Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 PraNAms to all. Nairji - My PraNAms - Please continue your pursuit and I am sure the answers will come to you that will be satisfactory to you with the grace of the Lord. That is the saadhana that we have to do. Shyamji - PraNAms -Long time no hear! Please continue to share your wisdom with us. It is good to hear different perspectives. Bhaskarji - My salutations. I do admire your devotion to your parama guruji. Similarly others have their reverence to lineage of aachaaryas and each aachaarya looks at the problem and sees different perspectives. But no advaitic teacher would go against the fundamentals - Brahma satyam, jagat mithyaa and jiivo brahma eva na aparaH - Given that the rest are details of vyavahaara level - I would give just room for other's opinions as long as the fundamental doctrine is not violated. Shastriji has clearly stated in all his posts the source of his explanation. You need not have to accept if it does not agree with your understanding. We respect all aachaaryas, but we follow one as our guru. That is the only way, the Vedanta works. What is self Realization? Sreenivas posed. I try to capture this in my last post on the Analysis of the Mind-5. Unfortunately the word file did not show up properly. Next time I will use notepad as Ram suggested. The essence is this - obviously based on my understanding. 1. The ego which is based on the notion that I am this - cannot realize. 2. Consciousness that I am is eternally pure jnaana swaruupam and it need not have to realize. Then what is realization and who has to realize? Realization is the recognition of the above two and understanding that I am not the ego and claim my immortality by shifting by way of understanding that I am that sat-chit-ananda swaruupam rather than the mortal ego. Essentially I am stripping out the reality that I have given to ego and claiming my real nature by clear understanding of my true nature. All this understanding occurs in the mind or actually in the intellect only. I am that which pervades the whole saakshii and saakshyam too. Ego stripped out of reality assumed to it now remains as tool in my hands (or in I am = Brahman hands) to transact whenever and wherever I want - I will be transacting the way Krishna says in Sthitaprajnaa section. I am very much enjoying the analysis of Vedanta paribhaasha - particularly Dharmaraja Advarindra's analysis of pratyaksh pramaaNa - He takes in one sweep to chaitanya swaruupam - God - that is beautiful. My PraNAms to Michealji for his persistent reference to this text. I will start posting something on this based on my understanding. Hari Om! Sadananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 snsastri wrote: > because it is said that in Atmavidya sraddha is very important and > sraddha means accepting the teachings of the guru and the sAstra as > true. For each one the teaching of his own guru is sacrosanct. > Dear Sastri-Ji: This is very well put and quite straight forward and easy to accept. All those who have walked the path sincerely know the truth of it. Don't we have the following mantra to emphasize it? Guru Brahama, Guru Vishnu, Gurudev Maheshvara Guru Sakshat, Para Brahman, Tasmai Sri Guruve Nama. I hope there is no misspelling above. The teachings of the Guru work at the right time. When the Acharya was in Savikalpa Samadhi, the thought came to him that I am not the enjoyer of the bliss but bliss itself and thus leading to Nirvikalpa stage. Where did that thought come from at that critical juncture? It came from meditating on the teachings given by the Guru. That thought came at the right time. That is Grace. Sri Krishna has said that what a person thinks of at the time of death determines the next birth. So we see that what is most dear to us, what we have meditated on always, what we have kept in our heart at all times comes up when needed. Namaste and love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 So when someone refers to " types of jnAnI-s " , it is only from the vyavahAra perspective with respect to upAdhi-s. praNAms Sri Ramesh K prabhuji Hare Krishna But we often tend to forget here we are referring to jnAni who is brahman himself ...so *types* of jnAnI-s is simply a wrong notion of ajnAni-s those who still *see* the nAma & rUpa vikAra (upAdhi-s) in the jnAni...The jnAna which he has realized is itself reveals the truth that he is NOT an individual jnAni but he is yEkamEvAdvitIya jnAna svarUpa...So, strictly speaking we can not draw a bifurcation line between a jnAni & his jnAna to say jnAna is ONE but jnAni-s are different!! IMO, just we cannot drag this paramArtha satya to the vyAvahArik sphere to arrive at wrong conclusions... Hari Hari Hari Bol!