pUrNamadah pUrNamidam... revisited (April 04 topic)

April 14, 2004

Namaste, dear Balaji,

Today being a holiday for us in Calcutta, I have gone through your mail very

carefully.

I do not know whether I should with agree with whatever you said regarding

“enlightenment” and “liberation” and how difficult it is to attain it, and the

fact it may take many births, even to know what exactly is the meaning of

enlightenment. True, because I do not know what exactly is meant by

“enlightenment” and “liberation”

First of all:-

<<<<Donot think that you are already enlightened, just because Advaita says so.

Advaita means to say 'You are already enlightened' only if you are enlightened.

Till then there is incorrect understanding>>>>

I do not entertain any such thought that I am already enlightened, whether

Advaita means to say so or not.

I mentioned “for me”, yes for me only, liberation means abiding “to some extent”

in a mind not agitated by the shad urmies. Further, I also said, by exposure to

Advaita Vedanta, again I say, to some extent, I have managed to be emotionally

mature.

To my little understanding, there is no “thinking” involved in liberation, as it

is “thinking” alone brings us all the misery. This is my understanding, I repeat

this is my understanding.

Whatever you said regarding how difficult it is to get “samatwam” rather be in

samatwam, I appreciate, in totality.

All I said was, from the point of the life one, at least me, has to live, and

how Advaita helps one, at least me to live one’s/my life peacefully.

Regarding anthakaranashudhi, I said once the knowledge takes place of the

reality of anthakarana, no further “effort” is required. I did not have even any

idea that my anthakarana required shudhi till I was exposed to the Teaching.

When the teaching started to work on me, anthakarnashudhi also started taking

place side by side, again I repeat to some extent, and there was no need for me

to take any effort for that. This is what I meant and if you think that I think

that I am already enlightened, that is not my problem. It is all how people

think about others.

All advise that one should become “desireless” to get anthakaranashudhi. It is

my privilege to desire, as Icha Shakti is given to me in addition to Jnanashakti

and Kriyashakti. I can even desire for a Jumbo Jet. What is wrong, and if I can

afford I can have it also. However, if I desire the Jumbo Jet because it is

going to make me happy, rather my happiness depends on Jumbo Jet, that desire or

that thinking is wrong- - -that is my understanding. It can serve a

purpose/provided there is a purpose for me, but my happiness need not and does

not depend on that.

If I am “enlightened” Advaita need not say that. Further, Advaita only unfolds

the Swaroopa of the Self i.e. Atma. It says, knowing that one crosses shoka.

Yes, to some extent I have managed to cross shoka, and with that knowledge,

(Atmana Vindate veeryam, to me only a little veeryam), I am sure, I will be able

to continue to cross shoka, at least to some extent.

I purposely use the words “to some extent” every time, as not only it is a

fact, but also, as otherwise you will take whatever I say as as if I am trying

to show you I am enlightened. In my understanding, liberation or enlightenment

is a personal affair, it is not like wearing a costly suit and one trying to

show it around. In my mail to you, I have only stated whatever little I could

understand from the Teaching.

I have done some reading on Bhagavan Ramana, Sri Ramakrishna, Adi Shankara,

Budha, etc. I learn from their Teachings quite a lot. My very humble

namaskarams to them again and again. I respect them and revere them from the

depth of my heart.

When you say equanimity is prerequisite for enlightenment, how can one,

particularly one who has no idea of equanimity, gain equanimity? It is only

through knowledge. I hope, you will agree. Where can I get that knowledge? In my

opinion, the knowledge of self swallows that also. Equanimity will lead to what?

Acceptance and accommodation of everything. That accommodation and acceptance I

call as emotional maturity.

I reciprocate and say with love for you that please do not misunderstand that I

try to show you that I am enlightened or liberated, nor do I think so, as quite

frankly even now I do not know what is the meaning of enlightenment and

liberation. I understand “sa na punaravartate” as, that person, who had an

exposure to That Knowledge, does not come back and entertain the earlier notions

he had about his own self, and about the world of objects and Easwara. The fact

that I am a member of this Group itself shows that I am continuing to learn and

understand any misunderstanding I have.

However, please let me know what exactly is your idea of “enlightenment” and

“liberation”, and why do you want to get enlightened/liberated, if at all you

want that?

With all good wishes and Love

Mani

Balaji Ramasubramanian <balajiramasubramanian wrote:Namaste Maniji,

Thankyou for reading my post carefully and for giving so much

attention to the import of the words. I shall, without advising

Tax Center - File online by April 15th

April 14, 2004

Namaste Maniji,

My post though was addressed to you, was not meant as an advice to

you. I agree with all that you say and all that you had said in the

earlier post as well. However, just to remind all of us again of a

fact, (to be used a reminder from now onwards) that the path ahead of

us is very long.

I agree with you fully and especially on the wonderful notes you made

in the last post and the previous ones as well. You posts are surely

very readable and enjoyable and are sources of profound knowledge.

They surely reflect your correct understanding of advaita philosophy.

May all beings be liberated

April 14, 2004

Namaste Maniji,

You wrote:

<<

> However, please let me know what exactly is your idea

of "enlightenment" and "liberation", >>>

I wish I had any idea. They say "Ashcharyavat pashyati kashchidenam".

Possibly I (an maybe all of us) are in for a surprise.

<<< and why do you want to get enlightened/liberated, if at all you

want that?

> >>

That was a very good question! I think your question is very rightly

asked. I think all of us should answer that question to ourselves

than to anyone else, for it is easy to say something. One can never

fool himself about his intentions. Let me simplify the task for all

of us, by giving you a set of choices. Answer this question for

oneself:

1. To become a guru/lokaguru and teach advaita to everyone like

Shankara. Some day I want to be called Shankara's incarnation.

2. Because I have faith in my religion and since my religion says

that it is the best thing to do, I shall do so.

3. I want to see God face to face. I want to know if he looks like

what I think/I want to be good friends with him etc.

4. I am curious to know the truth. There is so much said about it, I

want to know who is correct after all/I want to know what is the

absolute truth.

5. I want to see my Atma. Does it look like me? (Or I want to know

who/what I really am)

6. I am an advaitin and therefore I wish to see my Atma merge into

the paramAtma/Brahman. (Some people believe that paramAtma is the

supreme and hence larger in size than Atma) (Note: For other schools

of philosophy, replace their cheif understandings here)

7. I want to experience that Anandam. It must be ecstatic.

8. I am disillusioned with my way of life. I want to be the king of

some worlds, like heaven or something.

9. I don't want to be born again, because I will have to go to school

then! (Replace with some other thing you disliked about your life

here if that sounded too childish a reason. Perhaps you are afraid

that you may be born as ants or something!)

Appear as plausible reasons right? Which one is yours?

What? You don't think any of those choices suited you?

How about this....

10. I am disillusioned with life. I have so many desires/worries.

There is no end to it! I am constantly agitated with my

desires/worries. My living has become a constant quest for

desire/worry. I am not content with all this. I am only temporarily

satisfied with visit to holy places or temples or with mantras. I am

now disenchanted with this life. There seems no purpose to life.... I

don't want any 'liberation' or anything....

I shall try to approximate it with words. A better wording of this,

which was Sree Rama's case is possibly best found in the

Yogavasishtha.

May all beings be liberated

Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam

April 15, 2004

Hari OM!

Blessed Balaji-ji

In these set of questions if we can know who is that wanting person,

is he first person singular??? if we can analyze that, then all this

questions will be dissolved.

All the wanting and desires should end....

You know nowadays people learn vedanta to go to America!

With Love & OM!

Krishna Prasad

advaitin, "Balaji Ramasubramanian"

<balajiramasubramanian> wrote:

> Namaste Maniji,

>

> You wrote:

> <<

> > However, please let me know what exactly is your idea

> of "enlightenment" and "liberation", >>>

>

> I wish I had any idea. They say "Ashcharyavat pashyati

kashchidenam".

> Possibly I (an maybe all of us) are in for a surprise.

>

> <<< and why do you want to get enlightened/liberated, if at all you

> want that?

> > >>

>

> That was a very good question! I think your question is very

rightly

> asked. I think all of us should answer that question to ourselves

> than to anyone else, for it is easy to say something. One can never

> fool himself about his intentions. Let me simplify the task for all

> of us, by giving you a set of choices. Answer this question for

> oneself:

>

> 1. To become a guru/lokaguru and teach advaita to everyone like

> Shankara. Some day I want to be called Shankara's incarnation.

> 2. Because I have faith in my religion and since my religion says

> that it is the best thing to do, I shall do so.

> 3. I want to see God face to face. I want to know if he looks like

> what I think/I want to be good friends with him etc.

> 4. I am curious to know the truth. There is so much said about it,

I

> want to know who is correct after all/I want to know what is the

> absolute truth.

> 5. I want to see my Atma. Does it look like me? (Or I want to know

> who/what I really am)

> 6. I am an advaitin and therefore I wish to see my Atma merge into

> the paramAtma/Brahman. (Some people believe that paramAtma is the

> supreme and hence larger in size than Atma) (Note: For other

schools

> of philosophy, replace their cheif understandings here)

> 7. I want to experience that Anandam. It must be ecstatic.

> 8. I am disillusioned with my way of life. I want to be the king of

> some worlds, like heaven or something.

> 9. I don't want to be born again, because I will have to go to

school

> then! (Replace with some other thing you disliked about your life

> here if that sounded too childish a reason. Perhaps you are afraid

> that you may be born as ants or something!)

>

> Appear as plausible reasons right? Which one is yours?

>

What? You don't think any of those choices suited you?

>

How about this....

>

> 10. I am disillusioned with life. I have so many desires/worries.

> There is no end to it! I am constantly agitated with my

> desires/worries. My living has become a constant quest for

> desire/worry. I am not content with all this. I am only temporarily

> satisfied with visit to holy places or temples or with mantras. I

am

> now disenchanted with this life. There seems no purpose to life....

I

> don't want any 'liberation' or anything....

>

> I shall try to approximate it with words. A better wording of this,

> which was Sree Rama's case is possibly best found in the

> Yogavasishtha.

>

> May all beings be liberated

>

> Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam

April 15, 2004

Namaste Krishnaji,

> In these set of questions if we can know who is that wanting

person,

> is he first person singular??? if we can analyze that, then all

this

> questions will be dissolved.

You are so right. But the person will not do such analysis just like

that. Why should he, in the first place? Possibly the enquiry starts

elsewhere and results in liberation.

> You know nowadays people learn vedanta to go to America!

Whoah! If that is true, God bless them! May such beings come on the

right path.

Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam

April 15, 2004

advaitin, "Krishna Prasad" <rkrishp99>

wrote:

>

> You know nowadays people learn vedanta to go to America!

>

Namaste!

That's funny. I hope people don't have to go to America to learn

Vedanta :-)

Harih Om!

Neelakantan

> With Love & OM!

>

> Krishna Prasad

April 15, 2004

Namaste Balaji

The sole purpose of human life (after going through countless previous births)

is to gain eternal happiness which is infinte.

To experience that infinte happiness we have to become that.

This is not possible until we are bonded in the cycle of births-deaths.

This birth-death cycle is a disease (Bhavarog) and we have to get rid of this

Bhavarog.

When a person longs for this eternal happiness(though he may be still a

beginner) and when he knows that everything in this world is impermanent and

impermanet things cannot give permanent happiness, he bocme a Mumukshu (person

having Brahmajigyasa).

Once the seed of Mumukshatva is sown, he is sure to get moksha today or

tomorrow.

This is the final goal of all living creatures.

One may think - why to do all this sadhana and philosophy. What if i dont get

moksha. I will go through countless births-deaths and experience joy and sorrow.

I am ready for it.

But unknowingly all the creatures strive for happiness. Similarly this person

will one day (maybe after many births) come to conclusion that to gain eternal

happiness i have to do sadhan and gain enlightenment and finally moksha. Then he

becomes a Mumukshu.

Hope you got whatever i am trying to say.

Eternal Happiness is only the sole purpose.

