Taittiriya Aranyaka III.iii.7, Purusha Suktam & Upanishad

[Guest guest]

Satyan Wrote:

 

 

Our Advaitin Luminaries seem quite unambiguous on this matter:

 

"Sruti is an authority only in matters not perceived by means of

ordinary instruments of knowledge such as pratyaksha or immediate

perception; - i.e, it is an authority as to the mutual relation of

things as means to ends; but not in matters lying within the range of

pratyaksha; indeed, sruti is intended as an authority only for knowing

what lies beyond the range of human knowledge....A hundred srutis may

declare that fire is cold or that it is dark; still they possess no

authority in the matter" Sri Adi Sankaracharya, Bhagavad GitA Bhashya

(18:66)

 

 

"If a thing is perceieved by the senses, it cannot be revealed by the

Veda; if a thing is genuinely revealed by the Veda, it cannot be an

object of sense perception. A perception (purporting to bear on a

revealed subject) is a semblance of a perception; and a revealed text

(bearing on what is subject to perception is only) a mere semblance of

a revelation" Sri Sureshwaracharya, Naiskarmyasiddhi (3:84-86)

 

Since the main purport of the Sruti is to communicate Bramha Jnanam,

any passages related to creation are subservient to the main purport.

The passages related to creation dealing with the 5 elemental model,

demonstrate a simple model of the Jagat that is necessary for seeing

the unity in creation and conducive for the rise of Bramha Jnanam, as

opposed to the 108 elemental periodic table that is conducive for an

increment in knowledge of the empirical world (and is still never

quite done with that!).

 

If the mind indulges too heavily in researching the 108 elemental

empirical model, does the mind have room to ponder on the Self? Hence,

the mind is drawn away from such indulgences by the Sruti which

reduces the Jagat to just five elements.

 

One model doesn't contradict/invalidate the other. The five elemental

model doesn't help to fly airplanes in the empirical world. The 108

(and still counting) elemental model doesn't help in gaining Self

Knowledge.

 

|||||||||||||||||||||||||

 

Namaste Satyanji,

 

Your quote from Sankara puts it quite clearly, each domain minds its own

business. Why should Sruti have anything to say about Aeronautics when

empirical science has perception as the origin of its rational laws.

Chittaranjanji admits as much but withdraws into a gnostic silence on how

the Vedas really know all of Science. I will remain pro fanum on that.

 

Commentators within the western tradition have arrived at the categories

of the rational, the non-rational and the irrational. The division is

self-explanatory to a degree but what goes where is contested. Religious

language tends to be figurative, metaphorical and symbolic in short

poetical. For example when Wordsworth says of the daffodils '10,000 saw I

at a glance' it misses the point for the psychologist to say 'but you

can't see ten thousand at a glance, perception doesn't work that way, the

most you could see would be a clump of 50 or so'.

 

The literalists hold by the exact meanings of the words of scripture,

heaven for example is a real place and not a state of mind. Our

conceptual schema is based on the fact of having a body in a specific

place and time. Any description of a condition beyond that will have

elements of the non-rational.

 

Best Wishes,

Michael.

--

Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

[Guest guest]

Namaste Chittaranjan-ji. Congratulations on your masterpiece of

pramANa analysis!!

 

I have had a glance at the essay. And here I express my first comment

by way of wonderment. Wonderment at the rigor and complexity of the

analysis.

 

An opus of this nature deserves a full-bodied review. I have to take

more bites and should stop to chew and relish them. I must confess, it

will take me weeks to fully understand (if at all) the import of all

that you have tried to convey.

 

I would not forgive myself however if I did not yield to the

temptation of a quick comment.

 

Sri Chittaranjan wrote:

> If pratyaksha is isolated from sruti, it would provides no scope for

> the sruti to override it. Then this world would be real. Pratyaksha

> reveals it to be real. Period.

 

Pratyaksha just reveals what is perceived. It does not reveal anything

about the reality of the perceived. A magician may create illusion of

an object that is perceived by pratyaksha. The perception is real; the

object is not.

 

For advaita, the ultimate reality of the world is brahman. How can

therefore this subject fall in any domain other than shruti? It is

only the vyAvahArik satya that can be adjudicated by pratyaksha etc.

In regard to the ultimate reality, there has never been any doubt.

 

praNAm

[Guest guest]

And remember five elements are produced from other like a chain space->agni and

soo on.

So there is no real differance.

Neelakantan <pneelaka wrote: advaitin,

"Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

>

> Namaste Satyanji.

>

> You are right - the five element model is very basic and

> comprehensive if we really pause to observe the inherent pattern:

>

> Thus, space represents all the space there is including the mental

> where objects (objectifications) exist.

>

> Air stands for all gaseous matter including our much treasured

oxygen

> and the most toxic fumes.

>

> Fire has all that burns including our gastric juice and any type

of

> other acids one can visualize. Light and heat not excluded.

>

> Earth has all that Mendeleev classifed and those we are adding to

his

> basic classification.

>

> Water covers all material in liquid form.

>

> There isn't anything that we know of which fall outside this

> classification.

 

Namaste Nairji!

 

For me the 5-element model comes alive everyday, e.g. space, air,

water, earth and fire (of the sun) come together to form the

vegetables and fruits through the fundamental process of

photosynthesis. I know that biology has a detailed version of this,

and the details may explain how a tomato is different from a

cucumber, but, in essence, they are both the same - a combination of

the five basic elements. And so is everything else. Our quest as

advaitins, takes us to the source of even these five elements.

Science deals with the variations, while sruti tells us that the

underlying principle is one only, without a second.

 

Harih Om!

Neelakantan

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Religion and spirituality

Advaita Bhagavad gita

 

 

 

 

Visit your group "advaitin" on the web.

 

advaitin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enjoy this Diwali with Y! India Click here