. > But, still he was a person who would die for the Vedas, and thus in the > entire History he was among the chosen few, to whom the Vedas revealed > themselves. Like Rig-veda says, "some see the Vedas, but still are not able > to perceive it; some hear the Vedas, but still don't hear it (because they > don't understand it); it is only a chosen one to whom the Veda reveals > Himself". Indeed, Bhagavan Shankaracharya was one of them, and every person > with the Grace of the Great Acharya can become one of them. > Let me tell you one thing, if we revere Bhagavan Bhashyakara so much, we > should try to study the SadhanaPanchakam, and try to follow his > instructions. I just keep one teaching always in my mind "vedo > nityamadhiyatam" (study the Vedas everyday) and that is what I try to do > every day by studying the Rig-veda, trying to understand it with an > Adhyatmika Interpretation. > And now it seems to me, like Upanishads are nothing more then an Adhyatmika > interpretation of the Rig-veda (and many Upanishads, like Prashna and Katha > etc. clearly quote Rig-veda Mantras). > > Yes, that is what I was referring to. That (the third kind of knowledge > which you stated) is inherently there in every jIvA, irrespective of > what the intellect gains of the first two types of knowledge which you > referred. With this (the third kind of knowledge) being the inherent > core of the jIvA, the presence or absence of other intellectual > knowledge is not very relevant, I feel. > > >>>>I would restate my question from the previous post in the words of > your post: How important are the first two kinds of knowledge? > > The first kind of knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of worldly things, is there > with everybody. The moment you see something with your eyes, it happens. > But, indeed it is not essential for self-enlightenment. On the contrary, it > is an obstacle to self-realization, thus Katha says very clearly > "aavrittacakshuh", he who has changed the direction of his eyes etc. > Now, coming to the second state of knowledge, it seems to be impossible to > realize the presence of the third sort of knowledge, without obtaining the > second sort of knowledge. The motto of all moksha-shastras is to give this > second type of knowledge, and if the third type of knowledge can be obtained > without this sort of knowledge, all the Moksha Shastra's, including > Upanishads and Gita, would loose their importance. > > >>>>>Can a jIvanmukta be a jIvanmukta with only the third knowledge > and not the first two (intellectual) types of knowledge? > > The answer is not. Even, though people like Ramana Maharshi and Ramakrishna > did not studied the Shastras, they had the knowledge of Unity (the second > sort of knowledge), which they got from their masters. I think it is > impossible to be a Jivanmukta without the second sort of knowledge. > > >>>>>May well be so. However, this person is not a five-year old but is > in the twenties, is intelligent and well past development of subtle > impressions. I understand "naive-ness" as lack of worldly tact. > Exploitation by the world of such "innocent" behaving people says > more about the world than the person. Wouldn't you agree? > > I do agree, but now it becomes very difficult for me to comment, as I don't > know the person. But please don't take any offence, just for the sake of > discussion, how do you think the person would behave when she is confronted > with physical temptations? > > >>>>>>I wonder if you can expand on this saying "a saint is a saint, till > he > doesn't know that he is one" and also give a source reference to this > saying. I have difficulty understanding "... till he doesn't know". > I thought, in the intellectual frame, ignorance (of anything) is > supreseded in time by knowledge. The saying "till he doesn't know" > seems to put the sequence knowledge followed by ignorance, which, > for intellectual knowledge, is an impossibility. > > You see, it is an English proverb. But, still I think, as soon as a person > gets the impression that he is a saint, or he thinks "I'm a saint" (and not > Brahman, I still have a quality), that means he has not yet transcended the > qualities and is still a subject of ego. Apart from this, he would also > realize that others are not saints, and thus he would obtain a superiority > complex, which would make him fall, because where is then "sama darshana" > (nirdosham hi samam brahma, sama means brahman)? > Even Shankaracharya after all his scholarship was a subject of this complex, > and thus came Bhgavan Shankara in the form of Chandala to remove this > complex from his mind. And then see, what has happened, Shankara has bowed > in to the feet of the Chandala, chandalostu dvijostu gururityesha manisha > mama (manisha panchakam). > Warmest Regards, > Siddhartha > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Your use of is subject to > > ______________________ ______________________ Message: 18 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 21:39:24 -0700 "R. Viswanathan" <drvis Re: jnAnam, moksha Hi again! I could not contain myself! Can any Bhakta be a JivanMukta? -- Vis - "sidha" <sidha <advaitin> Friday, July 20, 2001 3:54 PM Re: jnAnam, moksha > Respected Gummuluru Murthy Ji, > >>>>>I am going by the context of adhyAsa and > brahmasUtrAbhAShyA-s. No ill-will is intended towards the vedA-s. > > Sorry for misunderstanding! > In fact it is the same with me. I have a great devotion to BhagavatPada and > because of some of my difficult situation, there were many difficult > scriptures, which I couldn't learn from somebody, as it was difficult to get > a teacher, like of Nirukta or Patanjali's Mahabhashya along with the > commentary of Kaiyata and Nagesh. But thinking "better than nothing" I > started to learn them by my self, every time when there came a difficult > step I just prayed to BhagavatPada, and sooner or later that difficult part > of the scripture became clear to me. Once or twice he even came in to my > dreams and explained it to me. Thus I always keep a Murti of Him. > But, still he was a person who would die for the Vedas, and thus in the > entire History he was among the chosen few, to whom the Vedas revealed > themselves. Like Rig-veda says, "some see the Vedas, but still are not able > to perceive it; some hear the Vedas, but still don't hear it (because they > don't understand it); it is only a chosen one to whom the Veda reveals > Himself". Indeed, Bhagavan Shankaracharya was one of them, and every person > with the Grace of the Great Acharya can become one of them. > Let me tell you one thing, if we revere Bhagavan Bhashyakara so much, we > should try to study the SadhanaPanchakam, and try to follow his > instructions. I just keep one teaching always in my mind "vedo > nityamadhiyatam" (study the Vedas everyday) and that is what I try to do > every day by studying the Rig-veda, trying to understand it with an > Adhyatmika Interpretation. > And now it seems to me, like Upanishads are nothing more then an Adhyatmika > interpretation of the Rig-veda (and many Upanishads, like Prashna and Katha > etc. clearly quote Rig-veda Mantras). > > Yes, that is what I was referring to. That (the third kind of knowledge > which you stated) is inherently there in every jIvA, irrespective of > what the intellect gains of the first two types of knowledge which you > referred. With this (the third kind of knowledge) being the inherent > core of the jIvA, the presence or absence of other intellectual > knowledge is not very relevant, I feel. > > >>>>I would restate my question from the previous post in the words of > your post: How important are the first two kinds of knowledge? > > The first kind of knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of worldly things, is there > with everybody. The moment you see something with your eyes, it happens. > But, indeed it is not essential for self-enlightenment. On the contrary, it > is an obstacle to self-realization, thus Katha says very clearly > "aavrittacakshuh", he who has changed the direction of his eyes etc. > Now, coming to the second state of knowledge, it seems to be impossible to > realize the presence of the third sort of knowledge, without obtaining the > second sort of knowledge. The motto of all moksha-shastras is to give this > second type of knowledge, and if the third type of knowledge can be obtained > without this sort of knowledge, all the Moksha Shastra's, including > Upanishads and Gita, would loose their importance. > > >>>>>Can a jIvanmukta be a jIvanmukta with only the third knowledge > and not the first two (intellectual) types of knowledge? > > The answer is not. Even, though people like Ramana Maharshi and Ramakrishna > did not studied the Shastras, they had the knowledge of Unity (the second > sort of knowledge), which they got from their masters. I think it is > impossible to be a Jivanmukta without the second sort of knowledge. > > >>>>>May well be so. However, this person is not a five-year old but is > in the twenties, is intelligent and well past development of subtle > impressions. I understand "naive-ness" as lack of worldly tact. > Exploitation by the world of such "innocent" behaving people says > more about the world than the person. Wouldn't you agree? > > I do agree, but now it becomes very difficult for me to comment, as I don't > know the person. But please don't take any offence, just for the sake of > discussion, how do you think the person would behave when she is confronted > with physical temptations? > > >>>>>>I wonder if you can expand on this saying "a saint is a saint, till > he > doesn't know that he is one" and also give a source reference to this > saying. I have difficulty understanding "... till he doesn't know". > I thought, in the intellectual frame, ignorance (of anything) is > supreseded in time by knowledge. The saying "till he doesn't know" > seems to put the sequence knowledge followed by ignorance, which, > for intellectual knowledge, is an impossibility. > > You see, it is an English proverb. But, still I think, as soon as a person > gets the impression that he is a saint, or he thinks "I'm a saint" (and not > Brahman, I still have a quality), that means he has not yet transcended the > qualities and is still a subject of ego. Apart from this, he would also > realize that others are not saints, and thus he would obtain a superiority > complex, which would make him fall, because where is then "sama darshana" > (nirdosham hi samam brahma, sama means brahman)? > Even Shankaracharya after all his scholarship was a subject of this complex, > and thus came Bhgavan Shankara in the form of Chandala to remove this > complex from his mind. And then see, what has happened, Shankara has bowed > in to the feet of the Chandala, chandalostu dvijostu gururityesha manisha > mama (manisha panchakam). > Warmest Regards, > Siddhartha > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Your use of is subject to > > ______________________ ______________________ Message: 19 Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:37:46 -0700 "R. Viswanathan" <drvis Re: Intro to Advaitha. Hi! Why does the Supreme has the Desire to see itself? Is it not unbounded, unblemished, unmanifest, omnipotent, and omnipresent? Where does it originate in the Supreme? -- Vis ---------- - "Anand Natarajan" <harihara.geo <advaitin> Friday, July 20, 2001 6:07 PM Re: Intro to Advaitha. > > Namaste, > > The only reason the Supreme is seemingly ignorant and > wants realization is because that was Its desire. > The infinite wanted to enjoy itself and hence the > Leela. > > Anand > > > > > ______________________ ______________________ Your use of is subject to S. Venkata Subramanian Venkat_advaita __ http://www.monsterindia.com - The Best Jobs. For the Best Minds. 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.