Knowledge and the Means of Knowledge - 14: Part I

[Guest guest]

Namaste All Followers of this thread,

 

The extraordinary thing is that the object is what is known by the mind.

How is this? That is the core of the ontology and epistemology of Advaita

and as Sri Sastri pointed out this seems to be at odds with science. How

did such an apparently impossible idea come to have a reality for the

ancient sages and provide the bedrock for their philosophical

speculations. From my reading in the metaphysics of Plato and Aristotle I

discern the inspiration from the same source which is none other than an

intuition of pure being. Underneath the differences of analogy and

illustration it is clear to me that there is a similar intuition at work.

I think it is possible to square the circle of the sensorial psychological

element and the intellectual rational. To stay within the tradition which

is the interest of this list I would consider that the concept of the

object as upadhi is the core of the advaitic account of perception. What

the upadhi is saying in plain terms is that the object is not the ultimate

particular which it seems to be. It is merely a focal point for pure

consciousness. Pure consciousness has taken that form. Note that there

is a difference between saying that pure consciousness has taken that form

and saying that pure consciousness now has those attributes. Here it may

be that the analogy which relates to material causality and which is meant

to illustrate the non-difference of cause and effect has become mixed up

with the idea that the different forms of gold are basically attributes of

the underlying substance.

 

The nature of the upadhi is such that the mind can go out to the object

and take its shape. There is nothing that prevents it from doing so and

it is also clear that what it takes the shape of is nothing less than the

reality of the object. At this level of discussion the conventional

distinction between absolute and relative does not apply. What presents

itself to the mind is the object but not in the gross form that we take to

be the ultimate particular. The problem as to how individual objects are

known as universals is sketched in by Shankara in his chapter on 'Vedic

Words' (B.S.B. I.iii.28) This allows us to know the same object in an

intellectual apprehension even though we clearly are not having the 'same'

experience.

 

Best Wishes,

Michael.

[Guest guest]

hare krishna namaskarams.On Mon, 28/7/08, Ram Chandran <ramvchandran wrote: This is so because we all use a frame-work of thoughts

which will be eventually unsupported by the Advaita Vedanta due to

the fact that "Brahman alone knows the Brahman" is the Truth. There

can never be any discussion when the Brahman knows the Truth! I will

be surprised if everyone agrees with what I have said or have to say

with respect the topic – Knowledge and the means of Knowledge (this

is a loaded subject area and I have to admit that it is impossible

for me to comprehend!! ).yea.i agree with you. all discussions scriptural readings makes you more a scholar of you in the subject. brahman alone knows brahman is a blessing to be given by the very brahman for an individual .while we are striving through all that is available as tools and steps in the direction the real knowledge is something that is direct that is bestowed on the individual seeker when the supreme brahman decides to.i wait in surrender for that with my lord krishna baskaran

 

Bring your gang together. Do your thing. Find your favourite Group.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

>

> Pranams Sadaji and Sastriji:

I will be surprised if everyone agrees with what I have said or

have to say with respect the topic – Knowledge and the means of

Knowledge (this is a loaded subject area and I have to admit that it

is impossible for me to comprehend!!).

> With my warmest regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

 

Dear Ram Chandran-ji,

I agree with you that the discussion has become very technical and

abstract. I do not propose to continue it any further.

At the same time such discussions are an intellectual treat for

those who can follow them.Hair-splitting arguments are the very life-

blood of all philosophies, whether Indian or western.

If the objective is only realization, the statement 'tat tvam asi'

alone is necessary. Even the bhAshya and the sub-commentaries are

not necessary for one who is an uttama adhikari.Nisargadatta Maharaj

is said to have got realization by meditating on just one sentence

which was given to him by his guru. But very few are so fortunate as

to get such a guru.

I have myself often wondered whether it is necessary to study the

various works on Advaita. But I feel drawn to them out of

intellectual curiosity. I shall however take care not inflict all

this on the group.

