yOga-vEdAnta, dhyAna & nidhidhyAsana, etc. Part-III

September 12, 2006

praNAms

Hare Krishna

In this part we shall see why individual experiences (vaiyuktika anubhava)

cannot be the valid means for brahmAtmaikatva jnAna...Infact these view

points with regard to *anubhava* have been discussed sometime back in this

very list. Anyway, this is for the fresh readers :-)) But before that it

is interesting to note that shankara gives us the process of jnAna

prApti/Atma jnAna...somewhere he says, shuddha satvasya jnAnanishTA

yOgyatAprAptidvArENa jnAnOtpatti hEtutvEna nishrEyasahEtutvamapi

pratipadyate...( I dont know where shankara says this)...I was just

wondering where PY's NS individual experience fit into this sequence!!!

Shankara gives special emphasis on anubhava in all through his prasthAna

trayi bhAshya...Unlike in dharma jignAsa, he says in brahma jignAsa shruti

& as well as experience (anubhavasAnatvAt) both are valid means for brahma

jignAsa. But what is this *experience* shankara talking here?? Is it some

sort of *supernatural* experiences of some exalted beings?? or is this

anubhava one and the same to ALL?? Through japa, dhyAna, upAsana, bhajana,

hatha yOgic practices people will get different type of supernatural

experiences. I myself experienced some state of trance when I did

sudarshana kriya basic course ( it is a breathing exercise course founded

by Sri Sri Ravishankar of Art of Living).. We have heard/read plenty of

these divine experiences through the biographies of noble souls.

paramahaMsa Sri Ramakrishna physically seen & talked kAli

mAta...paramahaMsa yOgAnanda seen & talked to ever youth bAbAji,

rAghavEndra mahAswamigal of maNtrAlaya has the krishna darshana at udupi,

vivEkananda has the experience of NS in Kashipur garden house, chaitanya

mahAprabhu in his premOnmAda always felt the presence of rAdhA gOpAla. No

doubt, these noble souls gained these divine & out of world experiences

through dedicated sAdhana towards it. But nobody can deny that all these

*experiences* of these exalted beings are their *individual experiences*

(vaiyuktika anubhava) only. It is quite acceptable and we will

wholeheartedly prostrate before these noble souls & respect their

experience & worship them as divine incarnations. But can we determine

vEdAnta siddhAnta based on these *individual experiences*?? I dont think

so, Sri chaitanya mahAprabhu, who has the personal interaction with krishna

(ISKCONites believe that he is krishna himself) refuted advaita &

propagated dualistic bhakti siddhAnta...paramahaMsa Sri Ramakrishna who has

seen & interacted with mother kAli & often experienced NS, approved all

paths & ultimately upheld advaita...paramahaMsa yOgAnanda recommended kriyA

yOga, madhvAchArya, rAghavEndra mahAswamigaL written volumes & volumes of

shAstra graNtha & mercilessly slaughtered advaita siddhAnta!! So, these

mahApurusha-s with their rich divine experiences back ground differed

within themselves with regard to ultimate siddhAnta of shruti-s. Under

these circumstances how can we adjudge who said it right & on what basis??

This is the reason why, shankara is not part with the validity of

individual experiences & says in sUtra bhAshya 2-1-1 " ShakyaM kapilAdInAM

siddhAnAm apratihatajnAnatvAt iti chEt! na ! siddhEpi sApEkshatvAt! Here

pUrvapaxin asking shankara, since kapila, kaNAda siddha purusha-s have

attained siddhis can they preach paramArthA jnAna ?? NO is the emphatic &

expressive answer of Shankara because even these siddhis gained through

individual sAdhana is relative (sApEkShata) & cannot be considered as valid

means to teach jnAna. He continues to say in the same sUtra bhAshya :

"prasiddhamAhAtmyAnumatAnAmapi thIrthankarANAm, kapilakaNabhuk prabhrutInAM

*parasparavipratipatti darShanAt!! Shankara tells here personalities like

kapila kaNAda etc. who were the great siddhA purusha-s will differ

themselves in paramArtha tattva & declarations of those characters with

regard to brahma jnAna cannot be treated as shruti pratipAdita satya since

they are talking through their individual experiences howsoever powerful it

may be!!!

As we all know the tattva embedded in vEdAnta is universal & applicable

without the limited boundaries of space, time & individual

experiences....and it is conveying the truth that is sArvakAlika & equally

applicable to ONE & ALL. vEdAnta does not deny these individual experiences

but fact is that we cannot do siddhAnta nirNaya based on these individual

experiences.

It is quite evident from the above shankara bhAshya statements that

individual experiences, occult powers, miracles, savikalpa, nirvikalpa

samAdhi experiences of certain people cannot be the valid premise for

paramArtha jnAna nirNaya. Then what is required for siddhAnta nirNaya??

Shankara says this *experience* which is capable enough to determine

brahma tattva should be uniform & universal irrespective of space, time

etc.

In sUtra bhAshya (2-1-11) shankara says : "taccha samyagjnAnaM yEkarUpaM

vastutantratvAt! lOkE tad vishaya jnAnaM samyag jnAnaM iti uchyAte!! yathA

agnirushNa iti!! tatra yEvaM sati saMyagjnAnE puruShANAM vipratipattiH

anupapannA"

See, how beautifully shankara explains shruti's samyag jnAna. can we say,

the experience of NS in a particular state is as simple as *agnirushna*??

I dont think the

prabhuji's who have been studying shankara bhAshya for decades find it

difficulty to understand the purports of this simple bhAshya vAkya. The

knowledge which has been realized through vastu tantra jnAna is equal to

one & all since it is in the control of objects / vastu-s, like fire...We

cannot modify the knowledge of fire according to

our will & wish & say it is cold ...we have to realize fire as

*fire* only as it is...noway, the cognizer of this fire can influence the

characteristics of fire & say it is cold!! The fire is *fire* for all the

human beings at all time & at all space...This vastu tantra *anubhava* is

called sArvatrika pUrNAnubhava this is not nirbIja, sabIja,

nirvikalpa-savikalpa, guNa rahita, guNa pUrNa, saMprajnATha-asaMprajnATha

samAdhi experience of few individuals...This anubhava is what has been

explained in

bruhadAraNyaka shruti also ayamAtma sarvAnubhuH ..shankara while commenting

on this says " sarvAtmAnA sarvaM anubhavatItI sarvAnubhuH"...

Without realizing the huge (yes it is indeed very huge :-)) difference

between individual experience & universal experience, here prabhuji-s have

been consistently trying to prove individual experience of PY's NS with

Atma jnAna & banging mercilessly others those who are trying to bring it to

the notice of *pundits* of this list:-)).

sadguru charaNAravindArpaNamastu..hariH Om tatsat...

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

September 12, 2006

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

In this part we shall see why individual experiences (vaiyuktika

anubhava) cannot be the valid means for brahmAtmaikatva jnAna.

Dear members,

Further to the points made by Sri Bhaskar, I would like to

quote an excerpt from the book "Spiritual Discourses Of

Sri Atmananda".

QUOTE:

EXPERIENCE AND SPIRITUAL SADHANA

It has been the bane of spiritual life, all over the world, to

consider and extol as spiritual experience every kind of unusual

expression of happiness, ecstacy or perception, external or internal.

They are actually the result of mental exercises ignorantly called

spiritual. Every devotee, mystic or YOGIN will naturally have any

number of such experiences to narrate. None of these so-called

experiences have anything really spiritual about them. They are

purely mental and MAY serve to purify the mind to a great extent.

EVEN NIRVIKALPA SAMADHI OF THE YOGIN IS NO EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE.

Really spiritual experience is ONLY ONE. Its tests are

changelessness and self-luminosity. THE ONLY EXPERIENCE THAT STANDS

THESE TWO TESTS IS THE REAL "I-Principle" or PURE AWARENESS. All the

rest disappear in time and so are unreal.

UNQUOTE.

Members may be knowing that Sri Atmananda was THE SAGE from

Kerala.

I quote a verse from Upadeshasahasri of Sri.Shankara:

vij~jAtEryastu vij~jAtA sa tvamityucyatE |

sa EvAnuBavastasya tatO anyO anuBavO mRuShA ||Ch12-8

The word 'thou' in 'That thou art' refers ultimately to

the 'Knower of knowing'. That is the "anuBava". Other than that all

other experiences are "mRuShA".

Please refer to the slokas Ch.18-195, Ch.18-210.

The Mantra from Bruhadaranyka states:

ayamAtmA brahma sarvAnuBUH ityanuSasanam||

As stated by Sri Shankara, our true nature is

AviBAvatirOBAvavarjitaH , hEyOpAdEyarahitaH , nityavartamAnasvaBAvaH.