Om tat-sat

Vishal

..

Tax Center - File online by April 15th

April 19, 2004

On 7th of April Sri Ramachandra prabhuji wrote:

At the Paramarthika level of reality, the Brahman/World is

changeless and there is no distinction between the world and the

Brahman.

praNAm Sri Ramachandran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Pardon me for the delay in response, reasons you know very well. Since

I've not read any of the subsequent mails in this thread, I dont know

whether your above observation has been addressed by list members. I am

desparately want to know where exactly shankara uses brahman / world

alternatively while talking about pAramArthika satya. It would be better

for us to see what shruti offers on world (jagat / prapancha / srushti /

prakruti ) & nirvishesha, nirvikAra parama satya para brahman. I would

like to bring to your kind notice that jagat kAraNatva of parabrahman,

kArya -kAraNa prakriya of parabrahman & jagat satyatva etc. have been

categorically denied in mAndukya kArika by gaudapAda, in kArikA bhAshya by

shankara & in bruhad vArtika by sureshwara. Further, prabhuji, I also

want to know where this world go in our deep sleep state?? I humbly

request you to educate me about the reality of the world by taking

avasthAtraya into consideration. As far as my naive understanding of

advaita, waking world is real to the waker & so is the case with dreamer

with his dreaming world. But these two worlds (!!??) ( very much in the

different realm of time & space) are clearly absent in our deep sleep state

& that is the reason why we call this jagat is mere false appearance in

avastha. Do we still have to call this world (which is within the

parameters of time & space) is as real as parabrahman prabhuji . Kindly

clarify.

Humble praNAms once again

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

April 19, 2004

Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji wrote on 7th of April 2004:

Thus, Bhaskarji, in conclusion, jagat is sad-vastu misunderstood,

like the mis-seen tree, miscognized Devadatta and the mistaken snake

on the rope. The mis-seen, miscognized, mistaken, or misapprehended

jagat is pUrNa as the sad-vastu it really is. So, where is the change

now. The contention that the world changes is in fact as erroneous

as the zig-zagness the astigmatic imposes on the normal tree. I

cannot go any farther than this. I hope I have carried you with me.

praNAm Sri Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

How long this business of seeing continue is my humble question to you

prabhuji?? is this seer & being seen in parabrahman continue for ever??

If it get stopped at some point of time...when is it?? Pls. clarify.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

April 19, 2004

Namaste Bhaskarji,

Your question is based on some vague imagination of Brahman as

different from the Universe. The rishis say 'Sarvam Brahma mayam',

not 'Sarve Brahma mayam'. There is surely a difference. Any object

with form, any feelings, any perception, any vAsanas or any jAgrt,

swapna or sushupta consciousness is impermanent, and not the self.

This knowledge of neti itself leads to the correction of our

presupposition of the self. The undivided consciousness that we call

the Self/Brahman is what is left. This supreme consciousness exists

in all living or non-living beings. Phenomena of this Universe are

not this supreme consciousness. We unfortunately recognize the

external phenomena to be the Truth, which is not. When we say, The

nature of the Universe is the same as that of Brahman, we mean the

supreme consciousness of the Universe as being the same as the Self.

Let me give you an example, if you look at a banana and say 'This is

a banana' you are having right cognition and hence you know the

Brahman. But if you say, this is a yellow banana, a black banana, a

ripe banana or a rotten banana, you have incorrect cognition and

hence perceive the Universe as phenomena. Such truths as the Brahman

is the same as the intrinsic nature of the Universe are not

understandable at this stage.

Nevertheless, I would suggest you to forget about such metaphysics

and to concentrate more on the Sadhana aspects of vedAnta. This is

because, even after trying to explain this concept to you, I myself

know that I have not the confidence to tell you how or why, because

of my ignorance. Such worded explanations cannot describe it very

well. It has to be cognized (known or realized).

Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam

April 19, 2004

Namaste Bhaskarji,

<<<How long this business of seeing continue is my humble question to

you

> prabhuji?? is this seer & being seen in parabrahman continue for

ever??

> If it get stopped at some point of time...when is it?? Pls.

clarify.>>>

Your very nature is to know this truth. Your ignorance is prohibiting

you from knowing you nature as thus. Therefore once ignorance melts,

the nature of the Self as the ever cognizant and the ever cognizing

is known. Such, cognition is endless and limitless. It is surely

effortless. So such cognition of the supreme Self is eternal.

Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam

April 19, 2004

Namaste Bhaskarji.

If and when it 'gets stopped', then time also stops. Any question

beginning with a 'when' then doesn't apply. Such questions are,

therefore, better not asked. So, enjoy the seeing as it lasts,

without of course feeling that we are seeing anything apart from us.

PraNAms.

Madathil Nair

_____________________

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

>

> How long this business of seeing continue is my humble question to

you

> prabhuji?? is this seer & being seen in parabrahman continue for

ever??

> If it get stopped at some point of time...when is it?? Pls.

clarify.

April 20, 2004

thank you nairji!

Sadar Pranaams !

please allow me to share this with you all !

DEIVATIN KURAL (The voice of the God)

"ATHUVETHAN ITHU"-- The teachings of Shankara.

"Marathai Maraithathu Mamatha Yanai Marathil Marainthathu Mamatha

Yanai"

"Parathai Maraithathu Parmuthal Bhutham Parathil Marainthathu

Parmuthal Bhutham"

"THIRUMULAR"

Viewing the wooden elephant, the child of the carpenter cautions his

father - "Father! Do not go near the elephant! It will hurt you." But

the carpenter allays the fears of the child, "Child! This elephant is

made out of wood and hence it will not hurt you."

Sage Thirumular points out - "Like there is no difference between the

elephant and the wood, the universe and Paramatma are not different.

The Universe (Elephant) is made out of Paramatma (Wood). Just like

the child does not see the wood (Paramatma) in the elephant

(Universe), we do not see the Paramatma in the Universe.

Our vision is covered by the five elements (senses) which created

this Universe from seeing the same. But the "Attained Ones" see

Paramatma in everything in the Universe. To them, the elements of

creation have merged into the wood (Paramatma - The Creator). This

knowledge of the unison of the Paramatma and the Universe must be

kept in the heart and mind of everyone and will act as a "Gnana Oli"

(Divine Light) to drive away the darkness around us.

HARI AUM TAT SAT

-

-- In advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Bhaskarji.

>

> If and when it 'gets stopped', then time also stops. Any question

> beginning with a 'when' then doesn't apply. Such questions are,

> therefore, better not asked. So, enjoy the seeing as it lasts,

> without of course feeling that we are seeing anything apart from us.

>

> PraNAms.

>

> Madathil Nair

> _____________________

>

> advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

> >

> > How long this business of seeing continue is my humble question

to

> you

> > prabhuji?? is this seer & being seen in parabrahman continue for

> ever??

> > If it get stopped at some point of time...when is it?? Pls.

> clarify.

April 20, 2004

Namaste Bhaskar Prabhuji,

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

> How long this business of seeing continue is my humble

> question to you prabhuji?? is this seer & being seen in

> parabrahman continue for ever?? If it get stopped at some

> point of time...when is it?? Pls. clarify.

The Acharya has already answered this question in the Brahma Sutra

Bhashya, I.1.5

QUOTE

Vedantin: No, for even in the absence of any object, it is said, "The

sun shines", thereby ascribing agency to the sun. Similarly, even

though Brahman has no object of knowledge, it is reasonable to

ascribe agentship to It by saying, "It saw". Hence there is no

inaptitude. If, however, the need of supplying an object (for the

transitive verb "to know") arises, the Vedic texts speaking

of "seeing" by Brahman become all the more logical.

Samkhya: What are those objects which form the content of God's

knowledge before creation?

Vedantin: We say that they are the unmanifested name and form which

cannot be referred to either as different or non-different from

Brahman, and which are about to become manifested. It goes without

saying that the eternally pure God is ever possessed of the knowledge

of creation, continuance, and dissolution; for it is held by the

adepts in the Yoga scriptures that the Yogins get their direct

knowledge about the past and the future out of His grace.

The further objection was raised that, since Brahman has no body etc.

before creation, no seeing is possible for It. That objection can

hardly be raised; for like the effulgence of the sun, Brahman has

eternal consciousness by Its very nature, so that It has no

dependence on the means of knowledge. Moreover, in the case of a

transmigrating soul, subject to ignorance, the rise of knowledge

depends on body etc., but not so in the case of God whose knowledge

is free from obstacles. And thus it is that the following two mantras

show how God is not dependent on body etc., and how His knowledge has

no covering: "He has no body and no organ; none is seen to be either

equal or superior to Him. The Vedas speak of His diverse supreme

powers as also of His spontaneous action that is accomplished by His

vigour arising from knowledge (Sv.VI.8). "Without hands and feet He

grasps and moves quickly; he sees without eyes, hears without ears.

He knows (all) that is to be known, but none can know Him. Him they

call the first, the great, and the all-pervasive Entity" (Sv.III.19).

UNQUOTE

If there is still doubt in the matter, the next sutra clarifies with

finality: "If it be argued that the seeing is in a secondary sense,

we say, not so, owing to the use of the word Self".

SEEING BELONGS ETERNALLY TO THE SELF. NOW THEN, HOW CAN THE SELF THAT

IS REALISED AS BRAHMAN EVER BE OBSTRUCTED FROM SEEING?

Pranams,

Chittaranjan

April 21, 2004

If and when it 'gets stopped', then time also stops. Any question

beginning with a 'when' then doesn't apply. Such questions are,

therefore, better not asked. So, enjoy the seeing as it lasts,

without of course feeling that we are seeing anything apart from us.

praNAm Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Yes prabhuji, you are absolutely right, *when* & *where* are not applicable

in that state. Thats why seers of shruti say paramArtha jnAna is desha,

kAlAthItha. But in the world both time & space are there & gets modified

in our waking & dream worlds accordingly & this false appearance is

completely absent in our deep sleep state!! Hence it is called mithyA or

avidyA kalpita mAyA. Anyway, prabhuji, we can enjoy the *seeing* of waking

world as it lasts till the time we go to some other world i.e. dreaming

world & enjoy the *seeing* as a dreamer in dreaming world till we wake up

to the waking world!!??

More constructive & reference based understanding of world from my

perspective will follow after looking at shankara's bruhadAraNyaka shruti

bhAshya.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

April 21, 2004

Namaste Bhaskarji,

praNAm Sri Balaji prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Balaji prabhuji:

Your question is based on some vague imagination of Brahman as

different from the Universe.

bhaskar

Not so prabhuji. I am questioning the very existence of world in all the

three states of ours i.e. jAgrat, svapna & sushupti. Have I anywhere said

that brahman & world are different??

Balaji prabhuji:

The rishis say 'Sarvam Brahma mayam',

not 'Sarve Brahma mayam'. There is surely a difference. Any object

with form, any feelings, any perception, any vAsanas or any jAgrt,

swapna or sushupta consciousness is impermanent, and not the self.

bhaskar:

yes U R right prabhuji. Our self is there as sAkshi to witness all these

avastha's. In these avasthas our sAkshi does not undergo any modification

but world does!!

Balaji prabhuji:

This knowledge of neti itself leads to the correction of our

presupposition of the self. The undivided consciousness that we call

the Self/Brahman is what is left. This supreme consciousness exists

in all living or non-living beings.

bhaskar:

But prabhuji this living or non-living beings are nothing but avidyA

kalpita, mere mind game so says shruti, kArika & shankara bhAshya. In

mundaka shruti bhAshya shankara says avyAkruta, hiraNya garbha, virAt

purusha etc.etc. are born out of avidyA.

Balaji prabhuji:

Phenomena of this Universe are

not this supreme consciousness. We unfortunately recognize the

external phenomena to be the Truth, which is not. When we say, The

nature of the Universe is the same as that of Brahman, we mean the

supreme consciousness of the Universe as being the same as the Self.

bhaskar:

Yes prabhuji,but you must be aware of the problems in arriving logical

conclusion as

regards to creation if we analyse creation theory from shruti perspective.

As we know, shruti itself giving different origin of creation at different

places...The logical consistency in explaining the *effect* (kArya) is

apparently lacking on the face of shruti purports. The mundaka shruti says

spider exudes & withdraws, plants born out of the earth, hair out of living

person etc. as regards to cause & effect. but in taitirIya we've some

different account about creation sOkAmayata, bahusyAm prajayeyEti etc. etc.

& in praShna & AitarEya shruti-s it is something

else. Prabhuji, with this dont you think the creation what we are holding

as a

reality & effect of the primordial cause is only for the name sake?? For

that matter Shruti itself declaring vAchArambhaNam vikAro nAma dhEyam as

regards to nAma rupAtmaka jagat, mruttikEva satyam as regards to chaitanya

vastu. It is evident shruti's primary intention is to teach us about the

parabrahman who is beyond cause & effect nomenclature & strictly not

advocating the material cause as such to prove the reality of jagat...We

can consider this srushti is merely a superimposition (adhyArOpa) on

adhishtAna vastu (substratum) the same will be negated & sublated (apavAda)

after the dawn of pUrNa jnAna. If we hold both cause & effect, nimitta &

upadAna kAraNatva

of parabrahman eternally, it leads us to further problem as said in my

earlier mail

that we never ever able to obscure the snakeness from the rope & we have to

be forever under the spell of avidyA only. As you know, shankara

categorically rejects the view of holding the eternal reality of both cause

& effect in arriving his siddhAnta.

Moreover, as said earlier, in dream state we are the pramAtru & we are the

pramEya & we are the pramAna to get vishaya jnAna. Why dont we stretch

this to our waking state also?? after all, shruti saying we have to

witness both waking & dream states with same degree of reality from sAkshi

bhAva. & In continuation shruti elsewhere says this triputi (jnAtru, jnEya

& jnAna) is conspicuosly absent in our deep sleep state (sushupti) wherein

mAtA amAtA, pitA apitA & even veda-s are no vedas

(reference vide bruhadAraNyaka shruti). So, prabhuji, IMHO the effect in

the form of

creation is not really there in reality since shruti's main purport is to

advocate Atmaikatva. We've ample references about the futility in holding

brahma jagat kAraNatva in gaudapAda kArika-s & shankara' commentary on

kArika also. We will discuss this elaborately when we take up Sri

Chittaranjan prabhuji's topic for month long discussion.

However, I'd like to reiterate that this is my naive understanding of

shankara siddhAnta prabhuji, kindly correct me if I strayed anywhere from

shruti pratipAdya siddhAnta.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

April 22, 2004

praNAm prabhujis

Hare Krishna

First of all, I'd like to offer my humble praNAms to Sri Sunder prabhuji

who has guided me to the shankara's commentary on pUrNamadah shAnti maNtra.

Atlast, I can say, I've some base to put-forth my views on the claims of

pAramArthika satyatva of jagat (eternal reality of jagat/world in

parabrahman).

Sri Shankara BhagavadpAda at the very beginning itself in his commentary

makes it amply clear the context in which the khila kAnda, the 5th

chapter comes in bruhadAraNkaya shruti ( pUrNamadah ityAdi khila kAndam

ArabhyatE). So, it is very important for us first to understand

shankara's position before going through his commentary. In the

introductory part of his commentary shankara clearly says in the previous

4 chapters it has been described the true nature of para brahman & now in

the khila kAnda chapter of bruhadAraNyaka shruti advocating OmkArOpAsana /

praNavOpAsana of sOpAdhika para brahman through upAsana which is not

against karma & conducive for krama mukti & more importantly this upAsana

he says vyavahAra vishayA ( athunA tasaiva AtmanaH sOpAdhikasya

shabdhArthAdhi *vyavahAra vishayApannasya* purastaad anuktAni, upAsanAni,

karmabhira viruddhAni, prakruShtAbhyudaya sAdhanAni, krama mukti bhAnji

chayAni tAni vyAkta vyAni iti saNdarbhaH).

With this background, now, we can approach shankara bhAshya on pUrNamidam

maNtra. As discussed earlier, shankara also says pUrNamadaH is parabrahman

only, so in that we dont have any disputes :-)). But it is very important

to be noted that while commenting on *pUrNamidaM* shankara nowhere mentions

the word *jagat* per se to describe the *jagat pUrNatva* in idaM. About

*idaM* shankara says it is nothing but brahman in the nAmes & forms with

attributes (sOpAdhikasya) & has the reality in transactions. So, when the

ultimate knowledge dawns we realise that this nAma, rUpa (i.e. kArya rUpa)

has its roots in avidyA & only ekamEvAdvitIya satyatvam of Atma vastu is

pAramArthika which has been described in shrutis as neither outside, nor

inside, which is pragnAna ghana & has yEka rasaM (avidyAkrutaM bhuta

mAtrOpAdhi saMsargajaM anyatvAbhAsaM tiraskrutya).

Further, shankara makes it evident that this nAma rUpAdhi samsarga sprout

out of our ignorance only & donot have reality whatsoever in kAryatva of

parabrahman. Taking the same upanishad mantra (1-4-10) he says in effect

( kArya) what we see upAdhikruta nAma rUpa in essence pUrNa only ( but not

in the sence that both kAryA & kAraNa are full ) but this names & forms

with limited adjuncts is nothing but a false appearance in avidyA. That

is the reason why, in shruti, it is said that at the beginning brahman

alone & he realises that he is brahman. It is not said that he realises

that jagat is brahman. (shankara says in the commentary : brahmAvA

idamagra AsIt tadAtmAnam Eva vEdahaM brahmAsmeethi tasmAt ataH adaH shabda

vAchyaM pUrNam brahma! tadEvEdam pUrNam kAryastaM nAma rUpOpAdhi saMyuktaM

*avidyayA udriktaM*)

With this, I think there is no harm in saying that shankara's *idaM* of

pUrNa is sOpAdhika brahman or nAma rUpAtmaka jIva bhAva & not definitely

avidyA kalpita mAya or jagat.

Now, we have come to the very important stage in which shankara takes us to

the theories now floating about jagat satyatva in parabrahman. In short,

what we have heard sofar in this list is parabrahman is pAramArthika satya

& in brahman, kArya rUpa jagat with names & forms is also real & vyavahAra

between kAraNa-kAryatva in brahman eternal. This souds like bharthru

prapancha's dvaitAdvaita school which shankara has taken for refutation in

the subsequent commentary on the same mantra. Since this mail already

getting lengthy, I'd not go into the details of it. Shankara says here

others (dvaitAdvaita vAdins) describe this mantra ( atra yekE varNayanti)

& say from pUrNa (cause-kAraNa) of parabrahman, pUrNa (effect-kArya) jagat

will come. That which has come from pUrNa at present even in duality pUrNa

only. ( pUrNAt kAraNAt pUrNam kAryaM udrichyate! udriktam kAryaM vartamAna

kAlEpi pUrNamEva paramArtha vastu bhutam dvaita rUpENa!) So, it is clear

that if we hold both jagat & brahma satyatva eternally it is not advaita,

it is theory of dvaitAdvaita school propagated by Bhartru prapancha etc.

Further, shankara narrates the dvaitAdvaita school view that even in

srushti, sthiti, laya in all three times this pUrNatva of parabrahman will

be there in bhEda rUpa. & for the sake of convenient teaching ONE & ONLY

parabrahman described as pUrNa in kArya & kAraNa. exp : water, waves,

bubbles, foam etc. in ocean. This is more or less similar to *purNamidaM*-

jagat in this thread. But shankara categorically refutes this view by

saying this is totally contradictory to shruti-s & it is like throwing

away shruti vAkya-s such as brahman has neither inside, nor outside, it is

astUla, anaNu etc. (sarvAh samudre prakshiptAH syuH!!).

For further details, I humbly request all the members to go through

shankara bhAshya on this mantra & sureshwavara's brahadAraNyaka vArthika in

detail.

No need to mention, this is my understanding of the shanti mantra & I may

be wrong in reading shankara. Hence, I humbly request the learned members

to kindly correct me with appropriate references from shankara bhAshya.

It is to be noted that instead of depending heavily on intellectual

answers, it is better to have the approval from shankara bhAshya while

drafting our understanding on shankara siddhAnta, so that speculative

answers can be avoided.

praNAms once again

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

April 22, 2004

Namaste Bhaskarji,

Please don't address me as prabhuji. It is not apt. I am much younger

than you and am not enlightened.

<<<<<<<> Not so prabhuji. I am questioning the very existence of

world in all the

> three states of ours i.e. jAgrat, svapna & sushupti. Have I

anywhere said

> that brahman & world are different??>>>>>>>

The objects in the Universe and the phenomena are impermanent in all

three states. Whether we know it or not. This is the reason that the

Universe is said to be impermanent.

On the contrary Brahman is eternal. So how is the intrinsic nature of

the Universe the same as Brahman?

That the all objects in the Universe and all phenomena are

impermanent is bodha. When this is known wisdom of equanimity,

towards all objects and phenomena dawns, it is called Brahman.

Brahman is not an object, but is this wisdom of equanimity. This

equanimity is the same for all objects in the universe whether gold

or clay. Hence, it is said that the intrinsic nature of the Universe

is Brahman. However, the Universe is different from Brahman.

For example, the Upanishad says:

sarvam khalu idam brahma tajjalAn, iti shanta upAsIta

The word tajjalAn is a akuaula-samasta-shabda (a grammatical form,

not part of pANinI's grammar, which came much after the Upanishad)

and is explained beautifully by Shankara as birth, maintainence and

destruction. This is the indication of impermanence of the Universe.

Some other time, I shall explain how impermanent the Universe is.

This is from my own anubhUti, which however is very little, and does

not show that the whole Universe is impermanent. (I am not so

advanced!)

But, note that the words are 'sarvam khalu idam brahma' not 'sarve

khalu ime brahma'. Thus it is talking of not the phenomena and the

objects in the Universe, but the underlying principle of the

Universe, which is tajjalAn.

<<<<<<<But prabhuji this living or non-living beings are nothing but

avidyA kalpita, mere mind game so says shruti, kArika & shankara

bhAshya. In mundaka shruti bhAshya shankara says avyAkruta, hiraNya

garbha, virAt purusha etc.etc. are born out of avidyA.>>>>>>

Alright, but the underlying law of impermanence is the same for all

of them. This knowledge, when dawned leads to equanimity and hence,

the underlying principle of all is the same - wisdom.

<<<< As we know, shruti itself giving different origin of creation at

different places...The logical consistency in explaining the *effect*

(kArya) is apparently lacking on the face of shruti purports. The

mundaka shruti says spider exudes & withdraws, plants born out of the

earth, hair out of living person etc. as regards to cause & effect.

>>>>

Why are you concerned with the origin of the Universe? We are not

here to satisfy our curiosity of the Universe or of Brahman, but to

become equanimous and free from all sorrows and suffering (birth and

death included). The knowledge of the origin of the Universe etc. are

a by-product of such adhyAtma-jnAna.

Anyway, the muNDaka says that the Universe is impermanent, when it

says that the spider exudes and withdraws. In fact, this is not a

poetic way of saying things. This is truly anubhUti. The way the

Universe is created and destroyed constantly nearly a google (1

followed by a hundred zeroes) times in a second.

Again, when the taittriya says that the Universe is created due to

will and desire, it is not wrong either. These centers of creation,

of dreams and the Universe in jAgrat state etc. are in the mind and

are surely therefore a will creates the Universe (not will of the

mind, but of our self). Brahman is not different from the self. One

can understand this better when one realizes the truth.

<<<<<<<<It is evident shruti's primary intention is to teach us about

the parabrahman who is beyond cause & effect nomenclature & strictly

not advocating the material cause as such to prove the reality of

jagat...>>>>>>>>>>

Well, in my opinion, the shruti cannot tell you what brahman is. No

words can do so. But, it can tell you what is not Brahman. As Sri

ramaNa says, 'Meditation is not for knowing what is Brahman, but for

knowing, what is not Brahman.'