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 There are two aspects to a jnani just like there are two aspects to a ajnani. The sat aspect and the namaroopa or mithya aspect. For a jnani there is abidance in the sat aspect, a Knowing, or Being, and hence alone an abiding understanding of the mithya aspect. Humble praNAms Sri Shyam prabhuji Hare Krishna After reading your thoughtful insights, Sri sadananda prabhuji's reconciliatory replies & seeing Sri Shastri prabhuji's all embracing approach towards advaita, I think I am missing something or misunderstanding something in respect of *jnAni's vyavahAra in this empirical world*....But I am still unable to put my finger on that particular problem...I am happy to discuss this issue with your goodself coz. you are always objective while taking these delicate issues for discussions...So, I can freely express my views without the fear of contravention of traditional barriers :-)) Hope you bear with my fussy nature prabhuji... Coming to the subject matter, prabhuji, as soon as I read your above para, my mind immediately asked me a question whether jnAni, who has realized his *satyasya satya* svarUpa can have *asat* (avidyA) part also in him ?? If yes, how can he be called *satya* svarUpa? can satya svarUpa accommodates a partial space for asat also in its domain?? can jnAni who is brahman himself have sat & asat vikAra like the above within himself ?? And again, if we take your subsequent clarification that we are talking about only *jnAni* (referring to the bodily structure of the jnAni) and NOT brahman..and jnAni can have both these aspects like any other ajnAni, even that observation also goes against my understanding of shankara bhAshya. In bruhadAraNyaka sUtra bhAshya (3-5-1) shankara talks about *jnAni* (not brahman) & says : ' na cha vidyAvidyE yEkasya purushasya saha bhavataH, virOdhAt tamaH prakAshAmiva' Since both vidya (sat) and avidyA (asat) are mutually contradictory in its nature like light & darkness, shankara says, both cannot have a *common* locus.. Kindly clarify how can I reconcile the above bhAshya vAkya with your observation & also kindly let me know from whose perspective the difference between embodied jnAni & brahman holds good?? Whether it is ajnAni's view on jnAni or jnAni himself asserting this?? Even after realization of dEsha, kAlA, dEhAtIta jnAna, how can the jnAni say since I am in *this body* I am only jnAni but not brahman ?? Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 BrahmAnanda. He says in his commentary on the SiddhAntabindu of madhusUdana sarasvati: " Vedanta sAstra is constituted of brahmasUtra, Sri Sankara's bhAshya on it, the bhAmati of vAchapati misra, the kalpataru of Sri amalAnanda and parimala of Sri appayya dIkshita. There are others who hold that vivaraNa of prakASatman and the commentaries on it are closer to Sri Sankara's views. praNAms Sri Shastri prabhuji Hare Krishna If possible kindly write Sri Brahmananda's view points on paNchapAdika-vivaraNa school prabhuji...From the above observation of Swamiji, it is clear that he belongs to bhAmati school & advocating only the works of vAchaspati mishra's bhAmati school. (Kalpataru is also one of the works of bhAmati prasthAna). Here is the above para, he says particularly that *There are others* who hold that vivaraNa & other works belong to this school closer to Sri shankara...So, what is his opinion on this prakAshAtman's vivaraNa school?? Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 Namaste Indian Rediff. Can you please give us your understanding of this Zen koan? Since you quoted it, you ought to know it. PraNAms. Madathil Nair ______________ advaitin , " Indian Rediff " <indianrediff wrote: > > This reminds me of a Zen koan: > > " Before I had realisation, mountains were mountains and rivers were > rivers, and when I had realisation, mountains were not mountains and > rivers were not rivers. After enlightenment mountains are mountains > and rivers are rivers. > > Sai > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 sadagaru : Anata koti namsakarams ! Sadaji , although Shri Nairji in all his infinite wisdom, has asked me not to resort to tangential quotations , i am still going to quote an Arabic Proverb : " Four things come not back: the spoken word, the sped arrow, the past life and the neglected opportunity. " Well, today , i am not going to let go of this opportunity even at the risk of being labelled a 'flatterer' Sadaji , you and shastriji are really enriching this forum with your valuable contributions - i am really beeginning to enjoy your input on ADVAITA VEDANTA and learning a lot from your postings . Although you know , i have my idealogical differences with some of you on what constitutes Shankara's Advaita ,( my leaning is towards Tantric Advaita) we cnnot afford to ignore the GURU PARAMPARA and WHAT IS TRADITIONL ADVAITA ! SO , IN ALL HUMILITY ( GOD KNOWS ! ME , NAIRJI AND BHASKAR PRABHUJI ET ALL HAVE A LOT TO BE HUMBLE ABOUT ! ) request you to kindly stick to only traditional teachings of Shankara's advaita and not deviate from Shankara's bhasyas and prashnatrayas! After all , can we learn Kuchipudi from a teacher of Bharatanatyam ? Sadaji , As per Ribhu Gita , the darsan of a jnani has the effect of bath in holy waters. Sadaji , you are so lucky to have darshan of Swami Paramarthanandaji and listening to his discourses . Let us all benefit from your learning from a great Swamiji whose very prsence radiates spiritual energy . i have had my pet peeves against Sri Ramji on many issues but he has matured into a very wise and intelligent man - sometimes - it is better to plead the 'fifth' when members want to keep on arguing and arguing over what they think is Shankara's advaita - which in reality is their guru's version of shankara's advaita ! Yes ! SILENCE IS GOLDEN ! may be that is why our beloved Anandaji is so silent ! btw , my mom and i are both enjoying reading his book ! my mom thinks Anandaji is great ! Yes ! a spoken word cannot be taken back nor a sped arrow ! But the Arrow which leaves the basket from Ambaal's basket has a different 'aim' - the aim of that Arrow is to sublimate the 'ego ' the false ego! Today is Thai Pusam ! A very special day dedicated to Lord Muruga's worship ! May Lord Muruga bestow 'jnana' on all of us ! kove and best wishes advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote: > > PraNAms to all. > > Nairji - My PraNAms - Please continue your pursuit and > I am sure the answers will come to you that will be > satisfactory to you with the grace of the Lord. That > is the saadhana that we have to do. > > Shyamji - PraNAms -Long time no hear! Please continue > to share your wisdom with us. It is good to hear > different perspectives. > > Bhaskarji - My salutations. I do admire your devotion > to your parama guruji. Similarly others have their > reverence to lineage of aachaaryas and each aachaarya > looks at the problem and sees different perspectives. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2008 Report Share Posted January 23, 2008 On 23/01/2008, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: > > But we often tend to forget here we are referring to jnAni who is brahman > himself ...so *types* of jnAnI-s is simply a wrong notion of ajnAni-s those > who still *see* the nAma & rUpa vikAra (upAdhi-s) in the jnAni...The jnAna > which he has realized is itself reveals the truth that he is NOT an > individual jnAni but he is yEkamEvAdvitIya jnAna svarUpa...So, strictly > speaking we can not draw a bifurcation line between a jnAni & his jnAna to > say jnAna is ONE but jnAni-s are different!! IMO, just we cannot drag this > paramArtha satya to the vyAvahArik sphere to arrive at wrong conclusions... > Bhaskar-ji, it is you who are mixing up the two levels. In fact, you are dragging vyavahAra into paramArtha. The distinction between jnAnI and ajnAnI itself is not valid in paramArtha. When you refer to (say) Ramana Maharshi as a jnAnI and to someone else as an ajnAnI, such a reference itself is valid only within vyavAhAra. Once one differentiates between a jnAnI and ajnAnI (which is necessarily a vyavahAra distinction), one may also postulate a continuum (different " grades " ) between them. paramArtha remains unaffected. All distinctions pertain to upAdhi-s and hence to vyavahAra only. dhanyavAdaH Ramesh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.