Guest guest Posted May 12, 2004 Report Share Posted May 12, 2004 Namaste Chitteranjan-ji, What you are saying about a negation being in its own way a position is interesting because though we start with a conceptual framework which on analysis turns out to be defective yet that analysis is not enough to dispel the faulty conception. It amuses me to consider it the analogue of the return of the repressed in Freudian therapy. What is everyday and in the broad daylight of normal consciousness is the confused and the true vision lurks and occasionally erupts spontaneously. Unless in some way we get a hint that 'everything is the knower' then Advaita will be no more than an ingenious wedge between realism and idealism. A central point to consider is that indeed the repressed returns each time we fall into deep dreamless sleep and remain the same. Now the same thing cannot have two beginnings in time, which trifling logical certainty might act like a drip of water wearing a hole in a stone over eons. You say that apavada is a pedagogical device which we adopt even though it is incoherent in that in involves positing that which is not. If we had the strength of mind of a Parmenides then we should reject the whole project. The ajativadins with sublime rigour tell us 'isn't, never was, next question please'. Subtle Advaita it is my belief takes the position of non-duality. This is not a cute way of saying no duality but a declaration that 'If I say one I'm wrong and if I say two I'm also wrong because in the fullness there is no numbering (ordinality)'. Are the appearances saved? Yes, as appearances. My compliments on a stimulating post, Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 12, 2004 Report Share Posted May 12, 2004 Namaste, It is not only "Mahatomaheeyan" but "Anoraneeyan" Hari Om Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik wrote: Namaste Nairji, Thank you. The word "Brahman" itself indicates purnam that encompasses and swallows up the entire universe -- for the etymological root of "Brahman" indicates growth and largeness. Brahman cannot be conceived because it "grows larger" than what can be seen or conceived. :-) Regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste Chittranjanji. > > Thanks a lot. > > Wht a beautiful conclusion! > > PraNAms. > > Madthil Nair > ___________________ > > > advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik" > <chittaranjan_naik> wrote: > > > Brahman remains purna in silence as well as in the swirling tornado > > of this universe. There is nothing other than Brahman. Unreality is > > only a magical warp of Reality. The warp lies within us - in > > the "knots of our hearts". 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 advaitin/ advaitin Movies - Buy advance tickets for 'Shrek 2' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 12, 2004 Report Share Posted May 12, 2004 Namaste Michael-ji, You are very perceptive -- your words effectively capture the subtleties and nuances of the tensions that irrupt when we endeavour to articulate the truth from within the play of vyavaharika. > It amuses me to consider it the analogue > of the return of the repressed in Freudian therapy. I believe that the Tantric form of Advaita recognises this tendency and seeks to conquer it not through suppression, but through "sublimation" of everyday experience into the light of effulgence. > Unless in some way we get a hint that 'everything is the > knower' then Advaita will be no more than an ingenious > wedge between realism and idealism. That is beautifully put. > If we had the strength of mind of a Parmenides then we > should reject the whole project. I am happy you mention Parmenides, for he is one of those Western philosophers - the others being Plato and Spinoza - that I am indebted to for their help in my striving to understanding Advaita. Warm regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...> wrote: > Namaste Chitteranjan-ji, > What you are saying about a > negation being in its own way a position is > interesting because though we start with a conceptual > framework which on analysis turns out to be defective > yet that analysis is not enough to dispel the faulty > conception. It amuses me to consider it the analogue > of the return of the repressed in Freudian therapy. > What is everyday and in the broad daylight of normal > consciousness is the confused and the true vision > lurks and occasionally erupts spontaneously. Unless > in some way we get a hint that 'everything is the > knower' then Advaita will be no more than an ingenious > wedge between realism and idealism. A central point > to consider is that indeed the repressed returns each > time we fall into deep dreamless sleep and remain the > same. Now the same thing cannot have two beginnings > in time, which trifling logical certainty might act > like a drip of water wearing a hole in a stone over > eons. > > You say that apavada is a pedagogical device which we > adopt even though it is incoherent in that in > involves positing that which is not. If we had the > strength of mind of a Parmenides then we should > reject the whole project. The ajativadins with > sublime rigour tell us 'isn't, never was, next > question please'. Subtle Advaita it is my belief > takes the position of non-duality. This is not a cute > way of saying no duality but a declaration that 'If I > say one I'm wrong and if I say two I'm also wrong > because in the fullness there is no numbering > (ordinality)'. Are the appearances saved? Yes, as > appearances. > > My compliments on a stimulating post, > > Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 12, 2004 Report Share Posted May 12, 2004 Sorry for interjecting but would like to make a small point to further clarify Mani-Ji's point. A small seed has a complete genetic template for a total and completely reproducing under the right conditions. That is why our ancestors created the "SUTRA" (as concise formulae) for the benefit of the generations. It is up to us to understand the finer intricacies what they wanted us to know for possibly our benefit. It is desire of every parent to pass on their acquired knowledge and preserve it for the future generations. Either we can try to preserve (or carry a whole tree) OR we can carry the seeds that can recreate that tree. "THAT SEED" is complete. It is only the seed that does not carry any defective genes can re-produce the "COMPLETE TREE". Some thing to think about ! Thank you for a wonderful discussion. With regards, Dr. Yadu advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote: > Namaste, > It is not only "Mahatomaheeyan" but "Anoraneeyan" > Hari Om > > Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik> wrote: > Namaste Nairji, > > Thank you. The word "Brahman" itself indicates purnam that > encompasses and swallows up the entire universe -- for the > etymological root of "Brahman" indicates growth and largeness. > Brahman cannot be conceived because it "grows larger" than what can > be seen or conceived. :-) > > Regards, > Chittaranjan > > > advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" > <madathilnair> wrote: > > Namaste Chittranjanji. > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > Wht a beautiful conclusion! > > > > PraNAms. > > > > Madthil Nair > > ___________________ > > > > > > advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik" > > <chittaranjan_naik> wrote: > > > > > Brahman remains purna in silence as well as in the swirling > tornado > > > of this universe. There is nothing other than Brahman. Unreality > is > > > only a magical warp of Reality. The warp lies within us - in > > > the "knots of our hearts". > > > > 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 > > > > > Sponsor > > > > Links > > > advaitin/ > > > advaitin > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > Movies - Buy advance tickets for 'Shrek 2' > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2004 Report Share Posted May 19, 2004 Namaste Narendranji and Madathilji, Thank you both again for sharing your thoughts. Prof. Krishnamurthy-ji also had discussed on this list, Narayaneeyam as Advaita Bhakti. Gita has used the word 'ananya' - (devoted) to the One only (an {prefix} = no; anya = other ) on several occasions: 8:14 ananya-chetAH 8:22 bhaktyA labhyaH tu ananyayA 9:13 bhajanti ananya-manasaH 9:22 ananyAH chintayantaH 9:30 bhajate mAm ananyabhAk 11:54 bhaktyA tu ananyayA 12:6 ananyena eva yogena 13:10 ananya-yogena 7:17 jnAnI nitya-yukta ekabhaktiiH vishiShyate Regards, Sunder advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote:> > Shri Narendran has replied you both as quoted here below: > > QUOTE > > May Lord > give > all > of us the consistency required to perform this yagna to His > satisfaction. > > > Let me also make one thing clear. I do not want to differentiate > between > Bhakthi and GnAna. Bhakthi is nothing but the love for GnAna (the > realisation of Truth). BhakthiyOga is turning the mind with full of love > towards > the > Truth and JnAnayoga is the intellectual submission to the Truth. UNQUOTE 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.