Guest guest Posted April 5, 2004 Report Share Posted April 5, 2004 Dear Shri Balaji, Namaste. I hesitated long before writing this reply. I hardly consider myself qualified to give advice to others. But I shall make a suggestion that will hopefully be found fruitful. If you have not had the opportunity to read the introductory text Tattvabodha of Shankaracharya, it will be an excellent starting point to distinguish between the qualifications necessary for realization and realization itself. You will see that the four-fold qualifications - viveka, vairagya, shatka sampatti and mumukshutvam - include the control of the mind, control of the sense organs, etc. So a tranquil mind is only one of the qualifications. Vairagya can certainly be developed through practice. And this can lead to control of the mind. ('abhyaasena tu kaunteya vairagyeNa ca grihyate' - Gita). Practice or sadhana is still action and action cannot lead to realization. Realization only comes from removal of ignorance and ignorance can only be dispelled by knowledge. (Shankaracharya explains this in many places e.g. the third verse of Atmabodha) > I am sure it would be agreed if I say, that Shruthi is not an > absolute necessity. Maybe, maybe not. Personally, since we have the shruti, why get into this question? :-) Harih Om! Neelakantan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2004 Report Share Posted April 5, 2004 Namaste Venkatji, Was expecting this query !! When i mean vasankshaya, it is the kshaya of harmful vasanas (causing re-birth) only. So when saints take to samdhi, it is not their fear, but it is their longing for videhamukti . And this longing for videhamukti is a vasana but an un-harmful one (not causing re-birth). This is my understanding, always can be corrected. is there any other explaination for the samadhi till death of great saints of yore? They could have remained alive (till their natural death) and go on doing good work for the betterment of the society. On tat-sat Vishal S Venkatraman <svenkat52 wrote: Namaste Vishalji, Can we say Vasanashaya has taken place if even a trace of fear is left behind? pranams, Venkat - M Vishal D <vishaldeshpande4 wrote: They dont want to remain alive unnecessarily and take risk of accumalating vasanas if they think their responsibilities and duties are over. They want to leave the body with no vasanas (vasanas that cause re-birth) WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Mail Internet Cafe Awards Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages advaitin/ advaitin Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 Namaste Shri Stig-ji, Once again, I am deeply impressed by your understanding of Advaita and the clarity of your expression. It is indeed a treat to read your posts. Warm regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, "Stig Lundgren" <slu@b...> wrote: > Dear Balaji, > > Thank you for your kind words about my > arguments, although not agreeing with them :-) > > I noted some typos in my last mail: In a few places I happened to > write "detachment" in stead of "attachment". I am sorry for this. > > However, I will make some further attempts to show that shruti is > the pramana, and also that shruti gives direct knowledge. This > time I have also provided some citations from the acharyas of the > classical Advaita tradition. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 Dear Balaji, You wrote >> However, I wanted to know what you think should one do after >> tranquility of mind (or in your words, control or detachment) are >> developed. Do you say that even now, only the Shruthi can help him >> attain Mukti, or liberation? Does he have no hope if he does not have >> access to the Shruthi? Even though, I am just a starter in Advaita Vedanta,I will express my view on this. I believe that Mukti or liberation is possible only through Shruthi. As Swami Chinmayananda says Ignorance or Mis-apprehension of the Self can be removed only through apprehension of the Self. Realizing the Self is called Mukti. This can be had only by knowing the Self. This knowledge can be gained only through the Shruthi. Without the Shruthi, one cannot know the Self, hence he cannot have Mukti even though he has got tranquility of mind. Please correct me & I believe the senior members can clarify this point. I am very much a starter in Advaita, still just learning Gita & Upanishads & haven't touched Adi Sankaracharya's commentaries at all even though have learned some of his Prakarana Granthas AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA Hariram Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 Namaste Neelkantanjim > I hesitated long before writing this reply. I hardly consider myself > qualified to give advice to others. But I shall make a suggestion > that will hopefully be found fruitful. Please do give me advice freely in the spirit of