Adhyasa -II

[Guest guest]

Dear Kathirasan-jI,

 

Please don't be under the impression that I am picking on you alone.

All of us know that the ideas that you have put forward are not really yours,

they come originally from great thinkers of the advaita school of thought,

which you have represented very well in english, by the by. I do appreciate

that fact.

>Adhyasa need not be validated or revealed by shruti. Our daily experience is

>sufficient to reveal this fact when analyzed with the revelations of the

>Veda.

 

Shruti in its entirity reveals only parabrahman. Why? because it says so,

"sarvE vedAh yat padam Amananti, tapAmsi sarvANi yat vadanti"

When this is clear, the question whether shruti reveals adhyAsa or not? does'nt

even arise. What you are saying is equivalent to

"Shakespearean drama need not be validated or revealed by Shruti".

 

Our daily experience definitely does not reveal parabrahman. If that was

the case, why have all these Veda, study of shAstra, and all these discussions.

All we had to do was to lead a daily life, which every one does

anyway.

 

(manushyANAm sahasrEshu kaschit yatati siddhayE, yatatAmapi siddhAnAm kaschit

mAm vEtti tattvataha) - Geetha

(Among 1000 people who lead their "daily lives", only one tries for siddhi,

and among 1000 such people who try, only one understands Me with pramANas).

 

 

Thus, 'daily life' may produce the knowledge of ahdyAsa ( if it really exists),

but definitely not the knowledge of parabrahman. Hence the need

for pramANa called prasthAna-traya.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hari OM!

 

Blessed Jayji,

 

Please follow Ramchandraji's suggestions, He is really helpful to

clearing our doubts, and one of the moderators of this Advaitin list.

 

May God Bless You.

 

With Love & OM!

 

Krishna Prasad

 

 

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay wrote:

> Dear Kathirasan-jI,

>

> Please don't be under the impression that I am picking on you

> alone.

> All of us know that the ideas that you have put forward are not

> really yours, they come originally from great thinkers of the

> advaita school of thought,

> which you have represented very well in english, by the by. I do

> appreciate that fact.

>

> >Adhyasa need not be validated or revealed by shruti. Our daily

> experience is

> >sufficient to reveal this fact when analyzed with the revelations

> of the

> >Veda.

>

> Shruti in its entirity reveals only parabrahman. Why? because it

> says so,

> "sarvE vedAh yat padam Amananti, tapAmsi sarvANi yat vadanti"

> When this is clear, the question whether shruti reveals adhyAsa or

> not? does'nt even arise. What you are saying is equivalent to

> "Shakespearean drama need not be validated or revealed by Shruti".

>

> Our daily experience definitely does not reveal parabrahman. If

> that was

> the case, why have all these Veda, study of shAstra, and all these

> discussions. All we had to do was to lead a daily life, which

> every one does

> anyway.

>

> (manushyANAm sahasrEshu kaschit yatati siddhayE, yatatAmapi

> siddhAnAm kaschit

> mAm vEtti tattvataha) - Geetha

> (Among 1000 people who lead their "daily lives", only one tries

> for siddhi,

> and among 1000 such people who try, only one understands Me with

> pramANas).

>

>

> Thus, 'daily life' may produce the knowledge of ahdyAsa ( if it

> really exists), but definitely not the knowledge of parabrahman.

> Hence the need

> for pramANa called prasthAna-traya.

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

[Guest guest]

Dear Krishna PrasAd,

 

I am planning to do that under a series called "The problem of ahdyAsa in

advaita"

 

Thanks and regards,

-

Krishna Prasad

advaitin

Wednesday, April 16, 2003 6:15 PM

Re: Adhyasa -II

 

 

Hari OM!

 

Blessed Jayji,

 

Please follow Ramchandraji's suggestions, He is really helpful to

clearing our doubts, and one of the moderators of this Advaitin list.

 

May God Bless You.

 

With Love & OM!

 

Krishna Prasad

 

 

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay wrote:

> Dear Kathirasan-jI,

>

> Please don't be under the impression that I am picking on you

> alone.

> All of us know that the ideas that you have put forward are not

> really yours, they come originally from great thinkers of the

> advaita school of thought,

> which you have represented very well in english, by the by. I do

> appreciate that fact.

>

> >Adhyasa need not be validated or revealed by shruti. Our daily

> experience is

> >sufficient to reveal this fact when analyzed with the revelations

> of the

> >Veda.

>

> Shruti in its entirity reveals only parabrahman. Why? because it

> says so,

> "sarvE vedAh yat padam Amananti, tapAmsi sarvANi yat vadanti"

> When this is clear, the question whether shruti reveals adhyAsa or

> not? does'nt even arise. What you are saying is equivalent to

> "Shakespearean drama need not be validated or revealed by Shruti".