With best wishes,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

Shastanga Namaskaram to Sastriji

 

Following words from your mail, made me to write this mail

Quote:

I have myself often wondered whether it is necessary to study the various works on Advantage. But I feel drawn to them out of intellectual curiosity. I shall however take care not inflict all this on the group

Unquote:

 

We would like to get educated through your contribution on the various works of Advaita in the and it really helps us to understand why we are ignorant & what makes us to be ignorant. We are very blessed to have you with us. May Lord provide you the good health & bless us with your comments & clarifications.

 

Hari Om

 

Kalyanasundaram

 

-

snsastri

advaitin

Tuesday, July 29, 2008 8:10 AM

Re: Knowledge and the Means of Knowledge - 14: Part I

 

 

advaitin , "Ram Chandran" <ramvchandran wrote:>> Pranams Sadaji and Sastriji:I will be surprised if everyone agrees with what I have said or have to say with respect the topic – Knowledge and the means of Knowledge (this is a loaded subject area and I have to admit that it is impossible for me to comprehend!!). > With my warmest regards,> > Ram ChandranDear Ram Chandran-ji,I agree with you that the discussion has become very technical and abstract. I do not propose to continue it any further.At the same time such discussions are an intellectual treat for those who can follow them.Hair-splitting arguments are the very life-blood of all philosophies, whether Indian or western.If the objective is only realization, the statement 'tat tvam asi' alone is necessary. Even the bhAshya and the sub-commentaries are not necessary for one who is an uttama adhikari.Nisargadatta Maharaj is said to have got realization by meditating on just one sentence which was given to him by his guru. But very few are so fortunate as to get such a guru.I have myself often wondered whether it is necessary to study the various works on Advaita. But I feel drawn to them out of intellectual curiosity. I shall however take care not inflict all this on the group. With best wishes, S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

>

> to get such a guru.

> I have myself often wondered whether it is necessary to study the

> various works on Advaita. But I feel drawn to them out of

> intellectual curiosity. I shall however take care not inflict all

> this on the group.

> With best wishes,

> S.N.Sastri

>

 

Dear Sastriji,

Yes, I also wonder what can be known about the knower. It is all about

the knower and the known. How can the knower be known ? If the knower

is known, that is an absurdity . It reminds me of the Kaivalya

Upanishat mantra - " samasta sakshim tamasaha parastaat " .

 

regards,

Shailendra

[Guest guest]

Pranams Sastriji:

 

First let me clarify my stand regarding the intellectual discussions

and the relevance of our scriptures with regard to our understanding

of the Brahman. I strongly believe that these discussions (with or

without hair-splitting arguments) do help us to focus our mind and

help us to sort out what are important and relevant. Along with the

other well wishers, I greatly value your participation and scholarly

contributions from you and others. Please continue to share your

wisdom with your participation and contribution.

 

The one and only reason for the mind not to comprehend the Brahman is

the fact that it is impure. Our scriptures rightly stress the

importance of mind purification and specify yoga-sadhana for mind

purification. When the mind is purified, it acquires the potential to

visualize the Brahman through the world. For the anjnanis, the world

appears as a separate entity from the Brahman. The question, how do

we purify our mind often arises. I do believe that reading the

scriptures with shraddha and strictly follow the guidelines provided

will be of immense help for mind purification. We can also gain by

the exchange of ideas through interactive discussions through this

list can also be immensely helpful. The following story (I am

reposting here because quite relevant for this discussion) contains a

subtle message which everyone will be able to appreciate.

 

" An old Farmer lived on a farm in the mountains with his young

grandson. Each morning Grandpa was up early sitting at the kitchen

table reading his Bhagavad Gita. His grandson wanted to be just like

him and tried to imitate him in every way he could.

 

One day the grandson asked, " Grandpa! I try to read the Bhagavad Gita

just like you but I don't understand it, and what I do understand I

forget as soon as I close the book. What good does reading the

Bhagavad Gita do? "

 

The Grandfather quietly turned from putting coal in the stove and

replied, " Take this coal basket down to the river and bring me back a

basket of water. "

 

The boy did as he was told, but all the water leaked out before he

got back to the house. The grandfather laughed and said, " You'll have

to move a little faster next time, " and sent him back to the river

with the basket to try again.

 

This time the boy ran faster, but again the basket was empty before

he returned home. Out of breath, he told his grandfather that it was

impossible to carry water in a basket, and he went to get a bucket

instead. The old man said, " I don't want a bucket of water; I want a

basket of water. You're just not trying hard enough, " and he went out

the door to watch the boy try again.

 

At this point, the boy knew it was impossible, but he wanted to show

his grandfather that even if he ran as fast as he could, the water

would leak out before he got back to the house.

 

The boy again dipped the basket into river and ran hard, but when he

reached his grandfather the basket was again empty. Out of breath,

he said, " See Grandpa, it's useless! " >

 

" So you think it is useless? " The old man said, " Look at the basket. "

 

The boy looked at the basket and for the first time realized that the

basket was different. It had been transformed from a dirty old coal

basket and was now clean, inside and out.

 

" Son, that's what happens when you read the Bhagavad Gita. You might

not understand or remember everything, but when you read it, you

will be changed, inside and out. That is the work of Krishna in our

lives "

 

Once again thank you and Sadaji again for your contributions on this

important topic under discussion.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> I have myself often wondered whether it is necessary to study the

> various works on Advaita. But I feel drawn to them out of

> intellectual curiosity. I shall however take care not inflict all

> this on the group.

[Guest guest]

hare krishna, namaskarams{ On Wed, 30/7/08, Ram Chandran <ramvchandran wrote:

"Son, that's what happens when you read the Bhagavad Gita. You might

not understand or remember everything, but when you read it, you

will be changed, inside and out. That is the work of Krishna in our

lives"}this is true and my experience. i first read the gita from first page to last in one go [chidbhavanada's tamil commentary] in sixties when i was at the lowest ebb of my life it just gave me a peace that stayed for some 15 days. after that i read that many times when ever during periods of difficulty and sadness it always gave me peace and hope that i carried on untill i happened to meet swami paramarthanada and became his student of gita and upanishads class in the nineties. now gita is the foundation to myspritual life and what i am now and seeking, the total release from the cycleof birth and deaath. baskaran

 

 

Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sastri-ji,

 

There is never any obligation on members to read messages if

they feel that they will not learn anything thereby. But, in a large group such

as this, there are seekers at all stages and I am sure that many relish the

opportunity to read your learned observations, even if it is only for

intellectual enjoyment. If and when you feel the inclination, please *do*

continue to ‘inflict’ your knowledge!

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of snsastri

Tuesday, July 29, 2008 8:11 AM

advaitin

Re: Knowledge and the Means of Knowledge - 14: Part

I

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have myself often wondered whether it is

necessary to study the

various works on Advaita. But I feel drawn to them out of

intellectual curiosity. I shall however take care not inflict all

this on the group.

With best wishes,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shri Shailendra,

In message #41060 (Tue, Jul 29) you asked:

Yes, I also wonder what can be known about the knower. It is all about the knower and the known. How can the knower be known ? If the knower is known, that is an absurdity.Yes, it is of course an absurdity, if the knower is sought to be known outside -- through body, sense and mind. But there is another way of seeking to know, as described in the Katha Upanishad, 4.1.

paramci khani vyatrnat svayambhustasmat parang pashyati na 'ntaratman .

The world that happens of itselfhas excavated outward holes,through which perception looks outsideand does not see the self within.

 

kash cid dhirah pratyag-atmanam aikshadavrtta-cakshur amrtatvam icchan ..

But someone brave, who longs for thatwhich does not die, turns sight back inupon itself. And it is thusthat self is seen, returned to self,to its own true reality.Ananda