advising. Your comments and advice is always well taken. I never try to misunderstand a person in the first go itself, without trying to see what he means to say and deliberating upon it a little. No body here is anyway qualified to do whatever we are really doing here - discussing metaphysics or arguing. I see that your advice to me on vairagya etc. are really great. But please also tell me how to develop vairagya. Are you a realized soul, btw? > If you have not had the opportunity to read the introductory text > Tattvabodha of Shankaracharya, it will be an excellent starting point > to distinguish between the qualifications necessary for realization > and realization itself. Thankyou, I shall try to procure that book. You will see that the four-fold > qualifications - viveka, vairagya, shatka sampatti and mumukshutvam - > include the control of the mind, control of the sense organs, etc. So > a tranquil mind is only one of the qualifications. > You are right. But please tell me is it possible to make one's mind tranquil without viveka, vairagya, and all? If you have had such an experience, please teach me how to tranquillize the mind as such. But if you are aware of Vyasa's yoga bhashya and Patanjali's yogasutras, tranquility is said to be only with viveka, vairagya, and shakta sampatti. I don't know, don't conclude that I have a tranquil mind. I am however only trying (only God knows if I am sincere enough). For doing this: I practice Arya mauna for about 2 hours in the evening on weekdays, and about 6 hours on weekends. (Stops me from even exagerations which are also lies, and keeps my mind quite) I eat only twice a day - I do not consume anything, not even water after sunset. I never felt like doing so, even from the day I decided I try my best to give dana, although only within my limits, without expecting anything in return - I don't know if it is sincere enough. I am still trying the practice of asamprajnata samadhi - I'm not very mature still. I thought of joining a satsangha where, there would be enough emphasis on Samadhi and rise of Prajna (realization). I thought, this is a good place, but there is nothing more than just argumentation and metaphysical speculation here. Partly, even I am to blame for that. > Vairagya can certainly be developed through practice. And this can > lead to control of the mind. ('abhyaasena tu kaunteya vairagyeNa ca > grihyate' - Gita). You are right. I must try to work on vairagya as well. Realization only comes from removal of > ignorance and ignorance can only be dispelled by knowledge. > (Shankaracharya explains this in many places e.g. the third verse of > Atmabodha) > Accepted, but I am yet not at that stage of removing ignorance. I need more to do on samadhi and should master it to such an extent that I can even walk and talk in samadhi. Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 Namaste Vishalji, Although the question and the answer are really irrelevant to one who is really worried about attaining Moksha, or atleast who tries to 'prepare oneself for the shruthi' or 'tranquillize the mind', the reason for such a termination of tenure is not incorrectly pointed out, although not exhaustively - I mean there may be many more reasons for them to do so. Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 advaitin, "Balaji Ramasubramanian" <balajiramasubramanian> wrote: > Please do give me advice freely in the spirit of advising. Your > comments and advice is always well taken. I never try to > misunderstand a person in the first go itself, without trying to see > what he means to say and deliberating upon it a little. No body here > is anyway qualified to do whatever we are really doing here - > discussing metaphysics or arguing. > > I see that your advice to me on vairagya etc. are really great. But > please also tell me how to develop vairagya. Are you a realized soul, > btw? > Dear Shri Balaji, Thank you for your reply. May your efforts to realize the Self be fruitful. May you find a realized master to guide you. As for me, I am a beginner and I find the discussions here valuable. Now, I am going to take a leaf from your book and practice mouna :-). Harih Om Neelakantan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 Dear Moderators and Fellow Advaitins and Fellow Sadhakas, My impression when I joined this group was that it will be an opportunity to express one's understanding of various aspects of the scriptures listed in the introductory message and that the learned Moderators and Fellow Sadhakas would try to clarify the understanding on the basis of their experiences and their understanding. As I have watched the exchanges on the above subject , I have found myself slightly distressed. Of course, as I have been away for 2 days, I am still reading the Apr 4 messages. Things might have got clarified later, I dont know. My understanding is that the man of " understanding " will be characterised by : Humility; Compassion; The ability to explain the Truth in words that help the questioner learn and understand and perhaps, experience; and so on. What I seem to witness , on the other hand, is impatience with a sadhaka's "ignorance "; pride of one's "knowledge "; etc etc. Sometimes the questions of a child can be trying to deal with. All children do not question with humility. They can be frank or even harsh. It is the greatest characteristic of our culture that the "teacher' does not "judge"; he is full of compassion and love. Sometimes the child could play a prank. But the teacher will deal with it in a way whereby the child learns. Am I wrong in this understanding ? As a fervent sadhaka wanting to experience the Truth , which is my very nature, I would appreciate the advice of fellow sadhakas. Warm regards and pranams S. Mohan Win an evening with the Indian cricket captain: India Promos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2004 Report Share Posted April 7, 2004 Namaste Maniji, Here is a quote from Swami Dayanandaji where he says that Sabda Pramana gives you direct knowledge of the Self, very unlike what you have stated in your post. In fact, this is exactly how Shankara views Sabda Pramana: "Vedanta is called a sabda pramana, a verbal means of knowledge. Through words, it is a direct means of knowledge of oneself" best regards, K Kathirasan > > R.S.MANI [sMTP:r_s_mani] > Tuesday, April 06, 2004 10:27 PM > advaitin > Re: Re: Why a commentary? Namaste, all > > I was traveling from Bombay to Calcutta. Breakfast was served. My > co-passenger took the opportunity to open a conversation with me. "Look > this Pineapple slice, very sweet and very tasty". "Yes" I said. He > continued "But I have never come across a fruit like Mangoostan. It is in > my opinion the most wonderful fruit". I said "Mangoostan? I have never > heard of it. What does it look like?" > > My co-passenger was full of admiration for that fruit and described it to > the best of his ability, and said "its shape is such and such, its color > is such and such, and it tastes like such and such. I think it is > available in abundance in such and such place." > > I got some "idea" (some indication) of the fruit. > > On getting off the aircraft we said 'bye' but my co-passenger reminded me > about 'Mangoostan' and asked me to look for it. > > After a couple of years or so, while I was shopping, in a fruit shop, I > came across a fruit, which I had never seen in my life. The shopkeeper > said "Sir, it is Mangoostan, a very tasty fruit". I remembered my > co-passenger's words, and bought a couple of Mangoostans. It matched with > the description he gave. When I tasted I said to myself "Mangoostan is > wonderful". > > I got knowledge of Mangoostan from my co-passenger through his words, and > it was "Sabda Pramanam" and only indirect knowledge. When I saw it and > tasted it myself I got direct knowledge of the fruit, i.e. its shape, > color, taste, etc. Though my co-passenger explained Mangoostan to the > best of his ability, i.e. about its shape, colour, taste, etc., till I saw > it myself, till I touched it myself, and till I tasted it myself, I had > only indirect knowledge about the fruit. The moment I tasted it, my > knowledge of Mangoostan became full, and direct. > > Similarly, when Sruties, 'sabda pramanam', say, "Prajanam Brahma", "Ayam > Atma Brahma" and "Tatwam Asi" I get only indirect knowledge. Respecting > Mother- sruti vakya, one accepts them. Just like, when I was shown a > picture of a man, and my mother said "Know this, person, he is your great > great great grandfather." I accepted it, although I cannot not verify it, > as it is my own mother's words, who is my well wisher. > > However, in the case of the Mahavakyas, "Prajanam Brahma", "Ayam Atma > Brahma" and "Tatwam Asi", after hearing them, one has to do a lot of > manana, i.e. intellectual analysis by himself, with the help of Bhashya > and also the enfoldment of Self by one's Guru, as Self or Brahman cannot > be objectified like a Mangoostan, continuously for days and nights, and > suddenly like a flash, one appreciates the sruti vakyas, and almost shouts > (to himself) "Aham Brahmaasi". > > Sruti only indicates That, through the "upadesha vakyas", and it is for > the listener to make it out, and realize it i.e. "Anubhava vakya". Even > sruti cannot explain That "Yato Vacho Nivartante". > > However, if the patra i.e. the Adhikari, the disciple has the adhikaritwa, > i.e. merits, blessed with Anthakaranashudhi, a clear mind free from all > notions and prejudices, he will require to do manana for a shorter period, > but without manana, "Tatwam Asi" will not turn to be "Aham Brahmasmi". > > In short, the sabda pramana i.e. sruti vakyas are indicative, or upadesha > vakyas, and therefore, they can give only indirect knowledge of That. > > Hope the learned members may correct my understanding of the position. > > Hari Om and warm regards > > > Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today > > > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > Links > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2004 Report Share Posted April 7, 2004 Namaste: Thanks for your valuable input. Members who want to convey their concerns should send an email to moderators. Your impression about this list - A forum to express one's understanding of Shankara's advaita philosophy and various aspects of associated scriptures," is quite precise. Lately, we have noticed that the exchanges on the above thread fell short of the list's scope and goals. The list will take appropriate steps to correct this problem and enforce moderating posts that violate the scope of the list and/or do not meet the intended goals of the list. Thanks again and our warmest regards, Advaitin List Moderators advaitin, S Mohan <mohanirmala> wrote: > Dear Moderators and Fellow Advaitins and Fellow Sadhakas, > > My impression when I joined this group was that it will be an opportunity to express one's understanding of various aspects of the scriptures listed in the introductory message and that the learned Moderators and Fellow Sadhakas would try to clarify the understanding on the basis of their experiences and their understanding. > > As I have watched the exchanges on the above subject , I have found myself slightly distressed. Of course, as I have been away for 2 days, I am still reading the Apr 4 messages. Things might have got clarified later, I dont know. > ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2004 Report Share Posted April 7, 2004 Namaste Balaji, I dont think there can any other reason for a jivanmukta other than longing for videhamukti. If there are other reasons, that means he still has some harmful vasanas (causing re-birth). What i am trying to bring out is when one gets the 'direct knowledge' (aparoksha anubhuti), all the harmful vasanas are destroyed. The person becomes jivanmukta. But that does not mean he has escaped the cycle of birth & death. He still has a body, has to live till death (due to prabdha). For videhamukti to happen, he has to maintain this state (nirmani) till death with the help of his viveka buddhi. For a jivanmukta the only prayojana (reason to be alive) is 'lokasangraha'. i.e bring the people to the path of moksha. Once he has done this duty, he decides again with his viveka buddhi to leave this mortal body. The ultimate aim of human life is to escape this bhavasaagar, or to get rid of this bhavarog (escape from birth-death). For that the only condition is 'nirmani' state (state where no harmful vasanas exist at the time of death). Theoretically, even if a person has done evil deeds all his life, but somehow manages to get rid of all his harmful vasanas at the time of death, he is a relieved from birth-death cycle. But in reality this is impossible. At the time of death, the powerful vasanas manifest and cause the jiva to take another birth. That is why, much stress has to be laid on dharmacharan. Dharmo rakshati rakshitaha. In all this process, the 'direct knowledge' which is required to become a jivanmukta does not really matter. They can vary - advaita, sankhya, dwaita, sunyavada, union with shiva, ....etc (these knowldge can be gained from differet paths like bhakti yoga, jnan yoga, raj yoga, hatha yoga ...ect ) Some sages have said all is one and it is brahma. They atained moksha. Some sages said purusha and prakriti are different and eternal, they attained moksha. some said jivatma and paramatma are different, still they achieved moksha. All these sages, wise men, saints are actually refering to the same reality. Difference arises the moment they try to limit that infinity in words. ekam sadviprA bahudA vadanti. (one reality, different learned men call it differently) As regards to Shruti mata, she only shows the path provided we have faith in her and try to get her essence rather than literal meaning. But the walking has to be done by us only.So it is better to have unconditional faith in her and not question her authority. Om tat-sat. Vishal Balaji Ramasubramanian <balajiramasubramanian wrote: Namaste Vishalji, Although the question and the answer are really irrelevant to one who is really worried about attaining Moksha, or atleast who tries to 'prepare oneself for the shruthi' or 'tranquillize the mind', the reason for such a termination of tenure is not incorrectly pointed out, although not exhaustively - I mean there may be many more reasons for them to do so. Satyameva Jayate Naanrtam Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages advaitin/ advaitin Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2004 Report Share Posted April 8, 2004 vishalji writes... ( I dont think there can any other reason for a jivanmukta other than longing for videhamukti.) yes. There are two kinds of mukti, jIvan mukti and vidEha mukti. A person who has realised the Self while in the body is a jIvan muktA. vidEha mukti is the transcendental state of Perfection obtained after a jIvan muktA leaves his body. But, for a jnAni, there is no difference between the two. Such was the state of Brahma jnanis (atma jnani) like Shri RAMANA MAHARISHI! Salutations to mauna guru Shri Ramana Bhagwan! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 Dear Balaji, I am sorry for not having been visible on the discussions for a week or so, but I have been quite busy. Within the next few days I hope being able to reply to the mails adressing me, sent by you and also by other members on the list. Balaji wrote: > Please correct me if my understanding of your statements is correct: > > Shruthi gives direct knowledge in itself. To grasp such knowledge the > right preparation is needed. > Yes, that´s the gist of my statements. And also if one is gaining knowledge after manana and nididhyasana (and not just shravana), that knowledge is still a direct knowledge from shruti. If a disciple is reading shruti or listening to a guru teaching the shruti, then all the necessary information comes from that reading or listening. But most likely, the disciple has to ponder and meditate upon the meaning of what he has read or listened to. When the meaning is finally completely grasped, the ignorance (avidya) is eradicated and hence perfect knowledge of the Absolute rises. But it is still a matter of direct knowledge from the shruti, even though manana and nididhyasana is needed. Remember the statement of Shankara: "But in the case of the person in whom this immediate experience does not arise at once, we admit that repetition is necessary in order to aquire that immediate experience." (Bh. Su. Bh. 4.1.2.). This is so, because it is the very meaning of shruti that liberates, not yogic practices, tranquillity of mind, samadhi or the like. Regardless of whether you grasp shruti already by shravana only, or by the help also of manana and nididhyasana, the knowledge is in any case direct knowledge from the shruti. However, this kind of practices (i.e. yoga, samadhi, tranquility of mind etc) can be of great use in purifying the disciple´s mind, and thereby preparing him for the grasping of the statements of the shruti. So, yoga, samadhi, tranquility of mind etc. are of use, although they are not in themselves the means for final liberation. Only the shruti gives the necessary knowledge, according to Adi Shankara. > > When I said that the Shruthi can do nothing much to us, I meant it > can do nothing much to the unprepared lot of us. If we are unprepared, shruti can not get us liberated through shravana only, that´s for sure. Nevertheless, it gives us the information, so to speak, that is necessary for liberation, although we might have to do quite a lot of manana and nididhyasana too. So in that sense, shruti can actually do everything to us, in the sense that it contains the texts necessary for eradication of ignorance. But most likely we have to ponder and meditate upon the meaning of those texts, before perfectly grasping the meaning of them. > you think of it, but I don't think I or anyone in this group is > really prepared for the knowledge of the Shruthi - no offense please. Well, all perfect knowledge of Brahman comes through shruti. It is not correct to say that some people get brahmavidya through shruti, and some other people get brahmavidya through some other source. If we are aspiring to attain knowledge of the Absolute, then that knowledge has to come through shruti. The knowledge through shruti includes not only knowledge arising from shravana. It also includes knowledge arising from manana and nididhyasana. So even if someone has to study the shastras for a lifetime (or for several lifetimes!), the resulting knowledge is nevertheless "knowledge of the Shruti". This is why Shankara is so emphatic in saying that all knowledge of the Absolute comes through the meaning of the shruti. For instance: "The Spirit proclaimed in the Upanishads, and only in the Upanishads, is the Absolute." (Shankara, Bh. Su. Bh. 1.1.4.) > > Therefore, when you say Sravana leads to realization of the self in > the prepared person, I accept it fully. If you had said that it would > lead to realization of the self even in an unprepared person, I would > have contested it. I fully agree with you here. > But, I was rather stressing more on another aspect, which I am afraid > you and many others have unfortunately entirely ignored. The fact > that we are not currently prepared for the Shruthis appears bad to me > (don't you think so? Don't you think you should do something about > it?), and in my opinion everyone should atleast try to develop > this 'preparedness' for the Shruthi. Absolutely. If someone is actually interested in attaining brahmavidya, this preparedness is no doubt necessary. But I can´t see why you think that I have "entirely ignored" this (or anyone else in this discussion either, for that matter). On the contrary, I have tried to explain several times that eradication through shravana is possible only if one has the right preparedness. This should make it very clear, I think, that I have pointed out the importance of preparedness. > > Like you correctly pointed out control of the bodily cravings is > necessary. I just said that tranquility of the mind is necessary for > such control. I just pronounced the method to develop the capabilty > to understand the truth of the Shruthi, when I said, 'practice of > Ashtangayoga'. Please note that I never therefore pointed that we > get 'something' out of this, as some have misinterpreted me. > Preparedness is important in order to attain knowledge of the Absolute. But what you said before was that one has to put into practice what the Shruti says, before gaining knowledge. In other words, the gist of your reasoning was that one can not get direct knowledge from shruti only, but one has also to do spiritual practises. But this is not so, according to Shankara. Shankara says that manana (and probably even nididhyasana) is necessary for all the aspirants who are not capable of grasping the meaning of the shruti from the mere listening to them. But manana and nididhyasana is completely different from trying to attain tranquility of the mind, practising Patanjali yoga, samadhi etc. Manana and nididhyasana has to do exclusively with trying to understand the meaning of shruti, heard through shravana. Yoga asanas and tranquility of mind is something else. For instance, your mind can be tranquil without studying any shruti. But it is not in any way possible to do manana or nididhyasana outside the bounds of the meaning of the shruti. > > However, I wanted to know what you think should one do after > tranquility of mind (or in your words, control or detachment) are > developed. Do you say that even now, only the Shruthi can help him > attain Mukti, or liberation? Does he have no hope if he does not have > access to the Shruthi? One has to have access to the meaning or message of the Shruti. For instance, it is possible to dispell ignorance by studying the Puranas, although the Purananas are not Shruti. But the important thing is that the Puranas contain the same thruths as Shruti. According to for instance the Manu smriti, the study of Shruti is eligible only for those who have undergone the upanayanam ceremony and thereby have becoming dwijas (twice-born). But attaining brahmavidya is nevertheless possible also for those who have not undergone upanayanam, because they can learn about the Absolute from the study of the smriti (including Bhagavad Gita), the Puranas and the epic works such as Ramayana or Mahabharata. This is possible, because the meaning of these shastras contain the same thruths as the shruti. So, to answer your question, it is possible to attain moksha without access to the shruti, IF one instead follows and study the works that contain the same meaning as the shruti (that is, the smritis and the itihasas). This is also how one shall understand the statements of Shankara that only shruti leads to moksha. > Finally on whether moksha comes first and cessation of sorrow comes > first or they are the same (as I am trying to say) or what the > situation is, we would best know only when we become enlightened. So > I don't think there is any point in discussing that. Sorrow is there because of duality. Duality is gone at the very moment of moksha. Hence, sorrow also vanishes at the very moment of moksha. > Ranjeet to post something on the need for Sravana. It does not appear > he is so interested in that. Would you please do so. Please explain > to all members the importance of Sravana. I guess I have said quite a lot on shravana already. The message of the shruti comes to the aspirant through shravana for the simple reason that shravana means the study of the shastras. It is through shravana that the aspirant gains knowledge on the content of the shastras. And if he has the proper preparedness and the necessary qualifications (perhaps from earlier lives of studying the shastras, being a vedantic philosopher or the like) the mere hearing of the statements such as "Tat tvam asi" is the only thing necessary for him to attain moksha. But if he is less qualified, mere shravana is not enough to make him liberated. So then he has to do some manana and probably also nididhyasana. However, it is the shravana that connects you, so to speak, to the shruti in the first place. It is through shravana that the message of the upanishads enters your mind. Most likely, the aspirant has to do a lot of manana and nididhyasana. But manana and nididhyasana means to ponder and meditate over the upanishadic thruths that the aspirant has been thaught through shravana. In this sense, shravana is what makes manana and nididhyasana possible. Warmest regards Stig Lundgren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 Dear Stigji: I was able to follow all that you said and it makes sense to me. Sadaji has also emphasized the same thing several times in slightly different ways. So one can see the importance played in Shankra's Advaita of direct knowledge coming from shruti. There is also found in scriptures, I don't know where...... It states that Self reveals It Self to those whom It chooses. Love to all Harsha Stig Lundgren [slu] Sunday, April 18, 2004 1:13 PM advaitin Re: Re: Why a commentary? Yes, that´s the gist of my statements. And also if one is gaining knowledge after manana and nididhyasana (and not just shravana), that knowledge is still a direct knowledge from shruti. If a disciple is reading shruti or listening to a guru teaching the shruti, then all the necessary information comes from that reading or listening. But most likely, the disciple has to ponder and meditate upon the meaning of what he has read or listened to. When the meaning is finally completely grasped, the ignorance (avidya) is eradicated and hence perfect knowledge of the Absolute rises. But it is still a matter of direct knowledge from the shruti, even though manana and nididhyasana is needed. Remember the statement of Shankara: "But in the case of the person in whom this immediate experience does not arise at once, we admit that repetition is necessary in order to aquire that immediate experience." (Bh. Su. Bh. 4.1.2.). This is so, because it is the very meaning of shruti that liberates, not yogic practices, tranquillity of mind, samadhi or the like. Regardless of whether you grasp shruti already by shravana only, or by the help also of manana and nididhyasana, the knowledge is in any case direct knowledge from the shruti. However, this kind of practices (i.e. yoga, samadhi, tranquility of mind etc) can be of great use in purifying the disciple´s mind, and thereby preparing him for the grasping of the statements of the shruti. So, yoga, samadhi, tranquility of mind etc. are of use, although they are not in themselves the means for final liberation. Only the shruti gives the necessary knowledge, according to Adi Shankara. Warmest regards Stig Lundgren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 advaitin, "Harsha" wrote: > Dear Stigji: > > I was able to follow all that you said and it makes sense to me. Sadaji has > also emphasized the same thing several times in slightly different ways. So > one can see the importance played in Shankra's Advaita of direct knowledge > coming from shruti. > > There is also found in scriptures, I don't know where...... > > It states that Self reveals It Self to those whom It chooses. > > Love to all > Harsha > Namaste, Harsha-ji Are your referring to the following lines in Kathopanishad?:(I -ii- 23) "yamevaishha vRNute tena labhyaH tasyaishha AtmA vivRNute tanUM svAM" It means: It can be known through the Self alone that the aspirant prays to; this Self of that seeker reveals its true nature. PraNAms to all advaitins profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 _____ V. Krishnamurthy [profvk] Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:35 PM advaitin Re: Why a commentary? Namaste, Harsha-ji Are your referring to the following lines in Kathopanishad?:(I -ii- 23) "yamevaishha vRNute tena labhyaH tasyaishha AtmA vivRNute tanUM svAM" It means: It can be known through the Self alone that the aspirant prays to; this Self of that seeker reveals its true nature. PraNAms to all advaitins profvk ********************************** Dear Krishnamurthiji: Yes, I believe so. I mentioned this verse because it seemed relevant to what Stigji had said. Sadaji has also said previously that Sruti is a valid mean (pramana) to Self-Knowledge. Sadaji, however, seemed to leave open the possibility that there might be other valid means. That was my reading of what Sadaji said at the time, but I could be mistaken. Here is the verse translated by Sanderson Beck. http://www.san.beck.org/Upan2-Katha.html "This soul cannot be attained by instruction nor by intellectual ability nor by much learning. It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses. To such a one the soul reveals its own self. Not those who have not ceased from bad conduct, not those who are not tranquil, not those who are not composed, not those who are not of a peaceful mind, can attain this by intelligence. The one for whom the priesthood and the nobility are as food, and death is as a sauce, who knows where this one is? Love to all Harsha 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.