Sri DakShNAmUrtistOtraM

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

This posting of mine has reference to the postings of Sri S.N.Shastri and

Sri V.Subramanian Which appeared on Thursday the 26th october. Sri Shastri has quoted from Sri Madhusudana Saraswathi and in reply Sri Subramanian ,

in his reply, has quoted from Mandukya Karikas. The quotations give rise to conflicting ideas and they put the jij~jAsu in confusion. Which one is the correct one, what is quoted from Madhusudana Saraswati or from the Mandukya Karika? Both cannot be the right views because there cannot be any vikalpas when dealing with vastutantraj~jAna. Sri Sankara states :

"kriyAyAsviva vastuni vikalpasyAsaMBavAt||"

I request the learned members to clarify the matter.

Sri Shastriji has used the word ' authority ' . In Vedanta is there a place for authority? I do not know in what sense that particular word is used.

I might have erred in my understanding of the contents of the two postings. If I have erred I may please be corrected.

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

 

 

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

[Guest guest]

advaitin, sreenivasa murthy <narayana145

wrote:

>

> H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

> Pranams to all.

>

> This posting of mine has reference to the postings of Sri

S.N.Shastri and

> Sri V.Subramanian Which appeared on Thursday the 26th october.

Sri Shastri has quoted from Sri Madhusudana Saraswathi and in reply

Sri Subramanian ,

> in his reply, has quoted from Mandukya Karikas. The

quotations give rise to conflicting ideas and they put the

jij~jAsu in confusion. Which one is the correct one, what is quoted

from Madhusudana Saraswati or from the Mandukya Karika? Both

cannot be the right views because there cannot be any vikalpas when

dealing with vastutantraj~jAna.

 

RESPONSE:

 

ShrIgurubhyo namaH

 

Namaste Advaitins,

 

Many thanks Shyam ji for that input. That view corresponds exactly

to the Kaarikaa view. In this post let me attempt to say a few

words on the view of Sri Madhusudana Saraswati (MS) and the KArikA

view (MK).

 

The context of MS is stated in the sequel. First i shall paraphrase

his words from the Siddantabindu that Shri Shastry ji has mentioned:

 

(Readers may optionally skip this immediate paragraph and go on to

the next para.)

 

[tatra cha antaHkaraNa-gata-vAsanA-nimitta indriyavRittyabhAva-

kAlIno'rthopalambhaH svapnaH. (as a result of the latent impressions

of the mind, without the activity of the sense organs, the

experiencing of objects is called dream)tatra mana eva gaja-

turagAdyarthAkAreNa vivartate, avidyAvRittyA cha jnAyate iti kechit.

(others hold the view that in dream, the mind itself transfigures –

vivartate, appears – as elephants, horses, etc. and these are

grasped by the special mode of avidya) avidyaiva shukti-

rajatAdivat svApnArtha-adhyAsaakAreNa pariNamate, jnAyate cha

avidyAvrittya ityanye. (yet others hold the view that avidya itself

appears as a superimposition of the dream objects and

these 'objects' are grasped by the special mode called

avidyaavritti , just as in the above case). kaH pakShaH shreyAn ?

uttaraH (Of these views which one is the best? The last one. ..nanu

tadA manaso dRishyAkAra-pariNAma-anabyhupagame draShTRitva-

sambhavena AtmanaH svayamjyotiShTva-asiddhiriti chet, na.]

 

// But then, in such a case, (in the dream state) as the mind is not

admitted to take on the forms of the objects, the mind will have to

be admitted to be the knower (seer). If this is admitted, the self-

luminosity of the Atman will not be proved. The objection is based

on the Shruti-based proof of self-luminosity of Atman in dream

state. Since the mind itself will be the knower then, where is the

question of the Atman's self-luminosity then? This is the meaning of

the objection. Then, the reply is provided: In the absence of the

generation of the vRittis due to the activity of the sense organs

during dream, the mind is not a knower then. So, you need not be

perturbed by the mind becoming a knower. This is because, the mind

becomes a knower only when the sense organs act and bring inputs to

the mind. The knower-hood of the jiva is contingent upon the

generating of mental modes. 'No mental modes, no knower-hood for

the jiva.' Therefore, even though the mind is present in the dream

state, there is no knower-hood for the jiva. //

 

This is the view of MS. Now, let us take a quick look at the view

of MK. The Kaarika, with the objective of bringing out the

similarity of the waking and the dream, considers the dream

experience itself as it is experienced. As the dream experience

consists of a person interacting with objects through his sense

organs and getting inputs, as is evidenced by our dreams, the kArikA

holds that the knower-knowing-known triad is very much present in

the dream also as it is in the waking. We can see that MS has

alluded to this view in close similarity in the first line of the

first paragraph within . MS has for his agenda in the above

context, the specifying of the three states namely the waking, the

dream and the sleep. So, naturally, he has to `differentiate' them

and show them as different states. To reiterate, in contrast, the

KaarikA has a different agenda: to show the similarity of the two

states and establish the mithyAtvam, unreality of the world of

subject-object duality. Hence the two views have different purposes.

 

 

Now, actually there is no contradiction between the view of MS and

the MK. They can both co-exist. Viewed from the man dreaming

(lying on the bed), the MS view is perfectly applicable. As

explained by me in my earlier post, this man, the dreamer, does not

get sense-inputs. All that is being experienced by him is in the

imagination, projection, level. Viewed from the actual dream

content-experience, the MK view is quite alright as the person `in'

the dream is experiencing objects through his senses.

 

We need not look for an 'absolute' view, as the purpose of each view

is different from the other. If we recognize the purpose while

reading each view, there will be no confusion. Let me conclude by

giving an example to elucidate my point: I have a Brahmin cook

named Gopalaiah in my house. On a particular day, I am arranging to

perform my Father's annual (death) ceremony. At the appointed

time, however, instead of the two Brahmanas, only one turns up with

the message that the other one is seriously indisposed and cannot

come. Now, I cannot go about looking for a replacement. I hit upon

the idea of asking my cook, Gopalaiah, to officiate as a shrAddha

brahmana. Now, Gopalaiah suddenly becomes someone worthy of my

worship. I prostrate before him, ceremonially invite him, offer him

all the upacharas, wash his feet, give him new clothes, take his

blessings and feed him. When someone asks me: Is Gopalaiah not your

cook, in your employment? I say `yes'. It is a fact that he is my

employee; after all, I have not dismissed him from service. Is he

not now elevated to a pUjya person, worthy of my worship? Yes, that

is also true.

 

The situation we have on hand is somewhat similar to this. Both the

views, of MS and MK are true; only their viewpoint is different.

When this is recognized, there will be no problem and we can happily

take them at their worth.

 

Trust this clarifies ShrI Srinivasa Murthy ji's question.

 

With humble pranams to all sadhakas,

Subbu

Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

The situation we have on hand is somewhat similar to this. Both the

views, of MS and MK are true; only their viewpoint is different.

When this is recognized, there will be no problem and we can happily

take them at their worth.

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Nice clarification of the different view points with cook cum brahmin

example:-))...I think it is in this light only we'll have to understand

shankara's unusal importance to waking state in sUtra bhAshya 2.2.29 &

treating both waking & dreaming with equal vision in kArika bhAshya.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

PS : Henceforth, if you find *brahmins scarcity anytime for any

occassion...just give me a ring I'll be there at your place within no time

:-))