Mechanical and Organic

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri sampath,

My regard for you has gone up further after I read your latest posting. My

website is only two years old. If, as you say, you started studying vedanta

only after you read my translations on my website, it means you have

mastered so much in such a short time. Now I understand why you did not

reply when I asked you some time ago for details about you. You must have

been a great vedic scholar in your previous birth. Merely saying that you

are as good as a Brahmin will be no compliment to you, seeing how Brahmins

have degenerated. It will only be degrading you.

I am now typing out on my computer an article entitled " Who is a

Brahmin? " . This article, written by me some years ago, was published in the

monthly journal of the Chinmaya Mission. It is based on an episode in

Mahabharata. Please read it when I post it on my website. According to it,

people like you are the real Brahmins and not those who are merely born to

Brahmin parents. The upanishad describes such persons as 'brahmabandhu', as

I am sure you know.

With my best widhes,

S.N.Sastri

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Pranams Sastrigaru:

 

Please post that article in the list which will become a handy

reference for the members. That will have high potential to clear the

doubts in the minds of those with a wrong impression.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> I am now typing out on my computer an article entitled " Who is a

> Brahmin? " . This article, written by me some years ago, was published

in the

> monthly journal of the Chinmaya Mission. It is based on an episode in

> Mahabharata. >

[Guest guest]

According to it,

people like you are the real Brahmins and not those

who are merely born to

Brahmin parents. The upanishad describes such persons

as 'brahmabandhu'

 

Aren't all of the castes and roles we play only

matters of attitude and outlook? In the West I think

one could be a monk and be " in the world " , doing the

things of the world but with mind unattached to the

doings. The Christian monks take vows of poverty,

chastity and obedience. Yet I think one could be

wealthy, married and the head of a corporation, yet

internally " own " none of those things, be free of

attachment to them.

 

And the other side is the story of monks who are not

monks at all, do with great attachment all the things

they took vows not to do!

 

So it seems there's an outward appearance and an

inward reality, the difference between the packaging

and what's in the package.

 

 

______________________________\

____

Be a better pen pal.

Text or chat with friends inside Mail. See how.

http://overview.mail./

[Guest guest]

Dear Sampath-ji,

 

 

 

Just an incidental query on your excellent exposition:

 

 

 

You say: " As you know very well, when there is a conflict between reason and

Sruti, Sruti alone has to be taken as correct. The reason has to be

rejected(if it is contradicted by Sruti) however lofty it may be. "

 

 

 

This was not quite how I understood this. Here is Gaudapada Mandukya

Upanishad (III.23):

 

" (The passing into birth may be real or illusory. Both these views are

mentioned equally in the shruti.)That which is supported by shruti and

corroborated by reason is alone true and not the other. "

 

 

 

Is there another reference for the particular situation that you describe?

 

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " S.N. Sastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

 

My heartfelt gratitude - praNAmaH to SrI Sadanandaji, SrI Baskaran ji,

SrI Ramchandranji, SrI Steve stoker ji and others.

 

praNAmaH SrI Sastri ji,

 

Thank you very much for your inspiring words. I am very much shocked

to see you saying that I did not reply to you when you have asked my

details. I am really not aware of that. Otherwise I would have

responded immediately. Apologies anyways.

 

Here are my details:

 

I am M. Sampath Goud, 20 yrs old, doing M.B.B.S Second year at Osmania

Medical College, Hyderabad, Andhra pradesh.

 

It has been around 14months since my entry into the world of internet.

I have started with Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda online and

later brought hard copies from Ramakrishna Math along with some other

literature related to SrI Ramakrishna paramahamsa and SrI Sarada ma

published by them.

 

After reading them, I have taken Brahma sUtra bhashyas of both SrI

Sankara and SrI Ramanuja by Vireswarananda ji from Rkmath and

completed reading and studying them. And of course I still have to

'learn' them.

 

And alongside, I have read the translations from your websites of

works attributed to Sankara like, Nirvanashatkam, maneesha panchakam,

bhaja govindam and also your elucidation of Vedantic concepts, along

with Prof. V Krishmamurthy ji's translations and works like, advaita

for beginners, advaita saadhana etc and also P.R. Ramachander ji's

translations like, Dakshinamurthy ashtakam etc.

