Vikshepashakti

[Guest guest]

Namaste Subbuji,

Excellent return of CN's points particularly

on the satkaryavada issue and eternal objects.

It is interesting that those who wish to promote

an assimilation of the dream to the waking

state resort to the Mandukya Karika.

The Karika itself is not an Upanishad.

Sadaji has been saying that a commentary

partakes of the importance of that which

it is a commentary on. What do you think?

 

Best Wishes,

Michael.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Subrahmanianji,

 

Refer your post 29982

 

advaitin, V Subrahmanian <subrahmanian_v>

wrote:

 

For a long time after i had finished reading your magnificent

presentation, i was left gazing at the screen, spellbound, hoping to

catch every single word of wisdom in it. I was completely awestruck

by it, especially since you began your presentation by seeking

to "bring out the picture as it would give no room for disagreement"

and ended it by saying that your "only concern is that since this

List is looked upon as the Voice of Shankara Vedanta, there ought not

to be any confusion that could be caused by any of the postings." Let

me congratulate you on the tremendous performance!

 

At the same time I also got your subtle message. This great

presentation is not meant for people like me, but is meant to be

a "brain teaser" which "only people of the like of our Rishi-ji will

relish understanding". It explains why you end your posts by saying

that you have no malice (or motive) in making such "brain-teasing"

messages to a dumb-witted person like me. Perhaps you feel pity that

i will not be able to grasp the great import of your messages. You

are right. Even after reading your last message multiple times, it

appears to me that the gist of what you are saying is the

following "brain-teaser":

 

"Only an effect which is not there is identical to the cause, and

when it is there it is an object which is not existent."

 

I frankly admit it. I am beyond understanding such brain-teasers.

 

If you believe that an ill-equipped person like me can be brought to

a stage where i can attempt understanding Advaita, then I seek your

help in equipping me for it by providing answers to the following

questions (from the Voice of Shankara):

 

1. What is the relation between samanya and vishesha?

 

2. Can one perceive a samanya or conceive of it?

 

3. What makes it possible for us to say that two birds in the sky are

the same thing called 'bird'?

 

4. What is it that is same and what is it that is different in

vivarta?

 

5. What is the relation between vivarta and the word 'AUM'?

 

6. Can the denotation of the word 'cow' change to become the

denotation of the word 'horse'?

 

7. When does an analogy become a snake that bites? What is the

necessary condition for making an analogy be operative as a means of

knowledge?

 

 

If you feel that I am taxing you too much by asking you these

questions, then I will be happy to provide my answers to them which

you can then correct. Until then it would be futile for me (and you)

to proceed with the discussion.

 

I assure you that I have no malice in writing this mail. :-)

Thank you.

 

I remain yours truly

the hollow reed,

Chittaranjan