<<<<<<<We can consider this srushti is merely a superimposition

(adhyArOpa) on adhishtAna vastu (substratum) the same will be negated

& sublated (apavAda) after the dawn of pUrNa jnAna. >>>>>>>>>>

How does it matter? The Universe is impermanent, let this lead to

some wisdom in all of us. But for that our depths of the mind must

know that the Universe is impermanent. This wisdom is Brahman.

<<<<<<<If we hold both cause & effect, nimitta & upadAna kAraNatva of

parabrahman eternally, it leads us to further problem as said in my

earlier mail that we never ever able to obscure the snakeness from

the rope & we have to be forever under the spell of avidyA only.

>>>>>>>>

I did not follow this at all!

<<<<<<<<As you know, shankara categorically rejects the view of

holding the eternal reality of both cause & effect in arriving his

siddhAnta.>>>>>>>.

I am not following, as to where you are taking your statements. What

is it that you are driving at?

<<<<<<Moreover, as said earlier, in dream state we are the pramAtru &

we are the pramEya & we are the pramAna to get vishaya jnAna. Why

dont we stretch this to our waking state also?? after all, shruti

saying we have to witness both waking & dream states with same degree

of reality from sAkshi bhAva. >>>>>>>>>

Well, you are right. It can be extended. And it may not be extended

too. The best right now is that instead of reading this theory of

mind being in jAgrat, swapna and sushupti, one follows Dharma and

tries to realize the truth.

<<<<<<<In continuation shruti elsewhere says this triputi (jnAtru,

jnEya & jnAna) is conspicuosly absent in our deep sleep state

(sushupti) wherein mAtA amAtA, pitA apitA & even veda-s are no vedas

(reference vide bruhadAraNyaka shruti). So, prabhuji, IMHO the effect

in the form of creation is not really there in reality since shruti's

main purport is to advocate Atmaikatva. >>>>>>>>

Ok, if I have correctly followed your point, you are trying to say

that shruthi does not talk of creation of the Universe and only of

Atmaikatva. Ok. Fine, if that is your opinion. It hardly matters. All

that matters is the rise of wisdom - prajnA. The others like origin

of the Universe are futile matters.

<<<However, I'd like to reiterate that this is my naive understanding

of shankara siddhAnta prabhuji, kindly correct me if I strayed

anywhere from shruti pratipAdya siddhAnta.>>>>

If at all, you have strayed, I have not noticed it. And even if you

have, it is surely pardonable. What is not pardonable is straying

away from Dharma. And I will not punish you for that, nature will.

For example, if one steals something nature has instantaneously

punished him - his mind is now anxious to get rid of the thing he has

stolen. Thus it leads to smrti-bhramsha, which leads to buddhi-nAsha,

leading to sarvanAsha. Hence just be careful about following Dharma.

Nothing else, like reading literature or Upanishad etc. none of them

matter.

When you understand that Dharma needs to grow on you by your self

enquiry into sorrow and suffering, you will realize the truth through

the path of Dharma. Of course, finally the absolute truth of the Self

is revealed by the Self itself. This is true shravaNa - the shravaNa

that Sri shankara has talked of, when he said 'shravaNa alone can

lead to liberation in some rare cases'.

Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam

April 24, 2004

Namaste Bhaskar Prabhuji.

I admire your insistence on Sankara's authority and the pains you

have taken to locate his bhASya and struggle through it. I haven't

seen the bhASya and, honestly, I wouldn't like to go through it

without external help, i.e. interpretations by others. That is why I

have accepted what a traditionalist like Sw. Dayanandaji has said,

which to me is intellectually and experientially very satisfying.

You quoted Sankara thus:

"pUrNAt kAraNAt pUrNam kAryaM udrichyate! udriktam kAryaM vartamAna

kAlEpi pUrNamEva paramArtha vastu bhutam dvaita rUpENa!"

I don't understand how this is different from what I have so far

maintianed on this thread. ParamArta vastu bhUtaM udriktaM kAryaM

dvaita rUpENa (api) vartamAna kAlE api pUrNamEva. Whatever apparent

plurality has risen seemingly afflicted by time (therefore, by space

too) from paramArta vastu, that is pUrNa. Here the kAryaM is idam

vishwam or jagat, which is pUrNa. That Sankara hasn't used the

specific word jagat doesn't disporve this understanding.

You then added:

"So, it is clear that if we hold both jagat & brahma satyatva

eternally it is not advaita,..........".

Who held that opinion? Perhaps, you misunderstood it that way. The

satya of jagat is brahman. The satya of brahman is also brahman.

They are not two parallel realities. They are one Reality. Sankara

hasn't said anything different.

You are pUrNa, your post is pUrNa and the reader of it, I, am pUrNa.

That doesn't mean that the three are three different satyAs. Since

there can be only one satya, all the three are just that one satya.

The 'threeness' is mityA. When it is undone through right knowledge,

satya (oneness in the apparent threeness) shines.

I am quoting your complete post in order for readers to fully

understand my point of view.

PraNAms.

Madathil Nair

_____________________________

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

>

> praNAm prabhujis

> Hare Krishna

>

> First of all, I'd like to offer my humble praNAms to Sri Sunder

prabhuji

> who has guided me to the shankara's commentary on pUrNamadah shAnti

maNtra.

> Atlast, I can say, I've some base to put-forth my views on the

claims of

> pAramArthika satyatva of jagat (eternal reality of jagat/world in

> parabrahman).

>

> Sri Shankara BhagavadpAda at the very beginning itself in his

commentary

> makes it amply clear the context in which the khila kAnda, the 5th

> chapter comes in bruhadAraNkaya shruti ( pUrNamadah ityAdi khila

kAndam

> ArabhyatE). So, it is very important for us first to understand

> shankara's position before going through his commentary. In the

> introductory part of his commentary shankara clearly says in the

& now in

> the khila kAnda chapter of bruhadAraNyaka shruti advocating

OmkArOpAsana /

> praNavOpAsana of sOpAdhika para brahman through upAsana which is

not

> against karma & conducive for krama mukti & more importantly this

upAsana

> he says vyavahAra vishayA ( athunA tasaiva AtmanaH sOpAdhikasya

> shabdhArthAdhi *vyavahAra vishayApannasya* purastaad anuktAni,

upAsanAni,

> karmabhira viruddhAni, prakruShtAbhyudaya sAdhanAni, krama mukti

bhAnji

> chayAni tAni vyAkta vyAni iti saNdarbhaH).

>

> With this background, now, we can approach shankara bhAshya on

pUrNamidam

> maNtra. As discussed earlier, shankara also says pUrNamadaH is

parabrahman

> only, so in that we dont have any disputes :-)). But it is very

important

> to be noted that while commenting on *pUrNamidaM* shankara nowhere

mentions

> the word *jagat* per se to describe the *jagat pUrNatva* in idaM.

About

> *idaM* shankara says it is nothing but brahman in the nAmes & forms

with

> attributes (sOpAdhikasya) & has the reality in transactions. So,

when the

> ultimate knowledge dawns we realise that this nAma, rUpa (i.e.

kArya rUpa)

> has its roots in avidyA & only ekamEvAdvitIya satyatvam of Atma

vastu is

> pAramArthika which has been described in shrutis as neither

outside, nor

> inside, which is pragnAna ghana & has yEka rasaM (avidyAkrutaM bhuta

> mAtrOpAdhi saMsargajaM anyatvAbhAsaM tiraskrutya).

>

> Further, shankara makes it evident that this nAma rUpAdhi samsarga

sprout

> out of our ignorance only & donot have reality whatsoever in

kAryatva of

> parabrahman. Taking the same upanishad mantra (1-4-10) he says in

effect

> ( kArya) what we see upAdhikruta nAma rUpa in essence pUrNa only (

but not

> in the sence that both kAryA & kAraNa are full ) but this names &

forms

> with limited adjuncts is nothing but a false appearance in

avidyA. That

> is the reason why, in shruti, it is said that at the beginning

brahman

> alone & he realises that he is brahman. It is not said that he

realises

> that jagat is brahman. (shankara says in the commentary : brahmAvA

> idamagra AsIt tadAtmAnam Eva vEdahaM brahmAsmeethi tasmAt ataH adaH

shabda

> vAchyaM pUrNam brahma! tadEvEdam pUrNam kAryastaM nAma rUpOpAdhi

saMyuktaM

> *avidyayA udriktaM*)

>

> With this, I think there is no harm in saying that shankara's

*idaM* of

> pUrNa is sOpAdhika brahman or nAma rUpAtmaka jIva bhAva & not

definitely

> avidyA kalpita mAya or jagat.

>

> Now, we have come to the very important stage in which shankara

takes us to

> the theories now floating about jagat satyatva in parabrahman. In

short,

> what we have heard sofar in this list is parabrahman is

pAramArthika satya

> & in brahman, kArya rUpa jagat with names & forms is also real &

vyavahAra

> between kAraNa-kAryatva in brahman eternal. This souds like

bharthru

> prapancha's dvaitAdvaita school which shankara has taken for

refutation in

> the subsequent commentary on the same mantra. Since this mail

already

> getting lengthy, I'd not go into the details of it. Shankara says

here

> others (dvaitAdvaita vAdins) describe this mantra ( atra yekE

varNayanti)

> & say from pUrNa (cause-kAraNa) of parabrahman, pUrNa (effect-

kArya) jagat

> will come. That which has come from pUrNa at present even in

duality pUrNa

> only. ( pUrNAt kAraNAt pUrNam kAryaM udrichyate! udriktam kAryaM

vartamAna

> kAlEpi pUrNamEva paramArtha vastu bhutam dvaita rUpENa!) So, it is

clear

> that if we hold both jagat & brahma satyatva eternally it is not

advaita,

> it is theory of dvaitAdvaita school propagated by Bhartru prapancha

etc.

> Further, shankara narrates the dvaitAdvaita school view that even

in

> srushti, sthiti, laya in all three times this pUrNatva of

parabrahman will

> be there in bhEda rUpa. & for the sake of convenient teaching ONE

& ONLY

> parabrahman described as pUrNa in kArya & kAraNa. exp : water,

waves,

> bubbles, foam etc. in ocean. This is more or less similar to

*purNamidaM*-

> jagat in this thread. But shankara categorically refutes this

view by

> saying this is totally contradictory to shruti-s & it is like

throwing

> away shruti vAkya-s such as brahman has neither inside, nor

outside, it is

> astUla, anaNu etc. (sarvAh samudre prakshiptAH syuH!!).

>

> For further details, I humbly request all the members to go through

> shankara bhAshya on this mantra & sureshwavara's brahadAraNyaka

vArthika in

> detail.

>

> No need to mention, this is my understanding of the shanti mantra

& I may

> be wrong in reading shankara. Hence, I humbly request the learned

members

> to kindly correct me with appropriate references from shankara

bhAshya.

> It is to be noted that instead of depending heavily on intellectual

> answers, it is better to have the approval from shankara bhAshya

while

> drafting our understanding on shankara siddhAnta, so that

speculative

> answers can be avoided.

>

> praNAms once again

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

April 26, 2004

"pUrNAt kAraNAt pUrNam kAryaM udrichyate! udriktam kAryaM vartamAna

kAlEpi pUrNamEva paramArtha vastu bhutam dvaita rUpENa!"

I don't understand how this is different from what I have so far

maintianed on this thread.

praNAm Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Yes, prabhuji this is what you've been maintaining in this thread sofar.

But, this is the view of Bhartru prapancha's dvaitAdvaita school. If you

see my mail, in the very beginning of that para, I had mentioned shankara

here talking about other school's interpretation of the same mantra, pls.

take spl. note of shankara's words *atra yekE varNayanti* & his refutation

of the above stand of dvaitAdvaita vAdin-s. So, prabhuji, pUrNatva of

kAraNa & udrichya kAryaM from pUrNa kAraNam is pUrva pakshi to shankara

siddhAnta. For your ready reference I am quoting once again the relevant

paragraph.

//quote//