atmaitaichanya:Vedantic Scholar and Spiritual-Realization

[Guest guest]

dear ones-especially guru atmaitaichanya:

 

wondering what your response is to someone

who philosophically defends ignorance to

jnani/wisdom/knowledge.

 

from my throne i am beginning to think

that the more ignorant i become the better.

 

hare om, om

o. peshtin

 

 

--- atmachaitanya108 <stadri wrote:

> Dear Gummuluru Murthy,

>

> You ask,: " Isn't Jnani, Jnananishta from an

> ignorant's

> viewpoint only?". But this is exactly what I said in

> my post:

> "Ultimately, even the empirical distinction

> between Jnanis and

> Ajnanis(i.e.Jnananishtas)is only in the realm of

> ignorance."

>

> When you state " If we call 'anyone' a Jnani,

> that is more an

> exhibition of our ignorance only." Of course, that

> is exactly the

> point of my entire post, except for the additional

> fact that if

> 'anyone' claims himself to be a Jnani, it merely

> betrays his own

> ignorance.

>

> Shankara makes clear in has Adhyasa Bhashya that:

> 1) Jnani-Ajnani

> 2) Bondage-iberation

> 3) Guru-student

> 4) THE SHASTRA BEING THE ONLY MEANS

> TO KNOWLEDGE

>

> Are all only in the realm of ignorance.

>

> Hari Om

> Atmachaitanya

>

>

>

> -- In advaitin, Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy@m...>

> wrote:

> >

> > namaste shri Atmachaitanyaji,

> >

> > That was an excellent post. The arguments are

> compelling and

> > your facts are straight. You made a distinction

> between

> > jnAni and jnAnaniShTa and have even categorized

> shri shankara

> > as a jnAnaniShTa. I have comment/question on this

> aspect of

> > your post.

> >

> > Isn't jnAni, jnAaniShTa from an ignorant's

> viewpoint only?

> > We are saying X is a jnAni, Y is a jnAnaniShTa. We

> are seeing

> > a difference between X and Y. As either X or Y see

> it, there

> > is no difference.

> >

> > Further, isn't the word jnAni a contradiction in

> terms? I am

> > assuming you are calling jnAni as the embodiment

> of jnAnam.

> > But jnAnam is never embodied. Hence, there cannot

> be anyone

> > called a jnAni. That is, if we call anyone a

> jnAni, it is

> > more an exhibition of our ignorance only.

> JnAnaniShTa is

> > all there is.

> >

> > This may be just semantics only. But I would be

> grateful for

> > your viewpoint.

> >

> > Regards

> > Gummuluru Murthy

> >

>

-

>

>

 

 

 

 

Send FREE Valentine eCards with Greetings!

http://greetings.