Dharma, in an overnight capsule for King Dhritarashtra, Part 5

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

Dharma, in an overnight capsule for King Dhritarashtra. Part 5

(For Part 4, see post #35375)

 

[Note: Please recall my style of writing Sanskrit verses: If Sanskrit is

unfamiliar to you, read only the English text in the order in which it is

presented; it will make sense].

 

Let us now continue with Sanatsujata's delineation of the Vedas as that

which indicates Brahman as the supreme knowledge to seek, though just the

knowledge of the Vedas is not direct knowledge of Brahman. And he who

understands this as such is the *brAhmaNa*. He becomes the knower of

Brahman. This 'brAhmaNa-hood' is the result of standing firm to the Truth

and does not occur if one is swayed by senses and sense-objects.

 

In writing his commentary at this point, Shankara quotes a verse:

 

vishhayAsh-cendriyANy-eva deho'hamkAra eva ca /

bAhyA AbhyantarA ghorAH shatravo yoginaH smRtAH //

 

which means: The sense-objects, the senses, the body as well as the ego are

all dreadful enemies, external and internal, of a yogi. Therefore,

 

nAsya paryeshhaNaM gacchet pratyarthishhu kadAcana /

avicinvan-nimaM vede tataH pashyati taM prabhuM // II - 46.

 

na gacchet kadAcana : Do not go, ever

paryeshhaNaM (= paritaH eshhaNaM) : searching all around

pratyarthishhu : after the obstacles (i.e., after the body, the senses and

sense-objects).

asya : to this Atman.

avicinvan : Not going after (this object-searching)

tataH : thereafter

pashyati : one sees

tam prabhuM : that Supreme Lord

vede : in the (MahAvAkyas of the) Vedas

imaM : (as) this Inner Self

 

Shankara, in his commentary, not only gives the above meaning to this verse

from the text, but gives an alternate meaning also:

 

na gacchet kadAcana : Do not go, ever

paryeshhaNaM (= paritaH eshhaNaM) : searching all around

asya : for this Atman

pratyarthishhu : in the obstacles (i.e., in the body, the senses and

sense-objects).

(That is, do not take the dharmas of the BMI as belonging to the Self).

avicinvan : Not taking the dharmas of the BMI as those of the Self

tataH :thereafter

taM prabhuM : ( looking) for the very Witness of all of them, namely, the

Supreme Lord

pashyati : one sees

vede : through the (MahAvAkyas of the) Vedas

imaM : this Inner Self ( itself as that Supreme).

 

tUshhNIM bhUta upAsIta na cecchen manasA api /

abhyAvarteta brahma asmai bahv-anantaram-ApnuyAt // (II - 47)

 

tUshhNIM bhUtaH : (Having renounced all sensory attractions and actions - in

other words, having renounced all that is non-Self) remaining by oneself,

upAsIta : propitiate (the world of Self alone) ;

na ca icchet : let there be no desire (for the sense-objects)

manasA api : even by the mind.

Asmai : To such a person

Brahma : the Unknown

abhyAvarteta : comes back, presents itself

anantaram : after which

bahu : the Infinite that is beyond Ignorance; in other words, the brahman

itself

ApnuyAt : is realised

 

In this connection, Shankara quotes the Upanishadic statement: (Katha

U.I-ii-23 2nd part)

 

Yamevaishha vRNute tena labhyaH tasyaishha AtmA vivRNute tanUM svAM

Meaning: It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses.

To such a one the soul reveals its own self.

 

The relevant full quote from Katha Upanishad translates as follows:

(translation by Sanderson Beck)

http://www.san.beck.org/Upan2-Katha.html

 

" This soul cannot be attained by instruction

nor by intellectual ability nor by much learning.

It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses.

To such a one the soul reveals its own self.

Not those who have not ceased from bad conduct,

not those who are not tranquil,

not those who are not composed,

not those who are not of a peaceful mind,

can attain this by intelligence.

The one for whom the priesthood and the nobility are as food,

and death is as a sauce, who knows where this one is? "

 

Such a person is the 'Muni', is the 'vyAkaraNi' (meaning the Source of

everything) and is the 'all-knower' - says Sanatkumara at the end of the 2nd

chapter of his teaching to Dhritarashtra.

 

(To be Continued)

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

 

 

 

You may have a look at my homepage at

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/

which now has a new enhanced look .

