Guest guest Posted April 17, 2003 Report Share Posted April 17, 2003 Namaste Sri Jay: You have beautifully articulated "the evolution of "Siddhantas" of "acharyas" based on "Shastras." It is quite remarkable that the followers of Acharyas of different Siddhanta have the common thread of unity called the 'Sanatana Dharma!' Warmest regards, Ram Chandran Note: The explanation that you provided to Sri Greg is likely to create great enthusiasm and expectation for your discussion topic. advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote: > Dear Greg, > > >Are you interested in any *other* topics in advaita vedanta? > > Of course I would be. > A question is a question to all. A research problem is a problem to > both the guide and to the phD student. Our AchAryas are the guides > here and we are the students. > What we know upto today is synopsis or poorva-paksha. > The research we do is "shAstra" > The conclusion we draw because of that research is siddAnta or uttara-paksha. > > Does it mean the research is over? Not at all. > > A research of this kind never comes to an end. Because that 'siddAnta' becomes > synopsis for either the same student at a later time, or to another student. > Research goes on, knowledge grows. > > You can see all this happening if you examine the way 'darshana' has grown in India. > > Each one examines the previous schools and is not content with the conclusions they > arrived at. Therefore they re-examine every aspect of that school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2003 Report Share Posted April 17, 2003 On Thu, 17 Apr 2003, Ram Chandran wrote: > Namaste Sri Jay: > > You have beautifully articulated "the evolution of "Siddhantas" > of "acharyas" based on "Shastras." It is quite remarkable that the > followers of Acharyas of different Siddhanta have the common thread > of unity called the 'Sanatana Dharma!' > > Warmest regards, > > Ram Chandran > > Note: The explanation that you provided to Sri Greg is likely to > create great enthusiasm and expectation for your discussion topic. > > advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote: > > Dear Greg, > > > > >Are you interested in any *other* topics in advaita vedanta? > > > > Of course I would be. > > A question is a question to all. A research problem is a problem > to > > both the guide and to the phD student. Our AchAryas are the guides > > here and we are the students. > > What we know upto today is synopsis or poorva-paksha. > > The research we do is "shAstra" > > The conclusion we draw because of that research is siddAnta or > uttara-paksha. > > > > Does it mean the research is over? Not at all. > > > > A research of this kind never comes to an end. Because > that 'siddAnta' becomes > > synopsis for either the same student at a later time, or to another > student. > > Research goes on, knowledge grows. > > > > You can see all this happening if you examine the way 'darshana' > has grown in India. > > > > Each one examines the previous schools and is not content with the > conclusions they > > arrived at. Therefore they re-examine every aspect of that school. > > namaste shri Ram Chandran-ji and shri Nelamangala-ji, The difficulties with that perspective are: 1. It treats advaita and spirituality as an academic subject which it is not. 2. It treats our past AcAryA-s and upanishadic sages as incomplete and it treats as if we are advancing the subject. Again, this is not the case. Thus, that viewpoint cannot be accepted. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ----- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2003 Report Share Posted April 17, 2003 Dear Ram Chandran Thanks for your kind words. >Because that 'siddAnta' becomes synopsis for either the same student at a >later time, or to another student. Research goes on, knowledge grows. A Mandana-mishra becoming a SurEshwarAchArya is just a case in point. I will add to what Shri SadAnanda pointed out, 'growth' in shAstra implies cleaning up of one's existing knowledge, or acquiring new knowledge or clarifying and hence obtaining more clarity, affirmation ( jnAna-dhArDhya). This is the same irrespective of which school of thought one s to. >Note: The explanation that you provided to Sri Greg is likely to >create great enthusiasm and expectation for your discussion topic. Oh boy! Am I in trouble or what?. They say God is "bhayakrit-bhayanAshanaha". (He is both the creator and destructor of fear). Anything is possible, if there is God's grace. - Ram Chandran advaitin Thursday, April 17, 2003 12:39 PM Re: Adhyasa - Final posting Namaste Sri Jay: You have beautifully articulated "the evolution of "Siddhantas" of "acharyas" based on "Shastras." It is quite remarkable that the followers of Acharyas of different Siddhanta have the common thread of unity called the 'Sanatana Dharma!' Warmest regards, Ram Chandran Note: The explanation that you provided to Sri Greg is likely to create great enthusiasm and expectation for your discussion topic. advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote: > Dear Greg, > > >Are you interested in any *other* topics in advaita vedanta? > > Of course I would be. > A question is a question to all. A research problem is a problem to > both the guide and to the phD student. Our AchAryas are the guides > here and we are the students. > What we know upto today is synopsis or poorva-paksha. > The research we do is "shAstra" > The conclusion we draw because of that research is siddAnta or uttara-paksha. > > Does it mean the research is over? Not at all. > > A research of this kind never comes to an end. Because that 'siddAnta' becomes > synopsis for either the same student at a later time, or to another student. > Research goes on, knowledge grows. > > You can see all this happening if you examine the way 'darshana' has grown in India. > > Each one examines the previous schools and is not content with the conclusions they > arrived at. Therefore they re-examine every aspect of that school. 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2003 Report Share Posted April 17, 2003 Namaste Murthygaru: Your objection confirms that 'search for the Truth' will continue as long as the objecting person disagree! Advaita and spirituality will not be an academic subject to the 'faithful' followers. Those who have faith in the Upanishads and the Acharyas of their choice, no more search is necessary! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy@m...> > > The difficulties with that perspective are: > > 1. It treats advaita and spirituality as an academic subject > which it is not. > > 2. It treats our past AcAryA-s and upanishadic sages as incomplete > and it treats as if we are advancing the subject. Again, this > is not the case. > > Thus, that viewpoint cannot be accepted. > > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2003 Report Share Posted April 17, 2003 Dear GuruMurthy, >It treats our past AcAryA-s and upanishadic sages as incomplete and it treats >as if we are advancing the subject. Again, this is not the case. >Thus, that viewpoint cannot be accepted. Your concerns are very well taken. I have the same respect for our Acharyas as well. Overtake our Acharyas !! you must be kidding. No one in this group including me, is trying to overtake any of our Acharyas. We should consider ourselves blessed if we can get even a fraction of an iota of the kind of depth in knowledge that they had. We are not advancing the subject. We are only trying to advance our knowledge of that subject. Don't worry, the articles I propose to write will keep "jargon" to a minimum, will not bring any AchArya by name, it will only have points of view on the theory of adhyAsa. That too, only after I get a green signal from the moderators of this group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2003 Report Share Posted April 18, 2003 Dear Jayji > Don't worry, the articles I propose to write will keep "jargon" to a minimum, will not bring any AchArya by name, it will only have > points of view on the theory of adhyAsa. That too, only after I get a green signal from the moderators of this group. I look forward to your articles with bated breath. Just a few requests: 1. I am not sure that you should avoid jargon. Whenever we wanted to learn a new subject, we never objected to jargon; we only wanted them explained when used for the first time. It is certainly possible to discuss Trignometry without using the terms Sin, Cos and Tan. But I would suppose it will be far more tedious, much less fun and may not even be quite as effective. 2. Also I feel we should not try to keep out the names of AchaAryas. Knowing that the theory of gravity is from Newton and that of Relativity is from Einstein is not without its own uses and benefits. The only proviso is that we should take their names with utmost reverence which I am sure you will do. Again it is for this reason that it will be useful for us to know the school of vedanta you to which for some reason so far you have not been too keen to tell us. 3. Advaita, atleast for me, has been a very complete and satisfactory explanation for the situation I find myself in for the simple reason that it does not fail logic or my own personal experience anywhere and is able to suggest a way out for all the problems for which I am seeking a solution. And I have every reason to believe that it is according to the scriptures though I am not that well read here. It is here that your objections to it has been the most insistent. So I would request that the subject be dealt with not only from the perspective of Scriptures, but also from those of Logic and human experience - If I am not very wrong the jargon for these 3 perspectives is shruti, yukti and anubhava. My attempts in the past to follow the approaches that you seem to be indicating in your posts atleast for me did not fully meet the requirements of logic and experience. It is here that I expect the greatest help from your articles. For this, in my opinion,it may not be enough if you merely touched upon 'adhyasa' without dealing with the complete world-view according to the alternative interpretation of the scriptures that you support. praNAms, Venkat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2003 Report Share Posted April 18, 2003 Dear Venkataraman, Thanks for brining out some very valid points. Some people in this group think vEdAnta should not be made into a phD theisis, and some others think you can't do away with technical jargon either. All said and done, vEdAnta is something that you learn at the feet of a Guru, and not by email exchanges. As Sri SadAnanda rightly said, we do email exchanges as part of our "manana". So, we will keep a balance on jargon to make both groups comfortable in this email group. >The only proviso is that we should take their names with utmost >reverence which I am sure you will do Thanks for having that much confidence in me. >So I >would request that the subject be dealt with not only from the >perspective of Scriptures, but also from those of Logic and human >experience - If I am not very wrong the jargon for these 3 >perspectives is shruti, yukti and anubhava. Another very good point. "shAstrArtha yuktO anubhavaha pramANam" The final pramANa is our experience which is in line with shAstra. Our experience alone is not the final pramANa because, each person has a different experience, and that experience is 'limited by' and 'limited to' that person. That is why we need something that is apourushEya such as vEda which is not 'limited by' any person, and the enquiry into that vEda which is not 'limited to' any one person. That enquiry comes in the form of shravaNa-manana-nidhidhyAsana or in short called as brahma-jignyAsA. As one's enquiry into vEda becomes more and more refined, the shruti nature of shruti becomes more and more explicit and it reveals its object which is "parabrahman" to the enquirer. Of course, all this can happen only by the Grace of God. "Without his Grace, not even a straw moves" you must have heard this. Shrutis present that idea as "na ritE tvat kimcha nArE maghavan", etc. Similarly, as Sri Kathirasan rightly pointed out if Veda says "Fire is cold" 100 times, it is not pramANA, because it is not in line with our experience. Given this background, "aham brahmAsmi" must be interpreted so as not to contradict our experience and other shrutis, smritis (such as geetha) , and sootras. or prasthAna-traya. I already "know" and I have already experienced that "I am God" - is that is often heard in this group. No one else can deny your experience. But, is it in line with shAstra is the question ?. Look at Geetha, 16.14 "IswarO aham aham bhOgee siddhO aham balavAn sukhee" Geetha, classifies a thought such as "I am God" under "Asuree" svabhAva which is something to be given up like any other Asuree thoughts, "Dambha darpa abhimAna..." like darpa (arrogance), abhimAna (hanging onto what is proved otherwise by pramANa), Dambha (pretending to be someone else knowingly) etc etc. Because of this reason, other AcharyAs say, it is not in line with shAstra. One may say, it may not be in the Geetha, but what about those 4 mahA-vAkyas "tat tvam asi", "aham brahmAsi" etc. Other AcharyAs say what about the 400 other vAkyas such as "jeevastu tad vashaha, alpajnyaha....etc" "yamaivEsha vriNutE tEna labhyaha" (God realization happens to only that person who is chosen by God ) That is where we are today, my friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2003 Report Share Posted April 18, 2003 Dear VenkatarAman, >My attempts in the past to follow the approaches that you seem to be >indicating in your posts atleast for me did not fully meet the requirements >of logic and experience. We will begin the series on AdhyAsa with logic and experience. How about that? >Again it is for this reason >that it will be useful for us to know the school of vedanta you > to which for some reason so far you have not been too keen >to tell us. Knowledge flows from a higher being to a lower being. That is a 'given'. That is why our AchAryas are our Gurus. I to that school which is consistent in explaining what 'is given' with shruti in the light of logic provided by sootras and is not against the Geetha. I to a school which has no self-negating theories, a school which considers Parabrahman as something that is 'to be known', 'to be attained', and as the Highest Teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2003 Report Share Posted April 18, 2003 Namaste Jayji, > We will begin the series on AdhyAsa with logic and experience. > How about that? Fantastic. > I to that school which is consistent in explaining what 'is given' > with shruti in the light of logic provided by sootras and is not against the Geetha. I to a school which has no self- negating theories, > a school which considers Parabrahman as something that is 'to be known', > 'to be attained', and as the Highest Teacher. You have still not answered my question because followers of all schools of Vedanta claim that their school answers to the description that you have provided. I think this is a very important piece of information which can considerably enhance our appreciation of your messages. praNAms, Venkat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 For some reason when I post it still cuts off the last line. It should read: "Of what use is scripture to one who can see as God sees?" Dan a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Suggest strike the ENTER key a few times after signature. Best of luck. Madathil Nair advaitin, "hu_mata" <Humata@a...> wrote: > For some reason when I post it still cuts off the last line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Jay: "I to a school which ... considers Parabrahman as something that is 'to be known', 'to be attained'." D: Not advaita, then. Best wishes, Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Hi Dennis, "advaita" is a term used in upanishat which is a part of prasthAna-traya. If you are using the term "advaita" in that sense, yes I belong to that school. If you are talking of Sri ShankarAcharya's school of thought, then the answer is No, I don't belong to that school. To avoid this confusion, "Sri ShankarAchArya's advaita" is often called mayaavaada by others. - Dennis Waite advaitin Saturday, April 19, 2003 10:06 AM Re: Adhyasa - Final posting Jay: "I to a school which ... considers Parabrahman as something that is 'to be known', 'to be attained'." D: Not advaita, then. Best wishes, Dennis 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Hari OM! Blessed Jayji, Please do not "measure the ocean with a scale you have in your hand". God bless You to have discrimination soon. With Love & OM! Krishna Prasad --- Jay Nelamangala <jay wrote: > Hi Dennis, > "advaita" is a term used in upanishat which is a part of prasthAna-traya. If you are using the term "advaita" in that sense, yes I belong to that school. If you are talking of Sri ShankarAcharya's school of thought, then the answer is No, I don't belong to that school. To avoid this confusion, "Sri ShankarAchArya's advaita" is often called mayaavaada by others. The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Hi Jay, You said: '"Advaita" is a term used in upanishat which is a part of prasthAna-traya. If you are using the term "advaita" in that sense, yes I belong to that school.' Sorry, I should have been a little more explicit. You had previously said "I to a school which ... considers Parabrahman as something that is 'to be known', 'to be attained'." To me, Advaita means 'non-duality', no 'subject and object' etc. Accordingly, parabrahman cannot be known or attained since there is no one who could do either, 'you' simply are it already. It would seem that, if you belong to this school, then you are using the term in a different sense. Best wishes, Dennis 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.