Guest guest Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 Srinivas-ji wrote: I see, you are equating minds of jnAni and ajnAni to " forms " of non- dual Brahman, just as bangle-form and ring-form of substance gold. But this is anti-thesis. In Advaita, Brahman is not only non-dual but also with no-form (nirAkAra), no-attributes (nirvishESha/nirhuNa). One should not forget this whole picture about Brahman. Your example ring and bangle forms are ok for the gold substance because gold was never treated as nirAkAra gold. For that matter there is no such thing as formless-gold. Gold if it exist it has to exist in a form (either as bullion, coin, rind, bracelet etc). Treatment of a concrete object " gold ring " into separate categories as " gold as a substance " and " ring as a form " is illogical and does not have any factual support. What is found as a unitary existence is " gold ring " only. It may have other attributes such as weight, caret etc, but separating substance from attributes is illogical. If you say scriptures are saying that analogy, I would say scriptures were misinterpreted to yield one's preconception only. In fact, the same scriptures are saying contrary elsewhere. |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Namaste Srinivas-ji, Shyam-ji, Madathil-ji and followers of this thread, Even if the analysis of clay pot into real substantive clay and mere name ‘pot’ were true, which I believe is dubious, its extension into a metaphysical analysis of the Absolute/Relative relation is not according to the understanding of Advaita as proposed in Vedanta Paribhasa. There the idea of upadhi is paramount and ‘substantive’ is not its equivalent. We have been told that the table which I see as a physical object is not in my mind. That is correct but only half the story. Advaita asks: What is a physical object such that it can be in my mind? What is the reality that is superimposed? In what sense is the vritti the object? Is it not that they are both consciousness? Those interested in this will peruse VP themselves. Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Dear Bhaskar-ji, I believe I have already explained it in my last post by saying that as far as the jnani is concerned, prarabdha is as good as non- existent. This aspect is stressed in Aparokshanubhuti. Obviously Aparokshanubhuti cannot contradict Shankara and so we have to reconcile the two. If you interpret Aparokshanubhuti in any other way, you have to reject Shankara's statements, which I suppose you will not do. Can you give any other meaning for Shankara's statements? If so, I would like to hear it.I am always ready to learn. Humble praNAms Sri Sastri prabhuji Hare Krishna Thanks a lot for your kind clarification prabhuji...Yes, shankara does not contradict himself...and yes, in jnAni's drushti prArabhdha karma is a non-existent one..If at all there is a mention/statement in favour of jnAni's prArabhdha karma, it is only there to satisfy the inquisitive minds of 'onlookers' is it not?? Hence there is no need for different interpretation of prakaraNa granTha and there is no contradiction in shankara's position in 1-1-4 & 4-1-15...Infact, tattu samanvayAt sUtra (1-1-4) is meant for this very purpose i.e. reconciliation.... Thanks onceagain for your time & patience... Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Prabhuji - Would Shankara have needed ears to hear such a question prabhu-ji? and a mind to process? and an intellect to decide on the answer? Would he, a jnAni, be operating a individualized set of upadhis? Will his answers be a projection of the avidya of the person asking such a question? If so will the answer have any validity? praNAms Sri Shyam prabhuji Hare Krishna I think 'my team' has answered this question multiple types in various forms prabhuji :-)) The jnAni who is nothing but paripUrNa jnAna himself does not have the burden of identity with avidyAkruta upAdhi-s like we mortals do :-)) He can walk without legs, he can see without eyes, he can teach without tongue...You cannot deny this by calling this as *lOkAnubhava viruddha* ...It is the shruti statement :-)) What 'lOkAnubhava', we, the ajnAni's have in our mind is entirely different from what the jnAni actually 'see'..So we cannot measure the jnAni's 'socalled' activities with our limited, conditioned scale :-)) Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 PranAms Bhaskar-ji *** "I think 'my team' has answered this question multiple types in various forms prabhuji :-)) " *** With due respect Bhaskar-ji, it would be best if you defended your hypothesis about this crucial point directly and in your customary scholarly style, rather than conveniently passing the buck onto "your team". If anything, "your team" has consistently managed to avoid answering this key question, inspite of a voluminous amount of posts. Of the "multiple types" and "various forms" I am sure "your team" could find one post and the relevant sentences where this has been attempted and bring it to our attention. I notice again in this post as well that you have totally avoided atttempting to provide any explanations, other than to say... *** "A jnani can teach without a tongue"....[and this has to be accepted, inspite of blatantly contradicting reason and common experience,] because "Shruti says so". *** Bhaskar-ji - could you clarify for us a] which Shruti statement is this a translation of - "jnani can teach without a tongue" and b] what is Bhagwan Shankara's own stance on Shruti statements that contradict common human experience and reason - such as fire being cold? Does He expect us to swallow the statements as is? In this particular case, your hypothesis stands neither to reason nor to Shruti, Bhaskar-ji. My humble pranams, Hari OM Shri Gurubhyoh namah Shyam --- On Thu, 2/26/09, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yrRe: Re: Some clarificationadvaitin Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 4:17 AM praNAms Sri Shyam prabhujiHare KrishnaI think 'my team' has answered this question multiple types in various forms prabhuji :-)) The jnAni who is nothing but paripUrNa jnAna himself does not have the burden of identity with avidyAkruta upAdhi-s like we mortals do :-)) He can walk without legs, he can see without eyes, he can teach without tongue...You cannot deny this by calling this as *lOkAnubhava viruddha* ...It is the shruti statement :-)) What 'lOkAnubhava' , we, the ajnAni's have in our mind is entirely different from what the jnAni actually 'see'..So we cannot measure the jnAni's 'socalled' activities with our limited, conditioned scale :-))Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 praNAms Sri Shyam prabhuji Hare Krishna Sri S prabhuji : Bhaskar-ji - could you clarify for us a] which Shruti statement is this a translation of - " jnani can teach without a tongue " bhaskar : Kindly check out in tattu samanvayAt sUtra bhAshya...shankara gives here some shruti quotes to clarify how jnAni is 'always' ashareeri and at the same time appears 'as if' he is doing everything... Sri S prabhuji : b] what is Bhagwan Shankara's own stance on Shruti statements that contradict common human experience and reason - such as fire being cold? Does He expect us to swallow the statements as is? bhaskar : No, that is the reason why I have said with the aid of our conditioned mind scale we should not ascertain the *vyavahAra* of jnAni...Krishna is the father of lakh & odd sons but he claims that he is an absolute celibate..According to us (loukika-s / ajnAni-s) it is lOkAnubhava viruddhA...But you can see, jnAni could easily assert that :-)) jnani's upAdhi-s are kevala adhyasTha, jnAni is devoid of this upAdhi adhyastha ajnAna...*tatra evaM sati yatra yadadhyAsaH tatkrutena guNena doSheNa vA 'aNumAtreNApi' sa na saMbadhyate* clarifies shankara in adhyAsa bhAshya itself... Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar 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.