Four kinds of Non-existence (abhAva)

[Guest guest]

Putraamji - praNams.

 

I have answered the questions you raised to the best I can.

 

--- On Fri, 8/29/08, putranm <putranm wrote:

 

 

Sadaji, this I saw as quoted by you. I accept that a jnani can be a

bhogi but would it be fair to say that the jnani can always detach

from the source of bhoga, excepting for minimal physical

sustenance. " I am a jnani but I cannot give up smoking, or watching

the Olympics. " seems a bit hypocritical.

---------

Sadananda:

Putramji - jnaani is the one who revels in himself by himself - aatmani eve

aatmanaa tushhTaH - Hence he does have to do anything for his sake. Even the

scripture does not prescribe him do-os and don'ts. Please look at the second

part of the sloka- he is revelling in Brahman all the time. There is no need

for him to smoke.

 

That sloka only means - if praaradba dictates he be a king or he be a butcher or

he be a former - he be a parivraajaka - whatever may be that he is destrined to

do due to praradda, it does not matter to him.

 

During the sadhana time he has disciplined his mind not to go after sense

pleasures - that life he continues automatically - whatever he does is for loka

kalyaanam only. yadyat brahmani ramate chittam nandati nandati nadatyeva - Is

is any need for him to do anything for his sake?

--------------

Putramji:

MY point is that if

asked/considered to renounce, they should be able to on the strength

of that complete awareness of Self (not that they must consider the

habit bad or good in itself), for Sannyasa (renunciation) is the

hallmark of the jnani.

 

Sadananda - that is true - the sanyaasa is during the sadhaka stage - his mind

is turned towards higher renouncing the lower. - Eveyone has to do it if one

wants self-realization - this is not necessarily bhoutika sanyaasa, although

that will help in maanasika sanyaasa. He can be a king like janaka or be married

to 160000 wives yet be called anaadhi brahmacaari!

------------------

Putramji:

(You can say smoking is a physical problem once the addiction sets

in, but where is this unknown boundary and when is it crossed? When

it is deeply psychological, the habit is called physical; and pure

jnana cannot free that person: the awareness is overturned by vasanas

in this real practice arena. Swami Vivekananda, Nisargadatta Maharaj

and Chinmayananda were all smoking addicts, if I am not mistaken.)

 

Sadananda: I would refrain characterizing any body else - If I can do what they

could do even one tenth, I feel I am blessed. All the sadhanaas and the

teachings are for self-evolution and are not meant for other's evaluation -

since we can never evaluate other's mental state, can we.

---------------------

 

Putramji

 

PS smoking is just an example here. My opinion is that jnana must

translate into life as renunciation without inhibitions (or

elimination of all binding psychological vasanas); otherwise at some

place, it is intellectual or ineffectual. We admire jnanis who imbue

peace and freedom, not slavery accompanied with an awareness of

slavery.

 

Sadananda: There is no problem - you can look for a teacher who meets your

criteria and passes your tests. Ultimately a right teacher is the one from whom

you got greatest help in your evolution.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

--- On Fri, 8/29/08, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

 

Bhaskarji - without going into details let me just say briefly:

 

Yes the 2 or 2 and half years tainting of the brahmachaari course - all the

Sandeepany saadhanalaya students of Chinmaya mission go through all the Shankara

bhaashyas of the major Upanishads when they study and also brahma sutra

bhaashya.

 

Yes when ever they teach they follow closely Shankara Bhaashya.

 

Yes when I study or teach Upanishad, I discuss using Shankara Bhaashya as the

basis in addition to other prakaraNa granthaas of great masters of Advaita

tradition.

 

Yes as you can see in the archives of the advaitin list - there is complete file

of Brahmasuutra bhaashya of Shankara bhagavat paada - even to write 5 sutras -

it took months. I got side tracked with something else.

 

If you ask me to quote bhaashya - no I do not know that much to remember the

details.

 

I understand the essence and I have no doubts left - I am spending my remaining

left over years in nidhidhyaasana to internalize the teaching- I teach only to

make sure I practice what I teach. That is really taking all my time - frankly

do not have time for anything else anymore. I write as part of my saadhana - to

the best I can of what I know - most of the quotes are directly from the

scriptures - bhaashyaas I use to understand the scriptures. I am interested to

know the truth - ultimately not even what shankara said or Ramanuja said or

Vidyaranya said. What they said help me to understand the truth. Hence I write

what I understand after studying what all they said. I am convinced that what I

understand is pure advaita. - where I do deviate because of my background,

mostly deal with loukika and not aloukika aspects. I clearly make a note of

that.

 

Hope this answers all your questions. What I wrote to you about quoting

Shankara bhaashyas - is only a friendly advice I am not trying to find fault

with you. But do not demand others to quote the bhaashyas to justify their

answer. If I have to do that, it implies to me that I have not done good job in

understanding the vedanta. You are of course welcome to reject based on your

understanding. I tried to provide as much support from scriputes and logic to

my arguments. Every answer I give is with the paraphrase – ‘based on my

understanding. It is left to the readers to take it or throw it in the garbage.

 

Since there were no other questions left, I can go back to my studies.

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Sadaji, thanks for the reply. TO clarify on your end statement, my

opinion of who a jnani is is not to find out the best teacher or to

put down swamis; it is to assess how jnana is to be understood

without fearing to bring them into question. Not my test, but the

general test. Intended Q was: should jnana free one from accumulated

mental tendencies/vasanas - should that awareness of Truth cut across

habits that were rooted in " I am body " idea? Freedom from vasanas,

both past and future, will mean that the person is truly free from

do's and don'ts. Otherwise not many 'jnanis' will dare to indulge in

kama even after 'realization'; so indeed do's and don'ts matter to

them ... which then challenges whether they are jnanis. Or should we

assign partial jnana-status?

 

This is how an ajnani assesses and must assess, especially when we

wish to define jnana as an absolute state, rather than give it

gradation. I am not questioning swamijis; I am frustrated that they

don't question themselves on these points and show us that jnana can

free them in these respects as well. " Oh, I am free, but my mind is a

slave and suffers " is no consolation. Moreover it makes us wonder on

the whole concept of jivan-mukti.

 

Anycase I understand the technical reply to be : Praarabda karma

(like from smoking) has its continued role to play, and the impact of

jnana will work at such levels in due course of time. Realization of

Satya by a jiva does not mean elimination of Maya. The mind is

internally laughing at its external sufferings.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

> Putraamji - praNams.

>

> I have answered the questions you raised to the best I can.

>

> --- On Fri, 8/29/08, putranm <putranm wrote:

>

>

> Sadaji, this I saw as quoted by you. I accept that a jnani can be a

> bhogi but would it be fair to say that the jnani can always detach

> from the source of bhoga, excepting for minimal physical

> sustenance. " I am a jnani but I cannot give up smoking, or watching

> the Olympics. " seems a bit hypocritical.

> ---------

> Sadananda:

> Putramji - jnaani is the one who revels in himself by himself -

aatmani eve aatmanaa tushhTaH - Hence he does have to do anything for

his sake. Even the scripture does not prescribe him do-os and

don'ts. Please look at the second part of the sloka- he is revelling

in Brahman all the time. There is no need for him to smoke.

>

> That sloka only means - if praaradba dictates he be a king or he be

a butcher or he be a former - he be a parivraajaka - whatever may be

that he is destrined to do due to praradda, it does not matter to

him.

>

> During the sadhana time he has disciplined his mind not to go after

sense pleasures - that life he continues automatically - whatever he

does is for loka kalyaanam only. yadyat brahmani ramate chittam

nandati nandati nadatyeva - Is is any need for him to do anything for

his sake?

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

> Putramji:

> MY point is that if

> asked/considered to renounce, they should be able to on the

strength

> of that complete awareness of Self (not that they must consider the

> habit bad or good in itself), for Sannyasa (renunciation) is the

> hallmark of the jnani.

>

> Sadananda - that is true - the sanyaasa is during the sadhaka

stage - his mind is turned towards higher renouncing the lower. -

Eveyone has to do it if one wants self-realization - this is not

necessarily bhoutika sanyaasa, although that will help in maanasika

sanyaasa. He can be a king like janaka or be married to 160000 wives

yet be called anaadhi brahmacaari!

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

> Putramji:

> (You can say smoking is a physical problem once the addiction sets

> in, but where is this unknown boundary and when is it crossed? When

> it is deeply psychological, the habit is called physical; and pure

> jnana cannot free that person: the awareness is overturned by

vasanas

> in this real practice arena. Swami Vivekananda, Nisargadatta

Maharaj

> and Chinmayananda were all smoking addicts, if I am not mistaken.)

>

> Sadananda: I would refrain characterizing any body else - If I can

do what they could do even one tenth, I feel I am blessed. All the

sadhanaas and the teachings are for self-evolution and are not meant

for other's evaluation - since we can never evaluate other's mental

state, can we.

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

>

> Putramji

>

> PS smoking is just an example here. My opinion is that jnana must

> translate into life as renunciation without inhibitions (or

> elimination of all binding psychological vasanas); otherwise at

some

> place, it is intellectual or ineffectual. We admire jnanis who

imbue

> peace and freedom, not slavery accompanied with an awareness of

> slavery.

>

> Sadananda: There is no problem - you can look for a teacher who

meets your criteria and passes your tests. Ultimately a right

teacher is the one from whom you got greatest help in your

evolution.

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

> thollmelukaalkizhu

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Dr. Shyamji,

 

Are you a psychiatrist? You have diagnosed a mental block in

Bhaskarji and me!?

 

" Eh, ye, mentallly blocked, shudder and bow, I am Oscimandias, King

of Kings " seems to be your self-esteem. I feel really sorry to

respond to such arrogance.

 

You have taken it for granted that your side is right and your

detractors are wrong. Who has given you the authority to arrogatge

so? While you appreciate the patience of one side (and you call it

titikshA!), the detractors are treated like a pain on the neck. Any

debate is an equation, until proved otherwise. The seniority,

volume of verbiage authored, social standing, professional success

etc. do not count in this equation.

 

I am a regular visitor to your blog, whether you like it or not,

because I consider it informative. Get rid of your arrogance - that

is the only fault and the undertone even at your blog - you will be

more acceptable. Otherwise not. Sorry to be blunt because you seem

to be out removing mental blocks while looking through tinted

glasses.

 

I am writing again to Dennis-ji elaborating further on my views on

the bone of contention. If you have time, please read. I won't

invite the all-knowing to the gibberish of mentally blocked.

 

Madathil Nair

________________

 

 

 

>>In advaitin , Shyam <shyam_md wrote:

> I have been unable to participate in these discussions, and in the

list in general, due to severe time constraints - and in this

particular case, am also lacking in the patience and especially

titikshA or forebearance :-) that someone like Sada-ji has in re-

explaining these basic simple concepts over and again ad nauseaum to

you dear Nair-ji(and Bhaskar-ji) - clearly there seems to be a

mental block that is preventing you from understanding the

functioning of a jnAni.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sadaji.

 

My comments are in .

 

> I am not sure where the problem is! Whether it is teachers or

with students. You are using only snake/rope analogy, forgetting

that there is mirage water analogy too where knowledge that there is

no water does not take away the perception of mirage water. I would

like to hear what Krishnanandaji said.

 

[MN: I used rope-snake because I was responding to Dennis-ji who

referred to it. Otherwise, I am clear about what I say without the

help of analogies. I am also aware of all the analogies employed in

Advaita (ten or more) and am capable of distinguishing their

limitations.]

 

> Actually, the objection that you are raising is the age old one

and Ramanuja in Shree Bhaashya as part of the untenables of advaita

Vedanta avidya is discussed elaborately in his mahaapuurvapaksha.

Of course the Madhavaas pound on it too - as there is no teacher to

teach after his realization and the whole Vedanta has to be thrown

out since it is the teaching projected by an ignorant student who

sees a teacher who is not there - since if I understand correctly

from the student's point there is a teaching and from the teachers

point there is no student to teach. What makes the student project

the correct teaching? We need to bring God out of compassion has to

come in the form of a teacher - which exactly what the analysis has

been presented!

 

[MN: I have never negated the transactional. If you go back to my

pUrNamadaH pUrNamidaM essay, you will notice that I have

categorically mentioned that negation of the world is tantamount to

the negation of myself. I stand by that view which I am going to

elaborate in another post addressed to Dennisji today, time and wife

permitting.]

 

NamaskAraM for your patience and incidentally to mine too! We are

part of an equation. Not a high pressure region sending knowledge

to a mentally blocked low pressure area as our Dr. Shyamji

presupposes.

 

Sorry for my aggressive language. I have a strong Mars in my third

house - the house of writing.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Dear Dennis-ji.

 

This is further to my 41496 addressed to you.

 

Believe it or not, at 04:00 hrs my time today, I suddenly remembered

that I didn't address the issue of compassion and love you

highlighted through your quote of Sw. P. I couldn't sleep

thereafter, rolled on my bed (my wife beside me cursing the

disturbance), got up in a hurry and began hammering this on the

keyboard.

 

I am reminded of the Wordsworthian poem " Upon the Westminster

Bridge " . Let us imagine. There is a jnAni on the bridge on Thames,

beside him is our famous William Wordsworth (WW) and an ajnAni

(would u like to be the last, Dennis-ji!?).

 

The jnAni's eyes seem turned towards the bright morning star (Eh

Dennisji, do you have clear early morning skies over your blessed

London?)and the hair on his body horripilates at the current calm of

the otherwise hellish London that is still in deep slumber ( " sukhena

mayA nidrA anbhUyata iti " as dear Shankara would have exclaimed!).

As far as he is concerned, he is now the morning star as well as the

calm that has befallen the otherwise ferentic city. When the city

awakes later like a rattle snake uncoils, he would be the hiss of

the snake too. Thus, he can be anything and everything. But, he is

always " He is, He is " . He has not seen anything, he has not

experienced anything, but he is there in everything.

 

Now look at our poet WW. He saw the morning star and the calm of

the otherwise frenetic city. For a moment, he lost himself like the

jnAni. But, immediately therafter, he returned to his couch, his

melancholy mood and lamented " Oh, what man has made of man?! " .

 

And there is the ajnAni on the same bridge. He saw the bright

morning star and thought ït was a beautiful sight. He also thought

that the city was more acceptable while it was still asleep as there

was much less competition and hellish rat-racing. However, active

at the back of his mind, were his enlarged prostate and the high PSA

reading which the pathologist handed him the previous evening and he

is now concerned what the doc would have to say about it. God

forbid a malignancy in the offing.

 

Dennis-ji, we all talk about our identification with our BMI. Let

me ask you how long are you aware of your body in a twenty-four hour

day. One hour or two hours. Even, then never completely. The

awareness is mostly in parts - hand, feet, back of neck etc. as the

spots of awareness shift. That is just nothing. Yet, body is

considereed as an overweighing factor in our identifications.

 

In the case of a jnAni, therefore, I would say that he is never

aware of his body. His mind is a total mind and his intellect is

the brilliance of several million hundred Suns (sUryakoti samaprabhA

is one of the names by which my ishtadevatA, the Devi,is known,whom

I consider as the Consciousness of Advaita).

 

When a jnAni is, therefore, 'aware' of something, he resides in his

object of awareness as a passion. His residence in everything that

he is 'aware' of is Compassion. He doesn't need anything to be

compassionate with, like a leper or one drowned in poverty. He is

an ocean of compassion without there being anything to be

compassionate with. His very nature is compassion. He is thus love

too without the need for any object to fall in love with.

 

" I am the Cross, I am the weight of the Cross that I carry, I am my

tormentors, I am the nails that are hit on my body, I am the blood,

I am the pain, and if I am the pain, can anything really hurt me? "

thought Jesus, and, centuries later, an Indian passionate about the

Crucified exclaimed " Oh Raam " when he was shot point blank on his

chest, for he saw himself, his Raam, in his shooter, in the bullets,

in the pain as they entered his mortal frame and in the blood that

oozed out as he collapsed.

 

Dennisji, where was your transactional for them? If anything, I

would like to be like them. Otherwise, my advaita is not worth a

dime. I am passionate about the whole thing as I can sense the

compassion in advaita. I don't have to be compassionate any more.

I am compassion. I don't have to love any more. I am love and I

roll on my bed early at 04:00 hrs. Oh God, make me roll always in

the ectasy of my compassionate being!

 

Dear Mounaji quoted Nisargadatta Maharaj. This I think is what

Maharaj meant when he said He is able to see Himself in everything.

This is not an understanding with a wise mind as Sw.P would like to

have us believe. This is just being which is by default compassion

and love, which I am, which you are, which all of us are!

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Dear Nair-ji,

I admire your passionate outpourings (when are you starting your

novel?) but am bound to point out that this mode of communication is not best

suited for resolving matters of dispute in advaita.

What you say is in direct conflict with the statement that “Since

neither the Atma nor the body have compassion, this must be a quality of the

mind.” Your speaking of a ‘total mind’ can only be a

reference to Ishvara, which is still at the level of vyavahAra. My

understanding is that enlightenment is the understanding that ‘I am

brahman’, not ‘I am Ishvara’. You might claim that this is

the same thing but this cannot be so; brahman is the non-dual reality while

Ishvara is the dualistic wielder of mAyA.

Basically, if you want your j~nAnI to have compassion (and

clearly you agree with the scriptures on this), then you must allow that he has

a mind (in the usually understood sense of this term).

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

[Guest guest]

Bhaskarji,

 

I have studied prasthanatrayi bhasya in a traditional gurukula setting

with my guru Swami Dayanandaji. I would like to make a comment here

since Bhaskarji has been trying to get across his point of view for

quite some time now.

 

After studying the Bhasyas and a few books of Swami Satchidandendra

Saraswathiji I have to say that Swami Satchidandendra Saraswathiji's

main contention that Avidya is jnanAbhava cannot be sustained and it

leads to unnecessary complications. After a lot of debate with the

people who follow this view I have to say that the only way they get

around certain uncomfortable questions is to suddenly switch to

paramarthika standpoint when the question is obviously from a

vyavaharic standpoint.

 

I would like to further add that in late 1970's there was a vidwat

sadas organised at Sringeri particularly to debate and finalise

whether avidya is jnanAbhava or jnanavirodhi. The followers of Swami

Satchidandendra Saraswathiji were defeated in this debate and even

agreed that they will not further propogate this wrong interpretation.

If the members of this group are interested I will try to post some

parts of Dr. Martha Doherty's thesis on this subject.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

>

> By the way, I would like to ask a simple & straight forward humble

question

> here...How many of us, have studied shankara's prasthAna trayi

bhAshya in a

> traditional way?? How many of us participated in the vidvat sabha &

witness

> the style of debates take place there?? Kindly dont think I am

asking this

> question out of arrogance or something of that order...Sri Sadananda

> prabhuji's repeated insistence on this issue compelling me to ask this

> question. I am not that much familiar with the teaching methods at

> Ramakrishna Ashrama & Chinmaya Mission etc. As far as my knowledge goes,

> there wont be a traditional way of teaching of *shankara vedanta in

these

> institutions based on his prasthAna trayi bhAshya...Sri Sadananda

prabhuji,

> kindly tell us the *method* of teaching at chinmaya mission...If you

could

> permit me, I would also like to ask you whether you have undergone any

> *bhAshya shAnti* in a traditional manner...Kindly pardon me for

asking this

> very personal question...I am forced to ask this question coz. of your

> repetitive statements like *bits & pieces, haphazard shankara

bhAshya* etc.

> Normally I dont see this type of allegations from the prabhuji-s who

have

> studied shankara bhAshya in a bonafide sAmpradAyik way...I onceagain

would

> like to clarify here that this personal question is not out of any

conceit

> ...just I am curious to know....

>

>

> In the next post, I'd share my understandings on the remaining

portion of

> your mail...which is the main topic of this discussion...

>

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

>

>

> bhaskar

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Nair-ji,

 

You say: “You seem to read meanings that I have not

intended in my writings.

Compassion is another word for jnAni/jnAna like Love is. (You might

dub me non-standard - it doesn't matter.). Compassion is not in a

mind like the lime pickle on my kitchen shelf contained in a

bottle. It is not an attribute. JnAni/jnAna has no attributes. Are

you deliberately playing with words? I am compelled to think so

reading the objections you are raising.”

All that I meant is that verbs such as love and compassion in

this context are transitive. They require an object. Subject-object distinction

is a characteristic of vyavahAra. They are also regarded as functions of a

dualistic mind. I believe that I am using words in their normal usage – I

am definitely not ‘playing with words’ as you suggest is a

possibility.

(Incidentally, I definitely do not want to open a discussion on

Ishvara!!)

Regarding the Swami K reference, I do not really have the time

to read a long chapter. If you want to summarize the point that you think

closes the issue (in a similar manner to my summarizing of Swami P’s

points), I would be happy to try to answer them if I disagree.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

[Guest guest]

Jaishankarji - praNAms

 

After long time! Yes we would like to hear from you, not necessarily from who is right, but from the point of the analysis of the truth. Yes please do post your understanding on the nature of avidya. avidyaa is understood as sat asat vilakshanam or from the point of the disucssion as bhaava abhaava vilakshaNam. Since it is the central theme in the Ramanuja's untenables - we would like to hear from you.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda--- On Sat, 8/30/08, jaishankar_n <jai1971 wrote:

jaishankar_n <jai1971 Re: Four kinds of Non-existence (abhAva)advaitin Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 11:28 AM

 

 

Bhaskarji,I have studied prasthanatrayi bhasya in a traditional gurukula settingwith my guru Swami Dayanandaji. I would like to make a comment heresince Bhaskarji has been trying to get across his point of view forquite some time now.After studying the Bhasyas and a few books of Swami SatchidandendraSaraswathiji I have to say that Swami Satchidandendra Saraswathiji' smain contention that Avidya is jnanAbhava cannot be sustained and itleads to unnecessary complications. After a lot of debate with thepeople who follow this view I have to say that the only way they getaround certain uncomfortable questions is to suddenly switch toparamarthika standpoint when the question is obviously from avyavaharic standpoint. I would like to further add that in late 1970's there was a vidwatsadas organised at Sringeri particularly to debate and finalisewhether avidya is jnanAbhava or

jnanavirodhi. The followers of SwamiSatchidandendra Saraswathiji were defeated in this debate and evenagreed that they will not further propogate this wrong interpretation.If the members of this group are interested I will try to post someparts of Dr. Martha Doherty's thesis on this subject.with love and prayers,Jaishankar> > By the way, I would like to ask a simple & straight forward humblequestion> here...How many of us, have studied shankara's prasthAna trayibhAshya in a> traditional way?? How many of us participated in the vidvat sabha & witness> the style of debates take place there?? Kindly dont think I amasking this> question out of arrogance or something of that order...Sri Sadananda> prabhuji's repeated insistence on this issue compelling me to ask this> question. I am not that much familiar with the teaching methods at>

Ramakrishna Ashrama & Chinmaya Mission etc. As far as my knowledge goes,> there wont be a traditional way of teaching of *shankara vedanta inthese> institutions based on his prasthAna trayi bhAshya...Sri Sadanandaprabhuji,> kindly tell us the *method* of teaching at chinmaya mission...If youcould> permit me, I would also like to ask you whether you have undergone any> *bhAshya shAnti* in a traditional manner...Kindly pardon me forasking this> very personal question...I am forced to ask this question coz. of your> repetitive statements like *bits & pieces, haphazard shankarabhAshya* etc.> Normally I dont see this type of allegations from the prabhuji-s whohave> studied shankara bhAshya in a bonafide sAmpradAyik way...I onceagainwould> like to clarify here that this personal question is not out of anyconceit> ...just I am curious to

know....> > > In the next post, I'd share my understandings on the remainingportion of> your mail...which is the main topic of this discussion.. .> > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!> > > bhaskar>

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

You only have a guru, you only have right knowledge, you only have a

brilliant intellect, you only have the Grace of Ishwra. That is the

problem. You don't think others also can have these.

 

About 'ridiculing' Sastriji, I have already explained the matter to

him and apologised for the unintended hurt, if any. I still think

that he misunderstood me. Why are you exhuming the issue now?

 

I haven't questioned Sadaji's standing. I might have remarked about

a tendency in the list to be on the side of the more experienced

seniors at the cost of objectivity. I didn't name any personality.

 

I have commented on Sw. P's opinion because the first part of it

related to destroying the mind, an idea which I or anybody else here

never professed, and the last part referred to brahmajnAna taking

place in a wise mind (replacing problematic mind with wise mind). I

am justified in questioning the latter part because I have another

Swami (Swami Krishnananda) holding a different opinion about

bramhajnAna. I gave you that link long back and you said it related

to some Buddhist objections. Were you not dismissive then? Is it

mandatory in vedanta that everyone should accept the opinion of a

particular teacher you vibe well with?

 

I didn't call Dennisji, with whom I have a very durable relationship

and understanding off-List, a gullible Westerner. Yours is a very

silly allegation. May be you want to drive a wedge between him and

me. Ask Dennisji if he was offended. You are feeling offended on his

behalf. That is your problem. Please be offended then. My remark

simply highlighted the sad dilution of advaita to suit the Western

palate. It is a known fact that many teachers (I don't want to name

anyone) are actually doing this. This wise mind stuff is some such

talk. This is my opinion and I have every right to express it, no

matter what you think about it.

 

Nothing has happened to my humility. I have no claims to

articulation. I just don't want to take things lying down -

particularly when someone thinks he is intelligent enough to

diagnose a mental block in me - psychiatristic or otherwise.

 

I don't want to entertain any more correspondence on this issue.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

My 41573 is addressed to Dr. Shyam-ji.

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Jaishankar prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Sorry for the belated reply...

JS prabhuji :

I have studied prasthanatrayi bhasya in a traditional gurukula setting

with my guru Swami Dayanandaji. I would like to make a comment here

since Bhaskarji has been trying to get across his point of view for

quite some time now.

bhaskar :

Nice to know that prabhuji, I hope our discussions based on shankara's prasthAna trayi bhAshya would be constructive & educative.

 

JS prabhuji :

After studying the Bhasyas and a few books of Swami Satchidandendra

Saraswathiji I have to say that Swami Satchidandendra Saraswathiji's

main contention that Avidya is jnanAbhava cannot be sustained and it

leads to unnecessary complications.

bhaskar :

Kindly let me know which are all the books you have studied & where exactly Sri SSS makes his conclusion that jnAna is *abhAva rUpa*..I am happy to know that you are familiar with my parama guruji's works...But as far as my knowledge goes, Sri SSS's main contention is NOT to prove ajnAna is jnAnAbhAva, but it is something else...If you are little bit familiar with his writings, you would know what exactly is his stand on avidyA...I'll not go into the details of it now, let me first get the reference from your goodself...Hope you would do the needful.

JS prabhuji:

After a lot of debate with the people who follow this view I have to say that the only way they get

around certain uncomfortable questions is to suddenly switch to

paramarthika standpoint when the question is obviously from a

vyavaharic standpoint.

bhaskar :

Kindly be specific prabhuji..so that we can focus on the issue on hand :-)) dont you think, in this discussion, we have already had enough in the name of paramArthika & vyAvahArika prabhuji ??

 

JS prabhuji :

I would like to further add that in late 1970's there was a vidwat

sadas organised at Sringeri particularly to debate and finalise

whether avidya is jnanAbhava or jnanavirodhi.

bhaskar :

Kindly give me the details of that debate if you are aware of it...As far as I know, it was not the debate on avidyA which is jnAnAbhAva or jnAnavirOdhi...This debate was about whether avidyA is bhAva rUpa (mUlAvidyA as propagated by vivaraNa school ) according to shankara's prasthAna trayi bhAshya...The main source material used for this debate were shankara's nyAya prasthAna, adhyAsa bhAshya & surEshwara's bruhad & taitirIya vArtika..The swamiji represented from Sri SSS's school was Sri jnAnAnandendra Saraswati..(pUrvAshrama name : Sri Vittala shAstri, AsthAna vidhwan)

JS prabhuji :

The followers of Swami Satchidandendra Saraswathiji were defeated in this debate and even

agreed that they will not further propogate this wrong interpretation.

bhaskar :

I called this *baseless* till you give substantial evidence :-)) AFAIK, this debate was held with the august presence of then shrungeri dakshiNAmnaya peetAdhipati H.H. Sri Sri Abhina vidyA teertha mahAsannidhAnaM...and the representative who argued in favour of *mUlAvidyA* was on the verge of accepting that the theory of *mUlAvidyA* is an alien concept in shankara's prasthAnatrayi bhAshya...I've the complete details of that debate...If you have the other valid source to disprove it...you can bring it on prabhuji..

JS prabhuji :

If the members of this group are interested I will try to post some parts of Dr. Martha Doherty's thesis on this subject.

bhaskar :

I myself received the complete details of this paper through courier directly from Dr. Martha Doherty's & I had directly interacted with her with regard to this paper...she mainly based her objection on ONLY one work of Sri SSS i.e. mUlAvidyA nirAsa...it seems she thinks whatever she had written on Sri SSS's is the *final* & does not want to entertain any further discussion. ...and infact, sometime back our Sri Stig Lundgren prabhuji has started writing the refutation of this paper elsewhere in cybernet...but he stopped it in the midway due to some reason..By the way, do you aware that the complete refutation of this paper is already available in the net prabhuji?? I dont have internet access, otherwise I'd have given that link...If you know Dr. Martha Doherty personally, kindly ask her to take a look at it...

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

> bhaskar :

>

>

> I called this *baseless* till you give substantial evidence :-)) AFAIK,

> this debate was held with the august presence of then shrungeri

> dakshiNAmnaya peetAdhipati H.H. Sri Sri Abhina vidyA teertha

> mahAsannidhAnaM...and the representative who argued in favour of

> *mUlAvidyA* was on the verge of accepting that the theory of

*mUlAvidyA* is

> an alien concept in shankara's prasthAnatrayi bhAshya...I've the

complete

> details of that debate...If you have the other valid source to disprove

> it...you can bring it on prabhuji..

>

 

Bhaskarji,

 

Namaskarams. The debate was published as a booklet in Kannada but I

have no inclination to search for it nor get it translated into

English. Even if I get it, the contents of the booklet can always be

questioned and I was not present in first person during the debate. So

I will only say that what I have said is from reliable sources and it

is believable. I don't expect you to accept it so we will leave it as

it is.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

[Guest guest]

Bhaskarji,

 

Namaskarams. The debate was published as a booklet in Kannada but I

have no inclination to search for it nor get it translated into

English. Even if I get it, the contents of the booklet can always be

questioned and I was not present in first person during the debate. So

I will only say that what I have said is from reliable sources and it

is believable. I don't expect you to accept it so we will leave it as

it is.

praNAms Sri JS prabhuji

Hare Krishna

If you are not sure about the contents of the work & if you are not there in that debate as a first person, it is not fair to make conclusive statements like : * Sri SSS's followers are defeated & they are agreed not to use theory against mUlAvidyA* etc. etc. is it not prabhuji...I have the Kannada work which argues in favour of *mUlAvvidyA* ( the title of that book is called *mUlAvidyA bhAshya vArtika sammata) written by Pundit at Sringeri and the detailed refutation of this work & details of the debate of *mUlAvidyA* by Sri jnAnanandendra saraswati (The first desciple of Sri SSS) in book titiled * mUlAvidyA vimarsheya vimarshe*....So, atleast I expect you to make your comments from the firm seat ( since you are travelling I am saying this :-)) when it comes to the comments that convey the wrong impression on the whole issue...Hope you would oblige my request.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar