The Need for a specific Atman-experience for Liberation - Part II

[Guest guest]

(Continued from Part I with the same Caption)

 

The Need for a specific Atman-experience for Liberation - Part II

 

2. Now, let us see how the `conclusion' (that there is no need for

any new experience of Brahman/Atman in order to abide as one's own

Self) is flawed logically:

 

Whenever logic, tarka, is taken up, there is a need for

a `driShTAnta', analogy. To make things simple, let us take a well-

known analogy, the rope-snake. Here, the problem is the erroneous

perception of the snake where actually only the rope exists. The

process of eradicating this error is this: One has to

only `perceive' the substratum, rope. One need not, however, bring

another rope from outside and place it there on the spot in order to

correct the error. There is a rope already there. What is required

is to shine a torch on the spot and see the rope. That dispels the

error.

 

Exactly as in this manner, to eradicate the error of samsara, what

is needed is a perception of the substratum, Atman/Brahman AS IT

IS. There is no need, as Sri Murthy quoted correctly the Acharya,

to `bring' any new `Atman' for this; Atman is already there. But

what is essentially needed is to HAVE A DIRECT PERCEPTION OF THE

PURE SELF WITHOUT ANY SUPERIMPOSTION. The `torch' that sheds light

on the `spot' is the Vedanta Shastra taught by the Guru. The `eye'

that is required to `perceive' the Self is the properly/suitably

cultivated intellect (manasA eva anu-draShTavyam). When this is

accomplished, the ignorance is destroyed and what results is the

error-free vision for the Jnani.

 

So, we saw that logically too, the view that `there is no need for a

new experience' is incorrect. This `new' experience is not to

replace or improve the already existing Atman. It is only to remove

the `covering' that prevents our `experiencing' the Self AS IT IS.

To appreciate this point, it is advisable to once again go to the

example that we saw above.

 

3. Now, finally, we shall see how even on the grounds

of `experience' the above view that `there is no need for a new

experience' is flawed:

 

There are several Sruti and Smriti passages to show that it is the

vision of the Self that is had through direct realization that

results in the cessation of samsara. `Bhidyate Hridaya-

granthiH…….tasmin dRiShTe para-avare' of the Mundaka Upanishad

(2.2.8).is a very famous instance where it is said:

 

// When that Self, which is both the high and the low, is realized,

the knot of the heart gets untied, all doubts become solved, and all

one's actions becomes dissipated.//

 

The Bhashya introduces this mantra thus: // The result of this

knowledge of this Supreme Self is being stated. (And proceeds) When

that which is….. realized, then, …. All this (results mentioned)

happens when that One, the omniscient and transcendent who is both

para, the high, as the cause, and avara, the low, as the effect – is

seen directly as `I am this'. The idea is that one becomes free on

the eradication of the cause (avidya) of the worldly state. //

 

All those Jnanis who have expressed their experience of realization

to others have unequivocally stated that there is a unique

experience of Atman that launched them in the state of error-free

experience of the Self. The Acharya, Shankara, Himself has

expressed this variously in the Bhashyas. We have seen these

instances already.

 

The instance graphically described in the Vivekachudamani was also

seen by us. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (4.4.8 and 12) with the

Bhashya also may be studied, preferably with the gloss of Anandagiri

to gain the purport.

 

Thus, even on the count of experience of the Jnanis, the view

that `no new experience of Atman is required' is incorrect.

 

Finally, these following observations of Sri Murthy require some

comment:

 

He says:

// There is a beautiful proverb in Kannada ;"dEvaru vara kottarU

pUjAri vara koDa". It means that even if the Lord gives the boon, the

priest will not give it. In the name of Sankara/ Vedanta such a lot

of misconceptions are circulated so widely which have become the

biggest hurdles in the path of the sincere seekers. Sri Sankara's

commentaries do not need any commentaries to them. What Sri Sankara

has stated in them is self-evident and self-explanatory.The day to

day LIFE ITSELF provides the necessary guidance to realize the truths

stated by the Greatest Of All Teachers, Sri Sankara.

Once again a request to seekers of Advitaj~jAna : To ascertain

the Truth and abide as THE TRUTH, let us go to Sri Sankara And Sri

Sankara ALONE, because what he has blessed us with is PURNA. //

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

 

Comments:

 

It is to be noted that the `pUjAri' that is referred to above means –

the commentaries and other works that are held in the Advaita

sampradaya with great reverence. Kindly note, Sir, that

this `pUjAri' is not an obstacle that prevents us from receiving the

BhAshyakAra's teachings. On the other hand, the `priest' is a guide

that helps us to understand and assimilate the Bhashya- teachings

with greater clarity. In quantitative terms, if our understanding

of the Bhashya without any commentary is stated to be `x', what the

sub-commentaries do is to make our understanding `x to the power of

n'. To entertain the belief that what Sri Shankara has stated in

the Bhashyas is self-evident and self-explanatory is to run a grave

risk. Just think: Why did Shankara Himself ask Sri Sureshwaracharya

to write the Vaartika (consisting of thousands of verses) for the

two Upanishad Bhashyams? Why was Sri Padmapadacharya asked to write

the `panchapaadika' on the Brahmasutra Bhashya? Why did the

BhashyakAra Himself pen a number of `prakarana granthas'? Does not

this prove to us that the Acharya Himself knew that his Bhashya is

very profound ?