With warm and respectful regards,

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

>

September 12, 2006

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> praNAms

> Hare Krishna

>

> In this part we shall see why individual experiences (vaiyuktika

anubhava)

> cannot be the valid means for brahmAtmaikatva jnAna...Infact these

view

> points with regard to *anubhava* have been discussed sometime back

in this

> very list. Anyway, this is for the fresh readers :-)) But before

that it

> is interesting to note that shankara gives us the process of jnAna

> prApti/Atma jnAna...somewhere he says, shuddha satvasya jnAnanishTA

> yOgyatAprAptidvArENa jnAnOtpatti hEtutvEna nishrEyasahEtutvamapi

> pratipadyate...( I dont know where shankara says this)...I was just

> wondering where PY's NS individual experience fit into this

sequence!!!

>

Srigurubhyo NamaH

Namaste,

The following is to bring to the notice of the sadhakas :

http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/brahma_sutra/brahma_sutra_sankar

a_38127.php

api cha samrAdhane pratyakSha-anumAnAbhyAm (Br.Sutra III.ii.24)

24. And in the state of perfect conciliation also (the Yogins

apprehend the highest Brahman), according to Sruti and Smriti.

At the time of perfect conciliation the Yogins see the unevolved Self

free from all plurality. By 'perfect conciliation' we understand the

presentation before the mind (of the highest Self), which is effected

through meditation and devotion.--This is vouched for by Sruti as

well as Smriti. So, e.g. Ka. Up. IV, 1, 'The Self-existent pierced

the openings of the senses so that they turn outward; therefore man

looks without, not within himself. Some wise man, however, with his

eyes closed and wishing for immortality, saw the Self within.' And

Mu. Up. III, 1, 8, 'When a man's mind has become purified by the

serene light of knowledge then he sees him, meditating on him as

without parts.' Smriti-passages of the same tendency are the

following ones, 'He who is seen as light by the Yogins meditating on

him sleepless, with suspended breath, with contented minds, with

subdued senses; reverence be to him 1!' and 'The Yogins see him, the

august, eternal one.' (sanatsujAtIya V chapter).

But if in the state of perfect conciliation there is a being to be

conciliated and a being conciliating, does not this Involve the

distinction of a higher and a lower Self?--No, the next Sûtra

replies. (unquote)

The Words of the Bhashya are:

api cha enamAtmAnam nirasta-samasta-prapancham-avyaktam

samrAdhanakAle pashyanti yoginaH. SamrAdhanam cha bhakti, dhyAna,

praNidhAnaAdyanuShThAnam. Kataham punaH avagamyate samrAdhana-kAle

pashyanti iti ? pratyakSha-anumAnAbhyAm = shruti-smritibhyAm

ityarthaH. tathA hi shrutiH: paraanchi khAni vyatruNat…..kashchit

dhIraH pratyagAtmAnam aikShat…..amrutatvam icchan (Kathopanishad 4.1)

iti. `jnAnaprasAdena vishuddha-sattvaH …tam pashyate niShkalam

dhyAyamAnaH (Mundaka. 3.1.8) iti chaivamAdyA. Smritirapi : yam vi-

nidrA jitashvAsAH santunShTAH samyatendriyAH . jyotiH pashyanti

yunjAnaaH tasmai yogAtmane namaH. YoginaH tam prapashyanti

bhagavantam sanAtanam' (sanatsujAtiiya of Mahabharatha) iti

chaivamAdyAH. (unquote)

It is up to the learned members to decide whether these persons

referred to as yogis by the BhashyakAra paadaH are individuals or

not. And whether these experiences are not something those

individuals personally got as a result of their saadhana or not. And

whether their experiences are some 'siddhis' that are outside the

perview of Vedanta or not. This is an adhikarana to arrive at the

true nature of Brahman and its attainment. It is not in the scope of

this adhikarana to speak of some charlatans and waste the prescious

time of the sadhakas.