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk wrote:

 

> In this connection, Shankara quotes the Upanishadic statement: (Katha

> U.I-ii-23 2nd part)

>

> Yamevaishha vRNute tena labhyaH tasyaishha AtmA vivRNute tanUM svAM

> Meaning: It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses.

> To such a one the soul reveals its own self.

>

> The relevant full quote from Katha Upanishad translates as follows:

> (translation by Sanderson Beck)

> http://www.san.beck.org/Upan2-Katha.html

>

> " This soul cannot be attained by instruction

> nor by intellectual ability nor by much learning.

> It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses.

> To such a one the soul reveals its own self... "

 

 

> (To be Continued)

>

> PraNAms to all advaitins.

> profvk

 

Namaste Profvk,

 

I remember when this verse was unfolded in

Vedanta class. I had heard a version of

it somewhere else and was confused by it.

 

The words:

" It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses. "

can in particular lead to confusion.

 

For many years I was disheartened because the

self had not chosen to reveal itself to me.

Such ideas can really set up a duality in the mind of

the seeker. A self which chooses, and a person to

whom the self chooses to reveal itself.

 

Furthermore, how can that self, which is not a doer,

make a choice to reveal itself? Does the self

have a choice? If so, then it must be a doer.

 

The answer which was given in class was this,

(and I paraphrase, and hope I get it correctly)

is that, since the self is self-revealing, then

if obstacles to self-recognition are cleared,

then that self cannot but be revealed, because

it is entirely self-evident.

 

Thus the self does not 'choose' an individual

to reveal itself to, but rather is self-evidently

seen because that is the nature of the self,

self-luminous, self-evident, self-revealing.

 

What do others think about that?

 

Pranams,

Durga

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

 

 

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk

wrote:

, Shankara quotes the Upanishadic statement: (Katha

> U.I-ii-23 2nd part)

>

> Yamevaishha vRNute tena labhyaH tasyaishha AtmA vivRNute tanUM svAM

> Meaning: It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses.

> To such a one the soul reveals its own self.

>

> The relevant full quote from Katha Upanishad translates as

follows:

> (translation by Sanderson Beck)

> http://www.san.beck.org/Upan2-Katha.html

>

> " This soul cannot be attained by instruction

> nor by intellectual ability nor by much learning.

> It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses.

> To such a one the soul reveals its own self.

 

Dear readers,

 

The mantra 1-2-23 from Katha Upanishad reads as follows:

 

nAyamAtmA pravacanEna laByO

 

na mEdhayA na bahunA SrutEna |

 

yamEvaiSha vRuNutE tEna laByaH

 

tasaiSha AtmA vivRuNutE tanUgM svAm ||

 

The translation of the mantra , as quoted by Sri Krishnamurthy,

is erroneous. The translator either has overlooked or not understood

correctly the significance of the line " yamEvaiSha vRuNutE tEna

laByaH " . This is the most important line in the mantra.

Sri Shankara in his commentary to this verse states : yamEva

svamAtmAnam ESha sAdhakO vRuNutE prArthayatE tEnaiva AtmanA varitrA

svayam AtmA laByaH j~JAyatE ityEtat |niShkAmasya AtmAnamEva

prArthayataH AtmanyEva AtmA laByatE ityarthaH || " .

 

The essence of the commentary is this : there should be a

sincere and intense longing in the heart of the seeker to realize

Atman and to such seeker only The Self reveals His Svarupa. The Self

does not reveal His svarupa to every Tom, Dick and Harry, who do not

long for IT.

 

The KEY WORD IS " vRuNutE " , SINCERE AND INTENSE

LONGING.This the only qualification a sincere seeker should possess

right from the beginning and all the other necessary qualifications

will be added on to.

 

I have a request in this connection to make to the members.

Whenever a translation of Upanishad Mantra is quoted the one who

quotes the translation should ensure that the translation conveys the

correct meaning and THE TRUE SPIRIT of the mantra in original.

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

[Guest guest]

hare krishna

 

namaskarams.it is self revealing.but we dont know as to how much we are all

purified enough for it to reflect like a pure mirror. hence we have to wait

until such time. we go on with out even expecting and one fine day may be

the veil is gone.

 

baskaran

 

Durga <durgaji108 wrote: --- In

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk wrote:

 

 

 

Thus the self does not 'choose' an individual

to reveal itself to, but rather is self-evidently

seen because that is the nature of the self,

self-luminous, self-evident, self-revealing.

 

What do others think about that?

 

Pranams,

Durga

 

 

 

 

 

 

BASKARAN.C.S

[Guest guest]

Dear Murthy-ji,

 

Ideally, of course, whenever someone quotes from the scriptures, the precise

meaning would be stated. However, I'm sure you must see that this is

extremely difficult, to say the least. ANY translation is bound to be

limited since the original Sanskrit words do not always have exact English

equivalents. Most of the members on this group are not Sanskrit scholars and

are therefore not in a posistion to check any given translation word for

word. The best that they can do is to quote from whichever translation they

happen to have, in which case they are totally dependent upon the

scholarship and skill of that translator.

 

I would also question your contention that a 'sincere and intense longing'

is the key qualification. It may well be that a seeker will never attain the

clarity of mind and ability to discriminate etc. UNLESS he or she possesses

mumukShuthva. However I agree with Durga-ji that, once the mind is free of

ignorance, the Self is self-revealing - there is no choice in the matter.

Accordingly, if the appropriate knowledge to remove that ignorance has been

provided (willingly or not!), the result follows.

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of narayana145

29 March 2007 05:12

advaitin

Re: Dharma, in an overnight capsule for King

Dhritarashtra, Part 5

 

 

..

 

<http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=3

5468/stime=1175141527/nc1=3848550/nc2=3848567/nc3=3848580>

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

This is the 20th time I am getting the same mesg. from durga mAtAji, Sri

Srinivas Murthy prabhuji & Sri dhyAnasaraswati mAtAji...!!! what's

happening???

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

From; H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

 

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

Dear Sri Dennis,

 

The Sanskrit word " vRuNutE " means " to beg " , " to request " , in

other words to surrender . What is " Mumukshutva " itself ? It is

intense longing for moksha/liberation. Sri Shankara ha defined moksha

as follows:

A) nityatvAt mOkShasya, sAdhakasvarUpAvyatirEkAcca ||

[bruhadaranyaka upanishad; 3-3-1]

B) brahmaiva hi muktyavasthA ||

[brahmasutra ; 3-4-2]

Tens of such quotations from Sri Shankara can be given.

The central idea is this:Moksha is none other than abiding as the

Self or REALIZING ONE'S TRUE NATURE. One who has this desire is a

mumukshu. Will you please tell in what way the word 'mumukshu' is

different from What I have said Viz.'sincere and intense longing'?

Are you justified in questioning my contention ? Please ponder over.

 

There is beautiful proverb in Kannada " aLiya alla, magaLa gaMDa " .

The English version reads something like this: " Not son-in-law, but

daughter's husband " . Your questioning is similar to this.

 

In the translation of the mantra, which the Professor has quoted,

the translator has completely ovelooked to give the meaning of the

line from the mantra Viz. " yamEvaiSha vRuNutE " and this a a serious

lapse on the part of the Translator.I would prefer to quote the

Translations of the mantras done by Swami Nikhilananda . They are

much nearer to the original. I know translation is a very difficult

art. It is not just enough to know the literal meanings of the words,

but the translator must also get into the spirit of the original

writing. That means the translator should get into the heart of the

Writer of the original. It is very important. If this is not done, it

is similar to " Operation successful, but the patient died " .

 

All the above stated matter is like carrying coal to the

Newcastle . I am not competent enough to hold a dialogue on these

matters with an eminent person like you. But I could not resist the

deep urge to share my feelings.Hence this posting.I may please be

pardoned if I have transgressed any of the rules.

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " narayana145 " <narayana145 wrote:

>

> From; H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

> Pranams to all.

>

> Tens of such quotations from Sri Shankara can be given.

> The central idea is this:Moksha is none other than abiding as the

> Self or REALIZING ONE'S TRUE NATURE. One who has this desire is a

> mumukshu.

>

 

> With warm and respectful regards,

> Sreenivasa Murthy

 

Namaste Shri Sreenivasa Murthyji,

 

Mumukshutvam certainly is one of the qualifications

for gaining self-knowledge, and there are others,

which have been discussed recently in this forum.

 

Perhaps it might be difficult to say which one

is the most important. All of them need to

be developed to a certain extent before knowledge

can take place. And no doubt many of us have

particular ones which might be in need of

improvement :-) However, without mumukshutvam

the seeker would not even begin to want to know.

 

I have tried unsuccessfully to search the list

and find the quote from the Bhagavad Gita,

which translated into English, states:

" The one who has 'shraddha' gains Knowledge. "

 

Of course, it sounds a lot better in the

original Sanskrit, which I will attempt to

write it out here, (no doubt very incorrectly,

so learned members please pardon my

ignorance) 'Shradhahavan lubyate jnanam'

 

Would someone kindly please supply the

correct words and spelling, which are so

very beautiful?

 

Mumukshutvam is certainly necessary. Otherwise

the study of Vedanta might just be a philosophical,

but not practical, pursuit. However, all of the

'qualifications' have their part, including

shradha, mumkshutvam and the rest.

 

May all mumukshus gain those qualifications that

will then enable them to gain this precious knowledge,

which a very esteemed teacher of Vedanta once said,

" is worth [going through] anything to gain. "

 

Pranams,

Durga

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Durga " <durgaji108 wrote:

>

 

> I have tried unsuccessfully to search the list

> and find the quote from the Bhagavad Gita,

> which translated into English, states:

> " The one who has 'shraddha' gains Knowledge. "

>

> Of course, it sounds a lot better in the

> original Sanskrit, which I will attempt to

> write it out here, (no doubt very incorrectly,

> so learned members please pardon my

> ignorance) 'Shradhahavan lubyate jnanam'

>

> Would someone kindly please supply the

> correct words and spelling, which are so

> very beautiful?

>

 

Gita 4:39:

 

shraddhaavaa.Nllabhate GYaanaM tatparaH sa.nyatendriyaH .

GYaanaM labdhvaa paraaM shaantimachireNaadhigachchhati .. 4\-39..

 

" The qualities that are necessary for an individual to be assured of

the Knowledge-Divine are being enumerated here as vividly as from

the leaf of a Science text-book. Three great qualities have been

indicated and to understand them is to understand why the so-called

seekers, in spite of their claims to sincere self-application, do

not actually reach anywhere near the ladder of development. Faith,

devotion, and self-control are the three imperative necessities to

be acquired ere we can hope to evolve to the diviner stature from

our present mortal encumbrances. But these three words are more

often misunderstood than rightly evaluated.

 

FAITH (Shraddha) --- Exploiters of religions have been making

capital out of repeating this word as their safest excuse for all

problems spiritual, to clear which devotees may approach these men

who pose themselves as guides in religion. Invariably, we find that

the ordinary devotees are completely rendered, sometimes fanatical

and often poorer, in their intellectual and mental growth, because

of the unintelligent insistence of Shraddha translated as " blind

faith and unquestioned acceptance of any declaration said to be

divine. "

 

Shankara tolls the death-knell of this misunderstanding when he

explains Shraddha as " that by which an individual readily

understands the exact import of the scriptural text as well as the

pregnant words of advice of the preceptor. "

 

DEVOTED TO IT (Tatparah) --- Whatever be the 'path' of divine self-

development that he may be following, it is an unavoidable necessity

that the seeker must give his undivided attention to it, and must,

on all occasions, maintain in his mind a continuous consciousness of

the Divine. A mere intellectual study of the scriptures will not

help us in purifying and shaping our " within' to the glorious Beauty

of the Divine. It is necessary that we must pour out our mind and

intellect into the scheme of living that the Upanishads advise.

 

WHO HAS SUBDUED THE SENSES --- The Shraddha and Jnana explained

above will not sustain themselves, and no seeker can consistently

hope to entertain them unless he is constantly striving his best to

live in a spirit of self-control. It is the sense-organs that seduce

us away into the life of excessive sensuousness, and when one has

entered into the troubled waters of a sensuous life, one has no

chances of maintaining oneself quietly in the higher values of life.

To walk the Path-Divine is to get out of the gutters-of-

sensuousness. Excessive sense-life and Absolute God-life are

antitheses to each other; where the one is, the other cannot be.

Where the light of inward serenity and deeper peace have come, the

darkness created by sense passions and animal appetites must depart.

It is imperative, therefore, that a seeker should learn to live in

steady and constant sense-control.

