[Advaita-l] Shankara on non-Advaitic mokSha/Brahman
swami.sarvabhutananda at gmail.com
Sun Feb 24 22:29:04 CST 2013
The very word vaishnavam indicates dvaitam.or vishishtAdvaitm.
Veda and VEDANTA being part of VEDA is the pramAnA for advaita siddhi.
The msg is clear that one who is a BrahmajnAni/Jivan muktah gets lliberated
and never ever takes birth!!
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:54 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
> rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > RV: In gaudiya vaishnavam, it is not mandatory for a jiva to go to some
> > other loka to attain liberation. Bhagavad jnana produces atma jnana
> > instantaneously just as opening the window of a dark room reveals not
> > the sun but also oneself.
> The question is: what will be the state of this jiva with self-knowledge
> after death? Will he continue as an individual or not?
> > One may still go to a world to relish a particular type of relationship.
> How long? For the body-mind apparatus is perishable, no matter of what
> they have been made. Certainly they cannot be made of Pure Consciousness;
> only prakRti can take shapes and sizes and attributes.
> > A chair is different from the table but a leg of a chair is different
> > from the chair but at the same time the chair.
> I do not understand how a leg of a chair can be different from a chair, for
> a chair is a chair only with all its constituent parts.
> In the same way, jiva is considered one with ishwara while being different.
> Further, there can be no amsha-amshi bhAva between brahman and jiva. In
> the BG verse 15.7 shankara comments:
> //'Objection: How can the partless supreme Self have any limb, fragment or
> part? If it has limbs, then there arises the contingency of Its becoming
> destroyed through the dismemberment of the limbs !
> Reply: This fault does not arise, since Its fragment, which is delimited by
> an adjunct arising out of ignorance, is imagined to be a part, as it were.
> And this idea has been fully explained in the chapter (13) dealing with the
> 'field'.How that individual soul, imagined as a part of Mine, enters into
> the world and leaves the body are being stated:..//
> There is no delimitation just as shakti does not limit a shaktiman.
> If the shakti of the shaktimAn Brahman has produced the jiva-s that are
> different from Him/It, then it goes without saying that the products of
> Brahman are non-different from It even as clay products are non- different
> from clay in truth.
> I would be curious to know if bhedAbheda has been dealt with by Adi Sankara
> > or other Sankaracharyas.
> I am aware of at least one instance, the Brahma sutra bhashya 2.1.14. It
> is pretty long and hence I am not quoting it. One can read it and get
> great benefit. This concerns in part the bhedAbheda thinking and brings
> out the untenability of such a proposition.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
WELCOME YOUR INTERACTION.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list