Guest guest Posted July 31, 2001 Report Share Posted July 31, 2001 Respected Group Members, I feel the need to remind the members of this list about the following point that the modern Vedantists have apparently forgotten. What is Shruti after all ? Vedas is the limitless knowledge on all aspects of Life that is contained in the storehouse of Brahman. Every single one of us has access to this storehouse. All we need to develop is an ability to tap into the storehouse of Brahman and retrieve that portion of the Vedas that concerns the issue that we would like to obtain insights into. The portions of the Vedas that various illustrious individuals starting from the likes of Hiranyagarbha and Shiva, prajapatis, and innumerable rishis have retrieved from time to time from this storehouse and have recorded, is Shruti - the Vedic literature. But this is just a sampling of the infinite Vedic knowledge. EVERY SINGLE BEING, even an ant or an amoeba has direct access to the eternal Vedas. I would eagerly await the day when we don't feel the need to rely so heavily on a small sampling of the Vedas that the society has managed to preserve. Vedic literature has to be dynamically updated by tapping into the store house of Brahman. Each one of us should strive to reach a position where one can say that what he/she is saying is based on direct experience and hence by DEFINITION it is Shruti. I also find that the Vedanta community does not respect modern individuals who can retrieve Shruti from the storehouse of Brahman. Surprisingly this same community, however, holds very highly individuals who could achieve this feat thousands of years ago. I apologize for this rather strongly worded message. But I had to say this. Best regards Shrinivas Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Messenger http://phonecard./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2001 Report Share Posted August 1, 2001 > > >What is Shruti after all ? > >....... > >I apologize for this rather strongly worded message. >But I had to say this. > >Best regards >Shrinivas Shree Shrinivas, Good you said it - now you do not have to carry it on your chest as a burden. Your catholic understanding of 'What is Shruti after all?' is laudable, but I doubt if it can withstand the rigor of a pramaaNa. Hari OM! Sadananda -- 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 August 1, 2001 Report Share Posted August 1, 2001 namaste shri srinivas-ji, That was an interesting post and observation. Let me state my viewpoint on this. In brahmavidyA, what is to be known was known. There is nothing new to discover or invent. Thus, it is but natural, it seems to me, that we look to the ancients and compare our experiences with the ancients' experiences. Quite often, human experience is not always the Truth. That is another reason why we have to calibrate our experiences with that of the ancient sages. I feel this (comparison of our experiences with that of the ancient sages, and also sometimes being skeptical of the experiences of the modern individuals) is not a modern-day phenomenon but was going on in time. This would be natural if (i) we accept that the ancient sages have *seen* the Truth and have stated That in the upanishads, and (ii) also there is only one Truth and hence invariably the modern individuals have also to see the same Truth. Regards Gummuluru Murthy -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2001 Report Share Posted August 1, 2001 Namaskaaram I doubt if "Shruti" could be referred to as Vedic Literature. Quoting from http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap7.htm titled "Sound and Creation", (translation - His Holiness Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi MahaSwamiji) : The Vedas are called "Sruti. " That which is heard is Sruti. "Srotra" means the "ear". The Vedas have been handed down orally from generation to generation and have not been taught or learned from any written text. That is how they got the name of "Sruti". Why were these scriptures not permitted to be written down? Because the sound of the Vedas cannot be properly transcribed. Venkatesh ------------------- [snip] > What is Shruti after all ? [snip] >The portions of the Vedas ...[snip] ... > retrieved from time to time > from this storehouse and have recorded, is Shruti - > the Vedic literature. -------------------------- --- OREKA ! L'ACCES A INTERNET MOINS CHER ! Connaissez vous nos nouveaux forfaits ? 