A clarification on the ShAnkaran view of Self-Realization

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

V prabhuji :

He has shows very clearly in black & white the opinion of SSS on the

'Samadhi' of the two systems and on 'realization'.

 

bhaskar :

 

what is *black & white* that you have understood from the English

translation of this work?? First I request you to present it...I dont see

any discrepancy in Sri SSS's stand with regard to the *usage* of word

samAdhi in this work...I've been telling there is absolutely no problem in

the usage of the word *samAdhi* in advaita dictionary...Shankara himsef

uses this word at various places in his bhAshya...problem is with the

interpretation of *experience* of samAdhi & its undue linking with PY's

asaMprajnAtha samAdhi & time bound flashy experiences of nirvikalpa

samAdhi...

 

V prabhuji :

 

I don't think there is any need form his end to fabricate something by

quoting slectively

from your paramaguru's works.

 

bhaskar :

 

Y'day I've explained to the list how *self-realization*/Atma

sAkshAtkAra/brahmAkAra vrutti/ akhandAkAra vrutti is the *reading between

the lines* from my swamiji's work... and clearly shown how & where my

paramaguruji explicitly mentioned Atma sAkshAtkAra in his own work...Today,

I'll once again show from the book *Intuition of Reality* itself how the

interpretation of Sri subbu prabhuji of my swamiji's work is mere

fabrication of some unwanted things...

 

V prabhuji :

 

Can you kindly clarify why SSS has made such a statement if he doesn't

accept samadhi and self-realization?

 

bhaskar :

 

If you are really serious to know Sri SSS position on this, why dont you

start studying his works yourself?? instead of asking clarification based

on some selective quotes in this list, you can yourself see how swamiji has

dealt with these mis-representation of shankara vEdAnta...Since you know

kannada, I suggest you to start with small books like *shankara

mahAmanana*, *shankara Hrudaya*, vEdAnta vichArada ItihAsa, adhyAsa

bhAshyArtha vimarshe... etc. etc. Hope you do that first.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy,

Pranams to all.

It is most surprising and painful that such a simple and direct subject like

Self-Realization should attract so much of words and so many letters.

Instead of clarifying , more and more confusion is being

created in the minds of the readers like me.

Does it need all these unnecessary dialogues? Is it not possible to present the subject in a direct manner as the Upanishads have done?

Are we caught in the deluge of words formed by the unbriddled

highly developed intellect and presenting them as the Teaching of Vedanta?

The Mantra of Brihadaranyaka Upanishad states

"Atmani Eva AtmAnaM paSyati " and as Sri Sankara in his commentary to this mantra states :" Atmani - within this body/ psychosomatic apparatus( svE kAryakaraNasaMGAtE), AtmAnaM- the innermost CONSCIOUSNESS ( pratyakcEtayitAraM) , paSyati- cognizes/realizes ".

Also Sri Sankara says: AtmA hi nAma svarUpam ||

This line is self-explanatory.

My request to the enlightened participants in this dialogue is this :

please teach the Science and Art of cognizing one's Svarupa in a

direct and simple way as taught by the Upanishadic Sages. This

will be authentic only when the truth of what is being communicated

has been realized by the communicator.

This yeoman service will help the sincere seekers very much and the

purpose of this group will be fulfilled.

I may please be pardoned for giving vent to my feelings and reactions

when I was reading this series of postings on Shankara's views on

Self-realization. If I have transgressed the rules and regulations of this group

I tender my apologies.

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

 

 

Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Answers

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v

wrote:

>

> advaitin, "krithivasan_sukumaran"

> <krithivasan_sukumaran@> wrote:

 

A question would arise: When such is the declaration, where is the

need for saadhana and subsequent realization of the Self?

 

But, when we juxtapose the Asparsha Yoga that the Kaarikas III. 39

onwards delineate as the means to realize the Self, it would become

clear that what was stated in the II.32 above is ABOUT the ultimate

Truth and what is stated in III.39 onwards is the practice to

realize that Truth. In the Kaarika III.37, there is the word

samAdhiH. The AchArya comments for this word: //It is realizable

through the insight arising out of the deepest concentration

(smaaadhi). Or It is called sammadhi because It is the object of

concentration.//(translation by Sw.Gambhirananda)

 

Dear Advaitins,

 

Namaste,

 

There seems to be striking similarity between the Asparsha yoga taught

by gauDapAda and meditation and process of realization as elaborated

in Viveka Chudamani. Let us try to see the similarity by reading the

karikas in the advaita prakarana.

 

39. The yoga that is familiarly referred to as `contactless' is

difficult to be comprehended by any one of the Yogis. For those Yogis,

who apprehend fear where there is no fear, are afraid of it.

 

40. For all these yogis, fearlessness, the removal of misery,

knowledge (of the self), and everlasting peace are dependent on the

control of the mind.

 

41. Just as an ocean can be emptied with the help of the tip of a

blade of kuSha grass that can hold just a drop, so also can the

control of the mind be brought about by the absence of depression.

 

42. With the help of that proper process one should bring under

discipline the mind that remains dispersed amidst objects of desire

and enjoyment; and one should bring it under control even when it is

in full peace in sleep, for sleep is as bad as desire.

 

43. Constantly remembering that everything is full of misery, one

should withdraw the mind from the enjoyment arising out of desire.

Remembering ever the fact that the birthless Brahman is everything one

doesn't surely perceive the born (viz. host of duality)

 

44. laye sambhodayecchittam vikShiptam shamayetpunaH

sakaSAyam vijAnIyAtsamprAptam na chAlayet

 

 

 

One should wake up the mind merged in deep sleep; one should bring

the dispersed mind into tranquility again; one should know when the

mind is tinged with desire (as in the state of latency). One should

not disturb the mind established in equipoise.

 

 

 

(Unquote)

 

Another interesting thing I came across while I was going thought

vedanta sara of sadAnanda which I would like to mention.

 

While expalining about the obstacles to samadhi and its removal he

quotes this very karika to explain/and to show that it has the support

of the shruti as he does for all important points.

 

He mentions the following obstacles to Nirvikalpa Samadhi:

 

(Quote)

 

209. The Nirvikalpa Samadhi, of which these are the steps, has four

obstacles, viz, torpidity, distraction, attachment and enjoyment.

 

210. Torpidity (laya) is the lapse of the mental state into deep

because of the failure to rest on the absolute.

 

211. Distraction (vikShepa) is the resting of the mental state on

things other than the absolute, because of the failure to rest on it.

 

212. Attachment (kaSAya) is the failure of the mental state to rest on

the absolute, owing to the numbness brought by impressions(the lurking

desire for pleasures once experienced) due to attachment even when

there is no torpidity or distraction.

 

213. Enjoyment (rasAsvAda) is the tasting by the mental state of the

bliss of savikalpa samadhi owing to failure to rest on the absolute.

Or it may mean continuing to taste the bliss of savikalpa samadhi

while taking up the sirvikalpa samadhi.

 

Karika says that:One should not enjoy happiness in that state; but one

should become unattached through the use of discrimination.

 

Acharya also reiterates the same by mentioning `The sukam, happiness,

which a yogi gets while trying to concentrate his mind; na AsvAdayet,

he should not enjoy; that is to say, he should not get attached to

tatra, there, to that state

 

Note: In the Swami Gambhiranandaji's translation nAsvAdayetsukham

appears in 45th karika but in Swami Nikhilanandaji's translation

karika contains the very word nAsvAdayetrasam

 

 

(Unquote)

 

The bhashya of Sri Shankaracharya on the karika is as under:

 

Thus with the help of the dual process of detachment and practice of

knowledge, sambodhayet, one should wake up; the mind merged in laye,

in deep sleep; one should engage it in *realization of the

transcendence of the self*. The word chitta has the same meaning as

manas, mind. Shamayet punaH, one should again make it tranquil; the

mind that is vikShiptam, dispersed, amidst desire and enjoyment. When

the mind of a man who is practising again and again, is awakened from

deep sleep and is withdrawn from objects, but is not established in

equipoise and continues in an intermediate state, then vijAnIyAt, one

should know; that mind to be sakaSAyam, tinged with desire in state of

latency. From that state, too it should be diligently led to

equipoise. But when the mind becomes samaprAptam, equiposed, that is

to say when it begins to move toward the goal, na vichAlayet, one

should not turn it back toward again.