 

Finally, let us not commit the mistake of rejecting the various

seminal works on Advaita, especially the ones like the

Vivekachudamani, the Panchadashi, the Bhamati, the other

commentaries, etc. It would be suicidal. All these works are like so

many diamonds, rubies, emeralds, etc., embedded on the dazzling

crown of Advaita. Take them away, and what you are left with is

just gaping holes; not only in the crown, but also in the

understanding of Advaita. The proof of committing this blunder is

here for all of us to see.

 

Let this post not be seen as an expression of some sort of cheap

rivalry. We are all co-walkers in the path of Sadhana. We derive

the benefit of each others' knowledge, experience and other counsel,

for our own good. This is satsanga. There is absolutely no room for

animosity or ill-will in our discussions.

 

With respectful regards and pranams to all sincere sadhakas.

 

Subbu

Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

To Shyamji, Subbuji, Bhaskarji,Sunderji,Sastriji, Katiresanji ..every one

This is great. This is the way debate has to progress...Very interesting analysis and arguements

Glad that the topic has come back in a very refined way and sure we are to learn a lot lot more.

Thanks to all Satsangis

 

bhaskar.yr (AT) in (DOT) abb.com wrote:

praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

subbu prabhuji:

 

Whenever logic, tarka, is taken up, there is a need for a `driShTAnta',

analogy.

 

bhaskar :

 

And also tarka should be endorsed by shruti-s...shrutyanugrahIta tarka says

shankara...if we follow this rule, then I think there is no need for undue

stretching of simple analogies, Infact, this analogy was meant to show the

adhyAsa not to show the steps in realization:-))...Anyway, let us see how

this *stretched* analogy is going to help you.

 

subbu prabhuji:

 

To make things simple, let us take a well-known analogy, the rope-snake.

Here, the problem is the erroneous perception of the snake where actually

only the rope exists. The process of eradicating this error is this: One

has to only `perceive' the substratum, rope. One need not, however, bring

another rope from outside and place it there on the spot in order to

correct the error. There is a rope already there. What is required

is to shine a torch on the spot and see the rope. That dispels the error.

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes, and at the same time there is no need for two steps..i.e. first

realizing that it is not snake & go and sit in an isolated place in a mind

blank state to realize that it is indeed rope:-))

 

Subbu prabhuji:

 

Exactly as in this manner, to eradicate the error of samsara, what is

needed is a perception of the substratum, Atman/Brahman AS IT IS.

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes, what is this Atman?? what is the meaning of knowing it *As it is*??

shankara himself clears this doubt in gItAbhAshya that *the knowing of

brahman* is only by the process of removing the pramAtrutva or knowership

that is imagined or wrongly conceived in him and thereby falsifying the

dealings of pramANa & pramEya!! Because Atman is the real nature of the

pramAtru and He is self established & there is no need for any pramANa or

means of knowledge or aids such as NS to know him...it is for this reason

only the shAstra is known as the ultimate proof (Antya pramANa)...Kindly

also see sUtra bhAshya on shAstrayOnitvAt sUtra.

 

Subbu prabhuji :.

 

There is no need, as Sri Murthy quoted correctly the Acharya,

to `bring' any new `Atman' for this; Atman is already there.

 

bhaskar :

 

Infact Sri Murthy prabhuji's quote was to show that there is no need for

any special experience to realize Atman & NOT about bringing new Atman

:-))

 

Subbu prabhuji:

 

But what is essentially needed is to HAVE A DIRECT PERCEPTION OF THE

PURE SELF WITHOUT ANY SUPERIMPOSTION.

 

bhaskar :

 

And this direct perception comes from vivEka of Atma & anAtma...this saMyag

drushti is not restricted to some particular exalted state called NS..it is

a permanent *normal* vision of jnAni...

 

Subbu prabhuji:

 

The `torch' that sheds light on the `spot' is the Vedanta Shastra taught by

the Guru. The `eye'

that is required to `perceive' the Self is the properly/suitably cultivated

intellect (manasA eva anu-draShTavyam). When this is accomplished, the

ignorance is destroyed and what results is the

error-free vision for the Jnani.

 

bhaskar :

 

Atman is ever self-effulgent one!! there is no necessity of phala vyApti

jnAna. For example to see the pot in a dark room, both eye sight & light

are required...but when we want to see the light then the eyesight is

enough...there is no necessily of another light... is it not?? This eye

sight here is shruti vAkya janita jnAna.

 

Moreover, I dont know how your above description can fit into the frame of

time bound individual experience of NS ?? would you mind to elaborate it

prabhuji??

 

Since rest of your mail has already been addressed by Sri Shyam prabhuji I

shall stop here.

 

Subbu

Om Tat Sat

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

 

 

 

 

Find out what India is talking about on - Answers India

Send FREE SMS to your friend's mobile from Messenger Version 8. Get it NOW