10H pour moins de 40F, ou 25H pour moins de 80F (Internet + télécoms) ! Découvrez les vite ! Cliquez ici : http://www.oreka.com/start.php3?id=op3b600eafd954b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2001 Report Share Posted August 1, 2001 Namaste Shrinivasji: You have made some insightful observations on the potential for each of us to access the storehouse of Brahman. Your observation does confirm with the fact, "the knower of the Brahman knows everything that needs to be known." All Vedantins whether ancient or modern agree that with "Self-realization," we can have full access to the storehouse of Brhaman that you are referring to. Let me state my understanding of the question: "What is shruti after all?" First we need to recognize that 'shruti' or 'sabda' (both mean 'sound' which means 'directly heard from Brahman') denote the 'Vedas' as compiled by Vedavyasa. The Scriptures are classified into 'Shruti' (free from human perception and interpretation) and 'Smriti'(human perception and subject to interpretation. As Sri Gummuluruji correctly pointed out that Vedantins both modern and ancient have no choice other than to respect the Vedas as the most authoritative source to learn the Brahma Vidya for human liberation. The Truth of Vedanta Philosophies of Sri Shankara, Sri Ramanuja and Sri Madhava can not be verified without the Vedas. The emergence of religions such as Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Christianity, Islam and personalities such as Buddha, Mahavir, Gurunank, Christ, Mohamad confirm that the store house of the Brahman is huge. evidenced from the emerge of many religions, saints, sages, scientists and written and spoken materials. The source book of Hinduism, Islam and Christianity are respectively Vedas, the Q'ron, and the Bible. In conclusion, I do not see the validity for treating the words of intuition from saints, sages and scientists as the Vedas. The knowledge and wisdom of saints, sages and scientists are always highly respected by both the modern and ancient Vedantins. warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, Shrinivas Gadkari <sgadkari2001> wrote: > Respected Group Members, > > I feel the need to remind the members of this list > about the following point that the modern Vedantists > have apparently forgotten. > > What is Shruti after all ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 2, 2001 Report Share Posted August 2, 2001 Shrinivas Gadkari wrote: > > What is Shruti after all ? > > [...] Each one of us should > strive to reach a position where one can say that what > he/she is saying is based on direct experience and > hence by DEFINITION it is Shruti. hariH OM! namaskaar. this is an important point, with significant implications. however, whether or not a given insight or revelation reaches any consensus among any number of people, who will in turn collectively confirm it as sruti, is where controversy will inevitably enter. obviously this would be mainly because of differences in temperament and understanding.. sruti is metaphysical postulates *within vyavaharika*. it is not--nor can it ever *be*--the "Truth" Itself, since Such cannot be verbalized. even the mahavakyas fall yet within vyavaharika. the attributeless nirguna state of the paramartha cannot be verbalized. we must always bear this in mind. therefore, to be clear about it, sruti represents *pointers*, as strategic insights geared to the practical path [sadhana] leading to moksha. therefore each individual must evaluate such insights [that resonate with them] psychologically (viz. engaging manana *as if* it were in fact based on sruti), and wait for the accompanying "light to shine in the Heart" before acknowledging such as being indeed sruti, at least for them; for where they are on the path. for example, the concept whether, upon Self-realization, one thereafter becomes permanently disembodied (being the most popular idea in almost all the metaphysical schools [except, for example, vaishnava sects within the hindu dvaita doctrine, certain tibetan buddhist sects, american shaman sects, etc]) falls yet squarely within vyavahara! as such, i've come to believe the possibility that: both, neither, plus both and neither, *all at the same time* (i.e. co-existing in the eternal Now) represents the true existential circumstance! a real mind-blower, to be sure! and yet, any [what winds up being a] linear-specific/rigid, sterile conclusion otherwise--when duly philosophically invesigated--becomes even *more* of a mind-blower(!)... however here in a negative because *limited* sense! to put it briefly, it's unphilosophical to conclude a given behavior attributable to brahman's leela. simply because leela is *as* ineffable and inscrutable as brahman Itself! how else can it be? we're confident we can't say anything about nirguna brahman, yet what gives us the confidence to think we can really say anything final or definitive about Its [saguna] leela?! OM ramanarpanamasthu! OM shaanthi shaanthi shaanthiH 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.