It is pertinent to note the previous sutra bhashya

23. That (Brahman) is unevolved; for (thus scripture) says.If that

highest Brahman which is different from the world that is negatived

in the passage discussed above really exists, why then is it not

apprehended?--Because, the Sûtrakâra replies, it is unevolved, not to

be apprehended by the senses; for it is the witness of whatever is

apprehended (i.e. the subject in all apprehension). Thus Sruti

says, 'He is not apprehended by the eye, nor by speech, nor by the

other senses, not by penance or good works' (Mu. Up. III, 1,

8); 'That Self is to be described by No, no! He is incomprehensible,

for he cannot be comprehended' (Bri. Up. III, 9, 26); 'That which

cannot be seen nor apprehended' (Mu. Up. I, 1, 6); 'When in that

which is invisible, incorporeal, undefined, unsupported' &c. (Taitt.

Up. II, 7). Similar statements are made in Smriti-passages; so

e.g. 'He is called unevolved, not to be fathomed by thought,

unchangeable.'

Again the main sutra in this adhikarana (III.ii.22) is an extremely

important one where there is a detailed discussion of the True Nature

of Brahman. The sutra 23 addresses the question as to why is that

Brahman not apprehended? The next sutra 24 gives INSTANCES OF HOW,

WHEN, BY WHOM, IT IS APPREHENDED. Every word of that bhashya quoted

in the beginning is of vital importance to decide this. Notice the

words in saptami `kAle'. Notice the words `pashyanti'. Note the

word `yoginaH'. Again the word `dhyaana aadi anushThaanam'. And also

see the weighty Shruti passages that DIRECTELY convey that very

method of experience.

If someone can hoodwink the others by misreading the Acharya's

impeccable bhashya, it is something of great regret.

For the `vishuddha-sattvaH' of the Mundaka shruti, the Ratnaprabha

explains: jnAnAkhya-sattvOtkarSheNa sam-dhyAyan tam niShkalam

pashyati ityarthaH. For the sanatsujaatiya smriti quoted, the

Ratnaprabha explains: vinidrAH = vi-tamskAH, tatra hetuH jita-

shvAsatvam prANAyAma-niShThatvam, …yogalabhyaH AtmA yogAtmA.

For the sutrabhashya on `samAdhyabhAvAccha' (II.iii.39), the Bhamati

says:

SamAdhi connotes `samyama'. DhAraNa,dhyAna and samAdhi are known by

the common term samyama. Here, in the Brihadaranyaka mantra that the

Acharya quotes in the Bhashyam, `shrotavyo and mantavyo' are the

upadesha of dhaarana. NididhyAsitavyaH is the upadesha of dhyAna.

DrashTavyaH (the Atman has to be apprehended) is the samAdhi upadesha

(in the Shruti). The ultimate sUtrArtha is: this kartA, jiva, is

adviced, enjoined, by this shruti to attain samAdhi, thereby, the

jiva-Atma acquires, assumes, doership, kartritvam. (unquote).

If someone claims that he (alone) understands the Bhashyam in the

right manner and all others including the Bhamati and other

purvacharyas are ignoramuses, then let God alone save such a soul.

We do not need any further proof than the Bhashyakara's unambiguous

words, as we saw in the first quoted bhashya, the shruti vakyams and

the yukti that the acharya showed for the obtaining of the

AtmAnubhava and the anubhava pramana of those advaitins who have

attained the experience that follow the bhashya above verbatim – to

understand that the liberating experience is one had by that

individual only and that any one who follows the method of the Shruti

can indeed have that experience and get liberated. After all, the

Shruti teaches only for aspirants to get liberated. It it showing

instances where people can get the experience, making it a

definite `possibility' and not leave a person in some probability.

What more do we want from the Shruti maata?

Pranams to all sincere seekers,

Subbu

Om Tat Sat

September 12, 2006

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

> here prabhuji-s have

> been consistently trying to prove individual experience of PY's NS

with

> Atma jnAna & banging mercilessly others those who are trying to

bring it to

> the notice of *pundits* of this list:-)).

Namaste,

We need to remember also that the whole Gita is a YOGA-

Shastra,

every chapter ends with the sentence: brahmavidyaayaaM yogashaastre

shriikRRiShNaarjunasaMvaade 'amuka-amuka' yogo naama 'amuka'

adhyaayaH |

It is worth meditating on Gita 5:4-5-6 and the Shankara

Bhashya:

saaN^khyayogau pR^ithagbaalaaH pravadanti na paNDitaaH .

ekamapyaasthitaH samyagubhayorvindate phalam.h .. 5\-4..

4. Children, not the wise, speak of SANKHYA (Knowledge) and YOGA

(YOGA -of-action) as distinct; he who is truly established even in

one, obtains the fruits of both.

yatsaaN^khyaiH praapyate sthaanaM tadyogairapi gamyate .

ekaM saaN^khya.n cha yoga.n cha yaH pashyati sa pashyati .. 5\-5..

5. That place which is reached by the SANKHYAS (JNANIS) is also

reached by the YOGINS (KARMA-YOGINS) . He "sees, " who "sees "

SANKHYA and YOGA as one.

sa.nnyaasastu mahaabaaho duHkhamaaptumayogataH .

yogayukto munirbrahma nachireNaadhigachchhati .. 5\-6..

6. But renunciation, O mighty-armed, is hard to attain without YOGA;

the YOGA -harmonised man of (steady) contemplation quickly goes to

BRAHMAN.

The finest commentary on Dhyana-Yoga, Ch. 6 of Gita, was

written by a 16 year old boy named Jnaneshvara, in 1298 A.D. in his

work called Bhavartha-Dipika (popularly known as Jnaneshvari). May

he bless us to study it with faith.

Regards,

Sunder

September 13, 2006

Namaste Sunderji,

The Gita not only teaches Brahmavidya but also Karma Yoga so that one can

prepare oneself for Brahmavidya. Therefore, Gita is complete as a Moksha

Shastra. The Yoga is not to be ONLY seen as a Dhyana Sadhana but an attitude

towards Karma with a Yoga Buddhi. Karma normally binds us if not carried out

with the attitude of Karma Yoga.

Pranamas,

Kathirasan

On 9/13/06, Sunder Hattangadi <sunderh > wrote:

>

> advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> > here prabhuji-s have

> > been consistently trying to prove individual experience of PY's NS

> with

> > Atma jnAna & banging mercilessly others those who are trying to

> bring it to

> > the notice of *pundits* of this list:-)).

>

> Namaste,

>

> We need to remember also that the whole Gita is a YOGA-

> Shastra,

> every chapter ends with the sentence: brahmavidyaayaaM yogashaastre

> shriikRRiShNaarjunasaMvaade 'amuka-amuka' yogo naama 'amuka'

> adhyaayaH |

>

> It is worth meditating on Gita 5:4-5-6 and the Shankara

> Bhashya:

>

> saaN^khyayogau pR^ithagbaalaaH pravadanti na paNDitaaH .

> ekamapyaasthitaH samyagubhayorvindate phalam.h .. 5\-4..

>

> 4. Children, not the wise, speak of SANKHYA (Knowledge) and YOGA

> (YOGA -of-action) as distinct; he who is truly established even in

> one, obtains the fruits of both.

>

> yatsaaN^khyaiH praapyate sthaanaM tadyogairapi gamyate .

> ekaM saaN^khya.n cha yoga.n cha yaH pashyati sa pashyati .. 5\-5..

>

> 5. That place which is reached by the SANKHYAS (JNANIS) is also

> reached by the YOGINS (KARMA-YOGINS) . He "sees, " who "sees "

> SANKHYA and YOGA as one.

>

> sa.nnyaasastu mahaabaaho duHkhamaaptumayogataH .

> yogayukto munirbrahma nachireNaadhigachchhati .. 5\-6..

>

> 6. But renunciation, O mighty-armed, is hard to attain without YOGA;

> the YOGA -harmonised man of (steady) contemplation quickly goes to

> BRAHMAN.

>

> The finest commentary on Dhyana-Yoga, Ch. 6 of Gita, was

> written by a 16 year old boy named Jnaneshvara, in 1298 A.D. in his

> work called Bhavartha-Dipika (popularly known as Jnaneshvari). May

> he bless us to study it with faith.

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

>

September 13, 2006

Namaste Moderator,

The series of 3 articles by Bhaskarji are worthy to be compiled and uploaded

onto the files/reference section of the Advaitin Homepage. Thanks to

bhaskarji for doing justice to Advaita Vedanta. I have one suggestion to

make. Bhaskarji, could you pls translate all the relevant quotes of Shankara

for the benefit of people like me who may not be well versed in Sanskrit.

Thanks in advance.

Om,

Kathirasan

On 9/12/06, bhaskar.yr (AT) in (DOT) abb.com <bhaskar.yr (AT) in (DOT) abb.com> wrote:

>

> praNAms

> Hare Krishna

>

> In this part we shall see why individual experiences (vaiyuktika anubhava)

> cannot be the valid means for brahmAtmaikatva jnAna...Infact these view

> points with regard to *anubhava* have been discussed sometime back in

> this

> very list. Anyway, this is for the fresh readers :-)) But before that it

> is interesting to note that shankara gives us the process of jnAna

> prApti/Atma jnAna...somewhere he says, shuddha satvasya jnAnanishTA

> yOgyatAprAptidvArENa jnAnOtpatti hEtutvEna nishrEyasahEtutvamapi

> pratipadyate...( I dont know where shankara says this)...I was just

> wondering where PY's NS individual experience fit into this sequence!!!

>

> Shankara gives special emphasis on anubhava in all through his prasthAna

> trayi bhAshya...Unlike in dharma jignAsa, he says in brahma jignAsa shruti

> & as well as experience (anubhavasAnatvAt) both are valid means for brahma

> jignAsa. But what is this *experience* shankara talking here?? Is it

> some

> sort of *supernatural* experiences of some exalted beings?? or is this

> anubhava one and the same to ALL?? Through japa, dhyAna, upAsana,

> bhajana,

> hatha yOgic practices people will get different type of supernatural

> experiences. I myself experienced some state of trance when I did

> sudarshana kriya basic course ( it is a breathing exercise course founded

> by Sri Sri Ravishankar of Art of Living).. We have heard/read plenty of

> these divine experiences through the biographies of noble souls.

> paramahaMsa Sri Ramakrishna physically seen & talked kAli

> mAta...paramahaMsa yOgAnanda seen & talked to ever youth bAbAji,

> rAghavEndra mahAswamigal of maNtrAlaya has the krishna darshana at udupi,

> vivEkananda has the experience of NS in Kashipur garden house, chaitanya

> mahAprabhu in his premOnmAda always felt the presence of rAdhA gOpAla. No

> doubt, these noble souls gained these divine & out of world experiences

> through dedicated sAdhana towards it. But nobody can deny that all these

> *experiences* of these exalted beings are their *individual experiences*

> (vaiyuktika anubhava) only. It is quite acceptable and we will

> wholeheartedly prostrate before these noble souls & respect their

> experience & worship them as divine incarnations. But can we determine

> vEdAnta siddhAnta based on these *individual experiences*?? I dont think

> so, Sri chaitanya mahAprabhu, who has the personal interaction with

> krishna

> (ISKCONites believe that he is krishna himself) refuted advaita &

> propagated dualistic bhakti siddhAnta...paramahaMsa Sri Ramakrishna who

> has

> seen & interacted with mother kAli & often experienced NS, approved all

> paths & ultimately upheld advaita...paramahaMsa yOgAnanda recommended

> kriyA

> yOga, madhvAchArya, rAghavEndra mahAswamigaL written volumes & volumes of

> shAstra graNtha & mercilessly slaughtered advaita siddhAnta!! So, these

> mahApurusha-s with their rich divine experiences back ground differed

> within themselves with regard to ultimate siddhAnta of shruti-s. Under

> these circumstances how can we adjudge who said it right & on what basis??

>

> This is the reason why, shankara is not part with the validity of

> individual experiences & says in sUtra bhAshya 2-1-1 " ShakyaM kapilAdInAM

> siddhAnAm apratihatajnAnatvAt iti chEt! na ! siddhEpi sApEkshatvAt! Here

> pUrvapaxin asking shankara, since kapila, kaNAda siddha purusha-s have

> attained siddhis can they preach paramArthA jnAna ?? NO is the emphatic &

> expressive answer of Shankara because even these siddhis gained through

> individual sAdhana is relative (sApEkShata) & cannot be considered as

> valid

> means to teach jnAna. He continues to say in the same sUtra bhAshya :

> "prasiddhamAhAtmyAnumatAnAmapi thIrthankarANAm, kapilakaNabhuk

> prabhrutInAM

> *parasparavipratipatti darShanAt!! Shankara tells here personalities like

> kapila kaNAda etc. who were the great siddhA purusha-s will differ

> themselves in paramArtha tattva & declarations of those characters with

> regard to brahma jnAna cannot be treated as shruti pratipAdita satya since

> they are talking through their individual experiences howsoever powerful

> it

> may be!!!

>

> As we all know the tattva embedded in vEdAnta is universal & applicable

> without the limited boundaries of space, time & individual

> experiences....and it is conveying the truth that is sArvakAlika & equally

> applicable to ONE & ALL. vEdAnta does not deny these individual

> experiences

> but fact is that we cannot do siddhAnta nirNaya based on these individual

> experiences.

>

> It is quite evident from the above shankara bhAshya statements that

> individual experiences, occult powers, miracles, savikalpa, nirvikalpa

> samAdhi experiences of certain people cannot be the valid premise for

> paramArtha jnAna nirNaya. Then what is required for siddhAnta nirNaya??

> Shankara says this *experience* which is capable enough to determine

> brahma tattva should be uniform & universal irrespective of space, time

> etc.

>

> In sUtra bhAshya (2-1-11) shankara says : "taccha samyagjnAnaM yEkarUpaM

> vastutantratvAt! lOkE tad vishaya jnAnaM samyag jnAnaM iti uchyAte!! yathA

> agnirushNa iti!! tatra yEvaM sati saMyagjnAnE puruShANAM vipratipattiH

> anupapannA"

>

> See, how beautifully shankara explains shruti's samyag jnAna. can we say,

> the experience of NS in a particular state is as simple as *agnirushna*??

> I dont think the

> prabhuji's who have been studying shankara bhAshya for decades find it

> difficulty to understand the purports of this simple bhAshya vAkya. The

> knowledge which has been realized through vastu tantra jnAna is equal to

> one & all since it is in the control of objects / vastu-s, like fire...We

> cannot modify the knowledge of fire according to

> our will & wish & say it is cold ...we have to realize fire as

> *fire* only as it is...noway, the cognizer of this fire can influence the

> characteristics of fire & say it is cold!! The fire is *fire* for all the

> human beings at all time & at all space...This vastu tantra *anubhava* is

> called sArvatrika pUrNAnubhava this is not nirbIja, sabIja,

> nirvikalpa-savikalpa, guNa rahita, guNa pUrNa, saMprajnATha-asaMprajnATha

> samAdhi experience of few individuals...This anubhava is what has been

> explained in

> bruhadAraNyaka shruti also ayamAtma sarvAnubhuH ..shankara while

> commenting

> on this says " sarvAtmAnA sarvaM anubhavatItI sarvAnubhuH"...

>

> Without realizing the huge (yes it is indeed very huge :-)) difference

> between individual experience & universal experience, here prabhuji-s have

> been consistently trying to prove individual experience of PY's NS with

> Atma jnAna & banging mercilessly others those who are trying to bring it

> to

> the notice of *pundits* of this list:-)).

>

> sadguru charaNAravindArpaNamastu..hariH Om tatsat...

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

>

September 13, 2006

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to you all.

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

wrote:

Dear Sri Sunder Hattangadi,

With my very limited shastric knowledge I would like to bring

to your kind attention that even though the words,Samkhya and

Yoga,are used in Gita do they refer to Kapila Samkhya and Patanjali

Yoga? No doubt there is SabdasAmAnya, but is there arthasAmAnya? If

one examines Sri Shankara's commentaries, he will realize that there

is no arthasAmAnya.Unless we are sure about this vital point, we will

be committing the same blunder as the ones who called Sri Gaudapada

and Sri Shankara as prauchauna bauuddhas.It is vaidika Samkya and

vadika Yoga that are meant in Sri Shankara'S tradition. There is a

very wide difference in their meaning and contents.

There is an excellent book "GitashastrarthavivekaH" in

Sanskrit written by HH Sri Satcidanandendra Saraswati Swamiji. I

request everyone who is an ardent student of Gita to read that book.

It will facilitate the student to understand the true and correct

meaning of the PAriBAShika words.

We will be doing a great service to the tradition of

Upanishadic sages who gave the lofty Adwaita Darshana to the world if

we try to give quotations from Sri Shankara's commentaries only and

not from the works like Vedantasara, Adwaitabodhadipika, Panchadashi

etc. whenever there is a discussion on Adwaitic Doctrines. This will

avoid unnecessary arguements and counterarguements. Not all the

Adwaitic texts prevailing now a days reflect the pariSuddhavedantic

doctrine but are polluted with alien thought positions of other

dvaita darshanas.

I may please be excused for expressing these thoughts of mine.

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy.

>

September 13, 2006

Srigurubhyo NamaH

Namaste,

The following is to bring to the notice of the sadhakas :

http://www.bharatadesam.com/spiritual/brahma_sutra/brahma_sutra_sankar

a_38127.php

praNAms

Hare Krishna

I am not able to understand the intention behind pouring of these bhAshya

vAkya-s in reply to my mail. Since I am not having the text of sUtra

bhAshya here in office, I am not able to comment on the sUtra quoted in

this mail. But before that, I would like to clarify that in sUtra-s we

have different adhikaraNa-s & each adhikaraNa has a saMshaya, pUrvapkshi's

objection/answer & counter objections/answers from siddhAnti & ultimate

siddhAnta etc (which we call anubaNdha chatushtaya). we have to study all

these aspects in detail before selectively quoting some sUtra-s...It is

clear from the bhAshya vAkya that shankara does not saying anything about

doctrines propagated by some individuals, he is simply talking about

brahmAstitva, the existence of brahman. I failed to understand how this

bhAshya vAkya is relevant & can be upheld to prove *individual experiences*

are valid means to determine brahma jnAna when shankara himself arguing

kapila kaNAda are not eligible to pass their siddhAnta though they are

siddha purusha-s !! Moreover, I have already shown, the terminologies

yOga, dhyAna etc. are differed from standard usage in PY...Under these

circumstances I dont see any valid point in bringing this sUtra commentary

in defence of patanjala yOga....IMHO it is completely out of context.

And with regard to bhAmati school & their subcommentaries like ratnaprabha

& its interpretation of samAdhi etc. etc. hardly attracts the minds of

those who wants to follow shuddha shankara prakriya as enshrined in

bhagavadpAda's prasanna gaMbhIra prasthAna trayi bhAshya. Hope this

clarifies the stand of *shankara siddhAnta* followers.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

September 13, 2006

Namaste.

I don't belong to any sides. I don't advocate PYS, NS etc. although

I have felt that those who advocate them may well have a point.

Nevertheless, can someone clear a simple doubt?

'agnirushNa' (heat in fire) is a universal experience. No doubt

about it *only and only if one has had an experience with fire*. Why

can't we apply the same logic to a yogic experience, say

nirvikalpasamAdhi (NS). The yogis who have had it are not a few.

They have all described it. NS is not denied to those who really

work hard to have it. Even those who decry it can experience it if

they really want to. Besides, NS is well explained and defined. So,

what is the difficulty in granting NS the status of universal

experience? With refrence to Shankara's statement about Kapila et

al, it seems he has rejected only their siddhis (special powers) and

not their experiences like NS.

PraNAms.

Madathil Nair

__________________

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>>

> In sUtra bhAshya (2-1-11) shankara says : "taccha samyagjnAnaM

yEkarUpaM

> vastutantratvAt! lOkE tad vishaya jnAnaM samyag jnAnaM iti

uchyAte!! yathA

> agnirushNa iti!! tatra yEvaM sati saMyagjnAnE puruShANAM

vipratipattiH

> anupapannA"

>

> See, how beautifully shankara explains shruti's samyag jnAna. can

we say,

> the experience of NS in a particular state is as simple as

*agnirushna*??

> I dont think the

> prabhuji's who have been studying shankara bhAshya for decades find

it

> difficulty to understand the purports of this simple bhAshya

vAkya. The

> knowledge which has been realized through vastu tantra jnAna is

equal to

> one & all since it is in the control of objects / vastu-s, like

fire...We

> cannot modify the knowledge of fire according to

> our will & wish & say it is cold ...we have to realize fire as

> *fire* only as it is...noway, the cognizer of this fire can

influence the

> characteristics of fire & say it is cold!! The fire is *fire* for

all the

> human beings at all time & at all space...This vastu tantra

*anubhava* is

> called sArvatrika pUrNAnubhava this is not nirbIja, sabIja,

> nirvikalpa-savikalpa, guNa rahita, guNa pUrNa, saMprajnATha-

asaMprajnATha

> samAdhi experience of few individuals...This anubhava is what has

been

> explained in

> bruhadAraNyaka shruti also ayamAtma sarvAnubhuH ..shankara while

commenting

> on this says " sarvAtmAnA sarvaM anubhavatItI sarvAnubhuH"...

>

> Without realizing the huge (yes it is indeed very huge :-))

difference

> between individual experience & universal experience, here prabhuji-

s have

> been consistently trying to prove individual experience of PY's NS

with

> Atma jnAna & banging mercilessly others those who are trying to

bring it to

> the notice of *pundits* of this list:-)).

September 13, 2006