Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 My dear Sunderji, Your post 14892 reads like a grammarian's funeral. To tell you honestly, we are operating at two different frequencies. I, therefore, wonder how we ever can share common ground on this topic. Before we come to the grammar part, I agree that guhyatamam is very much there in 15:20 and 18:64 and in those verses this adjective compound directly refers to paramam vacha and sAstra respectively. No arguments there. But you are extending that argument to cover 9-1, where I am compelled to think differently simply for the sake of depth of understanding. I was not correcting Vyasa, Panini or Sankara or you for that matter. I have nothing against guhyatamam going with jnAnam. Let it, by all means. I was only pointing out that if guhyatamam goes with idam that would impart a new dimension to our understanding. JnAnam is such that It does not need any qualifying because It is That knowing which all other knowledges are as well known. However, till the truth of it is seen, idam can do well with a companion. So, idam guhyatamam. Just see the expanses we are gaining by simply shifting the focus. There is another reason too for my line of thinking. The whole of Ch. 9 (4 through 34) is a journey from idam to THAT. This will be clear to any discerning mind - from all the diversity of beings, actions, sacrifices, movables, immovables, the whole of creation down to the essence of it all, to what is guhyam in idam, to the Unity behind idam. Where else to point this out other than in the very introductory verse? You have done a fantastic job to prove me wrong and used all resources at your command to ensure achieving that end. I cannot measure upto you here and I don't find any point in doing that. I only wish you had come up with corrections that served to upgrade our current level of understanding of these three verses, which, alas, has not happened! We haven't gained an inch. If Sanskrit language has, is a mute question. About the grammar of it, you are quoting Cologne Digital to say that tamaM is not legitimate. I mean tamaM with a dot over the letter "ma". Please check Apte. He has clearly mentioned the meanings of darkness and Rahu without feeling "illegitimate". The finer grammatical nuances that you are applying to understand guhyatamam are just beyond me. There is a communication gap here. The import that I wanted to convey was that of avidya because of which we fail to perceive the truth of idam. GuhyatamaM may sound like an adjective to idam. However, it can be seen as a complementary, parallel noun too. Like avidyA mAya, where both point at the same entity. The two, therefore, can stand without the support of pravakshyAmi. In all your grammatical fervour, you seem to have forgotten that the object under review has great literary import, where we may have to set aside the strict rules of grammar, lest we spoil the beauty of it all. Why should we deny poetic licence to Vyasa when we can gleefully grant it to William Wordsworth or Shakespeare? If my way of looking at things has helped widen our vision, I am more than satisfied. I, therefore, would not like to be dragged into answering any further grammatical repeat grammatical objections. To talk philosophy, I am always there as that is what I love to do. Now the tailpiece. There was this very beautiful girl – a personification of grace and gracefulness. A radiologist went proposing to her parents and demanded to see all her X-ray pictures in order to make sure that all the sandhis and samAsAs were intact! Be a radiologist by all means but not at the cost of losing the eye for beauty. Best regards and pranAms. Madathil Nair advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote: > > These are some reasons: I hope Sanskrit scholars will correct > my interpretation - > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Namaste all. In the hurry of posting my message 14893 earlier today, I missed to mention the following thoughts: Let us examine the widely and generally accepted translation of "most secret" or "secret of secrets" for guhyatamaM. What is a secret? It is something not known to someone who becomes its knower later on. When it is known to him, it is no more a secret. How is it expressed in common parlance? The knower says: "I was kept totally in the dark.". What does he mean? He means that something was kept a secret from him. So, darkness is to secret what brilliance is to the sun. If guhyatamaM is secret, then naturally there is an element of darkness already in it! Do we still need dictionaries? However golden and glittering the hiraNmaya pAtra be, there ought to be darkness when it covers the face of Truth. We call it avidyA. May pUshan (Sun of Enlightenment), therefore, undo what is guhyatamaM and reveal. Then, idam will stand revealed as the brilliance of rAjaguhyam rAjavidya that is jnAnam. Pranams. Madathil Nair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > > Your post 14892 reads like a grammarian's funeral. > > Namaste, anudvegakaraM vaak{}ya.n satyaM priyahita.n cha yat.h . svaadhyaayaabhyasana.n chaiva vaaN^mayaM tapa uchyate .. 17\.15.. When you speak out, speak out auspicious things, O bird of inner conscience; when you remain silent, be pleased to cherish kind thoughts toward us. When you speak out, flying upwards, your voice is like sweet musical notes of a lute. Rig Veda 2.43.3 mauna.n chaivaasmi guhyaanaa.n GYaanaM GYaanavataamaham.h .. 10\.38.. Best wishes, Signing off, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Namaste, advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > My dear Sunderji, > > Your post 14892 reads like a grammarian's funeral. > > To tell you honestly, we are operating at two different frequencies. > I, therefore, wonder how we ever can share common ground on this > topic. As the Title suggests, this is Gita Satsangh. Can we not be a little more courteous ? Why so much venom? Why so much bitterness? You asked for the grammatical reasons why it should not be interpretted the way you did, and Sunderji just listed them out for you. As usual, he was most generously trying to help. vAngmaya tapas is very important for a sadhaka. Savithri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Namaste Nairji: First, let me express my sincere appreciation to your thoughts and insights on these important verses on several posts. At the same time I admire Sunderji for his unselfish service to this list as a moderator by providing valuable guidance to all list members. More than this list, he has been constantly providing service to Sanskrit Bharati and other Web sites for storing important Sanskrit documents in the Internet. He is very impartial and always impersonal while correcting someone's grammatical or logical errors. He has contributed significantly when Sadaji was posting his Brahma Suutra notes and we all need to learn from Sadaji how to be a good scholar with humility. Sadaji's characterization of the Royal Secret by 'Supreme Secret,' is quite appropriate given the complex nature of the simple Truth. Those who knows the codes to the secret only will be able detach their attention from false identity. Whether we admit or not, we only have limited knowledge and consequently we indulge in body, mind, intellect paradigm to generate more thoughts, writings and discussions. Sooner or later the thinkers cross the threshold and commit logical and grammatical errors due to ever-present weakness. When we expose our stupidity, someone with the command of the Lord rise up and points out our mistakes. This is part of His mAyA or Leela and the only viable stratagy for us is to take a deep breath and contemplate our thoughts with objectivity. If fail to take the corrective step, the ego bursts up and anger emerges from nowhere to now here. The Satsangh is a great opportunity to all of us to express our understanding of Gita and share our thoughts with our friends in the list. We also get the opportunity to show our scholarship with humility and learn to accept logical and grammatical errors pointed out by our fellow members. Within this Satsangh, God has provided professors, grammarians, thinkers, listeners and moderators. This diversity of talents is once again His Leela and we should be thankful to Him for keeping the discussions with check and balance. The nice thing about the Gita Satsangh is that we have full freedom to express our thoughts and at the same time, someone also has full freedom to point out our errors and shortcomings. With contemplation, it is possible for us to understand that the Lord's messenger takes different names and forms just to inform us when we make logical and grammatical errors. The Lord's message is clear and sound – Peace prevails with wisdom and anger prevails with ego! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste all. > > In the hurry of posting my message 14893 earlier today, I missed to > mention the following thoughts: > > Let us examine the widely and generally accepted translation > of "most secret" or "secret of secrets" for guhyatamaM. What is a > secret? It is something not known to someone who becomes its knower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote: > Namaste Nairji: > > First, let me express my sincere appreciation to your thoughts and > insights on these important verses on several posts. At the same > time I admire Sunderji for his unselfish service to this list as a > moderator by providing valuable guidance to all list members. More > than this list, he has been constantly providing service to Sanskrit Pranaam Sri Ram, I have been silently following