 

I have also been studying Upanishads both major and minor and few

works of Saiva siddhanta scholars and pUrNAnanda swami's shatchakra

nirUpaNa, and Vivekachudamani, tattvabodha, atmabodha, tarka samgraha,

laghuvasudevamananam, mimAmsa paribhAsha, vEdAnta paribhasha, vedanta

sara, aparokshanubhuti, vedanta panchadasi, bhasa pariccheda,

ISvarakrishna's sAmkhya kArika, patanjali yogasutras, narada bhakti

sutras, bhagavad gita commented upon by Sankara, prabhupada etc,

drg-drishya viveka, few others books and articles online.

 

YOURS

SAMPATH.

=======================================

> Dear Shri sampath,

> My regard for you has gone up further after I read your latest

posting. My

> website is only two years old. If, as you say, you started studying

vedanta

> only after you read my translations on my website, it means you have

> mastered so much in such a short time. Now I understand why you did not

> reply when I asked you some time ago for details about you. You must

have

> been a great vedic scholar in your previous birth. Merely saying

that you

> are as good as a Brahmin will be no compliment to you, seeing how

Brahmins

> have degenerated. It will only be degrading you.

> I am now typing out on my computer an article entitled " Who is a

> Brahmin? " . This article, written by me some years ago, was published

in the

> monthly journal of the Chinmaya Mission. It is based on an episode in

> Mahabharata. Please read it when I post it on my website. According

to it,

> people like you are the real Brahmins and not those who are merely

born to

> Brahmin parents. The upanishad describes such persons as

'brahmabandhu', as

> I am sure you know.

> With my best widhes,

> S.N.Sastri

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

 

> Also, is there a reference in the Sruti which states that the subtle

body of a jiva is immutable throughout its life and during

transmigration? I ask this only because you seem to be very particular

about that position and have been so in our earlier discussion on Orkut.

 

Dear Vaibhav-ji,

 

Why should shruti say so? Is there any logical necessity for that?

 

While pondering over the subject I remembered words of Swami

Vivekananada which I am quoting below:

 

" In this universe there is one continuous substance on every plane of

existence. Physically this universe is one: there is no difference

between the sun and you. The scientist will tell you it is only a

'fiction' to say the contrary. There is no real difference between the

table and me; the table is one point in the mass of matter, and I

another point. Each form represents, as it were, one whirlpool in the

infinite ocean of matter, of which not one is constant. Just as in a

rushing stream there may be millions of whirlpools, the water in each

of which is different every moment, turning round and round for a few

seconds, and then passing out, replaced by a fresh quantity, so the

whole universe is one constantly changing mass of matter, in which all

forms of existence are so many whirlpools. A mass of maker enters into

one whirlpool, say a human body, stays there for a period, becomes

changed, and goes out into another, say an animal body this time, from

which again after a few years, it enters into another whirlpool,

called a lump of mineral. It is a constant change. Not one body is

constant. There is no such thing as 'my body', or 'your body', except

in words. Of the one huge mass of matter, one point is called a moon,

another a sun, another a man, another the earth, another a plant,

another a mineral. Not one is constant, but everything is changing,

matter eternally concreting and disintegrating.**So it is with the

mind**. Matter is represented by the ether; when the action of Prana

is most subtle, this very ether, in the finer state of vibration, will

represent the mind and there it will be **still one unbroken mass**.

If you can simply get to that subtle vibration, you will see and feel

that the whole universe is composed of subtle vibrations. "

 

Source: rAja yOga lectures by swami vivEkAnanda.

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

<paramahamsavivekananda wrote:

 

> SrI Sankara in his Brahma sUtra bhashya iii.2.38-41 takes up this

> issue and says in iii.2.41,

>

> " The final conclusion then is that the fruits come from the Lord

> acting with a view to the deeds done by the souls, or, if it be so

> preferred, with a view to the apûrva springing from the deeds. This

> view is proved by the circumstance of scripture representing the Lord

> not only as the giver of fruits but also as the causal agent with

> reference to all actions whether good or evil. Compare the passage,

> Kau. Up. III, 8, 'He makes him whom he wishes to lead up from these

> worlds do a good deed; and the same makes him whom he wishes to lead

> down from these worlds do a bad deed.' "

>

> ## Although SrI Sankara allows the cry babies(pUrvamImAmsakAs) to

> assume the existence of apUrva, he declares solidly in the sUtra.38

> that there is no proof to say that apUrva exists !!