 

SadAnanda quotes the next karika also which is as under:

 

nAsvAdayetsukham tatra niHsangaH prajhnayA Bhavet|

nishchalam nishcharachittamekIkuryAtprayatnataH||

 

45.One should not enjoy happiness in that state; but one should become

unattached through the use of discrimination. When the mind,

established in steadiness, wants to issue out, one should concentrate

with diligence.

 

Bhashya for the karika is as under:

 

The sukam, happiness, which a yogi gets while trying to concentrate

his mind; na AsvAdayet, he should not enjoy; that is to say, he should

not get attached to tatra, there, to that state. How should he behave

there? He should become nihsangah, unattached; prajnaya, through the

discriminating intellect. He should think, whatever happiness is

perceived is a creation of ignorance, and it is false. He shouold also

withdraw his mind from that kind of attraction for joy-this is the

purport. When having been withdrawn from the attraction for happiness,

and having attained the state of steadiness, the mind becomes

nishcharat, intent on going out; then withdrawing it from those

objects with the help of above-mentioned process, one ekikuryAt,

should diligently concentrate it-in the self itself;prayatnatah, with

diligence. *The idea is that it should be made to attain its true

nature of consciousness alone.*

 

46. When the mind does not become lost nor is scattered when it is

motionless and does not *appear in the form of objects*, then it

*becomes brahman*.

 

YadA, when; the chittam, mind; brought under contro through the

aforesaid process, na liyate, does not become lost, in sleep; and also

na cha punah vikShipyate, does not, again, become dispersed, amidst

objects; and when the mind becomes aninganam, motionless, like a lamp

in a windless place; and anAbhAsam, *does not appear in the form of

any fancied object*; when the mind assumes such characteristics, *then

it niShpannam brahma, becomes Brahman*;or in other words, the mind

then becomes *identified with brahman*.

 

(Unquote)

 

Hence it is quite evident that these karikas explain the sadhana with

which self has to be realized.

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> In my understanding, a deliberation of the above meanings of the

> word 'intuition', it can be conclusively said that this intuition

> that the Swamiji mentions all over this book is the equivalent of

> the sAkshAtkAra through the 'akhandaakAra vritti' of the Vedanta.

> He has not used this term, but the reading of the above book,

>

> praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

>

> I regret to say that the above is your own interpretation of my

swamiji's

> stand. Kindly dont think the below is pickings to show your

ignorance

> about my paramaguruji's stand on Atma sAkshAtkAra..but this is

just a

> clarification to the neutral readers : In the *Salient Features

of

> Shankara's Vedanta* at page No. 79, in Appendix, Sri Sri

SatchidaanandEndra

> says :

>

> // quote //

>

> Persons unable to understand this truth have conceived the theory

of

> Atma-SakshatkAra (self-realization) for which they imagine that

practices

> like the repetition of the Mahavakyas (texts like *Tat-twam-asi*-

That thou

> art), laya-chintana (merging the objective world in Brahman by

means of

> meditation) or the practice of Patanjala yoga, are necessary.

>

> // unquote//

>

> Prabhuji, kindly note, unlike your above imagination, my

paramaguruji above

> explicitly mentioned the term Atma sAkshAtkAra which is equivalent

to your

> brahman shaped vrutti (brahmAkAra vrutti) / indivisible shaped

vrutti

> (akhanda AkAra vrutti.. *akhanda* but still has AkAra--

akhandAkAra). I

 

 

ShrIgurubhyo namaH

 

Namaste Bhasker ji,

 

In an earlier post you objected to terms like 'vrittivyApti',

phalavyApti' etc., are concoctions of later vyAkhyAnakAras and these

concepts and terminologies are not there in Shankara's Bhashya.

Thinking on this, i recalled a recent incident:

 

A friend asked me: Shankara uses terms like: AdhyAropa, adhyAsa,

avidya-pratyupasthaapita, etc. so freely in his bhashya and says

that is the purport of the Upanishads about creation. You do not

see such terminologies and concepts in the Upanishads. How can

Shankara be looked upon as a Vaidika when he writes all concocted

theroies and terminologies that are not found in the Upanishads?

 

What reply i gave him is not relevant here. Your complaint against

the later commentators is similar to this.

 

Regarding the term 'intuition', my conclusion is this: The

Swamiji's bitterness with the later vyAkhAtas is well known. As he

cannot tolerate their views, he cannot bear to take their

terminology as well. So, in the manner of 'aLiya annade magaLa

gaNda annuvudu' nyaya, he has used a different term: 'intuition'

instead of the word sAkShAtkAra, etc.

 

What method he has taught, adhyAtma yoga, is the method taught by

the Vedanta to attain direct realization of the Truth. When a

sadhaka follows the method and takes it to its logical end, what

will happen is jnanotpatti, called sAkshAtkara. The Munkaka Shruti

says: Tasmin dRRiShTe paraavare' when That is directly seen. The

swamiji has used the word intuition for this darshanam. Shankara

has used terms like: samyagdarshanam, avagati, etc.

 

Again, you seem to derisively use terms like: 'in some supernatural

state, 'peculiar state', etc. while caricaturing Jnanis that are not

to your approval. Remember that this caricature is unknowingly

being applied by you to your Pujya Swamiji too. The adhyAtma yoga

that he has taught with STILLING of the mind and senses have been

justified by himself elsewhere in the Geethashastra viveka by

equalizing it with the Patanjali system. The Kathopanishad says the

senses are 'naturally' outward turned: ParAnchi khaani...mantra.

So, when the mind and sense organs are STILLED their 'natural'

outward turned state is, with effort, made into a 'super natural'

inward turned state, suitable for Atma darshana. So the state that

is conducive for 'intuition', even as taught by the Swamiji is

definitely a 'supernatural' state, in that sense. And that it is

a 'peculiar intuition' is borne out by his own words in the book, as

i have quoted recently. 'Those in glass houses can't afford to

throw stones at others'.

 

You have objected to the word 'AkAra' 'form' for 'akhanda',

infinite. While there are many instances to show that your

objection is not well-founded, i shall show you one instance. The

Taittiriya Upanishad says: adRRishye, anilayane, etc. The Atman is

not 'seeable'. Yet the Acharya uses: Samyagdarshanasya antrangam

dhyAnam' in the VI chapter Gita bhashya. How can that which cannot

be 'seen' be 'very well seen'? The Parmaguru Swamiji has translated

it as: sariyaada arivige teeraa hattirada saadhana = dhyana is the

proximate means to the accurate knowledge of Atman. Why can't we

take the meaning of akhandaakaara in the same spirit? In sanskrit

this usage is widely accepted. The explanation will be: AkAra iva

AkAraH. When the mind is always used to take some form or the

other, ghaTAkaara, vRRikShAkAra, sukhAkAra, mohAkara, etc., the

shastra asks the sadhaka to use this mind instrument: manasaa eva

anudrashtavyam, to apprehend the Atman. So when that happens what

is wrong in saying that the mind takes the form of

Brahman/Atman?

 

The more i read the works of your Swamiji, the more i am able to see

his acceptance of Yoga, samadhi, sakshatkara, etc. The day is not

far when there will be enough evidence to show that he indeed admits

mUlaavidya.

 

Thanks for your response and the quote from the other book.

 

With warm regards,

subbu

Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

Dear Subbuji,

Pranams.

I read with interest your explanations for the theory and practical

parts on the subject of Self-Relaization.

 

Your explanation on the Brahma Sutras are quite helpful, but I'd

like to add that I haven't yet graduated to that level of Brhama

Sutra yet!

 

As far as Swami Paramarthanandaji's talks on Kathopanisad,

fortunately I have his tapes, and I will listen to his lecture on

the summary part again.

 

I did listen to the BU again (Swamiji's tape), and you are correct

about the Mananm and Nididhyasanam part that Swmaiji is referring to

and it was my misunderstanding that I failed to see it in the same

perspective as theory and practical part. I kind of understood it as

a single step to purify your mind in realizing the Self.

 

I rememeber in Gita also Bhagavan talks about the Abhyasa for

manonigrahaH and indria nigrahaH, and the Daivi sampad Vs Asuri

sampad as the necessary qualities and virtues one should practice.

 

Again,in Tatvabodha Swamiji talks about the Samadi shatka sampathiH

in great detail as the necessary qualifications for acquiring the

Self Knowledge.

 

Thanks for pointing out the relevent portions that stress the

importance of mananam and nididhyasanam in seeking the Atman/Brahman

from the anatma.

 

Om Shri Gurubhyo NamaH

With Regards,

Suku

[Guest guest]

ShrIgurubhyo namaH

Namaste Bhasker ji,

 

Humble praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Quite often I think not to reply your mails in an argumentative/provocative

mood, coz. I think when compared to your goodself, brahmachAri vinAyaka &

other exalted souls in this list..I am noway even near to that intensity of

mumukshatva.(my shraddha, dhyAna, goal etc. etc. only aimed towards

negotiating my CTC with my boss :-)))....but fact is that, whenever I

start replying to your mails, I shall miserably fail to maintain that

equilibrium ... this time let me try to bluntly reply your mail...Hope

you pardon my *aparAdha*...

 

Subbu prabhuji:

 

In an earlier post you objected to terms like 'vrittivyApti', phalavyApti'

etc., are concoctions of later vyAkhyAnakAras and these concepts and

terminologies are not there in Shankara's Bhashya.

 

bhaskar :

 

not only these terminologies & their interpretaions hardly find any place

in advaita, and it is quite illogical & anubhava viruddha (contrary to

experience) as well...I have explained how it is..in that mail...if

anything you have in reply kindly let me know.

 

Subbu prabhuji:

 

Thinking on this, i recalled a recent incident:

 

A friend asked me: Shankara uses terms like: AdhyAropa, adhyAsa,

avidya-pratyupasthaapita, etc. so freely in his bhashya and says

that is the purport of the Upanishads about creation. You do not

see such terminologies and concepts in the Upanishads. How can

Shankara be looked upon as a Vaidika when he writes all concocted

theroies and terminologies that are not found in the Upanishads?

 

bhaskar :

 

Problem is not exactly with usage of a particular term...but its

interpretation/implications...is it not?? By the way, avidyA, adhyArOpa

etc. etc. have the upanishadic origin...you can tell your friend (he is

most probably from dvaita background..I think :-))

 

Subbu prabhuji :

 

What reply i gave him is not relevant here. Your complaint against

the later commentators is similar to this.

 

bhaskar :

 

As said above, that is not exactly the case...the word brahman abundantly

being used by other dualistic schools...do we have any objections for

that?? dont you think the problem with their interpretation/understanding??

The word *avidyA* they use as frequently as we do is it not?? do you think

it has the same implication in the doctrine of vEdAnta from both

perspectives ??

 

Subbu prabhuji :

 

Regarding the term 'intuition', my conclusion is this: The Swamiji's

bitterness with the later vyAkhAtas is well known. As he cannot tolerate

their views, he cannot bear to take their terminology as well. So, in the

manner of 'aLiya annade magaLa gaNda annuvudu' nyaya, he has used a

different term: 'intuition' instead of the word sAkShAtkAra, etc.

 

bhaskar :

 

you can have your grand imagination on what my swamiji implied by

mentioning *intuition* etc...who am I to change that prabhuji?? In my

previous mail, I have shown to the best of my ability how Sri SSS differs

from traditional belief system of advaita vedanta.

 

Subbu prabhuji :

 

Again, you seem to derisively use terms like: 'in some supernatural

state, 'peculiar state', etc. while caricaturing Jnanis that are not

to your approval. Remember that this caricature is unknowingly

being applied by you to your Pujya Swamiji too. The adhyAtma yoga

that he has taught with STILLING of the mind and senses have been

justified by himself elsewhere in the Geethashastra viveka by

equalizing it with the Patanjali system.

 

bhaskar :

 

Time and again I've been telling shankara/Sri SSS have not rejected PY &

its efficacy outrightly...The first five limbs (i.e. yama, niyama, Asana,

praNAyAma & pratyAhAra) have been adopted as preliminary steps before

proceeding to direct sAdhana-s like shravaNa, manana & nidhidhyAsana.

Problem starts from dhAraNa, dhyAna & samAdhi :-))

 

Subbu prabhuji :

 

'Those in glass houses can't afford to throw stones at others'.

 

bhaskar :

 

Sri SSS ready to destroy his own house, coz. his ultimate intention is to

protect the edifice of shankara..not of his own :-))

 

Sri Subbu prabhuji :

 

The more i read the works of your Swamiji, the more i am able to see

his acceptance of Yoga, samadhi, sakshatkara, etc. The day is not

far when there will be enough evidence to show that he indeed admits

mUlaavidya.

 

bhaskar :

 

I dont think that is going to happen in my life time :-)) but I hope

tradtionalists one fine day give up all *extra notions* about shankara

vedanta & realize the validity of shuddha shankara prakriya as discovered

by Sri Sri Satchidaanandendra MahaswaminaH...Anyway, it is not strictly all

about a *personal* battle among Sri SSS & vyAkhyAnakAra-s, the final goal

is to maintain shankara's *shruti sammata shuddhAdvaita*...is it not???

 

Subbu prabhuji :

 

Thanks for your response and the quote from the other book.

With warm regards,

subbu

Om Tat Sat

 

Humble praNAms onceagain,

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenivasa Murthy-ji,

 

 

 

<< It is most surprising and painful that such a simple and direct subject

like Self-Realization should attract so much of words and so many letters.

Instead of clarifying , more and more confusion is being created in the

minds of the readers like me.

Does it need all these unnecessary dialogues? Is it not possible to present

the subject in a direct manner as the Upanishads have done?>>

 

 

 

I can understand your concern but the purpose of the group is 'discussion'

and not 'teaching'. People join the group to learn from others who are,

perhaps, more knowledgeable. It would be inappropriate for any member simply

to 'present' the material 'in a direct manner as the Upanishads have done'.

In fact, there is a tendency sometimes for members to attempt to do this and

(you may have noticed!) it comes across rather as arrogance than as

humility, which would be the appropriate stance of the true guru.

 

 

 

What we should all endeavour to do is to offer the little knowledge we have

with humility so that it may be shared by all. What we should not do is to

claim that knowledge as our own or as belonging to a specific teacher and

state that it is the only true knowledge. Reality is beyond description and

various differing views may help, whereas strict adherence to a single view

may continue to baffle. The List Policy states that: "The purpose of the

Advaitin list is to facilitate discussions on Advaita as established by

Shankara and carried on by succeeding traditions of living teachers.". There

is no question but that shruti should be the final authority or that

Shankara's interpretations should be regarded as the principal ones but this

does not preclude other views being helpful, even if the various

interpretations conflict.

 

 

 

The 'Weekly Definitions' and the 'Topics for Beginners' are intended to be

clear and simple but there are many knowledgeable members who are interested

in discussing the intricacies of the various interpretations and we must

honor these even if we don't always understand them! It is, of course, still

important that such members retain politeness and do not get 'carried away'.

If you find the discussions confusing, the safest advice is to ignore them!

 

 

 

<<If I have transgressed the rules and regulations of this group I tender my

apologies.>>

 

 

 

Not at all, and no need to apologize!

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

>

> V prabhuji :

> He has shows very clearly in black & white the opinion of SSS on the

> 'Samadhi' of the two systems and on 'realization'.

>

> bhaskar :

>

> what is *black & white* that you have understood from the English

> translation of this work?? First I request you to present it...I

dont see

> any discrepancy in Sri SSS's stand with regard to the *usage* of word

> samAdhi in this work...I've been telling there is absolutely no

problem in

> the usage of the word *samAdhi* in advaita dictionary...Shankara himsef

> uses this word at various places in his bhAshya...problem is with the

> interpretation of *experience* of samAdhi & its undue linking with PY's

> asaMprajnAtha samAdhi & time bound flashy experiences of nirvikalpa

> samAdhi...

 

Dear Bhaskar-ji,

 

PraNams,

 

Personally I feel that for reasons unknown you cherish strong hatred

towards certain terms like experience/realization/realization

happening in time etc. etc. :-) and you are giving vague definitions

to some 'innovative' terms which is making the posts absurd and

difficult to make any sense out of it(May be I am unable to!)

 

At least from my side I don't want to continue because it is like

beating around the bush eternally...

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

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

> .Anyway, it is not strictly all

> about a *personal* battle among Sri SSS & vyAkhyAnakAra-s, the final goal

> is to maintain shankara's *shruti sammata shuddhAdvaita*...is it not???

>

>

The final goal is to attain Self-Realization. All the swamis disappear

in that.

 

Namaste and love to all

Harsha

[Guest guest]

Dear Advaitins,

 

Recently I had asked the following question in advaita-L:

 

(Quote)

 

> vRitti is defined as getting rid of all anatma thought and when it

is totally devoid of all anatma

> thought avidya gets automatically destroyed. But i could not follow

why it is said that vRitti

> itself disapperars. ...

 

(Unquote)

 

Following reply was given by one gentlemen called Amuthan. I thought

of sharing it in the advaitin as it may be of interest to some members.

 

 

the vRtti mentioned above is variously known as brahmAkAra/

akhaNDAkAra/ AtmAkAra vRtti, ahaM sphuraNa, nirvisheSha-Atma

sAkShAtkAra etc.

 

according to sha~Nkara, the immediate knowledge of brahman that arises

because of vedAnta vichAra destroys aj~nAna and leads to anAtmavRtti

nirodha. this immediate knowledge of brahman is the same as brahmAkAra

vRtti. from the yoga point of view, it is a form of saMpraj~nAta

samAdhi where the mind assumes the form of the self.

 

the siddhAnta is that brahmAkAravRtti destroys avidyA (dehAtmabhAva)

and finally destroys itself. the destruction of the brahmAkAra vRtti

by itself would correspond to a transition from sampraj~nAta to

asaMpraj~nAta samAdhi, in the above scheme of classification.

 

AchArya gauDapAda talks of brahmAkAra vRtti in his mANDUkya kArikAs as

follows:

'yadA na lIyate chittaM na cha vikShipyate punaH.

ani~NganamanAbhAsaM niShpannaM brahma tattadA..' (mA.kA. 3.46)

 

the resolution of brahmAkAra vRtti into the self after destroying

avidyA is known, for instance, from verses like:

'aj~nAnakaluShaM jIvaM j~nAnAbhyAsAdvinirmalam.

kRtvA j~nAnaM svayaM nashyejjalaM katakareNuvat..' (Atmabodha 5)

the j~nAnAbhyAsa mentioned by AchArya is the

shravaNa-manana-nididhyAsana process (= vedAnta vichAra)

 

it is important to keep in mind that according to sha~Nkara, it is not

chitta vRtti nirodha that produces Atmaj~nAna. it's the other way

about - by steadily holding on to Atmaj~nAna, which arises from

vedAnta vichAra, chitta vRtti nirodha is effected permanently. this

doesn't mean mano nigraha is not necessary. mano nigraha is absolutely

necessary for vedAnta vichAra. however, permanent chitta vRtti nirodha

is impossible without Atmaj~nAna.

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhaskar-ji,

 

praNAms Sri Vinayaka prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Sri V prabhuji :

 

Personally I feel that for reasons unknown you cherish strong hatred

towards certain terms like experience/realization/realization

happening in time etc. etc. :-) and you are giving vague definitions

to some 'innovative' terms which is making the posts absurd and

difficult to make any sense out of it(May be I am unable to!)

 

bhaskar :

 

That is the reason why I requested you to stop asking for the vague

definitions from my side & go back to shankara's works & my swamiji's works

on one to one basis to get your doubts clarified :-)) Hope atleast

henceforth you would do that :-))

 

Sri V prabhuji :

 

At least from my side I don't want to continue because it is like beating

around the bush eternally...

 

bhaskar :

 

Thanks for your patience sofar...

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

Br. Vinayaka

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar