Practical Vedanta

[Sunder Hattangadi]

Truly speaking, the only one 'qualified' to study vedanta is one who has
been initiated into the 'brahma vAkya' by a sadguru.

As I do not fall into this category, I shall gladly stay silent.

Sunder

----- Original Message -----
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM>
To: <ADVAITA-L at advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: Practical Vedanta


| msrao at MTU.EDU <msrao at MTU.EDU> wrote:
|
| >>That is exactly my point. So, we have to necessarily be careful
| about
| >>using the word vedAnta. We wouldn't claim the moon is made of green
| >>cheese just because the moon is sublated in the ultimate sense,
| would
| >>we? Without using the intellect vedAntaviGYana is also not possible,
| >>shravaNa, manana necessarily entail the use of intellect. That
| however
| >>is not "intellectual understanding" of vedAnta. There is no such
| >thing.
| >> >Rama
| >
| >Though realisation is beyond the realms of intellect, I feel for
| people
| >who are new to the path, there is a need for intellectual
| understanding,
| >atleast in the beginning.
|
| It seems I haven't got my point across. I'll say it one last time. I
| was NOT talking about self-realization when I said vedAnta cannot be
| "intellectually understood" (intellectual understanding as used common
| parlance). Please read the mail of mine which you quoted again.
| shravaNa, manana (and nididhyAsana too if you accept sha.nkaras
| definition instead of sureshvaras) ENTAILS the use of the intellect.
| However this is NOT "intellectual understanding" of vedAnta. There is
| no such thing.
|
| Distinctions of "intellectual understanding" and "practice" is mainly
| a western concept. In pretty much any Indian darshana such a
| distinction is absent.
|
| I am making this point only because it brings out the necessity of
| qualifications for embarking on vedAntic study. vedAnta is not a 3
| credit course which can be "intellectually understood." :->
|
| Rama
|