 

Dear Sri Sampath,

 

Can you tell us how the manes and deities get replenished by the food

offered in the shrAddha ritual and the oblations poured in the

sacrificial fire respectively? Is there any physical transfer of

subtle elements (tanmAtrAs) or it 'just happens' by the vibhUti of

ishwara? Why fire is called the carrier of the oblations? (please note

that I have a very limited exposure of this topic)

 

What does the pUrvamImAmsakAs say and our AchArya say?

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

 

namaskAraH SrI Dennis ji,

 

Your query points out the serious flaw I have committed in my post.

Finding no other way, I shall attempt to patch it up now.

 

In the context where I wrote it, Vaibhav ji had written as below:

 

" If a jiva can use up all its karma in a higher plane, what

stops it from taking up new karma? If karma can be exhausted, then why

is it not accrued? For each of these questions, the functioning of

karma is necessary to be described. "

 

## I have actually ruled out such a possibility in my previous post to

him wherein I have mentioned an explanation from SrI Vasudeva yati who

compares the sukshma sharira with the fire and gross body with the

firewood. Fire burns only when it is in connexion with firewood.

Similarly, sukshma sharira functions only when it is associated with

the gross body which happens in earthly plane alone. Hence the karma

is accrued here. But in other planes, temporary bodies like that made

up of water etc are taken up by the sukshma sharira which serve only

the purpose of enjoyment or suffering. They do not accrue any karma.

 

 

Now, what I have answered today is,

 

As you know very well, when there is a conflict between

reason and Sruti, Sruti alone has to be taken as correct. The reason

has to be rejected(if it is contradicted by Sruti) however lofty it

may be. No where in Sruti it is mentioned that the departed souls

acquire new karma in other worlds. Hence such a claim is unfounded.

Further, at many places in scriptures it is stated that the earthly

plane is karma bhUmi. Even Swamiji says at many instances that the

earthly plane alone is karma bhUmi.

 

## In the above reply, I have mentioned three points which are:

 

* No where in Sruti, a possibility of departed souls accruing new

karma is mentioned.

 

* It is mentioned in Sruti that earthly plane alone is the place where

karma is done.

 

* Now, if the reason favors an opinion which is not found in Sruti, it

has to be rejected even if it seems highly plausible because there is

a chance that we are unaware of other possibilities. Or, if there is

only single mention in Sruti and that contradicts our reason, we need

to reject our reason.

 

In the above case,

 

Sruti mentions of earthly plane alone as karma bhUmi.

Sruti doesn't mention about accruing of karma in other planes.

Reasoning says that karma can be accrued in other planes.

 

This sort of reasoning is contradicted by Scripture(as it is against

the mention of earthly plane alone as karma bhUmi) and also it is

unfounded since it was not mentioned anywhere in Sruti.

 

Similar line of argument was adopted by SrI Sankara when he speaks of

animal sacrifices in rituals like jyotistoma. He says that when Sruti

sanctions such sacrifices as necessary things, we should not employ

our reasoning since there is a chance that we are unaware of what is

right and what is wrong. So we have to depend ultimately on the Scripture.

 

## Now, the case you have presented before us from mANDUkya kArika is

a situation where the Sruti mentions both views " equally " . And one

more thing is that Sruti is not " specific " about any particular view

like for example, Sruti itself says that we should not injure living

beings which is a *general* rule but again says that we should

sacrifice animals for the *particular* rituals. In such cases, when

Sruti sanctions the killing of animals for *particular* rituals, there

is no wrong in doing so. We need not bring our reasoning to judge the

issue. General rules can be omitted to value the particular exceptions.

 

But here, Sruti *equally* mentions both the views i.e. passing into

birth may be *real* or *illusory*. Here, Sruti is not specific to any

particular view. Hence, we have to employ our reasoning to judge the

issue.

 

Kindly point out the mistakes if any.

 

Yours,

SAMPATH.

===========================

> Dear Sampath-ji,

>

>

>

> Just an incidental query on your excellent exposition:

>

>

>

> You say: " As you know very well, when there is a conflict between

reason and

> Sruti, Sruti alone has to be taken as correct. The reason has to be

> rejected(if it is contradicted by Sruti) however lofty it may be. "

>

>

>

> This was not quite how I understood this. Here is Gaudapada Mandukya

> Upanishad (III.23):

>

> " (The passing into birth may be real or illusory. Both these views are

> mentioned equally in the shruti.)That which is supported by shruti and

> corroborated by reason is alone true and not the other. "

>

>

>

> Is there another reference for the particular situation that you

describe?

>

>

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Dennis

>

>

>

 

[Guest guest]

Paramhamsaji,

 

Firstly, I would like to say that you have empirically

proven the original demarcation of society where one's

varNa is by one's character, knowledge etc. and not by

birth; as described in the Vajrasuchika Upanishad. On

an individual as well as on a social level, such an

understanding of the ancient varNa system is very

important.

 

------------

Coming to the arguments:

 

You said:

" As you know very well, when there is a conflict

between reason and Sruti, Sruti alone has to be taken

as correct. The reason has to be rejected(if it is

contradicted by Sruti) however lofty it may be. "

 

Reply:

I would strongly disagree on this position, since a

lot of enquiry would be shunned because of it. Rather,

the correct position should be, whenever reason

differs from Sruti, it means our understanding of

Sruti is flawed, and we need to think in terms of

reconciling both the Sruti and reason.

 

If this were not Sri Shankara's position, he would not

have defeated the Buddhists in debate, because

Sruti-pramana is not valid for the Buddhists. As you

are aware, Buddhism has its own theory of rebirth and

karma, and Shankaracharya was able to defeat them only

because he was able to show that Vedanta was nearer to

truth than their theories. This cannot be done using

Sruti-pramANa alone (because for it both sides need to

accept them as infallible).

 

So, we need to say that Srutis are infallible, but our

understanding of Srutis is not. Hence, whenever there

is conflict between reason and Srutis, reason has to

be tuned vis-a-vis Srutis.

 

-----------------

 

You said:

" Kindly note that your arguments are similar to those

of Buddhism and pUrvamimAmsa which leave no scope for

ISvara who is the ultimate bestower of all fruits of

karma. "

 

Reply:

No, I didnt say there is no Ishvara, He ultimately is

the bestower of the fruits of all deeds. Before I

argue further on these lines, let me quote Swami

Vivekananda's definition of Ishvara.

 

In reply to a question as to the exact position of

Ishvara in Vedantic Philosophy, the Swami Vivekananda,

while in Europe, gave the following definition:

 

" Ishvara is the sum total of individuals, yet He is an

Individual, as the human body is a unit, of which each

cell is an individual. Samashti or collected equals

God; Vyashti or analysed equals the Jiva. The

existence of Ishvara, therefore, depends on that of

Jiva, as the body on the cell, and vice versa. Thus,

Jiva and Ishvara are coexistent beings; when one

exists, the other must. Also, because, except on our

earth, in all the higher spheres, the amount of good

being vastly in excess of the amount of evil, the sum

total (Ishvara) may be said to be all-good.

Omnipotence and omniscience are obvious qualities and

need no argument to prove from the very fact of

totality. Brahman is beyond both these and is not a

conditioned state; it is the only Unit not composed of

many units, the principle which runs through all from

a cell to God, without which nothing can exist; and

whatever is real is that principle, or Brahman. When I

think I am Brahman, I alone exist; so with others.

Therefore, each one is the whole of that principle. "

 

This ties so nicely with his statement that " ISvara

-seva is same as jana-seva " .

 

So, as per Swamiji, Ishvara is simply the sum-total of

all the individual jivas. Why is such an entity

necessary? Because, otherwise there is no way of

ensuring that the same karmic law is applicable

irrespective of time and place. Ishwara is that entity

which ASSURES the existence of karmic law. From the

viewpoint of one soul, IShwara is definitely infinite,

just like for a single cell, the entire body seems

infinite.

 

So, my position is not that there is no place for

Ishvara, in fact quite the contrary. The law of karma

cannot exist without the existence of Ishvara. But,

none of these should stop one from inquiring into the

working of the law. Although Ishvara is the bestower

of karma-phala, he does not do it " automatically " .

Once we accept that position then we reduce ourselves

to the position of other religions which have no

inquiry into the working of the Divine. But Vedanta is

based on enquiry, where nothing " magical " happens. It

is this what led Swami Vivekananda to call Vedanta as

'the science of religion'.

 

I believe the words of the Sruti as well as Sri

Shankara need to be interpreted with this in mind. It

is on these grounds that I was seeking the explanation

of the law of karma and the process of rebirth.

 

-------------

 

You said: (in response to the above question)

" As we accept, ISvara, our theory is more justified on

logical grounds. "

 

Reply:

Yes, but merely saying ISvara bestows the karma-phala

is no description at all, since we know nothing about

Isvara, nor about how he functions. I am not seeking a

complete understanding into the Cosmic mind (since

that is impossible), but rather general principles for

the same.

 

--------------

 

 

Lastly, both the references you provide about the

immutability of the sukshma sharira (that of bhASya

and the sarva-sAra Upanishad) do not say that the

subtle body does not change. While Shankara says that

the subtle body " continues to exist " , the Upanishad

says the sukshma sharira " appears as imperishable " .

Both do not say or even hint that there cannot be

changes in the subtle body.

 

---------------

 

You said:

" Hence the " I-ness " that reveals the jIvatman is

proved to be existent which re-incarnates as per the

law of karma. Hence re-incarnation is not an illusion

even from the vyavahArika reality. "

 

Reply:

My dear friend, noone here is denying the existence of

either the jIvAtman or even karma or reincarnation.

But, from the vyavahArika viewpoint, one needs to

explain the functioning of the process, like you would

explain the functioning of any other process. It is

this functioning I have been asking since the

beginning of this thread.

 

Hope that conveys the exact point I was trying to

make.

Hari Om,

~Vaibhav.

 

 

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on

http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html/

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Sampathji:

 

The following information from Wikipedia provide futher evidence that

the caste name should not be interpreted as non-Brahmin or as

backward:

 

Goud (also written as Gowd, Gowda or Gaud) Saraswat Brahmins are a

Konkani or Marathi speaking Hindu Brahmin community in India. They

are popularly referred to as GSBs.

 

Saraswats are people of Aryan descent who had settled down on the

banks of the Saraswati River. The river Saraswati eventually dried up

and this led to the migration of the Saraswats to the plains of

northern India. Though the exact dates of this migration are unknown,

the Rig Veda eulogies the river Saraswati was huge. It is believed

that Lord Parshuram, a Brahmin, also counted as an avatar of Lord

Vishnu brought the Saraswats from the northern Indian plains to Goa

for the purpose of religious functions. 96 families of Goud (meaning

northern) Saraswats came to the southern half of India and hence

carried the appellation of 'northern' in the form of the word Goud.

In view of the 96 families who formed 96 settlements in Goa -

Sasashti (66) (Salcette) + Tissuari (30) (Tiswadi), they were also

called Shenoy or sinai or shenvis. There were further settlements in

Baradesh (12 settlements) (Bardez) , Goa.

Source: Wikipedia

 

This historical information futher supports the hypotheis of the

degneration of Varna system of the Vedic Period.

 

Gaud in Goa is a Brahmin but in Andhra and in Tamil Naud (Gowd became

Gowda) they became a backward class! As advaitins, we are once again

reminded that the Atman has no name or form!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

 

 

advaitin , " paramahamsavivekananda "

<paramahamsavivekananda wrote:

>

 

> I am M. Sampath Goud, 20 yrs old, doing M.B.B.S Second year at

Osmania

[Guest guest]

--- Vinayaka <vinayaka_ns wrote:

 

Dear Vaibhav-ji,

 

Why should shruti say so? Is there any logical

necessity for that?

 

While pondering over the subject I remembered words of

Swami

Vivekananada which I am quoting below:

 

 

Yes, Dear Vinayakaji,

I agree completely with Swamiji's view when he says,

 

" There is no such thing as 'my body', or 'your body',

except in words. Of the one huge mass of matter, one

point is called a moon, another a sun, another a man,

another the earth, another a plant, another a mineral.

Not one is constant, but everything is changing,

matter eternally concreting and disintegrating. **So

it is with the mind** "

 

 

Yes, I completely agree with this view. I only asked

so because our friend Paramhamsaji seemed to say that

the subtle body is unchangeable until its dissolution

at mukti; hence my query.

 

Regards,

~Vaibhav/

 

That's one of the remarkable things about life. It's never so bad that it can't

get worse.

The Authoritative Calvin and Hobbes

 

 

Flying to Bangalore or Bhopal? Search for tickets at

http://in.farechase.