 

Why should we live renouncing sense enjoyments, and employing our

mind in remembering constantly the Divine goal of life, with faith

both in ourselves and in the science of religion? Ordinarily, an

intellect can enquire only as to the cause-and-effect of things. The

ego is ever employed in its own motive-hunting. A seeker in the

initial stages of his self-development remains constantly in his

intellect. Naturally, he will enquire what the result of such a

conspicuous sacrifice would be. To convince him, the second line is

given.

 

That a seeker who lives the above-mentioned triple-programme of

Divine life, reaches the State-of-'Knowledge' is the promise and

guarantee of the Rishis, who are the authors of the immortal

scriptures. A doubt again arises as to why we should, after all,

acquire the 'Knowledge-Divine.' Krishna explains here that, having

gained the right-knowledge, the individual " SOON REACHES THE SUPREME

PEACE. " The promise of reaching the great Goal-of-life is not

guaranteed to take effect in a definite period of time. Just as, in

the previous stanza, it was said, " In good time " (Kalena), so too,

here it is said, " Ere long " (Achirena). In short, after gaining

this 'Knowledge,' one would " soon " reach the Goal-of-life.

 

SUPREME PEACE (Param Shantim) --- The Goal-of-life is labelled here

as the " Great Peace " that knows no diminution. In these days of

peace-mongers getting ready for war in the name of peace, one is apt

to become honestly sceptical about the goal indicated in this

stanza. The term 'peace' here is not that undefined vague concept,

that is often repeated in politics, whenever it is convenient for a

set of politicians to do so, but the term Shanti has a wealth of

psychological suggestiveness.

 

It is very well-known that every living creature is, at all moments,

trying to gain a better happiness, through all its activities in

life. From breathing and eating, to the organised endeavour in

capturing the world-market through war and destruction, all

activities are attempts by the frail individuals to discover a

greater and a better joy or happiness. This is true not only in man

but in the animal kingdom, and even in the vegetable world. In

short, no action is possible unless the actor is motivated by an

inner urge in him to seek a greater sense of fulfilment or joy unto

himself.

 

If thus, the whole world is striving to win the highest joy that it

possibly can, and having gained it, to invest all energy and

intelligence to retain the same, then the goal of life should be

ABSOLUTE-HAPPINESS, where all strife ends, all desires are

fulfilled, all thoughts and agitations are finally exhausted.

Desires for joy give rise to thought disturbances, which, trying to

fulfil themselves in the outer world, become the visible actions in

everyday life. The restlessness of the mind and the weary fatigue of

the body shall both end, when Absolute Joy is attained. Therefore,

Absolute Joy is Absolute Peace.

 

Here, in this stanza the Goal-of-life is indicated as the Supreme

Peace, which may be, in other words, explained as the Supreme Joy. "

 

Ref: http://tinyurl.com/2z7h2m

Sw. Chinmayananda's commentary

[Guest guest]

Dear Murthy-ji.

 

Please excuse me if I have been misunderstood. I did not mean to imply that

mumukShutva was not *effectively* a qualification for the sAdhaka - and I

would never presume to argue with Shankara! Perhaps an analogy would make it

cleare what I was trying to say. If you force-feed a hunger striker, for

example, the necessary nourishment for the body will be given, irrespective

of the desires of the person involved. Similarly, if you are depressed and

have lost your appetite, you can nevertheless be persuaded to eat and your

body will remain healthy. Ideally, of course, you will actually have the

desire to eat regularly and this is the normal and recommended manner!

 

What I was suggesting is that, if you could 'force feed' someone who has no

desire for enlightenment with the requisite knowledge, they would eventually

be enlightened regardless, as soon as the ignorance was nullified. I

concede, however, that it is unlikely that someone without the desire would

aquiesce to such treatment! You can imagine them putting their fingers in

their ears and singing 'la la la' loudly while the scriptures are being

unfolded! :-)

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of narayana145

29 March 2007 14:13

advaitin

Re: Dharma, in an overnight capsule for King

Dhritarashtra, Part 5

 

 

..

 

<http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=3

5485/stime=1175174009/nc1=3848546/nc2=3848567/nc3=3848629>

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

>

> Dear Murthy-ji.

>

>

> What I was suggesting is that, if you could 'force feed' someone who

has no

> desire for enlightenment with the requisite knowledge, they would

eventually

> be enlightened regardless, as soon as the ignorance was nullified.

>

> Best wishes,

> Dennis

 

Namaste Dennis,

 

I'm not sure if I would agree with what you

write above. In order for Vedanta to work

as a pramana (a direct means of knowledge),

a certain type of mind, on the part of the

listener, has to be available, a mind which

has a relative degree of shanti.

 

Whether merely hearing the teachings would

enable someone to acquire such a mind, I think,

is doubtful. A desire to 'know' would need to be

there in the first place, IMO, in order that

the mind be receptive for the teachings to work.

 

And furthermore the mind would need to have,

the mental 'qualifications' which are mentioned

in the teachings, shama, dama, etc., at least

to a certain extent, and also 'faith pending

understanding' that the words which are

being heard are true.

 

So whether one accepts the theory of karma or

not, I think it is only a very particular

type of individual whose mind would be

available for the teachings to work.

 

To me, to this mind, from what I

understand of the way that the teachings

of Vedanta actually work as a pramana,

what your analogy leaves out is the preparedness

of the mind of the person listening to the teachings.

 

In a similar vein, one might also wonder,

why is it that someone who has attended

teachings for several years and actually

wants self-knowledge does not have it?

 

Most likely (if the teachings and teacher are good),

it may have something to do with the conclusions

which that person's mind holds against the

'vastu,' the self, which that person actually

is, but which that person's mind has taken to be

something else. So those types of conclusions, which

can vary from individual to individual, need to be

looked into and examined, and gradually and gently

let go of in the light of the teachings.

 

Furthermore, just to be clear, (because

oftentimes the word 'self' is implied

in the teachings of Vedanta when the words

'knowledge' and 'ignorance' are used),

it is only self-knowledge itself which removes

self-ignorance.

 

There is no other type 'knowledge' which removes it,

not knowledge of the scriptures, or hearing the words,

only direct and immediate self-knowledge itself.

 

Only self-knowledge removes self-ignorance,

and that self-knowledge is gained through listening

to the teachings wielded by a teacher who knows

how to use the methodology, which Vedanta offers,

That methodology is called a 'pramana,' a direct

means of (self)-knowledge.

 

So while the methodology is very precise, and I

would say even scientific, because it is entirely

logical; it works step by step; and you your self

are here to be known, it does take a certain type

of mind to be available for the teachings to work,

and not every person has that type of mind, nor do

I think would they necessarily be able to acquire

it without first (a) wanting to know and (b) having

the trust that the words are true.

 

Pranams,

Durga

[Guest guest]

Hi Durga-ji,

 

Again, I don't disagree with the essence of your message. As before, I am

being very pedantic and literal in what I say. To quote: " ...they would be

enlightened regardless, as soon as the ignorance was nullified. " You cannot

deny this if you accept that enlightenment effectively *is* the removal of

ignorance. What you are questioning is whether it is feasible to remove

ignorance from a person against their will and I can certainly agree that

this might well be the case, which is why I said " ...*if* you can force feed

someone with the requisite knowledge " .

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf

Of Durga

30 March 2007 12:53

advaitin

Re: Dharma, in an overnight capsule for King

Dhritarashtra, Part 5

 

 

..

 

<http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=3

5506/stime=1175255533/nc1=3848549/nc2=3848583/nc3=3848570>

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

Dear Sri Dennis,

I request you kindly to study and digest Chapter VIII of

Chandogya Upanishad with Sri Shankara's commentary at the feet of ONE

who has realised what he is teaching if you have not already done

so..Then you yourself will realise whether what you have written is

correct or not. Please read again and again the reply of Smt Durga

and ponder over it.

 

In this connection I would like to bring to your kind notice that in

dealing with sacred metaphysical vidya like Advaita one needs a deep

intuitional framework of mind and not a mind which is highly

intellectual. That was what my revered Guru

taught and helped me to acquire that frame of mind .

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy.

[Guest guest]

PraNams to everybody,

 

Must say, I have not been following this thread - in

fact many of the threads - since I got caught up in

the rat race here even though I have not seen a single

rat.

 

What I am writing here may have been already

discussed. I will express my understanding anyway.

 

About the knowledge - it is considered as vastu

tantram not purusha tantram. That it does not depend

on the will of the student or on the will of any other

person too to force feed. So one cannot force feed

knowledge. One can force feed the environment

conducive for knowledge like taking him to the library

and showing where all the books are, or taking him to

a teacher where teaching is going on, etc.

 

Knowledge comes only to the prepared, contemplative

mind. Therefore there are prerequisites for any

knowledge - this is true for objective knowledge or

subjective knowledge or self knowledge.

 

Every sinner can become a saint with proper change in

attitude based on clear understanding.

 

In Uddava Gita - there is a chapter on Bikshu Gita

where a notoriously selfish guy transforms into a

saintly person. What is required is willingness to

transform (mumukshutvam) which comes with viveka,

vairaagya and shatsampatti. Among them shraddhaa is

most important - If you read the biography of

Nisargadatta Maharaj, its value can be appreciated.

'Shraddhaavan labhate jnaanam' - says Krishna.

Shraddhaa cannot be force fed; it has to come from

within.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

--- Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

 

What you are questioning is whether it is

> feasible to remove

> ignorance from a person against their will and I can

> certainly agree that

> this might well be the case, which is why I said

> " ...*if* you can force feed

> someone with the requisite knowledge " .

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

>

[Guest guest]

hare krishna

 

namaskarams

 

very concept of mumukahutavam is that vedanta is taught only to the persons who

seek that knowledge.hence question of force feeding does/nt arise -not even for

any other knowledge.in favt even for the well versed in vedanta one does/nt get

enlightenement with out the blessing of the supreme.

 

baskaran

 

Durga <durgaji108 wrote: --- In

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

>

> Dear Murthy-ji.

>

>

> What I was suggesting is that, if you could 'force feed' someone who

has no

> desire for enlightenment with the requisite knowledge, they would

eventually

> be enlightened regardless, as soon as the ignorance was nullified.

>

> Best wishes,

> Dennis

 

Namaste Dennis,

 

I'm not sure if I would agree with what you

write above. In order for Vedanta to work

as a pramana (a direct means of knowledge),

a certain type of mind, on the part of the

listener, has to be available, a mind which

has a relative degree of shanti.

 

Whether merely hearing the teachings would

enable someone to acquire such a mind, I think,

is doubtful. A desire to 'know' would need to be

there in the first place, IMO, in order that

the mind be receptive for the teachings to work.

 

And furthermore the mind would need to have,

the mental 'qualifications' which are mentioned

in the teachings, shama, dama, etc., at least

to a certain extent, and also 'faith pending

understanding' that the words which are

being heard are true.

 

So whether one accepts the theory of karma or

not, I think it is only a very particular

type of individual whose mind would be

available for the teachings to work.

 

To me, to this mind, from what I

understand of the way that the teachings

of Vedanta actually work as a pramana,

what your analogy leaves out is the preparedness

of the mind of the person listening to the teachings.

 

In a similar vein, one might also wonder,

why is it that someone who has attended

teachings for several years and actually

wants self-knowledge does not have it?

 

Most likely (if the teachings and teacher are good),

it may have something to do with the conclusions

which that person's mind holds against the

'vastu,' the self, which that person actually

is, but which that person's mind has taken to be

something else. So those types of conclusions, which

can vary from individual to individual, need to be

looked into and examined, and gradually and gently

let go of in the light of the teachings.

 

Furthermore, just to be clear, (because

oftentimes the word 'self' is implied

in the teachings of Vedanta when the words

'knowledge' and 'ignorance' are used),

it is only self-knowledge itself which removes

self-ignorance.

 

There is no other type 'knowledge' which removes it,

not knowledge of the scriptures, or hearing the words,

only direct and immediate self-knowledge itself.

 

Only self-knowledge removes self-ignorance,

and that self-knowledge is gained through listening

to the teachings wielded by a teacher who knows

how to use the methodology, which Vedanta offers,

That methodology is called a 'pramana,' a direct

means of (self)-knowledge.

 

So while the methodology is very precise, and I

would say even scientific, because it is entirely

logical; it works step by step; and you your self

are here to be known, it does take a certain type

of mind to be available for the teachings to work,

and not every person has that type of mind, nor do

I think would they necessarily be able to acquire

it without first (a) wanting to know and (b) having

the trust that the words are true.

 

Pranams,

Durga

 

 

 

 

 

 

BASKARAN.C.S

 

 

 

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