the discussions taking place.....sorry am unable to participate because its like more of a learning experience for me and I am not yet ready to 'give' my views. However, I'd like to say a few words about the discussions over the past few weeks. Whilst I am sure that all list members appreciate Sri Sunder's exceptional mastery over the Sanskrit language, and also your comments as to his contribution to not only this list but to the language in general, we often tend to forget that this forum is more for the "understanding" of the message and spirit of the Shastras rather than the grammatical importance. I must hasten to add, however, that that does not mean that grammar should be neglected as it helps in a deeper understanding of the words.....but to get into lengthy discussions on such matters as a dot here and a matra there, I feel is defeating the purpose of learning through online discussions. I realised that whilst following the long and sometimes dreary postings on grammar, I was getting lost in those mails and almost losing the 'thread' of thoughts so beautifully created by enlightening postings from list members, especially Prof VK, Sri Sunder and other senior members. I very strongly feel that this great opportunity of online Satsangh should be utilised by us in understanding the spirit of the great teachings of the Gita rather than getting caught up in trivia. Did someone say "Grammar is the grave of a language"?? As always, these are my personal thoughts without meaning disrespect to any group members, least of all to you, Sri Sunder and other senior members/moderators. Let us enjoy and benefit from the teachings of Holy Gita. With respect and warm regards, Kamal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Sunderji, Savitriji, Ramji, I had only Robert Browning's poem "A Grammarian's Funeral" in mind. No inauspicious thoughts at all. Those interested can read it at http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/rp/poems/browning12b.html and find how sweet and enlightening it is. Besides, didn't Sankara himself laugh at grammar in his famous Bhajagovindam? My apologies nevertheless. Shri Kamal Kothari, your advice well taken. Pranams. Madathil Nair advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote: > advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> > wrote: > > > > > Your post 14892 reads like a grammarian's funeral. > > > > > Namaste, > > anudvegakaraM vaak{}ya.n satyaM priyahita.n cha yat.h . > svaadhyaayaabhyasana.n chaiva vaaN^mayaM tapa uchyate .. 17\.15.. > > When you speak out, speak out auspicious things, O bird of inner > conscience; when you remain silent, be pleased to cherish kind > thoughts toward us. When you speak out, flying upwards, your voice is > like sweet musical notes of a lute. > > Rig Veda 2.43.3 > > mauna.n chaivaasmi guhyaanaa.n GYaanaM GYaanavataamaham.h .. 10 \.38.. > > Best wishes, > > > Signing off, > > Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Namaste While free-lance writing of Madathil Nairji is welcome, unpleasant writing which assaults another member by strong words is objectionable. A grammatical point was raised. Nair was ignoring the grammar as well as tradition and interpreting things in his own way, incidentally taking shelter under a 'poetic licence of Vyasa'. Well, let it be. Just as he has the freedom to interpret things in his own way, Sunder has also the freedom to point out the unsuitability of that interpretation by pointing out the grammatical failings and also the dictionary meanings of words and non-existence of the meanings as suggested by Nair. Nair, if he did not agree with that, should have left it there saying, 'I can't agree'. Instead, his post no. 14893 broke all sound traditions of this list and spoiled the atmosphere of transparent cordiality that prevailed in the postings of the list. I am very pained to note that a discussion bearing the name of Gita satsangh has turned out to be like this. Now that Nairji's point has been made and everyone has read it, I would now like to appeal to Nairji to take back his post no.14893. This is the least that he can do to bring back the satsangh to its normal course. May we appeal to him to do so in the good interests of the health of the advaitin list? praNAms to all advaitins profvk ===== Prof. V. Krishnamurthy My website on Science and Spirituality is http://www.geocities.com/profvk/ You can access my book on Gems from the Ocean of Hindu Thought Vision and Practice, and my father R. Visvanatha Sastri's manuscripts from the site. Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 6, 2002 Report Share Posted October 6, 2002 Namaste Prof. Krishnamurthyji and all. I go by your wish. This Satsang is important to me as it is to all of you. I do not know how to withdraw my message. The moderators have my full consent to delete either the objectionable part of it or the whole of it or even the ones that went before it. Pranams to you all. Madathil Nair ______________________ In advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk> wrote: Now that Nairji's point has been made and everyone has > read it, I would now like to appeal to Nairji to take back his > post no.14893. This is the least that he can do to bring back > the satsangh to its normal course. May we appeal to him to do so > in the good interests of the health of the advaitin list? > > praNAms to all advaitins > profvk > > > > > > ===== > Prof. V. Krishnamurthy > My website on Science and Spirituality is http://www.geocities.com/profvk/ > You can access my book on Gems from the Ocean of Hindu Thought Vision and Practice, and my father R. Visvanatha Sastri's manuscripts from the site. > > > > Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More > http://faith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2002 Report Share Posted October 7, 2002 Namaste Sri Kamal: You have made a valid point that as one of the moderators, I fully understand your point. At the same time, we do need to recognize the fact that Sanskrit grammar is an integral part of our scripture written in Sanskrit language. It is very easy for any novice to indulge in his/her own imagination to make alternative interpretations but it is quite essential that the grammar part is kept intact. If we don't respect that, the oral tradition which has been kept alive by generations will disappear in no time. This list does want to keep our traditions and culture in tact, we are willing to bend but can never anyone to break it. Our tradition does require any expression of scholarship with humility, without that understanding, we lose civility. warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "Kamal Kothari" <kamal_kothari_india> wrote: > > Whilst I am sure that all list members appreciate Sri Sunder's > exceptional mastery over the Sanskrit language, and also your > comments as to his contribution to not only this list but to the > language in general, we often tend to forget that this forum is more > for the "understanding" of the message and spirit of the Shastras > rather than the grammatical importance. I must hasten to add, > however, that that does not mean that grammar should be neglected as > it helps in a deeper understanding of the words.....but to get into > lengthy discussions on such matters as a dot here and a matra there, > I feel is defeating the purpose of learning through online > discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2002 Report Share Posted October 7, 2002 Namaste: This is my first posting. I too was getting a little lost in the lengthy discussions on grammar and some response that betrayed ego. What I was looking for when I joined the group was an understanding of Advaita thinking and how it can change my life in its day to day functioning. As Arjuna had asked Krishna as to how he could recognize a Sthitapragnya, how did he talk, how did he behave and so on, I too want to know from this learned group as to how I can change my thinking, speaking and behavior as a true Advaitin. Prof. Vk had given a constructive advice to someone the other day on how he could begin to progress in his goal to achieve Moksha. I was touched by that advice. Can we have a similar discussion on how to recognize and be a true Advaitin. Shanti Mehta Note from the List Moderator: Your point is well taken and the correspondence that I received from the concerned members do indicate that they also understand the importance of maintaining our behavior as a 'True Advaitin.' We are still in the learning process and hopefully, this Satsangh will help us all retain our memory about our 'True Divine Nature.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2002 Report Share Posted October 8, 2002 My dear noble devotee of Sri Sankara Bhagavatpujyapada, Right now I am facing a common Indian worldly situation. My mother's health is showing a different pattern.With my mediocre knowledge I hear that all this is maya.But I have only heard it. Now, I am trying to retrace my thoughts about my sweetest mother to their roots. Why do I get unhappy if she is affected? Because ,she is my mother. If she were not my mother, will I become as unhappy as I am now? I will feel unhappy but not really for so long. Why? Because they are not my mothers. So , it is MYNESS that is the cause. Where does it come from? Is it really true that she is my mother? What is mine and what is yours and what is everybody,s ? In the process ,I am forgetting about MY mother and getting somewhere.Temporarily,there is no thinking about MY mother and so there is no unhappiness. Again , the feeling comes back.As lonng as the MyNESS is there, all these pains and pleasures haunt us for the rest of our lives. I am trying to locate that I because of which the myness comes. I think by the grace of Sri Sankara bhagavatpujyapada I am able to feel it. But where does that I come from? Where does it come from ? One day , I pray that I will find out where that I comes from by Sri Sankara Bagavan's grace. Then, there will be an answer to all the questions. After reading Sri Sankara Bhagavatpujyapada's adhyasa , I have gone thus far.May be this will be of some information value to your quest to become an advaiti. Yours in Sri Sankara Bhagavatpujyapada's love, Chilukuri Bhuvaneswar -- Shanti <shanti wrote: <HR> <html><body> <tt> Namaste: This is my first posting. I too was getting a little lost in the lengthy discussions on grammar and some response that betrayed ego. What I was looking for when I joined the group was an understanding of Advaita thinking and how it can change my life in its day to day functioning. As Arjuna had asked Krishna as to how he could recognize a Sthitapragnya, how did he talk, how did he behave and so on, I too want to know from this learned group as to how I can change my thinking, speaking and behavior as a true Advaitin. Prof. Vk had given a constructive advice to someone the other day on how he could begin to progress in his goal to achieve Moksha. I was touched by that advice. Can we have a similar discussion on how to recognize and be a true Advaitin.<BR> Shanti Mehta<BR> <BR> Note from the List Moderator: Your point is well taken and the correspondence that I received from the concerned members do indicate that they also understand the importance of maintaining our behavior as a 'True Advaitin.' We are still in the learning process and hopefully, this Satsangh will help us all retain our memory about our 'True Divine Nature.'<BR> <BR> </tt> <br> <tt> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. <BR> Advaitin List Archives available at: <a href="http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/">of Service</a>.</tt> </br> </body></html> ______________________ Missed your favourite TV serial last night? Try the new, TV. visit http://in.tv.''>http://in.tv.'>http://in.tv. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2002 Report Share Posted October 8, 2002 advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote: > Namaste Sri Kamal: > > You have made a valid point that as one of the moderators, I fully > understand your point. At the same time, we do need to recognize the > fact that Sanskrit grammar is an integral part of our scripture > written in Sanskrit language. Pranaam, Point taken. I respect your sentiments fully. However, only a small request to all list members, especially senior members like Sri Sunder and yourself, that let us not get lost in the forest of grammar to such an extent that the *spirit* of the discussion goes haywire. In my humble opinion, in the mail under discussion, Sri Nair and Sri Sunder went a little overboard and got a little personal in trying to prove a point. Sri Sunder is a senior member. It is essential for at least senior list members, especially moderators, to (a)be short and sweet (strictly keep to the point) especially when discussing matters which are not central to the theme, and (b)keep restraint in reacting to mails especially when he identifies it as frivolous and offensive. Senior members discuss so many points in such detail, threadbare, we should not forget small pointers as TITIKSHA. I hope this sets at rest all further discussion on this matter. The point has been well taken by all concerned. Lets get on with the Satsangh. I am back to my task of shravana, manana and hope to be able to nidhidhyasana with respect and warm regards Kamal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2002 Report Share Posted October 8, 2002 Namaste. Thanks Kamalji. I already apologized to respected Sri Sunder-Ji. We understand each other better now and I look forward to having a very long association with him through effective advaitic satsang. The whole incident has been a big lesson to me. I believe I am a better man now. The ego has undergone a tremendous catharsis. Best regards. Madathil Nair ___________________________ advaitin, "Kamal Kothari" <kamal_kothari_india> wrote: In my humble opinion, in the mail under discussion, Sri Nair > and Sri Sunder went a little overboard and got a little personal in > trying to prove a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2002 Report Share Posted October 8, 2002 Dear Bhuvaneshwarji: Thank you for your explanation. I now understand that it is the 'Myness" and "I" that need to be understood. If everything is 'Brahman" there is no separate "I" and there is nothing "Mine". I appreciate your example. Shanti 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.