>

> Our daily experience definitely does not reveal parabrahman. If

> that was

> the case, why have all these Veda, study of shAstra, and all these

> discussions. All we had to do was to lead a daily life, which

> every one does

> anyway.

>

> (manushyANAm sahasrEshu kaschit yatati siddhayE, yatatAmapi

> siddhAnAm kaschit

> mAm vEtti tattvataha) - Geetha

> (Among 1000 people who lead their "daily lives", only one tries

> for siddhi,

> and among 1000 such people who try, only one understands Me with

> pramANas).

>

>

> Thus, 'daily life' may produce the knowledge of ahdyAsa ( if it

> really exists), but definitely not the knowledge of parabrahman.

> Hence the need

> for pramANa called prasthAna-traya.

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

 

Sponsor

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Jay-ji,

 

I would much prefer to learn more about any alternative, and

the name you give to it, and have you compare it with with adhyasa,

rather than expound on the latter's shortcomings alone.

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote:

> Dear Krishna PrasAd,

>

> I am planning to do that under a series called "The problem of

ahdyAsa in advaita"

>

> Thanks and regards,

> -

> Krishna Prasad

> advaitin

> Wednesday, April 16, 2003 6:15 PM

> Re: Adhyasa -II

>

>

> Hari OM!

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Jay:

 

As a moderator of the list, I have several suggestions for you:

 

(1) While replying a post, please keep only the relevant section of

the previous post. You seem to be continue to include all previous

messages and the tail of your message grows (like Hanumanji's tail!)

 

(2) The list is highly focused and the moderators are trying theirr

level best to keep 'one important topic' for a month long discussion.

The 'fate and free-will' discussion is a good example with a

volunteer discussion leader (Dennis) along with a moderator (Sadaji).

I don't want a scholarly person like you to engage in news-reporter

style conversations! The list and you can benefit better if you share

your wisdom with focus and true dedication to the Lord.

 

(3) Please send me an email describing what you intent to discuss in

advance. We already have a topic for next month (Jnana and Bhakti).

Sri Sunder a fellow moderator of the list has made a wise suggestion

and I agree with him wholeheartedly. Instead of stating, "The problem

of adhyAsa in advaita" you should be able to address your series as

a comparative study of advaita and visistadvaita or something similar

to that. I also recommend you to check with Sri Sadananda while you

choose the discussion topic.

 

Finally, let me share with you how I enjoyed Dr. S.M.S. Chari's

lectures and personal conversations during his Washington visit. The

admirable part of Dr. Chari's personality is his 'humility' and his

great admiration for Shankara even though he had some diasgreements

with advaita philosophy. He is over 85 years old and more than his

scholarship, I admire his love of our scriptures, his true dedication

and his willingness to share his knowledge without any reservation.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote:

> Dear Krishna PrasAd,

>

> I am planning to do that under a series called "The problem of

ahdyAsa in advaita"

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...>

wrote:

> Namaste Sri Jay:

>

> As a moderator of the list, I have several suggestions for you:

>

> a fellow moderator of the list has made a wise suggestion

> and I agree with him wholeheartedly. Instead of stating, "The

problem

> of adhyAsa in advaita" you should be able to address your series

as

> a comparative study of advaita and visistadvaita or something

similar

> to that.

 

Namaste,

 

In case there is any doubt in anyone's mind of the origin of

the term adhyAsa, it occurs in adhyAtma and nAda-bindu upanishads,

and the term adhyAropa occurs in pai~Ngala upanishad. It was not

an 'invention' of Shankara.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Dear Ram Chandran,

>

> Then how come Sri Shankara had to tell it to us? Why is it not so

evident to other thinkers?

>Namaste Sri Jay: Only Newton has to tell us 'Thelaw of gravity' and

>Einstein has provide us "The theory of relativity." Similarly

>Shankara has to tell us instead of other thinkers!!

 

One difference though, there were many theories on motion before

Newton came along. But later thinkers gave up all their theories.

Today no one even reads about those theories anymore, because scientists

dont have any hangups to cling onto any thing outside of pramANa.

 

Newton's theories were shown by Einstein to be inadequate in explaining certain

gravitational fields. But that did not make Newton's followers angry.

But in the case of vedAnta, if shankar's adhyAsa theory is questioned, it

makes all his followers angry. That is the difference.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Ram chandran,

>I don't want a scholarly person like you to engage in news-reporter

>style conversations! The list and you can benefit better if you share

>your wisdom with focus and true dedication to the Lord

 

Thanks for the compliments. Your suggestion well taken.

 

The content will be basically looking at the theory of adhyAsa,

Is adhyAsa possible at all or not? - kind of discussion.

 

Please suggest a title that we can use. Ofcourse title should reflect the

content as far as possible.

 

Also, point me to the right web-page or email me the documents which

SadAnanda-jI was referring to in Brahma-sootras, I would like to

read all of it before I write the first article, and possibly include

material from there as well.

 

Thanks and regards.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sunder-jI,

 

Namaste.

>In case there is any doubt in anyone's mind of the origin of

>the term adhyAsa, it occurs in adhyAtma and nAda-bindu upanishads,

>and the term adhyAropa occurs in pai~Ngala upanishad. It was not

>an 'invention' of Shankara.

 

Origin of the term adhyAsa is not under dispute at all.

 

adhyAsa happens to us all the time - when we get confused one thing for

another.

So no one can deny the existence of adhyAsa itself. No one can say it was

an 'invention' of Sri Shankara either. We talk to someone who looks like our

friend, but actually he turns out to be a stranger. This happens to us all the

time.

That is nothing but "adhyAsa" at work. So no one can deny the existence of

adhyAsa.

 

The philosophical question is: Is adhyAsa the cause of this world?.

Sri Shankara says Yes, and others say No. That is what is under dispute.

 

prasthAna-traya say parabrahman is the cause of the world. Geetha is full of

that.

"aham kritsnasya jagataha prabhavaha pralayas tathA" etc.

(I am the originator, destructor for this entire universe)

Did SriKrishna forgot that it was adhyAsa, and not Him that was the cause of

this world.

 

In the sootras, there is a whole viyat-pAda in avirOdha adhyAya just on

creation.

There "adhyAsa" does not even show up for discussion.

Did VedavyAsa forget to mention adhyAsa while talking about creation?

 

In the upanishats, "yatO vA imAni bhootAni jAyantE.... tat vijijnAsasva. tad

Brahma"

(all this that exists have come from what? enquire into that. That is Brahman)

What happened to adhyAsa here?

 

So when I say, it is coming from ouside of prathAna-traya, I am not talking of

adhyAsa itself, but I am talking of adhyAsa as being the cause of this world.

 

I hope I made myself clear.

 

 

[Guest guest]

praNAm Jay prabhuji,

Hare Krishna

 

you wrote in response to Sri Sundar prabhuji,

 

The philosophical question is: Is adhyAsa the cause of this world?.

Sri Shankara says Yes, and others say No. That is what is under dispute.

> But there is one more widespread understanding among the advaitins

prabhuji, that parabrahman is both material (upAdAna) & efficient

(nimitta) cause of this world. Sri Prof. V. Krishnamurthy prabhuji has

provided some explicit reasons with scriptural quotes that brahman is

material cause of this universe. With this understanding I dont think you

will find any problem even if you accept the reality of the world, in

ultimate realisation world/universe is also brahman. Sarvam khalvidam

brahma. Sri sadananda prabhuji also explains this comprehensively in brahma

sUtra notes. I think you are rasing objections with Sri GaudapAda's ajAti

vAda as explained in mandUkya kArikas.

>Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

>bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Dear Prabhujis

Hare krishna

 

I've small suggestion here. Would it be possible to advance *adhyAsa*

discussion by one month since this topic has already been discussing by

list members & postpone the topic *gnAna & bhakti* to June as right now we

donot have any specific issue regarding this. Jay prabhuji also will be

having sufficient time to read brahma sUtra notes till first week of May.

This is my humble opinion prabhuji.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

--- bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> Dear Prabhujis

> Hare krishna

>

> I've small suggestion here. Would it be possible to advance *adhyAsa*

> discussion by one month since this topic has already been discussing

> by

> list members & postpone the topic *gnAna & bhakti* to June as right

> now we

> donot have any specific issue regarding this.

 

Shree Bhaskar -Pranaams. I am currently tied up with too many things

and a spiritual camp on Bhagawan Ramana's text - Upadesha saara - during

Memorial week end. Busy also with week end classes and week days with

CBD dead lines. June or even July may be better for me to study and

share my understanding.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

=====

What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift

to Him - Swami Chinmayananda.

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

[Guest guest]

praNAm Sadananda prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

As you wish prabhuji. Sorry for the inconvenience.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote:

> Origin of the term adhyAsa is not under dispute at all.

>

> The philosophical question is: Is adhyAsa the cause of this world?.

> Sri Shankara says Yes, and others say No. That is what is under

dispute.

> I hope I made myself clear.

 

 

Namaste Jayji,

 

I shall await further clarification. Too much smoke is

covering the fire right now!

 

As I said before, I would like to learn a cohesive

alternative to adhyasa, an alternative that specifically clarifies

the four mahavakyas. (Will you please quote the references and the

contexts where Shankara says adhyasa is the cause of this world? - at

a later time).

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Hello Jay-ji,

>From what I understood from the discussion here, till

now.

 

 

 

Brahman is the Universe and Created Everything in the

Universe from himself.

 

The Jiva perceives the Universe differently because of

adhyAsa.

 

So adhyAsa creates a new version of the Universe for

the Jiva.

 

 

 

 

Looking forward to the adhyAsa discussion in June.

 

Regards

 

TKB

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.