Enlightened Empirical Engagements!!!

[Guest guest]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

How can a jnAni / a self realized person do the transactions in this world?? is the fundamental question that is revolving around in the recent discussions on geeta..Let us look into it now.

 

Some of the prabhuji-s in this list saying, jnAni, even after realization, through his localized BMI-s, seeing nonduality inspite of duality and doing the necessary transactions by maintaining paricchinna chaitanya of his own. Some of us, reiterating the absolute status of jnAni and insisting that there cannot be any individuality nor any individual set of indriya-s for the jnAni to do the business in this empirical world because he is none other than secondless BRAHMAN.

 

After reading the above absolute non-dual status of the jnAni, some prabhuji-s asked, if that is the case, how come a teacher can teach brahma vidya to his pupil?? Yes, it is really a legitimate question because krishna himself explains about jnAni's activities elaborately in geeta while answering questions from arjuna with regard to jnAni's sitting, standing, walking & talking :-)) Moreover, we have been witnessing/hearing about 'activities' of jnAni-s,such as, ramaNa talking to his disciples, shankara writing bhAshya-s, krishna teaching geeta, his 'krishna leela'in vrundAvan, Sri ramachandra's rigorous activities in rAmAyaNa, bhagavan ramaNa's perambulation at & around aruNachala, chopping vegetables at ashram's kitchen, ramakrishna paramahamsa's divine weepings, his dialogues with somany people, his special affection towards narendra, nisargadatta maharaja's continuous dialogues & non-stop puffing of beedies:-)) Swamy Satchidaanandendra Saraswati's indefatigable pen work, Swamy Chinmayananda's geeta saptAha all over the world, Swamy Dayananda saraswati's tireless discourses & works etc.etc. these are all clearly show that jnAni-s (if at all we consider above souls are realized ones:-)) do have a 'role' to play in this world and they were/are rigorously engaged in worldly activities like any other normal human being...

 

Going by above historical evidences & activities, one can easily argue that jnAni has the individuality and work according to the needs of the society. Let us now, put back the above question onceagain, does jnAni has anything to do with this world after realization??...who is asking this question?? obviously jnAni can not put this question to himself and say, yes, despite my realization I've a separate set of indriya-s to do 'my' routine activities, I've to teach & enlighten others...As far as my knowledge goes, no jnAni has ever declared that he has the ultimate knowledge & wanted to preach the same to the 'remaining' ajnAni-s with the aid of his own senses..Whenever they have been asked about their personal experiences, personal knowledge level or personal belongingness & their relation to this world & people, they, most of the time, have answered this question taking cosmic view into consideration & never ever tried to bring subjectivity into the picture...So from jnAni's point of view (??!!) this question 'who acts'? does not exist...It is only ajnAni-s who ask this question by seeing the seeming movements & involvement in vyavahAra of 'those' jnAni-s on the earth...For this ajnAni-s question, to satisfy their inquisitive minds, shankara says 'through bAdhita jnAna' (sublated knowledge) jnAni can continue this vyavahAra...It may be kindly noted shankara never ever declares in all through his prasthAna trayi bhAshya that jnAni, after realization, does carry the individual set of indriya-s & identifies himself with paripUrNa chaitanya and at the same time holds paricchinna chaitanya to continue transactions. If we say jnAni has the individuality & he still remains in the localized BMI, the whole essence of non-dual advaita will be blown out of the earth..it is shAstra viruddha, siddhAnta viruddha, apa siddhanta & sampradAya viruddha...Atmabhedha vishayO nirbandhO nirarThakaH...ye tu nirbhandaM kurvanti te vEdAntArthaM bAdhamAnAH shreyOdvAraM samyagdarshanameva bAdhante...krutakam anityaM cha mOkshaM kalpayanti, nyAyenacha na saMgacchate..says shankara in sUtra bhAshya (1-4-22)...Nor, at the same time, shankara tells us that Atma jnAna would immediately bring the physical death to the jnAni or he has to give up his mortal coil or jnAni has to experience some mysterious state like nirvikalpa samAdhi to realize that ultimate absolute non-dual state!!

 

 

So, what would be an appropriate answer to these activities of a jnAni who is verily nirvikAri, nirvishesha, niravayava parabrahman himself?? shankara anticipated this question and answers just keeping the ajnAni-s ever questioning minds in his mind :-))!! In tattusamanvayAt sUtra bhAshya shankara says : the shabda pratyaya which a jnAni & a normal human being is going to hear is ONE and the SAME...Same vibrations is going to happen in minds of both!! AtmAnAtmavivekinAmapi paNditANAM ajAvipAlAnAmiva Aviviktau shabda pratyatau bhavataH (1-1-4)...What does it mean?? does it mean both jnAni & ajnAni are the victims of this material turbulations?? No, shankara says jnAni's experience of shabda pratyaya is sublated one..coz. for him everything including his own socalled body, mind & intellect & this relative world & its vyavahAra sublated...Here are the express words of shankara in AraMbhAdhikaraNa sUtra bhAshya (2-1-14) :

 

atashcha idaM shAstreeyaM brahmAtmatvaM avagamyamAnaM svAbhAvikasya shAreerAtmatvasya bAdhakaM sampadyate rajvAdi buddhaya iva sarpAdi buddhinAM, bAdhite cha shareerAtmatvE tadAshrayaH samastaH svAbhAvikO vyavahArO bAdhitO bhavati, darshayati cha " yatra tvasya sarvaM AtmaivAbhoot tat kena kaM pashyet...ityAdinA (Br.Up. 2-4-14) brahmAtatvadarshinaM prati samastasya kriyAkAraka phala lakshaNasya vyavahArasya abhAvaM..na cha ayaM vyvahArAbhAvO avasthA vishesha nibaddhO abhidhiyatE iti yuktaM vaktuM 'tattvamasi' iti brahmAtmabhAvasya anavasThaA vishesha nibandhanatvAT..

 

If one would studies this bhAshya bhAga carefully, their questions about jnAni's vyavahAra would be answered satisfactorily..Here shankara does not say jnAni still has a localized BMI & partitioned chaitanya to do vyavahAra...instead he says : bAdhite cha shareerAtmatvE tadAshrayaH samastaH svAbhAvikO vyavahArO bAdhitO bhavati!! See how clear shankara's statements are...When jnAni realizes that identification of his body itself is avidyA vyavahAra, how can he be able to still maintain that individuality ?? nadee samudravat pravilA pitAni vinashyanti says shankara in bruhad bhAshya...Can a river maintain its individual boundaries even after merging with the ocean?? how absurd it is to ask questions like this?? It is onceagain clear that jnAni's Individuality is mere a wrong perception by avidyA driven minds...Noway, we can talk on behalf of jnAni & fabricate him avidyOpAdhi & bind him with limited chaitanya...akalpakaM, ajaM jnAnaM jnEya abhinnaM prachakshate ...brahma jneyaM ajaM nityaM ajenAjaM vibudhyate says gaudapAda kArika (3-33)...As you can see it does not anyway going to mean that jnAni with his limited indriya-s still perceives the duality but having the nonduality in mind!! Even if we see the body of jnAni, he is brahman only (ashareeri only), he is not an embodied jnAni to say he has separate set of indriya-s..vidvAn sa ihaiva brahma yadyapi dehavAniva lakshyate, sa brahmaiva san brahmApyeti..(br.up. bhAshya 4-4-6)

 

From the above what we can conclude is :

 

(a) jnAni is no more an individualized or compartmentalized jnAni...he does not have any burden of carrying his *localized* BMI..coz. he has already realized each & every minute detail of this world is ever *globalized* :-))

 

(b) Realization does not bring physical death to the jnAni but this realization reveals him the fact that he is *always* ashareeri.

 

© A guru-shishya saMbandha, jnAni's socalled engagements & obligations in vyavahAra etc. etc. are mithyA pratyaya-s which are passionately harbouring by the conditioned minds of ajnAni-s who are still in want of a rational answer to their perception about jnAni.

 

(d) The socalled jnAni's vyavahara has been explained by shankara by saying jnAni does vyavahAra through bAdhita jnAna..But point tobe noted here is this is just to appease the minds of ajnAni-s and not an absolute stand of a jnAni/brahman. And apart from this, we donot have an iota of room to infer that jnAni would still have a localized / individual BMI and chaitanya with limitations.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

PS : I've not given English translations to some of the bhAshya vAkya-s, but given the references...Since I donot follow any English version of commentaries, with my limited knowledge of English, it is very difficult for me to give word by word meaning to these bhAshya vAkya-s...I humbly request the prabuji's those who are interested to know the meaning of these vAkya-s, to study & understand the essence of these statements in their familiar language.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bhaskar-ji.

 

WOW! Marvellous!

 

Your 43016 needs to be canonized.

 

Coincidentally, it was only last night I thought about mentioning the

analogy of a river losing its boundaries upon merger with the sea.

It was my own thought then. And, lo, I find you now holding up the

same. Another example of Grace and how it works!

 

By the way, has Shankara interpreted Mundaka 3.2.9 (brahmaveda

brahmaiva bhavati...). Can you or someone else please quote him?

Doesn't matter even if it is in Sanskrit.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

>

> praNAms

> Hare Krishna

>

> How can a jnAni / a self realized person do the transactions

in this

> world?? is the fundamental question that is revolving around in

the recent

> discussions on geeta..Let us look into it now.

>

> Some of the prabhuji-s in this list saying, jnAni, even after

realization,

> through his localized BMI-s, seeing nonduality inspite of duality

and doing

> the necessary transactions by maintaining paricchinna chaitanya of

his own.

> Some of us, reiterating the absolute status of jnAni and

insisting that

> there cannot be any individuality nor any individual set of

indriya-s for

> the jnAni to do the business in this empirical world because he

is none

> other than secondless BRAHMAN.

>

> After reading the above absolute non-dual status of the

jnAni, some

> prabhuji-s asked, if that is the case, how come a teacher can

teach brahma

> vidya to his pupil?? Yes, it is really a legitimate question

because

> krishna himself explains about jnAni's activities elaborately

in geeta

> while answering questions from arjuna with regard to jnAni's

sitting,

> standing, walking & talking :-)) Moreover, we have been

witnessing/hearing

> about 'activities' of jnAni-s,such as, ramaNa talking to his

disciples,

> shankara writing bhAshya-s, krishna teaching geeta, his 'krishna

leela'in

> vrundAvan, Sri ramachandra's rigorous activities in rAmAyaNa,

bhagavan

> ramaNa's perambulation at & around aruNachala, chopping

vegetables at

> ashram's kitchen, ramakrishna paramahamsa's divine weepings, his

dialogues

> with somany people, his special affection towards narendra,

nisargadatta

> maharaja's continuous dialogues & non-stop puffing of beedies:-

)) Swamy

> Satchidaanandendra Saraswati's indefatigable pen

work, Swamy

> Chinmayananda's geeta saptAha all over the world, Swamy

Dayananda

> saraswati's tireless discourses & works etc.etc. these are all

clearly

> show that jnAni-s (if at all we consider above souls are realized

ones:-))

> do have a 'role' to play in this world and they were/are rigorously

engaged

> in worldly activities like any other normal human being...

>

> Going by above historical evidences & activities, one can easily

argue that

> jnAni has the individuality and work according to the needs of the

society.

> Let us now, put back the above question onceagain, does jnAni has

anything

> to do with this world after realization??...who is asking this

question??

> obviously jnAni can not put this question to himself and say, yes,

despite

> my realization I've a separate set of indriya-s to do 'my'

routine

> activities, I've to teach & enlighten others...As far as my

knowledge goes,

> no jnAni has ever declared that he has the ultimate knowledge &

wanted to

> preach the same to the 'remaining' ajnAni-s with the aid of

his own

> senses..Whenever they have been asked about their personal

experiences,

> personal knowledge level or personal belongingness & their relation

to this

> world & people, they, most of the time, have answered this

question taking

> cosmic view into consideration & never ever tried to bring

subjectivity

> into the picture...So from jnAni's point of view (??!!) this

question 'who

> acts'? does not exist...It is only ajnAni-s who ask this question

by seeing

> the seeming movements & involvement in vyavahAra of 'those'

jnAni-s on

> the earth...For this ajnAni-s question, to satisfy their

inquisitive minds,

> shankara says 'through bAdhita jnAna' (sublated knowledge)

jnAni can

> continue this vyavahAra...It may be kindly noted shankara

never ever

> declares in all through his prasthAna trayi bhAshya that

jnAni, after

> realization, does carry the individual set of indriya-s &

identifies

> himself with paripUrNa chaitanya and at the same time holds

paricchinna

> chaitanya to continue transactions. If we say jnAni has the

individuality

> & he still remains in the localized BMI, the whole essence of

non-dual

> advaita will be blown out of the earth..it is shAstra viruddha,

siddhAnta

> viruddha, apa siddhanta & sampradAya viruddha...Atmabhedha

vishayO

> nirbandhO nirarThakaH...ye tu nirbhandaM kurvanti te

vEdAntArthaM

> bAdhamAnAH shreyOdvAraM samyagdarshanameva bAdhante...krutakam

anityaM cha

> mOkshaM kalpayanti, nyAyenacha na saMgacchate..says shankara

in sUtra

> bhAshya (1-4-22)...Nor, at the same time, shankara tells us that

Atma jnAna

> would immediately bring the physical death to the jnAni or he has

to give

> up his mortal coil or jnAni has to experience some mysterious

state like

> nirvikalpa samAdhi to realize that ultimate absolute non-dual

state!!

>

>

> So, what would be an appropriate answer to these activities of a

jnAni who

> is verily nirvikAri, nirvishesha, niravayava parabrahman

himself??

> shankara anticipated this question and answers just keeping the

ajnAni-s

> ever questioning minds in his mind :-))!! In

tattusamanvayAt sUtra

> bhAshya shankara says : the shabda pratyaya which a jnAni & a

normal human

> being is going to hear is ONE and the SAME...Same vibrations is

going to

> happen in minds of both!! AtmAnAtmavivekinAmapi paNditANAM

ajAvipAlAnAmiva

> Aviviktau shabda pratyatau bhavataH (1-1-4)...What does it mean??

does it

> mean both jnAni & ajnAni are the victims of this material

turbulations??

> No, shankara says jnAni's experience of shabda pratyaya is

sublated

> one..coz. for him everything including his own socalled

body, mind &

> intellect & this relative world & its vyavahAra sublated...Here

are the

> express words of shankara in AraMbhAdhikaraNa sUtra bhAshya (2-1-

14) :

>

> atashcha idaM shAstreeyaM brahmAtmatvaM avagamyamAnaM

svAbhAvikasya

> shAreerAtmatvasya bAdhakaM sampadyate rajvAdi buddhaya iva

sarpAdi

> buddhinAM, bAdhite cha shareerAtmatvE tadAshrayaH samastaH

svAbhAvikO

> vyavahArO bAdhitO bhavati, darshayati cha " yatra tvasya sarvaM

AtmaivAbhoot

> tat kena kaM pashyet...ityAdinA (Br.Up. 2-4-14)

brahmAtatvadarshinaM prati

> samastasya kriyAkAraka phala lakshaNasya vyavahArasya abhAvaM..na

cha ayaM

> vyvahArAbhAvO avasthA vishesha nibaddhO abhidhiyatE iti

yuktaM vaktuM

> 'tattvamasi' iti brahmAtmabhAvasya anavasThaA vishesha

nibandhanatvAT..

>

> If one would studies this bhAshya bhAga carefully, their

questions about

> jnAni's vyavahAra would be answered satisfactorily..Here shankara

does not

> say jnAni still has a localized BMI & partitioned

chaitanya to do

> vyavahAra...instead he says : bAdhite cha shareerAtmatvE

tadAshrayaH

> samastaH svAbhAvikO vyavahArO bAdhitO bhavati!! See how clear

shankara's

> statements are...When jnAni realizes that identification of his

body itself

> is avidyA vyavahAra, how can he be able to still

maintain that

> individuality ?? nadee samudravat pravilA pitAni vinashyanti says

shankara

> in bruhad bhAshya...Can a river maintain its individual

boundaries even

> after merging with the ocean?? how absurd it is to ask

questions like

> this?? It is onceagain clear that jnAni's Individuality is mere

a wrong

> perception by avidyA driven minds...Noway, we can talk on behalf

of jnAni

> & fabricate him avidyOpAdhi & bind him with limited

chaitanya...akalpakaM,

> ajaM jnAnaM jnEya abhinnaM prachakshate ...brahma jneyaM

ajaM nityaM

> ajenAjaM vibudhyate says gaudapAda kArika (3-33)...As you can see

it does

> not anyway going to mean that jnAni with his limited indriya-

s still

> perceives the duality but having the nonduality in mind!! Even

if we see

> the body of jnAni, he is brahman only (ashareeri only), he

is not an

> embodied jnAni to say he has separate set of indriya-s..vidvAn

sa ihaiva

> brahma yadyapi dehavAniva lakshyate, sa brahmaiva san brahmApyeti..

(br.up.

> bhAshya 4-4-6)

>

> From the above what we can conclude is :

>

> (a) jnAni is no more an individualized or compartmentalized

jnAni...he does

> not have any burden of carrying his *localized* BMI..coz. he has

already

> realized each & every minute detail of this world is ever

*globalized* :-))

>

> (b) Realization does not bring physical death to the jnAni

but this

> realization reveals him the fact that he is *always* ashareeri.

>

> © A guru-shishya saMbandha, jnAni's socalled engagements &

obligations

> in vyavahAra etc. etc. are mithyA pratyaya-s which are

passionately

> harbouring by the conditioned minds of ajnAni-s who are still in

want of a

> rational answer to their perception about jnAni.

>

> (d) The socalled jnAni's vyavahara has been explained by shankara

by saying

> jnAni does vyavahAra through bAdhita jnAna..But point tobe noted

here is

> this is just to appease the minds of ajnAni-s and not an absolute

stand of

> a jnAni/brahman. And apart from this, we donot have an iota of

room to

> infer that jnAni would still have a localized / individual

BMI and

> chaitanya with limitations.

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

>

> PS : I've not given English translations to some of the bhAshya

vAkya-s,

> but given the references...Since I donot follow any English

version of

> commentaries, with my limited knowledge of English, it is very

difficult

> for me to give word by word meaning to these bhAshya vAkya-

s...I humbly

> request the prabuji's those who are interested to know the meaning

of these

> vAkya-s, to study & understand the essence of these statements

in their

> familiar language.

>

 

 

interesting analyses....

 

Whoever live and breath in a world ....has no choice about what

he/she do.

Such choicelessness is due to Oneness.

There is no individuality living in a world.

The imaginary individuality is reflected within the wholeness of

world.

 

So, whoever act & react in the world....act/react on him/herself.

There is a direct relation/connection to the one who appearently

act/react individual and the world.

 

The one who " see " him/herSelf in wholeness of perception....is

acting/reacting on a way that such unity remain stable.

Such life don't include anymore many questions about " doer " or " non-

doer " and other " concepts " ....it's just simply living liberation.

 

The one who dreamed for years to teach one day....will just do such

job one day....it's mainly a " role " he/she choosed by him/herself.

 

There is no mysterious Brahman behind through whom one is guided,

inspirated etc.....there is only Self & BMI....doing whatever he/she

planned to do...one day.

 

It is said that most of realised persons just live an ordinary life,

like everybody else....means, doing whatever jobs.....no importance.

 

The difference is on HOW they live and breath...and on their inner

balance, freedom and peace.

 

......

 

It's maybe not about the question " to have/get/got a special task or

role.....

 

It's all about Liberation & realisation, nothing else.

 

 

few thoughts...

 

 

Kind Regards,

 

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhaskasr-ji,

Unfortunately, I do not have time to study your references at present

(but I *will* get around to them eventually!) However, I would like to

pick up on just one point which does seem to be the essence of your argument.

You say: “Even if we see the body of jnAni, he is brahman

only (ashareeri only), he is not an embodied jnAni to say he has separate set

of indriya-s..vidvAn sa ihaiva brahma yadyapi dehavAniva lakshyate, sa

brahmaiva san brahmApyeti..(br.up. bhAshya 4-4-6).”

But, Shankara points out somewhere in the first 4 sutras of BSB

(don’t have the reference to hand) that all jIva-s are *already*

asharIra, j~nAnI-s or otherwise. As I pointed out in an earlier post, brahman-hood

is not something to be accomplished (sAdhya), it is already the truth of the

matter (siddhi). So, as regards this aspect of the discussion, neither j~nAnI-s

nor aj~nAnI-s have bodies in reality. So where does this leave your argument?

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Durga-ji,

I agree entirely. I only used that mode of expression because

Bhaskar-ji appeared to be suggesting that a j~nAnI somehow lost his body on

becoming enlightened. I wanted to point out that this was invalid. Either you

accept that neither j~nAnI nor aj~nAnI have a body (from a pAramArthika

standpoint) or you have to concede that both have a body (from a vyAvahArika

standpoint).

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of Durga

Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:57 PM

advaitin

Re: Enlightened Empirical Engagements!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just one tiny thing here. I'm not sure that you

can

say that neither jnanis nor ajnanis have bodies in

reality, because to my mind that statement is

a mixing of orders of reality.

[Guest guest]

Dear Dennis Ji / Bhaskar Ji

 

Could we not take it that the JIvan MuktA / JnAni has only

BrahmAkAra Vritti ( In whatever he thinks , speaks or does) ie.

his mind if it all it is considered to be existant , is

reduced to this Akhanda Vritti

 

Hari Om

Sri Gurubhyo Namah

Krishnan

 

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

>

> Dear Durga-ji,

>

> I agree entirely. I only used that mode of expression because

Bhaskar-ji

[Guest guest]

I agree entirely. I only used that mode of expression because Bhaskar-ji appeared to be suggesting that a j~nAnI somehow lost his body on becoming enlightened.

praNAms Sri Dennis Waite prabhuji

Hare Krishna

I'm surprised to see your comment!! where did I say jnAni would somehow lose his body after becoming enlightened?? OTOH, I've been reiterating the advaitic stand that jnAni is ashreeri always & this truth he would realize in its entireity after the dawn of non-dual knowledge.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> I agree entirely. I only used that mode of expression because

Bhaskar-ji

> appeared to be suggesting that a j~nAnI somehow lost his body on

becoming

> enlightened.

>

>

> praNAms Sri Dennis Waite prabhuji

>

>

> Hare Krishna

>

>

> I'm surprised to see your comment!! where did I say jnAni would

somehow

> lose his body after becoming enlightened?? OTOH, I've been

reiterating the

> advaitic stand that jnAni is ashreeri always & this truth he would

realize

> in its entireity after the dawn of non-dual knowledge.

>

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

>

>

> bhaskar

>

 

Pranam Shri Bhaskarji

 

At the ultimate reality that is when one has become fully

enlightened, there is no non-dual knowledge. That is the truth.

 

Shantanu Panigrahi

[Guest guest]

Pranaams to you Bhaskar Ji

 

 

Absolutely right . I have meant BRAHMAAKARA VRITTI Exactly as you

have detailed. Only , then then the word 'reduced'should actually

have been 'enlarged', so that the question reads - " his Mind , if at

all it it is considered to be existent ,would be ENLARGED to this

Akhanda Vritti.Whether reduced or enlarged the POINT is that

the Vritti is confined to Brahman ALONE and nothing else (in

whatever he does / thinks)

 

Have always looked at Verses 29 to 31 of Chapter Six of Gita ..

[sARVA bHUTHASTHAMaTMaNAM SARVAbhUTHaNI cHA aTMANI...( 29 ) &

yO MAm pashyathi sarvathra , sarvam cha mayi pashyathi...] , where

the Lord mentions the Yogi as the BrahmaBhOtha and the Acharya has

mentioned JIvanMukta as the meaning of this term in his commentary

and the widely accepted meaning is the state of BrahmAkAra

Vritti . These 3 slokas are generally discussed in the backdrop of

adhyarOpa and thus alongwith the verse quoted by you ie. Verse 4

and 5 of Chapter Nine.

 

Sri Gurubhyo Namah

Hari Om

Krishnan

 

 

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

 

>

>

> Problem here is brahman cannot be a vishaya for any type of

vrutti...it is

> not a subject matter of any type of mental pratyaya..but brahman

is the

> illuminator of all types of vrutti-s...So, akhandAkAra brahma

vrutti does

> not mean mere intellectual understanding of the brahman that he is

big, all

> pervading etc.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,Yes, what you say makes sense. (If the following comments by me have already been made, I apologize as I have not been through every post in this thread yet.)The body would of course still be there, as the body is part of the projecting power of Maya. Upon enlightenment, the veiling power drops away, but the projecting power does not. The j~nani would still "have" or "see" the body, however they would "see" it for exactly what it is with complete objectivity and no subjectivity. All karma is burned away upon enlightenment with the exception of the Prarabdha. The projecting power of Maya will continue so long as there is a body to see, which will be until the prarabdha karma is exhausted and the body withers and dies.Hope that makes sense (and is correct). Any failure on the above to be correct is due to my lack of understanding and not that of anyone who has tried to teach me.Harih OMEdadvaitin From: dwaiteDate: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:51:26 +0000RE: Re: Enlightened Empirical Engagements!!!

 

 

 

 

Dear Durga-ji,

I agree entirely. I only used that mode of expression because

Bhaskar-ji appeared to be suggesting that a j~nAnI somehow lost his body on

becoming enlightened. I wanted to point out that this was invalid. Either you

accept that neither j~nAnI nor aj~nAnI have a body (from a pAramArthika

standpoint) or you have to concede that both have a body (from a vyAvahArika

standpoint).

Best wishes,

Dennis

  Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Chat. Store. Share. Do more with mail. See how it works.

[Guest guest]

--- On Fri, 1/16/09, Ed Akehurst <nichiketa wrote:

 

 

The body would of course still be there, as the body is part of the projecting

power of Maya. Upon enlightenment, the veiling power drops away, but the

projecting power does not. The j~nani would still " have " or " see " the body,

however they would " see " it for exactly what it is with complete objectivity and

no subjectivity. All karma is burned away upon enlightenment with the exception

of the Prarabdha. The projecting power of Maya will continue so long as there is

a body to see, which will be until the prarabdha karma is exhausted and the body

withers and dies.

Hope that makes sense (and is correct).

Harih OM

Ed

 

Ed - PraNAms.

 

You got it right. That makes perfect sense. Realization is understanding that

all that you see is mithyaa and you are beyond the seer and the seen - the

substantive of both.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhaskar-ji

Humble pranAms.

 

I think more than anything else your title for this thread is right

on the mark.

 

The transactions of the Enlightened One are empirical with a

empirical BMI and with empirically ignorant jivAs, his Enlightenment

of Know " er " -ship status also being equally empirical.

At a paramarthic level, there is only Brahman - neither Guru nor

shishyA, neither bondage nor as well Mukti.

 

This empiricality is mithyA pratyaya alone - this is entirely

consistent with what I have been saying (of course, always, in a more

pedestrian and unscholarly manner)!

 

Thank you for your valuable reference to the sutrabhashyas as well -

it was nice to re-visit the relevant section.

 

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

 

Shyam

 

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> (d) The socalled jnAni's vyavahara has been explained by shankara

by saying

> jnAni does vyavahAra through bAdhita jnAna.

 

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

[Guest guest]

[so, the five sheaths are part of the sedge that conceals Atman.

Will then the sedge removal leave any scope for any continued body

identification post-realization?]

 

praNAms Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Though author of vivekachudamaNi heavily advocates the mysterious state like nirvikalpa samAdhi for this ultimate realization, I think yours above doubt is a very valid one...Because, apart from viveka chudamaNi, in taitirIya upanishad also there is an elaborated discussion on annamaya, praNamaya, manomaya, vijnAnamaya & anandamaya kOsha-s...Here it's been said that annamayAtma is covered by prANamayAtma and prANamaya by manOmaya etc. etc. and finally this upanishad says brahman itself is the tail (brahma puccha) for anandamayAtma..And continue to say that he who thinks that brahman is asat he himself become non-existent..It is only due to avidyA we superimposed all these sheaths (annamayAdi pancha kOsha-s) on Atman. This upanishad finally concludes that brahman alone is the substrate of all these selves or thought constructs wherein all specific features have vanished altogether. this upanishad also says this Atman is one and uniform (sa ekaH which is unconditioned by any associate) in *all* and the wise one who realizes it as the true self of even that anandamaya kOsha (yetasmAt Anandamayam AtmAnaM upasaMkrAmati) as his own self is entitled to attain the ultimate of life... Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

Let me try to summarise the two different views on the empirical

activities of a jnAni (knower of brahman) being discussed in this

group. To understand why the two views don't seem to converge even

after a lot of posts, we have to understand the fundamental positions

of the adherents of these two views.

 

We have one set of arguments which goes thus:

 

1. Ignorance (ajnAna) is jnAna-abhAva (absence of knowledge)

2. dvaita prapancha ( world of duality) is anAdi adhyAsa

(beginningless superimposition) which is due to wrong/ erroneous

cognition (mithyAjnAna) by mind

3. mAya is avidyAkArya ( effect of ignorance)

4. Isvara is mAyAvi (wielder of mAya) and is also an effect of ignorance

5. There is no difference of Isvarasrsti (Isvara's creation) and

jIvasrsti (individual's creation) as all perception is due to

erroneous cognition by mind

6. When knowledge 'dawns' the erroneous perception of duality is

removed like a snake perception on a rope

7. This implies that jnAni/jivanmukta can no more perceive any

duality and 'becomes' that very brahman. Further the jnAni/jivanmukta

cannot be identified with any particular body-mind-sense complex.

8. The so called teacher-student interactions and the empirical

engagements of jnAni/jivanmukta are only in the perception of ajnAnis

due to erroneous cognition by mind

 

The other view is that

 

1. Ignorance (ajnAna) is jnAna-virOdhi (opposed to knowledge)

2. dvaita prapancha ( world of duality) is adhyAsa (superimposition)

which is due to false ignorance (mithyA-ajnAna)

3. ajnAna / ignorance covers the truth (AvaraNa) and then projects the

world of duality (vikshepa). Brahman conditioned by ajnAna (ignorance)

is jiva (embodied individual)

4. Brahman conditioned by mAya is Isvara the creator. mAya is the

creative power and Isvara is the wielder of mAya. mAya covers the

truth (AvaraNa) and then projects the world of duality (vikshepa).

mAya is mithyA (false ontologically).

5. mAya and ajnAna are one and the same principle but mAya is with

respect to Isvara (cosmic) and ajnAna is with respect to the

jiva/individual.

6. Isvarasrsti (Isvara's creation) is vyAvahArika

(empirical/objective) and jIvasrsti (individual's creation) is

prAtibhAsika (subjective).

7. Knowledge is the understanding that Atma (Self) is brahman (satyam)

and the objective world and subjective individuality is false

(mithyA). Knowledge results in the permanent shift in one's identity

from jiva/individual to brahman. Knowledge does not end the perception

of duality. Knowledge is the understanding that even while perceiving

the duality, advaita (non-dual) alone is real (satyam).

8. jnAni/knower of truth, can continue to engage in Guru-Sishya

interactions and other worldly interactions due to prArabdha karma

(Karma which has already started to fructify), which are part of

Isvara srsti, while enjoying jIvanmukti (liberation while being alive).

 

I would like to quote BG chapter 3 verse 33

 

sadrSam ceSTate svasyAh prakrterjnAnavAnapi

prakrtim yAnti bhUtani nigrahah kim kariSyati

 

Even a wise person acts in keeping with his or her own nature. Because

all beings follow their own nature, of what use is control?

 

Shankar in his Bhasya says

 

sadrSam anurUpam ceState ceStAm karoti | kasyAh ? svasyAh svakIyAyAh

prakrteh | prakrtir nAma pUrva-krta-dharmAdharmAdi-samskAra

vartamAna-janmAdau abhivyaktAh | sA prakrtih | tasyAh sadrSam eva

sarvo jantur jnAnavAn api ceState, kim punar mUrkhah ?

 

Translation of swAmi GambhIrAnanda:

 

Api, even; jnanavan, a man of wisdom-what to speak of a fool!;

cestate, behaves; Sadrsam, according to;-what? svasyah, his own;

prakrteh, nature. Nature means the impressions of virtue, vice, etc.

[Also, knowledge, desires, and so on.] acquired in the past (lives)

and which become manifest at the commencement of the present life.

 

For more clarity you can read from BG Chapter Verse 17 onwards up to

end of chapter to understand clearly the vyvahAra of jnAni and ajnAni.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " jaishankar_n " <jai1971 wrote:

>

> Dear All,

>

> Let me try to summarise the two different views on the empirical

> activities of a jnAni (knower of brahman) being discussed in this

> group. To understand why the two views don't seem to converge even

> after a lot of posts, we have to understand the fundamental

positions

> of the adherents of these two views.

>

> We have one set of arguments which goes thus:

>

> 1. Ignorance (ajnAna) is jnAna-abhAva (absence of knowledge)

> 2. dvaita prapancha ( world of duality) is anAdi adhyAsa

> (beginningless superimposition) which is due to wrong/ erroneous

> cognition (mithyAjnAna) by mind

> 3. mAya is avidyAkArya ( effect of ignorance)

> 4. Isvara is mAyAvi (wielder of mAya) and is also an effect of

ignorance

> 5. There is no difference of Isvarasrsti (Isvara's creation) and

> jIvasrsti (individual's creation) as all perception is due to

> erroneous cognition by mind

> 6. When knowledge 'dawns' the erroneous perception of duality is

> removed like a snake perception on a rope

> 7. This implies that jnAni/jivanmukta can no more perceive any

> duality and 'becomes' that very brahman. Further the

jnAni/jivanmukta

> cannot be identified with any particular body-mind-sense complex.

> 8. The so called teacher-student interactions and the empirical

> engagements of jnAni/jivanmukta are only in the perception of

ajnAnis

> due to erroneous cognition by mind

>

> The other view is that

>

> 1. Ignorance (ajnAna) is jnAna-virOdhi (opposed to knowledge)

> 2. dvaita prapancha ( world of duality) is adhyAsa (superimposition)

> which is due to false ignorance (mithyA-ajnAna)

> 3. ajnAna / ignorance covers the truth (AvaraNa) and then projects

the

> world of duality (vikshepa). Brahman conditioned by ajnAna

(ignorance)

> is jiva (embodied individual)

> 4. Brahman conditioned by mAya is Isvara the creator. mAya is the

> creative power and Isvara is the wielder of mAya. mAya covers the

> truth (AvaraNa) and then projects the world of duality (vikshepa).

> mAya is mithyA (false ontologically).

> 5. mAya and ajnAna are one and the same principle but mAya is with

> respect to Isvara (cosmic) and ajnAna is with respect to the

> jiva/individual.

> 6. Isvarasrsti (Isvara's creation) is vyAvahArika

> (empirical/objective) and jIvasrsti (individual's creation) is

> prAtibhAsika (subjective).

> 7. Knowledge is the understanding that Atma (Self) is brahman

(satyam)

> and the objective world and subjective individuality is false

> (mithyA). Knowledge results in the permanent shift in one's identity

> from jiva/individual to brahman. Knowledge does not end the

perception

> of duality. Knowledge is the understanding that even while

perceiving

> the duality, advaita (non-dual) alone is real (satyam).

> 8. jnAni/knower of truth, can continue to engage in Guru-Sishya

> interactions and other worldly interactions due to prArabdha karma

> (Karma which has already started to fructify), which are part of

> Isvara srsti, while enjoying jIvanmukti (liberation while being

alive).

>

> I would like to quote BG chapter 3 verse 33

>

> sadrSam ceSTate svasyAh prakrterjnAnavAnapi

> prakrtim yAnti bhUtani nigrahah kim kariSyati

>

> Even a wise person acts in keeping with his or her own nature.

Because

> all beings follow their own nature, of what use is control?

>

> Shankar in his Bhasya says

>

> sadrSam anurUpam ceState ceStAm karoti | kasyAh ? svasyAh svakIyAyAh

> prakrteh | prakrtir nAma pUrva-krta-dharmAdharmAdi-samskAra

> vartamAna-janmAdau abhivyaktAh | sA prakrtih | tasyAh sadrSam eva

> sarvo jantur jnAnavAn api ceState, kim punar mUrkhah ?

>

> Translation of swAmi GambhIrAnanda:

>

> Api, even; jnanavan, a man of wisdom-what to speak of a fool!;

> cestate, behaves; Sadrsam, according to;-what? svasyah, his own;

> prakrteh, nature. Nature means the impressions of virtue, vice, etc.

> [Also, knowledge, desires, and so on.] acquired in the past (lives)

> and which become manifest at the commencement of the present life.

>

> For more clarity you can read from BG Chapter Verse 17 onwards up to

> end of chapter to understand clearly the vyvahAra of jnAni and

ajnAni.

>

> with love and prayers,

>

> Jaishankar

>

 

Dear Jaishankar,

 

 

thanks for this interesting post.....and the effort to describe

different viewpoints.....

 

It's not about to find out which viewpoint or side is the right

one......already to understand and to accept the existing different

viewpoints is of base ground for further talk on it.

 

But it seem that some people try hard to claim for their

personal " right " view.....and not for a personal " right " on whatever

of the described 2 views.

 

They talk about non-duality, nothing but Brahman etc.........and

their words seperate people....means, they work hard on their own

seperation to others.....maybe due to the effect of duality.....or a

certain amount of ego.

 

Maybe the amount of ego will melt....one day.....and then, there will

be nobody anymore " who " care for/about appearent different viewpoints.

 

 

Kind Regards,

 

 

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri. Srinivas,

 

You have brought out an important point. Let me offer you the

traditional explanation.

 

avidyA (ignorance) is satyam (real) in vyavahAra (empirical world).

The teaching of Guru also is also satyam in vyavahAra. The jnAna

gained from Guru and Sastra is also satyam in vyavahAra. But this self

knowledge removes the wrong notion that I am a knower (pramAta). Once

I am not a knower then where is the question of any ignorance or

knowledge? That is why sruti is known as antyampramAnam (final means

of knowledge) because after gaining self-knowledge from sruti all

pramAnas (means of knowledge) become apramAna i.e. no more valid.

There is no need to do any more vichara as whether 'Difference'

between satyam and mithyA is real or unreal because you are not a

knower anymore. You have already transcended categories like satyam

and mithyA.

 

refer brihadAraNyaka IV.iii.22

 

atra pitA.apitA bhavati mAtA.amAtA lokA alokA devA adevA vedA avedA ....

 

Here father is not father, mother is not mother, heavenly worlds are

not heavenly worlds, gods are not gods, vedas are not vedas etc...

 

 

Also refer Sankara Bhasya on Bhagavad Gita chapter 2 verse 69

 

tad-antatvAc ca sarva-pramANAnAm pramANatvasya | na hy

Atma-svarUpAdhigame sati punah pramANa-prameya-vyavahArah sambhavati |

pramAtrtvam hy Atmanah nivartayati antyam pramANam | nivartayad eva

cApramANIbhavati, svapna-kAla-pramAnam iva prabodhe |

 

svAmi gambhirAnanda's Translation

 

Surely, after the realization of the true nature of the Self, there is

no scope again for any means to, or end of, knowledge. The last valid

means of (Self-) knowledge eradicates the possibility of the Self's

becoming a perceiver. And even as it eradicates, it loses its own

authoritativeness, in the same way as the means of knowledge which is

valid in dream becomes unauthoritative during the waking state.

 

As for the second question raised by you prarabdha karma is mithya.

But who told you jnAni is satyam. brahman alone is satyam. The status

of being a jnAni also is mithya from the absolute standpoint

(pAramArthika drstyA). I would say that a jivanmuktA is one who knows

that he/she is not a knower. And this knowledge need not make the

Body-mind-sense complex disappear as it is already born due to

prarabdha karma.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

 

 

 

 

 

> View-1

> -----------

>

> In this view, I do not see any issues up to points 7 (except

> Sri.Bhaskar's reply on point 5, but that is subject of another topic

> and irrelevant in current context)

>

> > 8. The so called teacher-student interactions and the empirical

> > engagements of jnAni/jivanmukta are only in the perception of

> ajnAnis

> > due to erroneous cognition by mind

> >

>

> In that case, we have a major problem in validity of Teacher's

> teachings. Since the student is ajnAni and he sees dvaita everywhere

> including the teacher, his action of teaching, and the teaching etc,

> and such perceptions of the student are due to erroneous cognitions

> by his mind, such perception of his Guru's teaching is not at all

> vidya (or jnyAnOpadEsha) but another avidya in itself. Such

> teachings of avidya can not possibly be responsible for enlightment

> of the student and his release from this samsara. Either we need to

> say atleast Guru's teaching is real and not avidya , or we need to

> say all actions/perceptions are avidya (including Guru's teachings)

> and hence denounce the very concept of liberation by teachings.

>

> Therefore, this view-1 has a fundamental flaw.

>

>

> View-2 :

> --------

>

>

> > The other view is that

> >

> > 7. Knowledge is the understanding that Atma (Self) is brahman

> (satyam)

> > and the objective world and subjective individuality is false

> > (mithyA). Knowledge results in the permanent shift in one's

> identity

> > from jiva/individual to brahman. Knowledge does not end the

> perception

> > of duality. Knowledge is the understanding that even while

> perceiving

> > the duality, advaita (non-dual) alone is real (satyam).

>

> There are two difficulties with this position. One is Shankara's own

> opposition on Brahman's knowership and another one is from logical

> perspective.

>

> Logical difficulty:

> --------------------

> In this view-2, the jnyAni distinguishes the difference between the

> face value of the perception and the actual reality behind such

> perceptions. The former is mithya and the later is satya.

>

> Since a jnyAni is a jnyAni and his knowledge, by definition is true

> and yathArtha, his knowledge about the distinction between " face

> value " and " real value " of perceptions (in other words the

> distinction of mithya and sathya) must necessarily be true and

> yathArtha. This make the " difference " yathArtha and real. This will

> undercut the very foundation of non-dual.

>

> The above logical point is quite crucial and often ignored to notice

> by proponents of such view.

>

> Opposition from Shankara:

> --------------------------

>

> Shankara himself has denied all pramAtR^itva (knowership) of the

> Atman.

>

> From the adhyAsabhAShya:

>

> asaN^gasyAtmanaH pramAtR^itvamupapadyate . na ca

> pramAtR^itvamantareNa pramANapravR^ittirasti .

> tasmAdavidyAvadviShayANyeva pratyakShAdIni pramANAni shAstrANi ceti |

>

> (crude translation would be -- It is illogical to speak of

> pramAtR^itva of the Self, which is spoken of 'detached'. Without a

> pramAtR^i, there cannot be any operation of pramANas. Therefore,

> pramANAs such as the shAstras and pratyakSha operate only in the

> realm of avidyA)

>

> Also see his commentary on the BU2.4.14:

>

> " taM kena vijAnIyAt " yena vijAnAti, tasya karaNasya, vij~neye

> viniyuktatvAt. j~nAtushca j~neya eva hi jij~nAsA, na Atmani; na ca

> agneriva AtmA Atmani viShayaH; na ca aviShaye j~nAtuH

> j~nAnamupapadyate; tasmAt yena idaM sarvaM vijAnAti, " taM

> vij~nAtAraM "

> kena karaNena ki vA anyaH vijAnIyAt, yadA tu punaH paramArthavivekini

> brahmavidi vij~nAtaiva kevali.advayi vartate, taM vij~nAtAraM are

> kena

> vijAnIyAditi.

>

> Note the important point here: " na cha agneriva AtmA Atmani

> viShayaH: " The Self is not an object of knowledge for the Self.

>

> When atma itself is not the subject of knowledge of atman, how can

> this world be the subject of its knowledge? let alone how possibly

> atman or jnyAni perceive world and somehow " knows " it is mithya?

>

> The proponents of this view argues based on the difference

> between " knowledge " and " experience " . I have seen some argue that

> jnyAni " knows " (the unreality of this world) and they denies

> the " experince " of absence of duality by a jnyAni. But such

> arguments based on knowledge is in direct opposition with Shankara's

> own standing on knowership of Atman.

>

> > 8. jnAni/knower of truth, can continue to engage in Guru-Sishya

> > interactions and other worldly interactions due to prArabdha karma

> > (Karma which has already started to fructify), which are part of

> > Isvara srsti, while enjoying jIvanmukti (liberation while being

> alive).

> >

>

> Is that " prArabdha karma " satya or mithya? Given that only Brahman

> is sathya, so called " prArabdha karma " has necessarily mithya. Now,

> how can a mithya vastu has any efficacy and its fruitation on a

> jnyAni who is real?

>

> These are my observations about those two views. Any comments are

> welcome.

>

>

> Regards,

> Srinivas.

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote:

 

> All concepts and language are necessarily in the

> realm of the dual. No ultimate truth can be spoken about brahman at

all

> (only pointers towards, negative statements etc). ('Whereof you cannot

> speak, thereof you must remain silent' - Wittgenstein.)

>

> Gaudapada and Shankara speak about this in the Ma kArikA-s

 

Namaste,

 

Concerning the 'partisan' dialogue that has evolved in this

thread, the points I like to dwell on are:

 

1. There is no doubt that Krishna and Shankara were jnani-s and

jivanmukta-s.

 

2. The gIta has the most succint description of jnana & jivanmukta, and

entirely faithful to the Veda-s, and the 'maha-vakya'-s of the

Upanishads.

 

3. Any jnani and jivanmukta will fit the very same definitions that

apply to Krishna and Shankara.

 

4. 'Samanvaya', absolute harmony, 'pUrNatvam', is the goal for each

'sAdhaka/mumukShu' (aspirant for liberation). This has to be achieved

by each individual, and cannot be forced through the power of logic

alone.

 

5. To become fit for the 'Grace' of jnana and jivanmukti, the aspirant

has to follow in the footsteps of Arjuna.

 

6. Sureshvaracharya in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Vartika- 1:4:402 -

says:

 

" yayA yayA bhavet puMsAM vyutpattiH pratyagAtmani |

sA saiva prakriyeha syAt sAdhvI sA chAnavasthitA || "

 

" All the different means by which people can attain knowledge of the

Self should be understood to be valid. These means are unlimited in

number. "

 

(quoted also by Appayya Dikshit in Siddhantaleshasangraha).

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

hare krishna,namaskarams--- On Sat, 24/1/09, Sunder Hattangadi <sunderh wrote2. The gIta has the most succint description of jnana & jivanmukta, andentirely faithful to the Veda-s, and the 'maha-vakya' -s of theUpanishads.3. Any jnani and jivanmukta will fit the very same definitions thatapply to Krishna and Shankara."All the different means by which people can attain knowledge of theSelf should be understood to be valid. These means are unlimited innumber."the above puts in nutshell what one should understand and strive to become that gnani and all will be

answered. it certainly needs the grace of the lord in whom you have the trust.all rivers reach the sea in the end and all paths leads to the top of the mountain.baskaran

t

 

Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click here

[Guest guest]

--- On Wed, 1/28/09, pranipatachaitanya <pranipatachaitanya wrote:

 

Pranipata chaitanyaji - praNAms

 

What you say is correct - the whole analysis is done from vyavahaara only - that

is precisely the point of all this discussion too - from vyavahaara point only

whether jnaani has BMI or not - How do we know - only by pramaaNas only -

Anubhava? whose? jnaani's or ajnaani's -question will rise - If jnaani has

anubhava, we are back to tripuTi - experience-experienced-and experiencing -

ajnaani also has the same problem - only the difference is jnaani understands it

as mithyaa as in dream state while the ajnaani takes it as real - that is the

central point. And that is the cause for samsaara.

 

Any way - we are not going anywhere - let us leave it with the statement that

our understanding differs, if it differs, since I am not sure I understand

clearly the exact position from your point.

The question was:

Does jnaani with BMI sees the pluarilty but has clear understanding that the

plurality is mithyaa or jnaani does not have BMI - but god knows who is

operating that BMI of jnaani even if it the perception of the student.

 

From my understanding - it is clear to me based on sthitaprajna lakshana and

lokakalyaNam statements that Jnaani as though operates the equipments within

vyavahaara knowing very well that all is mithyaa and from the absolute point

there is no vyavahaara at all. In that way the slokas naiva tasya kRitenaathoo

naakRite neha kaschana -and loka kalyaanamm slokas also makes perfect sense.

 

I will leave it with that.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

pane Atmani jnAtr jneya jnAna bhedaH na vindati - implies there is no

 

triputis in Brahman/Atman it is jna or jnapti svarUpaH.

 

 

 

cid-Ananda-eka- rUpatvAt - is like ekadA eva draShTavyam i.e. sat-cit-

 

Ananda are not different in brahman but are one in it. Here also the

 

three seeming differences of vyavahAra are denied in it.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> The different practices based on the three Vedas, SaMkhya, Yoga,

> Pashupata-mata, VaishhNava-mata etc . are but different paths (to

> reach to the Greatest Truth)

>

> If that is the truth, I dont know why shankara has taken all the

trouble to

> refute As

> praNipatchaitanya prabhuji said in one of his mails...jnAni's

vyavahAra is

> really an *Ascharya*...(a big wonder) :-))

>

 

Namaste,

 

I take it in the context of Gita 4:11 -

 

ye yathaa maaM prapadyante taa.nstathaiva bhajaamyaham.h .

mama vartmaanuvartante manuShyaaH paartha sarvashaH .. 4\-11..

 

Howsoever men approach Me, even so do I welcome them, for the path

men take from every side is mine, O Partha!

 

and, Gita 7:21-22 -

 

yo yo yaa.n yaa.n tanuM bhaktaH shraddhayaarchitumichchhati .

tasya tasyaachalaa.n shraddhaa.n taameva vidadhaamyaham.h .. 7\-21..

sa tayaa shraddhayaa yuktastasyaaraadhanamiihate .

labhate cha tataH kaamaanmayaiva vihitaanhi taan.h .. 7\-22..

 

Any devotee who seeks to worship with faith any aspect of Divinity, I

verily, bestow unswerving faith on him and decree the fruits prayed

for, with intense faith, by such devotees.

 

The 'wonder' has already been described in Gita 2:29 -

 

aashcharyavatpashyati kashchidena\-

maashcharyavadvadati tathaiva chaanyaH .

aashcharyavachchainamanyaH shR^iNoti

shrutvaapyena.n veda na chaiva kashchit.h .. 2\-29..

 

2.29 Someone visualizes It as a wonder; and similarly indeed, someone

else talks of It as a wonder; and someone else hears of It as a

wonder. And some one else, indeed, does not realize It even after

hearing about It.

 

Again, in Gita 7:24 -

 

avyaktaM vyaktimaapannaM manyante maamabuddhayaH .

paraM bhaavamajaananto mamaavyayamanuttamam.h .. 7\-24..

 

24. The unintelligent, (non-discriminating ones), unaware of My

supreme state which is immutable and unsurpassable, think of Me as

the unmanifest that has become manifest.

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

> Any way - we are not going anywhere - let us leave it with the

statement that our understanding differs, if it differs, since I am

not sure I understand clearly the exact position from your point.

> I will leave it with that.

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

Hari Om Shri Sadanandaji, Pranaams!

 

I also may not have understood what you said but I fully understand

and appreciate why you said - your love for advaita.

 

Moreover with respect to the current chapter of Gita being discussed,

seeing the difference(distinction) is what is declared by Lord as

jnAna - evam kShetra-kshatrajnayoH antaram jnAna cakShuShA... (BG

13.34) - in the manner described in the chapter thro the eye of

wisdom the distinction of field and the knower-of-field,...

 

I would like to conclude quoting bhAshya of kaThopaniShad mantra

AsIno dUraM vrajati(i.ii.21)

 

asmAdeH eva sUkShabuddheH paNDitasya kasyacit vijneyaH ayam AtmA

sthiti-gati, nitya-anityAdi viruddha-dharma-upAdhikatvAt, viruddha-

dharmavatvAt, vishvarUpaH iva cintAmaNivad avabhAsate.

 

It is only by a wise man of fine intellect, like us, that this Self

can be known well. Since the Self, as conditioned by various

contradictory limiting adjuncts, is possessed of opposite qualities

like rest and motion, permenance and impermenance etc., therefore it

appears variously like a prism(vishvarUpa) or a philosopher's stone

(cintAmaNi). (Sw. GambhIrAnandaji's translation)

 

In Shri Guru Smriti,

Br. Pranipata Chaitanya

[Guest guest]

Dear Pranipata Chaitanyaji

 

NamaskArams. Please see below

 

> 1. Upanishad declares bothways – brahma eva idam sarvam as well

> sarvam khalu idam brahma. And also ayam Atma brahma. (Brahman is all

> this, all this is Brahman, This Atman is Brahman.

 

Jai: I agree

 

>

> 2. Brahman is not a jnAni is equal to saying Atman is not a

> jnAni means Atman does not possess jnAna which is directly against

> shruti vAkya – yaH sarvavid sarvajnaH.

 

Jai: I disagree here. You are confusing svarUpajnAna and vrittijnAna

here. A jnAni is one in whose mind the akhandAkAra-vritti (mental

modification revealing the whole) has taken place. This happens in

vyavahAra only as paramArtha-brahman does not require any self

realization. That jnAni-upAdhi-upahita-chaitanya only claims that 'I

have known(the truth)' like the student in kenOpanishad who says

'manye viditam' - 'I conclude that it is known'(Atma/brahman/ultimate

truth). Further sarvavid sarvajnaH etc are only with respect to the

mAyopAdhi and are part of mithyA. In Nirguna Brahman there is no

sarvajnatvam etc.

>

> 3. Logically also one cannot be a non-knower(ajnAni) atleast

> with respect to itself. That is why Vedanta says one's declaration

> that `I do not know myself' proves he knows himself.

>

 

Jai: 'I know myself' and `I do not know myself' etc. only implies

vyavahAra. Brahman is not a 'knower' because there is nothing else to

be known. If you say Atma is a jnAni then do you say that Atma has

pramAtrtvam? In that case Atma will become anitya.

 

Sankara in Taittiriya Bhasya on 'satyam jnAnam anantam brahma'

 

vijnAtrsvarUpa-avyatirekAt karaNadinimitta-anapekshatvAt brahmaNah

jnAsvarUpatvepi nityatvaprasiddhi | atah naiva dhatvarthah tat

(jnAnam), avikriyArUpatvAt | ata eva ca na jnAnakartr ; tasmAt eva ca

na jnAnasabdavAcyamapi tat brahma | tathApi tadAbhAsavAchakena

buddhidharmaviSayeNa jnAnaSabdena tallakSyate na tu ucyate...

 

Translation: Because Brahman is not different from the conscious one

(Self) and has not to rely on the sense-organs and other instruments

of knowledge we must understand that though essentially of the nature

of Consciousness, brahman is yet eternal. His Consciousness is not

what is connoted by the root (namely, the temporary act of knowing),

in as much as it is immutable. And for the same reason, brahman is not

the agent of the act of knowing. For the same reason brahman cannot be

designated by the word 'jnAna'. On the other hand, by the word 'jnAna'

which refers only to a semblance of his (Consciousness) and denotes a

state (dharma) of buddhi, brahman is indicated, but not designated

.......

 

 

> 4. I(Atman) am self-evident(svada-siddhaH) so know me

> (Atman/Brahman) at all times.

>

 

Jai: Even categories like svata-siddhaH and parata-siddhaH etc. are

relevant only in vyavahAra and only as lakshana for brahman/Atma, to

reveal that brahman/Atma.

 

 

> So jnAni is brahman but brahman is not jnAni contradict shruti, yukti

> and anubhava.

 

Jai: This is your wrong conclusion. Please read the sruti and Sankara

bhaSyA properly.

 

>

> I am sure I have not mixed up levels. Any level you take this is the

> position.

 

Jai: You have definitely mixed up vyavahAra and paramArtha.

 

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " jaishankar_n " <jai1971 wrote:

>

> Dear Pranipata Chaitanyaji

>

> NamaskArams. Please see below

> Jai: Please read the sruti and Sankara bhaSyA properly.

>

> with love and prayers,

>

> Jaishankar.

>

Hari Om Shri Jaishankarji, Pranaams!

 

Will do. Thank you.

 

In Shri Guru Smriri,

Br. Pranipata Chaitanya

[Guest guest]

Namaste to all.

Brahman is defined as satyam jnAnam anantam. Brahman is jnAnam or

knowledge. jnAnam is its very nature and not an attribute.

 

The derivation of the word jnAnI is—jnAnam asya asti iti jnAnI. One

who has knowledge is a jnAnI. If we say that Brahman and jnAnI are

the same it would amount to saying that Brahman has knowledge. Then

jnAnam would not be the very nature of Brahman but something

different from it. So it is not correct to say that Brahman is a

jnAnI. jnAnI means `knower'. Brahman is looked upon as a knower only

when associated with an upAdhi. This is stated in the following

shloka:--

 

Upadesha sAhasrI - (Metrical portion)-Ch.18. Verse 65—The Self is

said to be knowing things on account of the superimposition of the

agency of the intellect on it. Similarly, the intellect is called a

knower owing to the superimposition of Consciousness on it.

(Translation of Swami Jagadananda).

 

But it is correct to say that the jnAni is Brahman. In fact every

one, whether jnAni or ignorant, is Brahman. But the muNDaka

upanishad says that the knower of Brahman `becomes' Brahman, which

means that he has realized that he is Brahman, whereas others think

of themselves as different from Brahman.

 

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

hare krishna, namaskaramsa very succintly put answer. it is high time we understand our limitations in this regard and try instead to become one to know the truth ourselves with god's grace and wait till he willsbaskaran.--- On Wed, 28/1/09, jaishankar_n <jai1971 wrote:

Jai: This is like saying since the pot is clay there cannot be more

than one pot since there is only one clay. Let me again repeat.

 

jnAni's svarUpa is brahman but brahman is not a jnAni. If brahman is

avikriya (Changeless) how can it be a jnAni. There is no status of

being a knower in brahman. Brahman is jnAna but it is not a jnAni. As

soon as we say jnAni then the upAdhi comes into the picture. And

AtmajnAna/ brahmajnAna is relevant only to the

upAdhi-upahita- chaitanya (brahman apparently conditioned/ qualified by

the apparent adjuncts). There can be as many jnAnis as there are jIvas

since jnAni is only in vyavahAra. From paramArtha standpoint there is

brahman alone without any jnAni or ajnAni

 

 

 

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