ShaMkara and his commentaries

[Guest guest]

In respect of the recent (ongoing?!) discussions about what shaMkara

'really' meant in his various commentaries and the conflicting viewpoints

that have been expressed, I have just come across again the following

observation from Sri Atmananda:

 

"Shri Shankara has appeared in his life as a devotee, a yogin, a mystic, and

lastly as a vedantin. He appears in his true colours only in the commentary

on the Mandukyakarika and in his last and independent prakarana works.

 

The commentaries on the Brahma-sutra, Bhagavad-gita, Dashopanishads etc.

were all theological in approach, intended only to crush the intelligentsia

of the land, who were misguiding and polluting the spiritual life of the

country. They could be fought and made to surrender only on their own ground

of theology and the shastras. Therefore Shri Shankara, in the course of his

work of destroying the wild and pernicious growths in the religious and

spiritual life of India, made capital use of the existing systems of

theology and shastras.

 

After removing the weeds and preparing the ground, he sowed the seed of

Advaita, in his own independent manner, and without relying on any external

aids.

 

Some of the philosophers of the West as well as of the East did not

understand what Shankara really stood for. Many of them took him to stand

only for the waking state and the waking world. But his last, independent

works clearly show that he stood for that permanent, self-luminous principle

which is the background of the waking, dream and deep sleep states and their

worlds."

Note 1205 from 'Notes on Spiritual Discourses of Shri Atmananda', taken by

Nitya Tripta.

 

I don't myself wish to join in any of these discussions since I am

insufficiently knowledgeable. But if the above is true, then presumably one

should place much less emphasis on the commentaries from BSB etc. than has

been indicated recently by some members.

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

[Guest guest]

Many of them took him to stand

only for the waking state and the waking world. But his last, independent

works clearly show that he stood for that permanent, self-luminous

principle

which is the background of the waking, dream and deep sleep states and

their

worlds."

Note 1205 from 'Notes on Spiritual Discourses of Shri Atmananda', taken by

Nitya Tripta.

 

 

praNAm Sri Dennis waite prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Thanks a lot for sharing this very important piece of information. Not only

in prakaraNa grantha-s, shankara dealt with avasthAtraya in shruti bhAshya

also. In bruhadAraNyaka, ItarEya, chAndOgya, prashna & more importantly in

mAndUkya shruti shankara pressed his point very hard that avasthA-s are

mere superimposition on our ever existing Atman. If the waker & his waking

world is the ONLY reality & his (waker) arbitrary verdicts on other two

states are final, why shruti, gaudapAda, shankara spent unnecessary time

to educate us on avasthAtraya??

 

I vaguely remember even ramaNa maharShi also says exactly the above, that

the three states are just super-impositions on our true nature (state). He

also says that there

is no difference between waking and dream state & it has only temporal

reality in its respective spheres. There are also various arguments which

invalidate the seemingly more "continuous" & "stable" nature of waking

world/universe which seems to make it more "real" in our perception. ( I

dont have the exact reference of this observation by ramaNa...any help from

Sunder prabhuji, Adi mAtaji, Harsha prabhuji would be of great help). We

often forget that it is only in avastha-s corresponding worlds are

appearing. & it should be noted that coz. of our prejudiced favoritism to

waker, we think from the waking world we are having other two avastha-s.

This is in total contradiction to our anubhAva when all the three states

have been objectified analysed from sAkshi view point.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

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

>

>

> praNAm Sri Dennis waite prabhuji

> There are also various arguments which

> invalidate the seemingly more "continuous" & "stable" nature of waking

> world/universe which seems to make it more "real" in our perception.

( I

> dont have the exact reference of this observation by ramaNa...

 

 

Namaste Bhaskar-ji,

 

 

http://www.lotusandrose.com/Ramana/whoamib.htm

 

Who Am I? - (Nan Yar?)

The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi

 

Translation by

Dr. T. M. P. MAHADEVAN

from the original Tamil

 

22. Is there no difference between waking and dream?

Waking is long and a dream short; other than this there is no

difference. Just as waking happenings seem real while awake. so do

those in a dream while dreaming. In dream the mind takes on another

body. In both waking and dream states thoughts, names and forms occur

simultaneously.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder