Necessity of substratum etc

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

I am addressing various points in the same mail. Sorry for this bad
net-practice.

Kartik wrote:

>This is a bad (mis)interpretation of Buddha. The Buddhist philosophy which
>begins with Buddha and proceeds through Nagarjuna and others is *not* an
>ontological thesis, but rather a linguistic philosophy. The "void" in
>Nagarjuna's writings refer not to a "reality" (as Nagarjuna himself says,
>"If one believes these writings to refer to a treatise on reality, he's

That's exactly my point! The whole trouble shrI gauDapAda and shrI
sha.nkara have with buddhism is that they do _NOT_ accept a substratum
at the vyAvahArika level. Philosophizing is at the vyAvahArika levely
_only_. That's why shrI sha.nkara says in his upadeshasAhasrI when he
addresses the Buddhists, call the substratum brahman, Atman or whatever
you please! Basically call it shUnya if you please, but accept that it's
a real substratum.

>Not true of the mADUkya kArikA. There are several passages where the claim is
>made that people "cover THAT up" by saying things like "sat" "asat" "sadasat"
>and "asadasat."

You are as usual utterly confusing pAramArthika and vyAvahArika yet once
more. Why does gauDapAda also go to great lengths to prove the existence
of a substratum also? (son of a barren woman is never born, the
fire-brand analogy etc). The question of a substratum is at the
vyAvahArika level only. The Buddhists reject this since it would go
against their middle path fixation.

Kalupahana is more correct since he has realized a key point, viz, there
was a real point of difference between vedAntins and buddhists and what
was it? The existence of a substratum.

So according to you shrI sha.nkara had no clue of Buddhism, while some
Richard King or Karl Jaspers know better? Not very surprising, since
about a year back you claimed shrI sha.nkara must have been "immature"
when writing the GK bhAshhya!! Why? Because Ingalls says so !! This, in
my view, is only cultural slavery and nothing else. Whatever Weterners
say, even about Eastern philosophy has to be correct.

>That is far from being clear. There is nothing whatsoever in the KArikA that
>can establish the above claim. And there is way too much to the contrary.

I think you badly need to revise the GK once more. The whole point of
the GK is the existence of a substratum and if you haven't understood
this, well, I can't say much more. Read it by yourself with shrI
sha.nkara's bhAshhya and not blindly accept what some Richard King or
Ellery Queen say about the GK.

____________________

About sacred ash ego dust wrote:

>Belief in *anything* can result in a transformation.

Am I the only one who is amazed at this kind of pointless posts or are
there other people also? With enough belief icy water can also be used
to heat the body. So I suppose if you come to Indiana when it is -20F
you'll jump into the icy river nearby? Or if you want to make a
pradakshina of the Arunachala hill, you will instead go to South pole
and circumabulate a glacier instead? After all with enough belief they
are the same!

Certain things have properties inherent in them. Fire heats, water
cools. One can go through all kinds of yogic practices and achieve the
opposite effect is desired. It is utterly pointless and thoroughly
stupid to do do. Sacred ash purifies and that is it's property. Ribhu
Gita says so, Ramana Maharshi says so. RM set an example to disciples by
wearing sacred ash every day! Ribhu Gita says that sacred ash _alone_ is
sufficient. All of us know that if enough belief is present sacred ash
may not be necessary.

There is no need to make some Zen master like statements every time when
people explain simple things. If you feel you are beyond all this it
would be wise to keep silent. Even RM asked his disciples to
circumabulate the hill and not some arbitrary stone nearby. With enough
belief both are definitely the same. But for mere mortals like us the
inherent power of sacred ash or the Arunachala hill, etc is very useful.

___________________________

I have finished my Ph.D work here and am joining COMSAT laboratories in
the communication technology dept the coming Monday. I'll be living in
Gaithersburg, MD. I want to separate my net-stuff from work. So I won't
be subscribed to the list for a few more months till I can afford to buy
a computer. If you happen to come by the area you are most welcome to
visit me. I'll be putting my contact address in my web-pege (given
below) as soon as possible after I get to my work place.

In any case, I'll be greatly restricting my posts to this list. It's
easy to find time for this while at school, but during work that would
not be possible. Further I feel it is utterly pointless, with many
members here not having respect for people like shrI sha.nkara etc as
clearly seen from many of the recent posts. It seems to be more like
advaita with irreverence!

Ramakrishnan.
--
                   http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/