Fw: Fw: The Sankara contardiction - Something you mayfind some interest.

[Guest guest]

You final statement will directly contradict the 3rd sutra of the

Brahma Sutra: Shastrayonitvatbrahma (Scripture is the means to know

Brahman). Shastra is words revealed in a language which can reveal an

already existent reality, Brahman, as a fact (aparoksha jnana). This

has been the teachings of Shankara, Vyasa and the Vedic sampradayas.

 

Om Shanti

Kathirasan

 

On 8/11/06, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran > wrote:

>

 

>

> Ultimately it

amounts to this that both language and words are not the real

> media for understanding the Truth.

 

 

praNAms Sri Kathirasan prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

To this sUtra shankara gives two alternative interpretations...Anyway, what

Sri shankararaman prabhuji saying is not against advaita saMpradAya...for

that matter shruti itself says yato vAcho nivartante aprApya manasa

saha...shankara while commenting on shAstrayOnitvAdhikarana clearly says

*shAstra *does not* teach brahma as such & such a thing since parabrahma

tattva in its very nature is unobjectifiable*..shAstra can only remove

ajnAna about brahman but cannot teach brahman as an objective knowledge per

se...

 

My few thoughts

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskarji,

 

I am very much with you. Regardless of the fact whether words remove

ajnana or reveal jnana, the very same words become the very means to

the know Brahman. Am I right?

 

On 8/14/06, bhaskar.yr (AT) in (DOT) abb.com <bhaskar.yr (AT) in (DOT) abb.com> wrote:

>

> You final statement will directly contradict the 3rd sutra of the

> Brahma Sutra: Shastrayonitvatbrahma (Scripture is the means to know

> Brahman). Shastra is words revealed in a language which can reveal an

> already existent reality, Brahman, as a fact (aparoksha jnana). This

> has been the teachings of Shankara, Vyasa and the Vedic sampradayas.

>

> Om Shanti

> Kathirasan

>

> On 8/11/06, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran > wrote:

> >

>

> >

> > Ultimately it

> amounts to this that both language and words are not the real

> > media for understanding the Truth.

>

>

> praNAms Sri Kathirasan prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

>

> To this sUtra shankara gives two alternative interpretations...Anyway, what

> Sri shankararaman prabhuji saying is not against advaita saMpradAya...for

> that matter shruti itself says yato vAcho nivartante aprApya manasa

> saha...shankara while commenting on shAstrayOnitvAdhikarana clearly says

> *shAstra *does not* teach brahma as such & such a thing since parabrahma

> tattva in its very nature is unobjectifiable*..shAstra can only remove

> ajnAna about brahman but cannot teach brahman as an objective knowledge per

> se...

>

> My few thoughts

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskarji,

 

I am very much with you. Regardless of the fact whether words remove

ajnana or reveal jnana, the very same words become the very means to

the know Brahman. Am I right?

 

Humble praNAms Sri Kathirasan prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Kindly pardon for dragging this further...IMHO...*to know* the brahman *no

means* is required since it is *svataH siddhA*..it is a well known fact and

our tattva is not an adventitious thing!!. For that matter self/atman is

self-established...In strict sense we consider shAstra as a valid pramANa

only because they remove the distinctions superimposed upon brahman by

avidyA. shAstra reminds us of our svarUpa & does not bring knowledge of

brahman *afresh*...jnApakaM hi shAstram na kArakaM..that is the reason why

shAsra itself says, in that ultimate state even vEda-s are no vEda..(atra

vEdA avEdA)...

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar