*Intuition of Reality* By Sri SSS is not a digest on *brahmAkAra vrutti*

[Guest guest]

praNAms prabhuji-s of Advaitin list

Hare Krishna

 

Yesterday I've shown how *Atma sAkshAtkAra* was not my Swamiji's cup of tea

from his another English work...Today, let me present my Swamiji's stand in

his own words from the book * Intuition of Reality* which our Sri Subbu

prabhuji often quotes for justification of his stand.

 

Firstly, my swamiji quite categorically rejects any individual experiences

(vaiyuktika anubhava) as pramANa for Atma jnAna..that is including periodic

*from & to* time bound experiences of some yOgins.....Under the heading

*WHAT VEDANTA KNOWLEDGE IS NOT*, Subsection -4 at Page-9, under the

sub-heading " Vedantic Intuition is Not Any Individual Intuition*, he write

: (capital letters are my own emphasization)

 

// quote //

 

Fourthly, vedAntic intuition should not be confounded with knowledge

derived from any inidvidual intuition attained in a particular state like

the mystical samAdhi (trance). It is true that Shruti says : "where for

this knower, all has become Atman alone, there what can one see and with

what??

 

Thereby denying all empirical experiences to one who has attained the

vEdAntic intuition. But it does not allow from this that VEDANTIC

INTUITION REFERS TO A SUPER SENSUOUS STATE SUCH AS THE SAMADHI OF INDIAN

YOGINS OR EVEN TO AN ESCHATOLOGICAL STATE OF SALVATION WHICH IS REACHED

AFTER THE SEEKER HAS SHUFFLED OFF THE MORTAL COIL....

 

// unquote //

 

Then my swamiji quotes couple of references from shankara's sUtra bhAshya.

 

// quote //

 

Nor can it be right to say that this absence of all human procedure is

taught only as due to a particular state. For being of the nature of the

brahman self, taught in the text *That thou art* IS NOT CONSEQUENT ON ANY

ONE PARTICULAR STATE* (Sutra bhAshya 2-1-14)

 

// unquote //

 

And another quote from sUtra bhAshya 3-3-32...which I am not typing here

but which also conveys the same meaning with lots of quotes from shruti-s.

Hope with the above, my Swamiji's stand is clear with regard to

Individual's flashy & abrupt experiences which is restricted some

particular state & particular time.

 

Now comes our Sri Subbuji prabhuji's favourite quote from this book in

page No.11 swamiji says *peculiar Intuition*. After reading above

clarification from swamiji himself, how can you understand this word

*peculiar*?? does it any way mean peculiar experiences of some yOgins in a

exalted state at a particular point of time ?? the answer is obviously a

big NO ..since bhagavadpAda & my swamiji have categorically declined

this...in the previous sub paragraphs...

 

Secondly, this is with regard to the Nature of ignorance, objectification

of brahman to know/realize it in a state of trace etc. my swamiji in all

through his works crying at the top of his voice that it is rediculous to

hold material cause for adhyAsa & saying this potent power has *enveloped*

brahman etc. etc. Kindly see what he says about this under Chapter III,

the heading Atman and Non-Atman, sub-heading 2 Atman is Eternally Conscious

(page 27) :

 

// quote //

 

" With the aid of whose consciousness one knows all this, with what could

one possibly know him??" (bruhadAraNyaka upanishad 4-5-15)

 

Moreover, our self, as the knower, can never be objectified by any means of

knowledge, which can know only external phenomena.

 

"With what my dear, can one know the knower??" (bruhadAraNyaka upanishad

4-5-15)

 

The real self or Atman therefore, being the knower, and the very stuff or

the essence of consciousness whose light alone makes us aware of the triad

of the empirical knower, knowledge and the knowable objects neither needs

any means of knowledge nor is there any such means which could throw light

upon Him.

 

Strictly speaking, then, there is no ignorance possible, enveloping our

self (Atman) or brahman. Each one of us is aware of his ignorance and

actually objectified it when he says ' I know that I am ignorant ' and no

object can therefore objectify this consciousness, the eternal subject. IT

IS THEREFORE ABSURD TO SUPPOSE AS SOME DO, THAT AVIDYA IS SOMETHING THAT

HAS ACTUALLY ENVELOPED ATMAN'S REAL NATURE.

 

// unquote //

 

Kindly read the next part in continuation to know how Atman is eternally

free & never ever bound by anything....

 

Thirdly, the meaning of the English word according to Sri SSS, Sri Subbuji

/ Sri Vinayaka prabhuji have given multiple meanings for this word...Let me

clarify, in what context my Swamiji has used this word in this book....He

himself clarifies this in Chapter -IV, heading *The Genuine Intuition of

Atman* (page 36 ) :

 

// quote //

 

This Atman is the Brahman, He is the intuition of all, this is the teaching

" (bruhadAraNyaka Up. 2-5-19)

 

We are now in a position to consider the direct investigation of the nature

of vEdAnta vijnAna, the main subject matter of our enquiry. The word

*vijnAna* which occurs in the title of this booklet, has many variants in

Sanskrit. Avagati (ascertainment), adhyavasAya ( final understanding or

determination) and anubhava (Intuition) are of these equivalents that are

used by Shankara. WE SHALL EMPLOY THE ENGLISH WORD *INTUITION* UNIFORMLY

WHILE TRANSLATING THEM ALL....

 

// unquote //

 

So it is evident from the above, according to Sri SSS, intuition is

*anubhava*, avagati....what exactly this anubhava?? is this anubhava

sensuous or mere intellectual?? I hope I have clarified what is anubhava

according to shankara in my article * Nirvikalpa samAdhi in shankara's

advaita vEdAnta. I request to all the readers those who have this book to

read the whole 4th Chapter which throws ample evidences about vEdAntic

intuition. In the concluding part of this Chapter, Sri SSS observes :

 

// quote //

 

This, then, is the essence of vEdAntic Intuition. IT IS NOT SOMETHING TO

BE GENERATED BY EFFORT. Whenever we are said to have knowledge of a thing

as it is, we use some means of knowledge such as perception. Only function

of all such means is merely to remove our ignorance of the thing, that is

to say to remove the misconception that has been projected by the absence

of contact of the Light of Intuition and the object which is desired to be

known. As the author of mAndUkya bhAshya writes :

 

(here commentary on 7th Mantra of mAndUkya has been given)

 

// unquote //

 

I shall stop here.....I am getting tired of typing the book :-)) Hope the

above quotes from the *Intuition of Reality* is more than sufficient to

show Sri SSS's stand on Reality, intuition, avidyA, samAdhi etc. etc.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

Today, let me present my Swamiji's stand in

> his own words from the book * Intuition of Reality* which our Sri

Subbu

> prabhuji often quotes for justification of his stand.

>

> Firstly, my swamiji quite categorically rejects any individual

experiences

> (vaiyuktika anubhava) as pramANa for Atma jnAna..that is including

periodic

> *from & to* time bound experiences of some yOgins.....Under the

heading

> *WHAT VEDANTA KNOWLEDGE IS NOT*, Subsection -4 at Page-9, under the

> sub-heading " Vedantic Intuition is Not Any Individual Intuition*,

he write

> : (capital letters are my own emphasization)

>

> // quote //

>

> Fourthly, vedAntic intuition should not be confounded with

knowledge

> derived from any inidvidual intuition attained in a particular

state like

> the mystical samAdhi (trance). It is true that Shruti

says : "where for

> this knower, all has become Atman alone, there what can one see

and with

> what??

>

> Thereby denying all empirical experiences to one who has attained

the

> vEdAntic intuition. But it does not allow from this that VEDANTIC

> INTUITION REFERS TO A SUPER SENSUOUS STATE SUCH AS THE SAMADHI OF

INDIAN

> YOGINS OR EVEN TO AN ESCHATOLOGICAL STATE OF SALVATION WHICH IS

REACHED

> AFTER THE SEEKER HAS SHUFFLED OFF THE MORTAL COIL....

>

> // unquote //

 

 

ShrIgurubhyo namaH

 

Namaste Bhasker ji,

 

May i express some of my thoughts on the above?

 

First of all, what do you/the Swamiji mean by 'individual

intuition'? A sadhaka is an individual and he does sadhana and gets

the realization through the 'intuition'. Can it be a 'collective

intuition'? Can two or many sadhakas sit together in adhyAtma Yoga

and arrive at a 'sArvatrika anubhava'? The Bhashya is full of

mention about ' sa avagacchati'= 'He knows', 'sa vijAnAti', sa mukto

bhavati, etc. Nowhere it is mentioned that collectively some people

get realized together. The Gita and the Upanishads are also clear

about this. The Swamiji himself mentions above: '....to one who has

attained the vEdAntic intuition.' in singular.

 

It is however admitted that for Vedantins, the knowledge attained

through any samadhi without apriori study of Vedanta, is not

admissible. ONly that vedantic samadhi that results in realization

is recognized as advaitic realization.

 

 

Here are some more observations on the above quote from that book:

 

1. In the Gita bhashya 6th chapter translation, the Swamiji

translates the bhashya sentence: 'dhyAna-yogasya samyagdarshanam

prati antarangam'....as 'sariyAda arivige teeraa hattirada sAdhana...

(meditation is the very proximate means for the attainment of the

correct knowledge).

 

2. In the Gitashastraartha viveka, he says there is chitta vritti

nirodha in the same way as in the Patanjali shastra. He says the

dhyana culminates in samadhi in vedanta sadhana. Only thing is that

this samadhi is not the same as the PY samadhi. This is quite

understandable, given the fact that in Vedanta, Vedanta shravana

should form the basis for sadhana. Other schools' samadhi will

yield to their sadhakas only the realization as taught by their

philosophical systems: duality, etc.

 

3. In the book 'Intuition of Reality', the Swamiji has said that

the sadhana to get the 'intuition' consists of adhyAtma yoga which

he has explained with the Kathopanishad mantra 'yacched vaang

manasI..' as the basis. He says that this process involves STILLING

OF THE MIND AND SENSE ORGANS. This is in no way different from the

chitta vritta nirodha that he has admitted in the above point no.2.

 

4. The sadhaka before sitting in a particular session of adhyAtma

yoga, has not had the intuition. That he has to sit and do it is

not at all in doubt, for STILLING OF MIND AND SENSE ORGANS cannot be

done walking or working. Essentially this has to be a specific

session involving a time frame. After several such sessions, even

as the swamiji suggests, it has to be done gradually, a sadhaka

succeeds in getting the 'intuition' in a particular session. This

session is essentially a 'state'. And he gets it as an individual

only; others can't be with him in the STILLED state.

 

5. All these points that we saw above are from the Swamiji's books;

his sayings and ideas alone. So, is it not a contradiction when he

says that 'an individual intuition attained in a particular state is

invalid'? All the ingredients that he rejects: 'super-sensuous' (a

state in which a sadhaka has STILLED THE MIND AND SENSE ORGANS is

essentially a super-sensuous one)

state, 'individual', 'samadhi',etc. are all admitted by him in his

own words in the very two books that i have referred. And that the

Adhyatma Yoga taught by him is with the sole view of attaining

the 'peculiar intuition' in that state by a sadhaka in a session

which can happen at a particular time alone. If this is not

admitted, the sadhaka, after getting the intuition, should never

emerge from the STILLED state. Then you may happily certify him to

have not got the intuition in a 'from AM to PM' state.

 

Certainly, the ShAnkara Bhashya does not admit of this.

 

> Then my swamiji quotes couple of references from shankara's sUtra

bhAshya.

>

> // quote //

>

> Nor can it be right to say that this absence of all human

procedure is

> taught only as due to a particular state. For being of the nature

of the

> brahman self, taught in the text *That thou art* IS NOT CONSEQUENT

ON ANY

> ONE PARTICULAR STATE* (Sutra bhAshya 2-1-14)

>

> // unquote //

 

Response:

 

Very long ago, i had occasion to see this page of the

book 'Intuition...' and noticed the blatant mistake in quoting this

above sutra bhashya. I desisted from informing you just in order

not to embarrass you. The problem is like this:

 

This bhashya quote HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SAMADHI OR YOGA. The

context in which the Acharya writes this is: He is refuting the

bhEda-abedha vAdin. These people claiming to be Advaitins hold

thus: In bondage there is duality and this is real. In liberation

there is non-duality and that is also real. Vyavahara in ignorance

is real and no-vyavahara in liberation is also real. The Acharya is

refuting this view and says:

 

> Nor can it be right to say that this absence of all human

procedure is taught only as due to a particular state. For being

of the nature of the brahman self, taught in the text *That thou

art* IS NOT CONSEQUENT ON ANY ONE PARTICULAR STATE* (Sutra bhAshya

2-1-14)

 

What is even more surprising is: the Swamiji has not seen the

correct bhashya taatparya and taken this piece to substantiate his

view on samadhi-intuition. When i looked into the bhashya for this

sentence, my eyes naturally fell on the words of the Ratnaprabha,

just two inches below, and saw the words: The Acharya begins now the

refutation of the bedha-abedha vAdins. This clarified the context

of the quote and i readily saw that if only the Swamiji had seen the

Ratnaprabha, he would not have gone on to lift this passage and

mentioned in the above incorrect context.

 

Further, to say this will be quite contradictory to what the Acharya

himself has said about samadhi elsewhere in the Sutra/KaarikA

bhashya. In the 'api cha samraadhane...' sutra that we have several

times seen, the Acharya says: the yogis realize the Shuddha Brahman

in dhyAna kAla'. Essentially this statement of the Acharya will go

against the 'supposed' sense in which the Swamiji has quoted the

sutra bhashya (2.1.14). Again, the Acharya says in the Mandukya

kaarika bhashya which i recently mentioned: For the word samadhi the

Acharya gives two meanings: 'Because It is realized in the state of

samadhi, It is called samadhi' and 'because It is the object of deep

concentration, samadhi, it is called samadhi.' This too will go

against the 'supposed' quote from 2.1.14.

 

We have two choices: 1.to say Acharya Shankara has contradicted

himself by saying one thing in 2.1.14 and quite another in other

places, about the same topic.

 

2. to say the Acharya has not contradicted himself but the mistake

lies in misquoting the 2.1.14 bhashya to support a view of the

Swamiji, which view itself, as i have shown in the beginning is a

contradiction of what the Swamiji himself admits/allows in other

places in his own books.

 

The choice is yours.

 

 

> Hope with the above, my Swamiji's stand is clear with regard to

> Individual's flashy & abrupt experiences which is restricted some

> particular state & particular time.

 

Response:

 

Pl. note that there is no 'flashy' reference made by anyone out of

any fascination for the term. The experience of the truly

enlightened has been like that and it has a FIRM basis in the

Shaankara bhashya for the Mandukya seventh mantra. I had quoted

this passage and asked for help in understanding. It is this

passage that is the basis for others to say that it is the

akhandAkara vritti that is meant here. The Acharya says:

 

jnAnasya dvaita-nivrutti-kShaNa-vyatirekeNa kShaNAntara-anavasthAnAt.

 

jnAnasya: the vritti jnAna that is had in the 'peculiar intuition'.

dvaita-nivrutti-kShaNa: As soon as the intuition-born vritti arises,

the very next moment it destroys dvaita - avidya.

 

In order to destroy avidya in the next moment, naturally, the vritti

jnana has to have arisen the previous moment. This is what is

called 'in a flash'. And after destroying avidya, in the very next

moment it too disappears. This is what the Acharya says:

kShaNAntara-anavasthAnAt. The Anandagiri TIkA is clear about this.

I have had occasion to see the Swamiji's kannada translation. He

has not elaborated the point.

 

Soon after, the Acharya further says that this jnaana arises and

simultaneously destroys the adhyAropita anartha called antaHprajna,

etc.

 

It is clear beyond doubt that the realization that the Acharya

teaches takes place in a momentous event, as mentioned by Himself

above.

 

Having said all this, i find i have nothing more to say on the topic

of the current discussion. It is up to you to agree with my views

or disagree. I would like to retire from this.

 

With warm regards,

subbu

Om Tat Sat