No subject
List
List
Thu May 10 19:37:05 CDT 2001
<ADVAITA-L at b...>
From: vaidix at h...
Subject: Re: Application of advaita (Was Decaying of Hindu Varna Dharma)
To: advaita-l at l...
You may want to get that rectified with the Admin.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
--- Shuba <swamis at U...> wrote:
> Namaste,
>
> I apologize for digressing from the main threads.
>
> Could those list members who don't find Shri.Jaldhar's form of
> expression offensive or an hindrance to their learning please
> respond and say so?
>
> Many of you have responded to me personally concurring with my
> reaction, but would the rest of you please step up and make
> your voices heard?
>
> A lot of your personal responses made me think I was hardly
> alone, but I am willing to be corrected by the majority. Very
> few people who wrote to me personally were willing to post
> their opinions directly to the list possibly for the fear of
> launching yet another virulent tirade. So may be those of you
> who _don't_ think of it as such would post openly and say so?
>
> I am trying to make a decision whether I belong on this list or
> not, and if majority concur with Shri.Jaldhar, its obviously me
> who is in the wrong place. Please oblige with your responses.
>
> Thank you,
> -Shuba
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> To laugh often and much; To win the respect of intelligent
> people and the affection of children; To earn the
> appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false
> friends; To appreciate beauty; To find the best in others; To
> leave the world a bit better; To know even one life has
> breathed easier because you have lived.
>
> This is to have succeeded.
>
> -Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher (1803-1882)
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> Get your own "800" number
> Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
> http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Chaitanya Bhagavat" <chaitanya_bhagavat at H...>
Subject: Re: A quick poll
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 22:52:32 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Chaitanya Bhagavat" <chaitanya_bhagavat at H...>
>
>I apologize for digressing from the main threads.
>
>Could those list members who don't find Shri.Jaldhar's form of expression
>offensive or an hindrance to their learning please respond and say so?
>
First of all, I don't understand this attempt in mobilizing support to gang
up on Shri Jaldhar. Such politics only vitiates the atmosphere.
I don't find his posts offensive. Au contraire, I find them both
enlightening and enlivening. I respect his learning and spiritual practises.
I also salute his "seva" in operating this list.
Chaitanya
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Surjit Dixit <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:03:43 -0400
Subject: Re: A quick poll
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Surjit Dixit <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Namaskar Shubaji and list members,
I joined this list to learn more about advaita and I am sure most of
us have for that sole purpose. It may be that attaining the complete
jyana and the true import of advaita might be a difficult task, that
we all need to work hard for, but from the basics of what we all
know about advaita, isn't going for a poll and highlighting duality
contradictory to the purpose of our goal?
We are here to learn, I have learnt from both your and Shri Jaladhar's
mail, I am sure you could learn something from his mail and he from
yours. It could be an important and useful part of our learning process
if we give a patient hearing to things around us in the light of our own
conscience.
With regards,
Surjit
At 08:04 PM 5/10/2001 -0400, Shuba wrote:
>Namaste,
>
>I apologize for digressing from the main threads.
>
>Could those list members who don't find Shri.Jaldhar's form of
>expression offensive or an hindrance to their learning please
>respond and say so?
>
>Many of you have responded to me personally concurring with my
>reaction, but would the rest of you please step up and make
>your voices heard?
>
>A lot of your personal responses made me think I was hardly
>alone, but I am willing to be corrected by the majority. Very
>few people who wrote to me personally were willing to post
>their opinions directly to the list possibly for the fear of
>launching yet another virulent tirade. So may be those of you
>who _don't_ think of it as such would post openly and say so?
>
>I am trying to make a decision whether I belong on this list or
>not, and if majority concur with Shri.Jaldhar, its obviously me
>who is in the wrong place. Please oblige with your responses.
>
>Thank you,
>-Shuba
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>To laugh often and much; To win the respect of intelligent
>people and the affection of children; To earn the
>appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false
>friends; To appreciate beauty; To find the best in others; To
>leave the world a bit better; To know even one life has
>breathed easier because you have lived.
>
>This is to have succeeded.
>
>-Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher (1803-1882)
>
>
>
>________________________________________________
>Get your own "800" number
>Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
>http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:38:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Shriram Panyam
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
hello.....!
my name is sriram panyam.....and I am a student of law. any preachings
regarding the hindu religion or the ancient hindu philosophy intersest me
a lot. I heard about ur organisation dealing with advaita philosophy from
my uncle and I would like to enroll myself into the same.....! your's
thankfully, sriram panyam
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:40:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Significance of Linga
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
> why lord Shiva is worshipped in the form of Linga? What is the
> significance of Linga symbol.
The first thing we should bear in mind when thinking about this kind of
thing is there is not always one right answer because the symbolism works
on multiple levels. This is so it can give appropriate insight to people
at different levels and with different levels of ability.
Anyway, the literal meaning of Linga is penis. And the base upon which
the Linga rests is calle Yoni which literally means vagina. It represents
the cosmic maithuna of Shiva and Shakti. There are two kinds of adverse
reactions people give when they hear this. The first group cannot believe
that something pure and holy can be associated with sex. The second group
say aha! this proves that Hinduism is primitive and degenerate. Both
these views are based on a fundamental immaturity. They think any mention
of sex is "dirty" despite the fact that without it they wouldn't exist!
Desire is one of the strongest forces in human nature. Even the great
sages were sometimes ensnared by it. A third error is that of people who
think that because Shiva-Shakti are doing something they are entitled to
copy them. Some Tantric sects are like this. But our acharyas have
condemned this as contrary to Dharma and based on misunderstanding.
(Another meaning of "linga" is sign or symbol.)
So what is the true meaning? Shiva and Shakti are the parents of the
universe. Shakti (literally "power") is the active principle that
animates things. Shiva is the silent witness. Some philosophies like
Samkhya stop there. But Advaita Vedanta says those two principles are
really one. When two lovers embrace all ego vanishes. They become as
one. So maithuna is an apt symbol of this. (But not the only one -- The
depiction of ardhanarishvara is another example.) There is one big
difference between maithuna of mortals and maithuna of the divine couple.
Humans find it difficult to control their desires. They often take
the form of lust. and even when the lust is temporarily sated there is a
hunger for more. But Shiva Bhagawan is the Lord of Yogis. Even in the
midst of passion he is ever detached from it.
Over the Linga we have the jaladhari which drops water on it. Often this
is shaped into a snake. Shiva Bhagawan is Nageshwara. Arrogant people
like Daksha laughed at Him and looked down on Him for being garlanded in
snakes instead of gold and jewels. But Bhagawan knows that the outward
appearences are only maya. The drops of water are our prayers. Shiva
Bhagawan is wrathful towards those who do evil. With abhisheka we try to
"cool Him down" and pray He will look upon us with mercy. By contact with
the holy lingam, that water becomes like amrita.
Before it we have the murtis of a tortoise and the bull Nandi. Nandi as
is well known is the principal servant of Shiva Bhagawan. He represents
Bhakti and is always prostrate before the Lord. The tortoise (kacchapa) I
didn't understand for a long time. But last year I asked a saint, Shri
Giridharlal Shastriji who was visiting from India about this. He said the
tortoise represents vairagya. Just as a tortoise can entirely wwithdraw
its limbs into its body, we should withdraw our senses away from worldly
matters and into our souls. Together Bhakti and Vairagya are the pathway
to Jnana.
This as I said is one explanation we can no doubt come up with others from
the pauranic angle etc.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:41:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Shankarananda Saraswathi's Commentary
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Thu, 10 May 2001, venkata subramanian wrote:
> I am deligently searching for a copy of his Deepika on the Kata,
> Mundaka, Aithareya, Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads, but
> couldn't find them anywhere including Madras Kuppuswamy Research
> Institute, Kanchi International Library at Enathur.
>
> Can anyone kindly guide me regarding its availability as to by whom,
> where etc. so that i may either get a copy or atleast a photocopy.
>
Apparently Motilal Banarsidass published an edition containing the 11
major upanishads edited by Swami Amardas Udasin back in 1966.
Also the Dakshinamurti Matha in Kashi published editions of the Upanishads
(and many other Advaita works) which I believe include the Dipikas.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 23:48:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Mandukya Upanishad with sankara bhasya in sanskrit with tamil meanings
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 5 May 2001, Ballakrishnen Subramaniam wrote:
> Has anyone come across Mandukya Upanisad with Gaudapada Karika and Sankara
> Bhasya for the same with elaborate tamil translation, other than the one
> published by Ramakrishna Mutt, Madras, India.
> Thanks
> Ballakrishnen
>
In all the commotion of recent days this questions seems to have been
overlooked. Can any of the tamil-speaking members help?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Application of advaita (Was Decaying of Hindu Varna Dharma)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 00:18:10 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I fully understand that this list may be serving those who are masters in
various subjects as well as those who are beginning to learn advaita. So I
like to clarify the conventios used in my posts.
I copied many arguments from Shruti such as...
1. (Supposedly lower entities like) speech, mind, etc being Brahman.
2. Brahman being present in finite things and actions etc.
Such notions can be confusing, if not presented properly. My apologies in
advance for possible misunderstandings.
If I make a statement "Brahman is everything"; but at that time if I was
actually thinking of my next cup of coffee, my statement is not true however
textually correct. I must be really meditating on the words "everything" or
"all", and also make an amend that whatver deficiency in my thought also
belongs to Brahman. At that time my mind will be completely immersed in
Brahman, and the statement becomes a true statement. If we don't make that
effort it is not true.
To establish the Shruti "Mind is Brahman", for instance I can make a
statement: Brahman is the sum of all types of action (mano vRtti). This may
look surprising, or against tradition.
When I think of a single activity like my next cup of coffee, that manovRtti
is not qualified to be called advaita or Brahman. But one should not look
down upon phrases like manovRtti or cittavRtti as something lowly. This is a
big mistake committed by sAdhakas, and it will take long time to repair.
According to Shruti the entire manovRtti comsists of Rk, yajus and sAman;
which together comprise all types of action. We feel frustrated only because
we only look at a small piecc of manovRtti which limited. There is no
happiness in what is limited; it is only misery. But if we put these three
(Rk, yajus, sAman) together then the mind (manas) is Brahman, because then
the model of the universe then becomes complete.
Any completed entity is pUrNam. Shruti says pUrNamadaH pUrNamidam. So when
our model of universe becomes pUrNam, it will be equal to "that" pUrNam
(Brahman). An incomplete item can not be pUrNam.
When something is pUrNam, there can only be one such object! You can't have
two pUrNams. So it is advaita.
Best Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Br.U, 1. 4. 11-15
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 01:38:12 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Br.U 1.4.11
In the beginning this (the kSatriya and other castes) was indeed Brahman,
one only. Being one, he did not flourish. He specially projected an
excellent form, the kSatriya - those who are kSatriyas among the gods:
indra, varuNa, soma, rudra, parjanya, yama, mRtyu and IzAna. Therefore there
is none higher than the kSatriya. Hence the brAhmaNa worships the kSatriya
from a lower position in the rAjasUya sacrifice. He imparts that glory to
the kSatriya. The brAhnaNa is the source of the kSatriya. Therefore,
although the king attains supremacy (in the sacrifice), at the end he
resorts to the brAhmaNa, his source. He who slights the brAhmaNa, strikes at
his own source. He becomes more wicked, as one is by slighting one's
superior.
Br.U. 1.4.12
Yet he did not flourish. He projected the vaishya - those species of gods
who are designated in groups : The vasus, rudras, Adityas, vizvadevas and
maruts.
Br. U 1.4.13
He did not still flourish. He projected the shUdra caste - pUSaN. This
(earth) is pUSaN. For it nourishes all this that exists.
Br. U 1.4.14.
Yet he did not flourish. He specially projected that excellent form,
righteousness (dharma). This righteousness is the controller of the
kSatriya. Therefore there is nothing higher than that. (So) even a weak man
hopes (to defeat) a stronger man through righteousness, as (though the
opponent is contending) with the king. That righteousness is verily truth.
Therefore they say about a person speaking of truth, 'He speaks of
righteousness' or about a person speaking of righteousness, 'He speaks of
truth', for both these are but righteousness.
Br. U. 1.4.15
(So) these (four castes were projected) - the brAhmaNa, kSatriya, vaishya
and shUdra. He became a brAHmaNa among the gods as fire (agni), and among
men as the brAhmaNa (He became) a kSatriya through the (divine) kSatriyas, a
vaishya through the (divine) vaishyas and a shUdra through the (divine)
shUdra. Therefore people desire to attain the results of their rites among
the gods through fire, and among men as the brAhmaNa. For Brahman was in
these two forms (agni and brAhmaNa). If, however anybody departs from this
world without realizing his own world (the Self), It, being unknown, does
not protect him - as the vedas not studied, or any other work not undertaken
(do not). Even if a man who does not know It as such performs a great many
meritorious acts in the world, those acts of his are surely exhausted in the
end. One should meditate only upon the world of the Self. He who meditates
ony upon the world called the Self never has his work exhausted. From this
very Self he projects whatever he wants.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 22:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Significance of Linga
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
--- "ShrI Jaldhar H. Vyas" wrote:
> reactions people give when they hear this. The first
> group cannot believe
> that something pure and holy can be associated with sex.
> The second group
> say aha! this proves that Hinduism is primitive and
> degenerate. Both
> these views are based on a fundamental immaturity.
Or, based on ignorance and prejudice. There is a third
view.
As per this view, Shiva and Shakti are inseperable.
Hence, this symbol is the most sublime expression of this
cosmic union. In the eyes of the faithful it is NOT at all
obscene but divine! It is only those who do not understand
the traditional Saivite view who (mis)interpret it in
myriad ways.
The mythological version again underscores this unity.
In fact, the word Saivite itself means Saiva/shakta, as
they are indeed ONE! There is a story of a certain saint
who tried to worship Lord Shiva only and the Lord
manifested
as Half-woman(shakti) to rid the saint of his mistaken
notion. The lingam is just a symbolism of that.
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 05:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Effective Communication
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Jaldharji wrote:
> I'll try but people find the craziest things offensive. The audience has
> to work with me on this.
> or scared for the oddest reasons and there is a point beyond which it
> isn't my problem any more. It is pointless to cater to weak-minded
> people. It is better to help make them stronger.
> Alternatively someone will have to develop a spine and speak up a little.
In Hindu tradition (based on Vedas) vAk or speech has been given great
importance. Sarasvati is the presiding deity of vAk. Every word has a meaning
ie., an associated vR^tti. It is this very speech that is employed in
communicating wisdom from teacher to the pupil. vAk is a very subtle form of
our own existence. Our ancestors have always urged us to use vAk only for
uplifting purposes. Any other use is to have wasted our precious faculty.
Some of the evils uses of vAk are :
1) Uttering falsehood for a selfish gain
2) Hurting others (incl. using foul words)
3) Exaggerating
4) Twisting facts in an anxiety to please
5) Plain excessive talk
One of the definitions of a shUdra is "kAma vAda:" - ie., one who speaks as his
mind desires with no discipline in the choice of ideas, words and audience.
Our tradition says: "satyam brooyAt, priyam brooyAt" - the message is "firm in
principle, but gentle in expression."
Only when the vR^tti we have in our mind is same as the vR^tti that is created
by our communication (verbal or nonverbal) is communication effective, else it
is failed communication. Let us take gItOpadesha.
In the gItA Krishna answers Arjuna's despondent situation. The following are
salient points to note:
0. He does not speak until he is directly asked (shishyA: te aham), until he
is sure that the seeker is really in want of answer and is not just a curious
cat.
1. He berates him ("klaibyam", "xudram hridaya dourbalyam" etc) to wake him up
from his delusion as a sort of jump start!! But he uses it in limited measures
and only at the beginning. He does not make it a style of his communication.
2. In the 2nd chapter most of what needs to be communicated is done. The
nature of one's own true self is expounded clearly ("nA sato vidyate bhAvah, nA
bhAvo vidyate sataH etc.). So he presents the synopsis of his teachings first
and then goes on for another 16 chapters to expand on the theme, in a
systematic way aided by a dialogue format.
3. Whereever Arjuna's faculty of understanding fails him, he uses words like
"you are my friend and hence I teach you" etc to put him at ease because there
can be communication only when the mind is relaxed. If the other person is
tensed up, then no matter how right you are, how loud you are, you will never
"reach" him.
4. He does not answer questions that are either irrelevant or that would have
been otherwise been answered in addressing other issues. Even though Arjuna
raises the issue of "lupta piNDoka kriyA" and "varNa sankara", Krishna never
bothers with these questions which are out of the scope of His teaching (in the
context of teaching jnAna).
5. He uses a consistent methodology to describe his vision and in the middle
also gives practical proof of what He is elucidating (vishvarUpa darshanam).
Practical proofs will always aid in better communication.
6. He also explains about the fate of those who do not follow what He says
(all the talk about dark half of the year etc). Here there is a clear
indication of impending problems of paths contrary to the teaching. One always
has to answer the question: what happens if what we say is not done/followed.
7. He also explains the benefits of following what He teaches. That is also
equally important.
8. In the end again he summarises what He wanted arjuna to understand in
essence ie., "sarva dharmAn parityajya, mAmekam sharaNam vraja".
9. He then asks arjuna if he has understood everything. A good communicator
should ask for a feedback. Without feedback He will not know if communication
has taken place at all or not.
10. Arjuna asserts that he has understood everything "nashTO moha, gataH
sandeha:" and says obediently "karishyE vachanam tava". It is possible to say
that only when the vR^tti in his mind is the same as that of Krishna's which
means communication is complete.
Thus we see from the method adopted by Sri Krishna, on how we can make our
communication effective and to do it successfully without harm or hurt to
others.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Shuba <swamis at u...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 11:09:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Effective Communication
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Shuba <swamis at u...>
Shri. Subrahmanian-ji,
Thanks so much for posting this gem! Multiple points were
presented beautifully as a cohesive whole.
Especially this:
> Some of the evils uses of vAk are :
> 1) Uttering falsehood for a selfish gain
> 2) Hurting others (incl. using foul words)
> 3) Exaggerating
> 4) Twisting facts in an anxiety to please
> 5) Plain excessive talk
I listen and learn. Posts such as this are the reason why I
continue to stay on this list. This style of explanation
reaches me much better than any amount of taunts and personal
comments ever will.
May I have your permission and that of the list moderators to
forward this to others not on this list, but people who will
definitely appreciate the significance?
Thanks much,
Shuba
________________________________________________
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From kartik at K...
Subject: Re: Effective Communication
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:26:46 GMT
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: kartik at K...
OM
GURUR BRAHMA GURUR VISNU GURUR DEVO MAHESHVARAH
GURUH SAKSHAT PARAM BRAHM TASMAI SRI GURVE NAMAH
OM NAMAH SIVAYA
OM NAMAH SIVANANDAYA
Blessed self,
Thank you very much for this beautiful exposition of the
science and art of communication.
In Sri RAMCHARITMANAS: "SATYA SHEEL" A truth has to be
communicated sincerely, politely, gracefully and lovingly.
Even if a truth is communicated harshly, it is a half lie.
Namrata- that is required even in the communication of a
truth.
Thank you so much.
Pranam
OM
---------------------------------------------
Get FREE E-Mail at Y...
http://www.valuemail.net
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Effective Communication
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 12:49:37 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Thank you Sri Subramanian, it tells me how many people have taken to
dedicated life long study of scriptures to such detail.
Please let me now mention that arjuna and kRSNa are both already friends,
not just during mahAbhArata time but since eternity as nara and nArAyaNa.
But real life is a lot of more complex than that, and the opposite is also
true. As vidura always used to say in Chopra's mahAbhArat, truth is always
bitter to hear. Also life is always never as smooth, how many people are
fortunate to have someone like kRSNa as a companion? Biological, social,
economic and intellectual systems most often actually end up on the past of
most pain, inspite of the fact that Anando brahma is the highest truth...
again for philosophical reasons (needless to repeat, as explained in
Shruti).
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Effective Communication
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:30:30 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sorry for the typo: Please read "path of most pain" not "past of most pain".
Biological, social, economic and intellectual systems most often actually
end up on the path of most pain, inspite of the fact that Anando brahma is
the highest truth... again for philosophical reasons (needless to repeat, as
explained in Shruti).
When everything goes smoothly we don't observe anything, like we drive off
in a lane having no traffic. We observe the pain only when we get stuck,
only then we observe other objects or express names. In other words we
experience speech only when there is pain. Conversely any speech must be an
expression of pain irrespective of whether we notice pain or not; may be we
are too insensitive to notice, or they are crying loud enough. As we deal
mostly with objects and names born of this speech, it is proved that we are
on the path of most pain, already! To have compassion for this pain is to
understand that speech is Brahman (a sort of lower level Brahman though).
Shruti: Speech is the Brahman called gAyatri, Ch. U. III. 12.1 gAyatrIvA
idam sarvam bhUtam yadidam kiGca vAgvai gAyatrI, vAgvA idam sarvam bhUtam
gAyatica trAyateca. gAyatri is verily all these beings that there are.
Speech is indeed gAyatri. Speech indeed sings of all these creatures and
protects them.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: A quick poll
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 19:59:06
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>
>I apologize for digressing from the main threads.
>
>Could those list members who don't find Shri.Jaldhar's form of expression
>offensive or an hindrance to their learning please respond and say so?
>
Often it is difficult for people to accept views which are contrary to that
which they believe strongly in. But always use reason as the tool to settle
right or wrong. Jaladhar has painstakingly produced a lot of arguments and
he has also quoted a lot of evidence for traditional texts to support his
views. If you can please counter them with your own arguments. Also it is
not necessary to quote from traditional texts. Conscience too is a vital
aspect of a human being and dharma shaastrams themselves accept its primacy
in deciding right or wrong. If your views are sincere and reasoned maybe
Jaladhar would reconsider his views too. But there's little point trying to
raise support against Jaladhar - for what does it prove - just that people
without reason dispute Jaladhar's views?
Ofcourse it has been the opinion of quite a few members for a long time that
Jaladhar should moderate his tone. And actually he is much more mellow than
what he used to be. Maybe even more effort is needed - Jaladhar should pay
more attention to Subramanya's thoughtful post. For after all compassion too
is a desirable quality to cultivate, is it not?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Aniruddhan <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 16:40:15 -0400
Subject: upanayanam
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Aniruddhan <owner-advaita-l at L...>
namo namah.
I have a question regarding the extracts posted by Shri Vishal from the
Dharma-shastras. Do these smritis have anything to say about upanayanam
being a prerequisite to veda-adhikara? Granted, some smritis may sanction
women reciting the vedas, but isn't it the universal rule that only people
who've had their upanayanam done can learn/recite the vedas?
I request Shri Vishal and other list members to clarify.
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam lokaSam.karam
Aniruddhan
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Shuba <swamis at u...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 16:28:41 -0400
Subject: Response to Shri.Nanda
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Shuba <swamis at u...>
Shri. Nanda-ji,
Please bear with me to me while I repeat this once more - It is
not his _views_ or _what_ he said I have an issue with. It is
the _how_. The manner and the tone in which it was said is what
I find unacceptable and distasteful.
I find it hard to grasp the actual point being made when it is
couched in vitriolic rhetoric. That is what I meant when I said
it hampers my learning. It does not help me respond when
Shri.Jaldhar's response to Savithri-ji's request to tone down
his stridency was to call the people who were offended by his
tone "weak-minded" and "spineless". Those are stictly his
opinions and I treated them as such.
Thank you,
Shuba
> Often it is difficult for people to accept views which are
>contrary to that which they believe strongly in. But always
>use reason as the tool to settle right or wrong. Jaladhar has
>painstakingly produced a lot of arguments and
> he has also quoted a lot of evidence for traditional texts to
>support his views. If you can please counter them with your
>own arguments. Also it is
> not necessary to quote from traditional texts. Conscience too
>is a vital aspect of a human being and dharma shaastrams
>themselves accept its
> primacy
> in deciding right or wrong. If your views are sincere and
reasoned maybe
> Jaladhar would reconsider his views too. But there's little
point trying
> to
> raise support against Jaladhar - for what does it prove -
just that
> people
> without reason dispute Jaladhar's views?
________________________________________________
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: upanayanam
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 21:16:05 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
----Original Message Follows----
From: Aniruddhan <ani at E...>
namo namah.
I have a question regarding the extracts posted by Shri Vishal from the
Dharma-shastras. Do these smritis have anything to say about upanayanam
being a prerequisite to veda-adhikara? Granted, some smritis may sanction
women reciting the vedas, but isn't it the universal rule that only people
who've had their upanayanam done can learn/recite the vedas?
VA: Upanayanam is a pre-requiste for learning the Sruti. However, except in
an anu-brahmana of the Katha Sakha, the thread ceremony as such is not
mentioned in the Sruti and this difficulty was recognized even by Kumarila
Bhatta (vide his comments on the Purvamimamsa sutras dealing with
authoritativeness of Smritis).
Comming to the mimamsa Sastra and the Rights of Sudras,
certain sutras in both the Purva and Uttara Mimamsa have been
traditionally interpreted so as to debar the Sudras from the study of
Vedas, exclude them from Vedic rituals and also prohibit them from
acquiring Brahmvidya. In this regard, the commentaries of Sabara and
Samkara may be consulted. Here, I propose to offer a fresh
interpretation of all these sutras.In the discussion below, the
abbreviations PP and UP stand for Purva Paksa (prima facie view) and
Uttarapaksha (final view) respectively. (I am not reproducing the
traditional commentaries on these sutras as they are easily
accessible).
A. Purva Mimamsa
4. "Since the fruit of the ritual act is desirable, everyone should
have a right to the ritual acts prescribed in the scriptures." 6.1.4
PP: Since it is the object of the sacrifice that is Principal and
since the act itself and the materials required are subordinate to
the object, it follows naturally that anyone who desires to perform
the act has to right to carry it out. And since all desire the fruits
of these acts as described in scriptures, and all desire to obtain
the same, all should have a right to perform the ritual acts.
5. " On the other hand, the statement above applies to the doer who
is capable of performing the ritual completely, since the injunctions
defining the procedure are connected with Vedas." 6.1.5
UP: Jaimini qualifies the statement in the previous Sutra. He says
that the object of the rituals are attained only if they are
performed in accordance with the injunctions of the infallible
scripture. Hence, if someone is not able to follow the letter of
scriptural injunctions in performance of the sacrifice in its
entirety, he will not obtain the fruit thereto and so his effort will
be futile. Hence, the statement "He who is desirous of heaven should
sacrifice" really applies to only those who are capable of performing
the sacrifice in its entirety perfectly. The sutra does not really
contradict the preceding one but merely qualifies it since the
reason "X can perform the sacrifice since he desires the fruit
thereof " is stated as a Siddhanta in Purva Mimamsa Sutras 6.1.13,
6.1.20 etc.
6. "All the four castes, there being no distinction" (6.1.2
UP: Members of all the four castes can perform sacrifices, since the
Vedas do not distinguish between them with regard to their right to
perform the sacrifice. The scriptures just say - "A (man) desirous of
heaven should sacrifice." This text does not specify that only the
dvijas should sacrifice.
7. "On the other hand, under a command, the three castes are entitled
to the establishment of fire; the Sudra has no connection with the
sacrifice- Thus states the Brahmana texts according to Atreya" 6.1.26
PP: Atreya Rishi states: The Brahmana texts, state that that the
Brahmana should perform Agnyadhana in spring, the Ksatriya in summer
and a Vaisya in autumn. So, the non mention of Sudra implies that he
cannot perform the Agnyadhana- the first step in the performance of
Yajnas. Moreover, the Taittirya Brahmana and Samhita state: "
Therefore a Sudra is unfit for sacrifices." These two reasons lead to
the conclusion that the Sudra is debarred from Vedic rituals.
8. "For a special purpose", says Badari; "all should, because of
that have the right." 6.1.27
UP: Badari opposes this view and says that the injunction is only
with regard to the particular act of Agnyadhana and is not of a
general nature. The cause of this scriptural statement is that the
Sudra does not have the expertise to perform the Agnyadhana, but that
does not imply that he does not have the right to perform Vedic
rituals per se. Hence, all are entitled to perform Yajnas.
Traditionally, the view of Atreya is taken as UP and of Badari is
taken as PP. This is inappropriate since Badari is quoted by name
after Atreya has been quoted by name. Secondly, Badari is not refuted
anywhere in the sutras of Purvottara Mimamsa although Atreya is. The
solitary case where Badari's view is taken as PP (in Chap III of
Purva Mimamsa) is due to wrong interpretation by Sabara/Kumarila.
Moreover, Kumarila does state in his Tantravarttika that the
Vrttikara regards the opinion of Badari here as UP. It should be
noted that the Purva and the Uttara Mimamsa mention the names of
various teachers only on two cases: When there is a conflict of
opinion on a particular manner, and secondly when the Sutrakara
wishes to vest authority to a particular view. In the latter case,
only one teacher's name is quoted (Eg. in Purva Mimansa sutra 1.1.5).
In the former case, we see the names of several teachers (one after
the other) with contrasting or slightly different views and the view
of the last teacher ought to be taken as the Siddhanta. Traditional
commentaries however deal with such cases in an arbitrary manner in
some cases as this one and the view of Badari should be taken as the
final view.
9. "On the other hand, by seeing other analogous texts too; the other
view is in accordance with the Vedas."6.1.28
PP: The purvapaksin says that the view of Atreya is appropriate since
with regard to other acts too, the Vedic texts have injunctions only
for Brahmins, Ksatriyas, Vaisyas only and do not enjoin anything for
Sudras. (see traditional commentaries for appropriate scriptural
texts).
10. "Indeed/But (the opposite view), by reason of injunction, (we)
should be in favor." 6.1.29
UP: Jaimini refutes the previous argument and says that on the other
hand, there are definite scriptural texts mentioning performance of
sacrifice by Sudras and so the right of Sudras to perform Vedic
rituals is well established. Eg: "Mamahotram panchajanaah…" in
Rigveda where the word 'Pancajanaah' in interpreted by
some 'Purvacaryas' in Yaksa's Nirukta as the four castes and Nisadas.
11. " If it be said that by reason of adverse qualities he is not
entiltled." 6.1.30
PP: Jaimini quotes the PP. The purvapaksin says that Sudras cannot
perform Vedic rituals since they have bad qualities. For instance the
Taittiriya Samhita says "Asuryyaa vai Sudraah" (Verily darkness are
Sudras). The Satapatha Brahman also says: "Women, Sudras and a black
crow are falsehood. Do not behold their face" in the Pravargya
section.
12. "We say no, because of possessing a desire." 6.1.31
UP: Jaimini replies: "We have stated earlier that the main criteria
for eligibility for performing Vedic rituals are desire on the part
of the Yajamana, provided of course that he is able to perform the
complete ceremony on his own. Hence, adverse qualities cannot debar a
Sudra from the ritual since Sudras also desire to obtain the fruit of
the sacrifices.
13. "And in purificatory ceremonies, by reason of that being most
important." 6.1.32
UP: Jaimini continues: The desire on the part of the Yajamana is most
important for performance of rituals, not his varna etc. Thus, Manu
says in his Smrti: "If someone says that I will become free of
desires, it is not possible. For no one can be free of desires at any
instant. Indeed, it is desire that leads to the execution of all
great tasks and rituals."
14. "On the other hand moreover, by the injunction of the Vedas, of
non sudras is included." 6.1.33
UP: Jaimini now refutes the core argument in sutra 6.1.30 and adds
that certain Vedic injunctions disqualify even certain Non Sudras
from performing Vedic rituals. These non-Sudras are they who are
robbers, drinkers of wine etc.
and are therefore debarred from
rituals. So, it is bad qualities alone that make a person unfit for
Vedic ritual, and not his caste per se.
15. "If it said- not by reason of his desire to acquire learning."
6.1.36
PP: Earlier you have said that a Sudra cannot be debarred from
ritual just because of his varna. Now you will say that a Sudra can
desire to obtain learning and thus become competent to perform Vedic
rituals. But this is not possible since he cannot acquire learning
and become competent to perform Vedic ritual and so he is debarred
from the ritual.
16. "The purificatory ceremony is with that purpose; there is a Vedic
text related to education of men." 6.1.35
UP: Yajurveda 26.2 says- "As I have spoken for the benefit of all
men, be they Brahmins, Ksatriyas, Vaisyas, Sudras, natives or
foreigners…." This verse enjoins acquisition of learning by all men.
And the Upanayan Samskara is performed with the purpose of commencing
education. So, Sudras can undergo the Upanayana ceremony and start
their education.
17. " If it be said-no, because of the injunction for learning."
6.1.36
PP: The objector says that the scriptures enjoin the first three
castes to perform the Upanayana of their members at certain times and
in certain manner. But corresponding injunctions for Sudras are
missing. So, it is implied that the Sudras cannot undergo Upanayana
ceremony and therefore they cannot acquire learning and become
proficient in the performance of Vedic ritual.
18. "Non capacity for education should be the grounds for non
eligibility for performance of Vedic Ritual." 6.1.37
UP: Jaimini states that it is the incapacity to acquire knowledge
that should cause ineligibility for Vedic ritual. Hence those who are
not capable of acquiring knowledge, are termed as Sudras and are
debarred from Vedic ritual. Thus, a son of a dvija who cannot acquire
learning is also debarred from Vedic ritual.
19. " And similarly, there are analogous texts." 6.1.38
UP: Jaimini concludes -we have texts that debar acquisition of
knowledge by crooked persons etc. "Vidya ha vai Brahmanam jagaam…"-
i.e. "Knowledge went to Brahmin and said- Do not impart me to one who
is wicked, crooked etc."
The fact of Sudras performing Vedic sacrifices is in fact recorded in
several Srautra sutras. Manava Srautasutra 11.1.2 states that if the
giver of the sacrificial fees (daksina) is a Sudra, then the priest
should go to his house, touch water and then go over the sacrifical
formula mentally. In the Apastambha Srautasutra 5.11-18, sudras are
listed as one of them from whose homes, a sacrificer desirous of
prosperity must procure fire. According to some teachers (Apastambha
Srautasutra 1.19-23), some teachers allowed Sudras to perform Vedic
sacrifices, while others (Apastambha 24.1) deprived him of this
right. Bharadvaja Srautasutra 5.2.9 also records that according to
some teachers, the Sudras also have the right to establish the
sacrifical fires.
The preponderance of evidence in the Srautasutras is however towards
debarring the right to perform the Vedic sacrifices to the
Sudras.This may be indicative of the later enhancement of rigidity of
social stratification and accompanying caste based distinctions.
B. In the Uttara Mimamsa:
We consider the Apasudradhikarana (1.3.34-38). According to the
interpretation below, the section merely discusses the question "Is
the performance of 'samskara' are a pre-requisite for acquiring
Brahmavidya?" The objector cites an incident from the Chhandogya
Upanishad and states that since Janasruti, a Sudra obtained
Brahmavidya from Raikya Muni without having to undergo
any 'Samskara', it follows that no initiation ceremony is required as
a pre requisite for Brahmavidya as is the case for eligibility for
Vedic Rituals.
20. "The grief which he felt on hearing the disrespectful words
(about himself) made him run- that alone is indicated." 1.3.34
UP: In the Chhandogya Upanishad, we read that Raikya Muni addressed
King Janasruti as "Shudra" and then proceeds to instruct him in
Brahmavidya after Janasruti makes a gift to him. From this, it might
be inferred that Sudras can also acquire Brahmavidya upon payment of
fees to the Acarya. This possible interpretation of the episode is
controverted by Vyasa. He states that Janasruti is addressed as a
Sudra because he was very much grieved and because he hastened to the
Muni as a Sudra runs to his master when the latter calls him. It is
therefore wrong to conclude that Janasruti was a Sudra.
21. "Because his Ksatriyahood is known from the inferential sign
(supplied by his having mentioned) later on with Caitraratha." 1.3.35
UP: Janasruti cannot be said to be a Sudra also because this it is
clear from the episode in question and also because he is said to
have come on a chariot called Citraratha, which can be possessed only
by a Ksatriya who has some power.
22. "On account of suggestion for performance of purificatory rituals
and on account of its absence of mention of them." 1.3.36
UP: Scriptures enjoin that purificatory ceremonies should be
performed before Brahmavidya is imparted to the votary. Now, Shudras
are those who have not undergone that ceremony and so if Janasruti
were a Sudra, Raikya would have insisted that he undergoes an
initiation ceremony. But absence of Raikya's instruction to this
effect implies that Janasruti was not a Sudra.
23. " And because of proceeding after the ascertainment of absence
of that." 1.3.37
UP: Finally, Raikya determined that although he sent back Janasruti
several times and spoke to him disrespectfully, Janasruti came back
again and again with great humility and all his possessions. This
proved to Raikya the absence of pride in Janasruti and showed that
Janasruti was really desirous of acquiring Brahmavidya. Another
interpretation of the Sutra (Similar to the traditional
interpretation) - The episode of Satyakama Jabala, who was an
illegitimate child of a servant girl and an unkown father also
indicates the same. In this episode, Gautama ascertained that Jabala
was a Sudra by birth and not ordained. Yet, he possessed the desire
for Brahmavidya and was truthful like a Brahmin. Still, he did not
proceed to instruct Jabala directly, but rather asked for his
initiation ceremony to be performed before he could impart any
knowledge to him. This shows that the performance of Samskara is a
pre-requisite for acquiring Brahmavidya. Traditional commentaries
imply that Gautama ascertained that Jabala's father could only have
been a Brahmin since he spoke the truth. This is wrong because even
if the father were a Brahmin, the son would still have been of a
mixed caste since his mother was a Sudra. Thus, the statement of
Gautama- "A non-Brahmin cannot speak thus. You did not forsake
truth…" is rather a reflection of the high regard that Gautama had
for the truthfulness of Jabala. And this is why, judging Jabala to be
of a truthful character, he ordained Jabala and imparted Brahmavidya
to him. This episode in fact proves that the knowledge of Upanishad
can be imparted to anyone who is of a good character.
24. "And because of prohibition of hearing, studying and teaching and
because of injuctions of Smrtis." 1.3.38
UP: Vyasa concludes the section here. Srutis prohibit the non-
initiated from hearing, studying and teaching the sacred Word. The
Smrtis also say- "The Brahmin should rather die than impart knowledge
to a person who will misuse it." A teacher should not teach one who
does not seek knowledge, who is incapable of comprehending it…."
(Manusmrti Chap II)
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 18:36:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
[Note I'm currently having connectivity problems so it might be tuesday
before I can effectively respond again. I noticed Vishal has posted
another interesting article which I'm not ignoring.]
To research this topic I consulted Jaiminiyanyayamalavistara of
Madhavacharya and Mimamsayanayamanjari of Mahamahopadhyaya Pattabhirama
Shastri. Also for comparison I looked at the English translation in
"Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini" by Pandit Mohanlal Sandal (Sacred Books Of The
Hindus vol 28.) I've also changed the order of Vishals paraphrase around
somewhat to better organize my comments.
What is the context of this discussion? Take the sentance svargAkamoH
yajeta. "He who desires Heaven should sacrifice."
In the first adhikarana of this chapter it was established that karmas are
not pointless, but provide some reward. (In this case performing the
sacrifice results in gaining Heaven.) In the second, it was established
that the reward can only be gained by anyone but only one who has
competence (adhikara) to perform the action. (In this case desire for
Heaven qualifies one to sacrifice. So Gods who are already in Heaven or
animals who cannot grasp the concept are disqualified.
Now the third adhikarana asks: Are women capable in that sense?
> 6.1.6 (Purvapaksha)- Aitishayana Muni says that by virtue of the fact
that
> Vedic injunctions are addressed in masculine gender, it is appropriate
for
> men alone to perform Vedic rites
>
> 6.1.8 (Siddhanta): But, says Badarayana, the masculine gender is used in
the
> Veda to denote mankind in general. Therefore, women is automatically
> included in injunctions in masculine gender.
>
In Indo-European languages and perhaps others "He" is not just a masculine
pronoun but generically refers to men and women.
Earlier I had mentioned a rationale for women not being entitled to
upanayana is that they are not mentioned in the texts related to
upanayana. Does this rule invalidate that? No because it describes a
general rule which is always trumped by a more a specific rule. In the
case of upanayana the generic male is not referred to but specifically the
male Brahmanas, Kshatriyas and Vaishya for each of whom a different rule
is prescribed.
As a side note the fact that Badarayana (Vedavyasa) is quoted in the
Mimamsa sutras and Jaimini in the Brahmasutras shows the unity of the
Vedas and its philosophy.
> 6.1.7 (Purvapaksha continued) Moreover, by virtue of a mention of that
> (masculine gender), there is a text which lays down the sin on (the sex)
of
> the unborn foetus not being known.
>
This sutra is very interesting given the recent news about female
infanticide in India. There is a rule that condemns foeticide. "He who
kills an Atreyi is guilty of foeticide" Atreyi means a pregnant woman or
a daughter of Atri Gotra. Because it uses the masculine gender, the
opponent says the sin only applies if she is carrying a male child or if
the sex of the foetus is not known because there is a chance it could be
male. (The implication being it is ok to kill a girl.) Maharshi Jaimini
rejects this view. He says "He" and "him" are used generically and to
kill a male or female baby is equally sinful.
He also notes that this doesn't apply in the case of where for example a
male animal (like a bull) is specifically enjoined to be sacrificed. And
the above example only applies to the daughter of Atri gotra not pregnant
women in general. This is because as I noted above a specific rule
overrides a more generic one.
> 6.1.9 (Siddhanta continued): Moreover, being enjoined by the Sruti, the
> right of woman to sacrifice is established.
>
Furthermore there are several instances in Shruti and Smrti where women
are specifically asked to perform certain actions. Vishal noted some from
the Atharvaveda and there are several others. Again the specific over
generic principle applies. Even if you accept that women as a rule cannot
do karma, you cannot prevent them from doing specific things they are
enjoined to do.
Now the opponent tries a different tack:
> 6.1.10 (Purvapaksha): Yajnas are done by material wealth and men alone
> possess material wealth. Women are sold and purchased during wedding and
> therefore are bereft of any property, they are at the same level as
property
> itself. Hence, only men can perform sacrifices.
>
> 6.1.11 (Purvapaksha continued) Likewise, there is Vedic text "she,
though
> purchased by her husband, lives with others"
>
During the wedding ceremony a dowry is given and the father-in-law does
kanyadana or gift of his daughter to her husband. So she is the property
of her husband. Also sacrifices cost money and being property herself she
has no wealth to use for that purpose.
> 6.1.15 (Siddhanta): The so called sale of woman during her wedding is
only
> symbolic, of ritual signficance alone and women cannot really be sold or
> purchased
>
Not so! Those actions in the wedding are done as a matter of Dharma which
is done as an obligation. Financial transactions are by their very nature
for selfish gain so cannot be Dharma.
> 6.1.14 (Sidhanta continued): Besies, a woman is always connected with
the
> wealth that might even belong to her husband because they are joint
owners
>
Also there is no room for prenuptial agreements or seperate bank accounts
in our conception of marriage! Whatever the couple posess they posess as
a team. What is hers is his and what is his is hers. So if the wife
wants to spend some of the family resources on sacrifice, the husband has
no right to stop her.
The opponent doesn't want to give up yet:
> 6.1.12 (Purvapaksha continued): Moreover, women is meant for men, and is
his
> object of enjoyment. So how can she perform Vedic ritual?
>
A woman is there only to fulfill a mans desires so her only chance for
sacrifice is if her husband desires Heaven. Then she would be doing it for
his benefit not her own.
> 6.1.13 (Siddhanta): But indeed women can perform Vedic ritual because
she
> also desires the fruit of the sacrifice just as men do
>
The argument is nonsense. It is obvious that women can also have desire
for things like heaven. We have many examples from the shastras of women
who wished for certain things and by their efforts gained them.
Conclusion:
> 6.1.16 (Siddhanta) The Vedas show that women have independent existence
and
> possession of wealth. So they cannot be debarred from Vedic rites.
>
For instance in one sacrifice, the hindquarters of the animal are offered
to the wives of the Devas. If they were only subordinate to their
husbands why is the offering not to the Devas themselves? If wives
cannot own things how would the wives of the Devas be able to receive this
offering?
So it is settled that women also have a competency for karma.
Now to get back to our debate, this adhikarana doesn't really tell us
anything new. There was never a doubt that women couldn't perform karma
in general. The issue is what form that karma takes. In fact a word for
wife is sahadharmachAriNi "she who performs dharma together (with her
husband) Which brings us to another point. All the discussion and shruti
quotations mentioned here are about woman-as-wife not woman-as-woman.
Manu says "For women marriage is the sanskara" i.e. just as upanayana is
the entry to karma for boys, vivaha is for girls. There seems to be no
provision for an unmarried woman or a widow. There is philological
evidence to support this. For instance the English word "wife" comes from
the Anglo-Saxon word for woman. This is still present in some
Indo-European languages (Cf. German "frau") This adhikarana is only
describing a certain amount of rights within marriage not equality for
women overall.
>From all this one might gather that the Vedic culture is very sexist. But
the real problem is people are only looking at some of the facts and thus
getting a distorted view. In fact Indian women--even not married ones--do
have a wide range of spiritual activities. There is such a thing as
womens' dharma. You are just looking for it in the wrong place.
The ability of women to perform karma has been established. The next
adhikarana asks how does that happen? Because a theoretical right doesn't
mean much if it cannot be put into practice.
The discussion here is predicated on the assumption that women cannot
study the Vedas. If they could, there wouldn't even been a question about
how they could perform karma. Pattabhirama Shastriji summarizes the issue
like this:
nanu striyaH
vedAdhyayane'dhikArAbhAvena vidyAbhAvAt kathaM strikartrkaH
prayogAssidhyediti
"Given that women lack the knowledge because of their inability to learn
the vedas how can a female performer carry out the rituals?
> 6.1.17: (Siddhanta): But, when a husband and wife possess wealth
together,
> they should perform only one ceremony/ritual jointly. i.e. they should
not
> perform separate rites
>
After marriage there should be no "mine" and "yours" Husband and wife
should work together as a team. Where she is unable to do something, it
is his obligation to do it for her. For instance after I got married I
began wearing two yajnopavits one for myself and one on my wifes behalf.
> 6.1.18: (Siddhanta): And there is also a text indicating the unity of
wife
> and husband (Taittiriya Samhita 6.2.1.1)
>
Whatever punya the husband gains by his religious activities belongs
equally to his wife and vice versa.
The Taittiriya Samhita says "To initiate the sacrificer he [the priest]
ties
the mekhala [a belt of darbha grass] around him and a string around his
wife to become a pair."
Our opponent makes one last gasp:
> 6.1.19: (Purvapaksha): But even if the purchase of women is symbolic,
she
> loses possession of property in a marraige by virtue of that same
symbolism.
>
This tired argument has been made before (6.1.10-11). One new twist is
that the opponent says if the property belongs to both it's not
really "hers" But this is splitting hairs.
> 6.1.20 (Siddhanta): No. Her right to rites is affirmed because she also
> possesses the desire for fruit.
>
Maharshi Jaimini reminds him of the rejoinder made in the previous
adhikarana.
> 6.1.21 (Siddhanta): And Vedic text actually shows that she obtains the
> fruit of the Vedic rites (Taittiriya Samhita 3.7.5.11)
>
To clinch it, there is explicit mention in Shruti: "A wife with her
husband gains the fruit of good deeds. They both bear the yoke of
sacrifice. [alternatively: they are both connected with the sacrifice.]
Being of one mind, they both attain the light of Heaven"
This adhikarana also does nothing to prove "equality". It just shows a
husband and wife should perform Dharma as a team.
Now for the next two adhikaranas which are interesting and relevant but
you failed to mention.
6.1.22 Two establish it like yajnas for two. (purvapaksha)
There is a text "Dressed in silk, two should establish fire." Prior to
the commencement of nityagnihotra there is a ceremony called
agnyAdhAna--establishment of fire." The opponent says just as there are
yajnas like Indragnishtoma in which two men, the sacrificer and priest
take part, this rite should be done by two men.
6.1.23 but in order to maintain the quality wife should be the second
member. (siddhanta)
Because the agnyadhana is the root of all the rites that come after it
(all the Vedic yajnas involve fire) if the wife was excluded, all her
ability to do the other rituals would be for naught. So the second of the
two should refer to the wife.
Pattabhirama Shastriji is explicit here: strINAM patyA sahaivAdhikAraH na
svAtantryeNa "A womans' adhikara is together with her husband not
independently." If the husband were to do the agnyadhana without her, she
would not be able to do it at all.
6.1.24 Here the things that are explicitly laid down like cutting nails
and brahmacharya are for her not being equal. (siddhanta)
A woman has a right to karma but what karmas can she actually do? During
the DarShapaurnamaseShTi (full and new moon sacrifices which are
obligatory) there are certain preliminary rituals such as cutting ones
nails, shaving ones head (except for the shikha for men,) and being
celibate. Because she is explicitly mentioned there, she can do all these
things. But because her adhikara is not equal to a mans' she doesn't have
any right to the parts where she isn't mentioned except in her role as the
yajamanas wife.
I hope *this* gives a more accurate picture of the Mimamsaka views on the
matter.
Btw, my questions on this thread are still studiously being ignored. If
there is Vedic support for women studying and practising them, why is our
history so eerily empty of actual examples? If women already have set of
practices which are ancient and honored, why should they give them up for
something alien?
Could somebody tell me please?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 18:50:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: upanayanam
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Vishal Agarwal wrote:
>
> VA: Upanayanam is a pre-requiste for learning the Sruti. However, except in
> an anu-brahmana of the Katha Sakha, the thread ceremony as such is not
> mentioned in the Sruti
Sorry I couldn't resist. Not so, it is also described in some detail in
the Shatapathabrahmana. (Somewhere in the 9th kanda if I recall
correctly.)
More later.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: Re: A quick poll
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:34:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
namaskarams to all.
Ravi has taken the initiative as moderator in resolving this in private as
it should be. This list is by administrator policy and not by polls.
However, I hope it is also amply clear that the moderators have never
stopped discussion because the moderator did not like it. If you have
problems with the material or tone of the discussions, please do write to us
at listmaster at a...
I hope we can stop discussion on this topic of polls to see if Jaldhar or
others were polite or not. This is not in the scope of this list.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: Re: Significance of Linga
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:54:36 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
> > why lord Shiva is worshipped in the form of Linga? What is the
> > significance of Linga symbol.
Let me describe what my Guru taught me.
God is both with form and without form. The linga form is one formless form
where, yes it has a definite form, yet not easily described, not easily
captured in the mind's eye, not easily decorated, not easily pampered etc.
This form of Ishwaran is worshipped with cold water, sandal wood and other
such items that makes it cold. The linga form is actually sitting under a
constant stream of water to keep it cool. HE is sitting in the Kailash where
it is cold. He is adorned by snakes, whose skins are said to keep you cold.
Why is HE keeping himself cold like this?
It is because, this formless form of God is in our hearts where all our
short comings such as desires and lust and jealousy etc are constantly
burning like in hell and destroying us. HE is cold, so that our own desires
do not eat us from the inside out. He is formless to us when we see him
outside of us because we are unable to realize what His true nature is.
This formless linga to the outside eye, manifests itself in IT's true Bliss
form in our hearts when we can bring our senses and desires under control.
bhava shankara desikame sharanam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 19:16:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Fri, 11 May 2001 18:36:18 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas
<jaldhar at B...> wrote:
>
>Because the agnyadhana is the root of all the rites that come after it
>(all the Vedic yajnas involve fire) if the wife was excluded, all her
>ability to do the other rituals would be for naught. So the second of the
>two should refer to the wife.
>
>Pattabhirama Shastriji is explicit here: strINAM patyA sahaivAdhikAraH na
>svAtantryeNa "A womans' adhikara is together with her husband not
>independently." If the husband were to do the agnyadhana without her, she
>would not be able to do it at all.
>
I just remembered something from Manu Smriti (quoting from memory so might
be off in the actual wording):
It is said that after a man who worships the fire (Brahamana) is widowed,
he has two options - 1. Take to the forest and live there as a vAnaprathI
or 2. He can remarry. If he wishes to continue worshipping the fire, he
*must* remarry as the rites *cannot* be performed without a wife. On the
other hand, of the remarriage of widows, it is said by the sage that such a
thing was not heard of even in the previous kalpa.
It is fairly clear that a man needs a wife to be a part of the daily
sacrifices where he performs the actual sacrifice on behalf of them both.
The woman, since she does not have the right to actually perform the
sacrifice, is therefore not given the choice of marrying again. She remains
in the care of her husband's family or can become a vAnaprasthi. But what
if she (widow) wants to perform the sacrifices and attain the fruits
thereof? The sage says, perhaps in answer to this anticipated question,
that a woman devoted to her husband, no matter how vile he may be, attains
to heaven for that reason alone.
Remarriage is allowed, therefore, for men who wish to continue being
grihasthAs for performing the daily sacrifices. It should not be thought
that this (remarriage) is a favor for men and an act of stifling women's
freedom.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
--- ShrI Ashish Chandra wrote:
> Remarriage is allowed, therefore, for men who wish to
> continue being
> grihasthAs for performing the daily sacrifices. It should
> not be thought
> that this (remarriage) is a favor for men and an act of
> stifling women's
> freedom.
Ashish-ji,
I just wanted to point out the salient differences
between
rights and privileges. If I am not mistaken, "adhikAram"
means privilege. The tradition confers this privilege on
some and denies it to others. So, the question is about
whether "adhikAram" is by birth or by virtue. I realize
that
the hallowed tradition has maintained that it is by birth.
I, frankly, am not competent to question it.
That, having been said, what you have written above is
not
a question of privilege but a matter of right. Definitely,
notions of "rights" are quite Western but they have been
transplanted successfully in India and have given birth to
a democratic system. While learned opinion may hold that
widow re-marraige is base, the edifice of individual rights
confers such decisions on the widow alone.
So, I ask the learned members, Is our tradition opposed to
the concept of Individual Rights?
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Br.U, 1. 4. 11-15
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 23:44:39 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
In the middle of Br. U. 1.4.15, the Shruti drops the subject matter and
takes off tangentially and says..
"If, however anybody departs from this world without realizing his own world
(the Self), It, being unknown, does not protect him - as the vedas not
studied, or any other work not undertaken (do not)."
This means every human being (of any caste or gender), should make sure to
realize the Self before departing from this world. After realizing, this
person becomes a creator oneself even before departing.
"...From this very Self he projects whatever he wants." means even a shudra
who realized his self can project whatever he wants (people of different
castes etc, going back to beginning of the story at Br. U. 1.4 11).
So why is anybody fighting for the "lower" rights like doing karma kANDa and
yajnas? The priorities of life are reversed in illusion.
(Sankara's vyAkhyAna of earlier portion of this Shruti looks very
complicated. It needs lot of preparation.)
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 12:15:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Fri, 11 May 2001 17:13:32 -0700, Vivek Anand Ganesan
<v_ganesan at Y...> wrote:
>So, I ask the learned members, Is our tradition opposed to
>the concept of Individual Rights?
>
THe common pitfall is to interpret or wishfully think about dharma
as described in the Smritis and elsewhere as being based on a
concept of "fairness and justice" that is akin to Western democratic
ideals. There is a fundamental conflict between, say the crucial belief
which forms the basis of all working democracies namely "all men are
created equal" (from the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas
Jefferson) and what the shruti and smR^itis say, example "brAhmaNo
.asya mukhamAsId-bAhU rAjanyaH kR^itaH | UrU tadasya vaishyaH padbhyAM
shUdro ajAyata||" wherein it differentiates the creation of brAhmaNas
from Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and shUdras. Some may argue here that the
VirAT PuruSha from whom brAhmaNas and the others are born, is really
One and the mention of different organs such as mouth, arms, thighs,
and feet, is irrelevant. So they try to fit, actually retro-fit, the
Western Democratic concept to the SmR^iti/shruti concept.
This business of retrofitting Western Democratic concepts to dharma
concepts is naturally liable to misleading us to erroneous conclusions.
Also, when you say "Individual Rights" that poses a problem too. For,
what is an Individual here? In a democracy, an individual is just about
any person, often a citizen residing in the country. On the other hand,
it is hard to conceptualize an "individual" like this in terms of
Dharma. The individual, in this case, must necessarily come with a host
of attributes such as varNa, gotra (if applicable), Vedic shAkhA (if
applicable), family or kula, geographical locale, etc. There are rights,
although not always explicitly mentioned as rights, for such
well-defined individuals.
Just as an individual in democracy derives certain rights by virtue of
the fact that he is a citizen or is living in the country, so also there
are rights of individuals as defined in SmR^itis. But the error that is
committed often is to again try to retrofit the concept of individual
rights as defined by Western-style democracies into the concept of
individual rights as defined by the SmR^itis. And it may lead us to
conclude that the individual rights that we are "enjoying"
now are far superior to the rights that our ancestors may have had.
Whether this is true or not is not as simple to answer as many people
might think.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Krishna Yajur Veda
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Learned Members,
I belong to the Krishna Yajur Veda shAkhA. I would like to get a good book
that contains K. Y. Veda with Yajus, brAhmaNas (araNyakAs) and upanishads. I
want it to be both in Sanskrit and translated in either English or Tamil (the 2
languages I am equally comfortable with).
Please give some good publications. It does not matter whether it is available
in India or USA. Also, please give me some good recommendations on bhAshyAs on
this.
Even though my family is K. Y. Veda, my immediate ancestors have not taken much
interest in them excepting my grand uncle. I would like to revive the
tradition of a brahmaNa reading/understanding his shAkhA. Ofcourse I am in
search of a teacher also, who can teach this. Please give suggestions as to
which schools/teachers teach them. I may not have time to learn the sasvara
recitation, but I would like to learn atleast their meaning.
I want to try to whatever extent I can to revive it in my generation and pass
it on further.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "ballakrishnen subramaniam" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Krishna Yajur Veda
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 06:01:20
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "ballakrishnen subramaniam" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
13.5.01
The k.y.veda samhita is published by one Br Sri Satvalekar from Pune. This
contains the complete samhita text only in nagra (sanskrit script). The
price of the book is around 300 Rs. The book can be bought from M/s Motilal
Banarasidas, Chennai or Delhi or Kasi. The brahmanas and aranyakas are at
present available in grantha script. If you know tamil you can pick up the
grantha script very eaisly. The books are available with Br.Sri
Krishnamurthy Sastrigal, Principal, Sanskrit College, Mylapore, Chennai. As
of the bhasyas the best commentary is that of Sayanacharya. This is in
sanskrit only. The other commentary is that of Bhatta Baskara. This is more
vyakarna (grammer) oriented, this is also in sanskrit only. There are a few
tamil commentaries for a few prasnas (viz) Sri Rudram, Surya Namaskara
published by sringeri mutt. Pl note that to study the veda bhasyas and
understand them as propounded by our rishis it is best to study th complete
veda shaka under a proficient guru and then learn the bhasyas in sanskrit
under him. It is better that he is a agnihotri himself, and is performing
the vedic srauta karmas. Only then can the student understand what he is
learning. As you must be knowing that the vedas only talk about the srauta
karmas in detail. This study of veda samhita and brahmanas including the
veda bhasyas will take a person atleast 15 years. This is if you start at 7
years after upanayana you will finish the adhyayana in about 10 years and
the bhasyas in another 5 years.
Ballakrishnen
>From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <svsubrahmanian at Y...>
>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
><ADVAITA-L at b...>
>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
>Subject: Krishna Yajur Veda
>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:09:37 -0700
>
>Learned Members,
>
>I belong to the Krishna Yajur Veda shAkhA. I would like to get a good book
>that contains K. Y. Veda with Yajus, brAhmaNas (araNyakAs) and upanishads.
>I
>want it to be both in Sanskrit and translated in either English or Tamil
>(the 2
>languages I am equally comfortable with).
>
>Please give some good publications. It does not matter whether it is
>available
>in India or USA. Also, please give me some good recommendations on
>bhAshyAs on
>this.
>
>Even though my family is K. Y. Veda, my immediate ancestors have not taken
>much
>interest in them excepting my grand uncle. I would like to revive the
>tradition of a brahmaNa reading/understanding his shAkhA. Ofcourse I am in
>search of a teacher also, who can teach this. Please give suggestions as
>to
>which schools/teachers teach them. I may not have time to learn the
>sasvara
>recitation, but I would like to learn atleast their meaning.
>
>I want to try to whatever extent I can to revive it in my generation and
>pass
>it on further.
>
>Regards.
>S. V. Subrahmanian.
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 04:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Krishna Yajur Veda
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I have noted the following observation. Thank you and I agree with you. In my
generation, I atleast want to make a start and proceed to whereever I can.
Thus the broken tradition of studying one's own shAkhA will atleast be revived
and future generations will atleast have a precedence of somebody making an
attempt, of possessing the needed texts etc. Right now, I don't have a role
model in my immediate family circle who have made attempts to study Vedas.
They are very happy performing pUjAs during all festivals and srArdham on
appropriate dates. How can I call myself a brahmaNa if I don't atleast make
attempts (if not successful) to study my shAkhA? May be somebody in the future
generation can start early and do a better job - maybe!! All in the hope for
good.
> published by sringeri mutt. Pl note that to study the veda bhasyas and
> understand them as propounded by our rishis it is best to study th complete
> veda shaka under a proficient guru and then learn the bhasyas in sanskrit
> under him. It is better that he is a agnihotri himself, and is performing
> the vedic srauta karmas. Only then can the student understand what he is
> learning. As you must be knowing that the vedas only talk about the srauta
> karmas in detail. This study of veda samhita and brahmanas including the
> veda bhasyas will take a person atleast 15 years. This is if you start at 7
> years after upanayana you will finish the adhyayana in about 10 years and
> the bhasyas in another 5 years.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:40:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Krishna Yajur Veda
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Sun, 13 May 2001 04:33:54 -0700, S. V. Subrahmanian
<svsubrahmanian at Y...> wrote:
>I have noted the following observation. Thank you and I agree with you.
In my
>generation, I atleast want to make a start and proceed to whereever I can.
>Thus the broken tradition of studying one's own shAkhA will atleast be
revived
>and future generations will atleast have a precedence of somebody making an
>attempt, of possessing the needed texts etc. Right now, I don't have a
role
>model in my immediate family circle who have made attempts to study Vedas.
>They are very happy performing pUjAs during all festivals and srArdham on
>appropriate dates. How can I call myself a brahmaNa if I don't atleast
make
>attempts (if not successful) to study my shAkhA? May be somebody in the
future
>generation can start early and do a better job - maybe!! All in the hope
for
>good.
>
Dear SVS,
I agree with you whole-heartedly in making the start. In my family, several
generations have passed since the Vedas were given up - because of reasons
as yet unknown to me. It took me a while to even find out my Shakha -
Madhyandina of the Shukla Yajur Veda. IN the US, it is extremenly difficult
to find a teacher for this Shakha but I think KYV teachers are farily
common. I think the Ganesh Temple in Queens has several qualified teachers.
Also, the Sri Vaishnava temple in Bridgewater, NJ also has several teachers
of KYV.
Best of luck to you.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From kartik at K...
Subject: Re: Re: Significance of Linga
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 15:39:42 GMT
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: kartik at K...
OM
GURUR BRAHMA GURUR VISNU GURUR DEVO MAHESHVARAH
GURUH SAKSHAT PARAM BRAHM TASMAI SRI GURVE NAMAH
OM NAMAH SIVAYA
OM NAMAH SIVANANDAYA
Blessed Self,
Lord Siva and His Worship
By Sri Swami Sivananda
A DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY PUBLICATION
Siva Linga is Chinmaya
http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/lordsiva.htm#_VPID_85
Pranam
OM
> > > why lord Shiva is worshipped in the form of Linga?
What is the
> > > significance of Linga symbol.
>
> Let me describe what my Guru taught me.
> God is both with form and without form. The linga form is
one formless form
> where, yes it has a definite form, yet not easily
described, not easily
> captured in the mind's eye, not easily decorated, not
easily pampered etc.
> This form of Ishwaran is worshipped with cold water,
sandal wood and other
> such items that makes it cold. The linga form is actually
sitting under a
> constant stream of water to keep it cool. HE is sitting
in the Kailash where
> it is cold. He is adorned by snakes, whose skins are said
to keep you cold.
> Why is HE keeping himself cold like this?
> It is because, this formless form of God is in our hearts
where all our
> short comings such as desires and lust and jealousy etc
are constantly
> burning like in hell and destroying us. HE is cold, so
that our own desires
> do not eat us from the inside out. He is formless to us
when we see him
> outside of us because we are unable to realize what His
true nature is.
> This formless linga to the outside eye, manifests itself
in IT's true Bliss
> form in our hearts when we can bring our senses and
desires under control.
>
> bhava shankara desikame sharanam
> Vaidya.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
============================================================
====================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
listmaster at a...
>
============================================================
====================
>
---------------------------------------------
Get FREE E-Mail at Y...
http://www.valuemail.net
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "ballakrishnen subramaniam" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Krishna Yajur Veda
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 04:29:54
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "ballakrishnen subramaniam" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
14.5.01
I am glad to know that you are interested in making a beginning to study
your shaka. If you live in Chennai pl let me know your tel no I shall meet
you and help you in your endevour.
Ballakrishnen
>From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <svsubrahmanian at Y...>
>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
><ADVAITA-L at b...>
>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
>Subject: Re: Krishna Yajur Veda
>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 04:33:54 -0700
>
>I have noted the following observation. Thank you and I agree with you.
>In my
>generation, I atleast want to make a start and proceed to whereever I can.
>Thus the broken tradition of studying one's own shAkhA will atleast be
>revived
>and future generations will atleast have a precedence of somebody making an
>attempt, of possessing the needed texts etc. Right now, I don't have a
>role
>model in my immediate family circle who have made attempts to study Vedas.
>They are very happy performing pUjAs during all festivals and srArdham on
>appropriate dates. How can I call myself a brahmaNa if I don't atleast
>make
>attempts (if not successful) to study my shAkhA? May be somebody in the
>future
>generation can start early and do a better job - maybe!! All in the hope
>for
>good.
>
> > published by sringeri mutt. Pl note that to study the veda bhasyas and
> > understand them as propounded by our rishis it is best to study th
>complete
> > veda shaka under a proficient guru and then learn the bhasyas in
>sanskrit
> > under him. It is better that he is a agnihotri himself, and is
>performing
> > the vedic srauta karmas. Only then can the student understand what he is
> > learning. As you must be knowing that the vedas only talk about the
>srauta
> > karmas in detail. This study of veda samhita and brahmanas including the
> > veda bhasyas will take a person atleast 15 years. This is if you start
>at 7
> > years after upanayana you will finish the adhyayana in about 10 years
>and
> > the bhasyas in another 5 years.
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 21:56:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: God within
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
It is interesting to note that many of us travel long distances and after
observing many vratam-s go to sacred temples/tIrthA-s and once we are in front
of the deity we have been longing for - what do we do?
Close our eyes and pray within !!
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Bondada Umamaheshwar <bumamahe at v...>
Subject: RE: Significance of Linga
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 07:01:26 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Bondada Umamaheshwar <bumamahe at v...>
Dear Shri Kartikji
This is a splendid link! But, I think we need to download the fonts. Where
can I find these fonts?
Pranam
Uma
-----Original Message-----
From: Kartik Vashishta [mailto:kartik at K...]
Sent: None
To: ADVAITA-L at A...
Subject: Re: Significance of Linga
OM
GURUR BRAHMA GURUR VISNU GURUR DEVO MAHESHVARAH
GURUH SAKSHAT PARAM BRAHM TASMAI SRI GURVE NAMAH
OM NAMAH SIVAYA
OM NAMAH SIVANANDAYA
Blessed Self,
Lord Siva and His Worship
By Sri Swami Sivananda
A DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY PUBLICATION
Siva Linga is Chinmaya
http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/lordsiva.htm#_VPID_85
Pranam
OM
> > > why lord Shiva is worshipped in the form of Linga?
What is the
> > > significance of Linga symbol.
>
> Let me describe what my Guru taught me.
> God is both with form and without form. The linga form is
one formless form
> where, yes it has a definite form, yet not easily
described, not easily
> captured in the mind's eye, not easily decorated, not
easily pampered etc.
> This form of Ishwaran is worshipped with cold water,
sandal wood and other
> such items that makes it cold. The linga form is actually
sitting under a
> constant stream of water to keep it cool. HE is sitting
in the Kailash where
> it is cold. He is adorned by snakes, whose skins are said
to keep you cold.
> Why is HE keeping himself cold like this?
> It is because, this formless form of God is in our hearts
where all our
> short comings such as desires and lust and jealousy etc
are constantly
> burning like in hell and destroying us. HE is cold, so
that our own desires
> do not eat us from the inside out. He is formless to us
when we see him
> outside of us because we are unable to realize what His
true nature is.
> This formless linga to the outside eye, manifests itself
in IT's true Bliss
> form in our hearts when we can bring our senses and
desires under control.
>
> bhava shankara desikame sharanam
> Vaidya.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
============================================================
====================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
listmaster at a...
>
============================================================
====================
>
---------------------------------------------
Get FREE E-Mail at Y...
http://www.valuemail.net
============================================================================
====
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
============================================================================
====
The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From kartik at K...
Subject: Re: Re: Significance of Linga
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 08:11:40 GMT
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: kartik at K...
OM
GURUR BRAHMA GURUR VISNU GURUR DEVO MAHESHVARAH
GURUH SAKSHAT PARAM BRAHM TASMAI SRI GURVE NAMAH
OM NAMAH SIVAYA
OM NAMAH SIVANANDAYA
Blessed Self,
Please check out:
ftp://jaguar.cs.utah.edu/private/sanskrit/processing_tools/p
rocessing_tools.html
For fonts etc. Pranam
OM
> Dear Shri Kartikji
>
> This is a splendid link! But, I think we need to
download the fonts. Where
> can I find these fonts?
>
> Pranam
>
> Uma
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kartik Vashishta [mailto:kartik at K...]
> Sent: None
> To: ADVAITA-L at A...
> Subject: Re: Significance of Linga
>
>
> OM
> GURUR BRAHMA GURUR VISNU GURUR DEVO MAHESHVARAH
> GURUH SAKSHAT PARAM BRAHM TASMAI SRI GURVE NAMAH
> OM NAMAH SIVAYA
> OM NAMAH SIVANANDAYA
>
> Blessed Self,
> Lord Siva and His Worship
> By Sri Swami Sivananda
> A DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY PUBLICATION
> Siva Linga is Chinmaya
>
http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/lordsiva.htm#_VPID_85
>
> Pranam
> OM
>
> > > > why lord Shiva is worshipped in the form of Linga?
> What is the
> > > > significance of Linga symbol.
> >
> > Let me describe what my Guru taught me.
> > God is both with form and without form. The linga form
is
> one formless form
> > where, yes it has a definite form, yet not easily
> described, not easily
> > captured in the mind's eye, not easily decorated, not
> easily pampered etc.
> > This form of Ishwaran is worshipped with cold water,
> sandal wood and other
> > such items that makes it cold. The linga form is
actually
> sitting under a
> > constant stream of water to keep it cool. HE is sitting
> in the Kailash where
> > it is cold. He is adorned by snakes, whose skins are
said
> to keep you cold.
> > Why is HE keeping himself cold like this?
> > It is because, this formless form of God is in our
hearts
> where all our
> > short comings such as desires and lust and jealousy etc
> are constantly
> > burning like in hell and destroying us. HE is cold, so
> that our own desires
> > do not eat us from the inside out. He is formless to us
> when we see him
> > outside of us because we are unable to realize what His
> true nature is.
> > This formless linga to the outside eye, manifests itself
> in IT's true Bliss
> > form in our hearts when we can bring our senses and
> desires under control.
> >
> > bhava shankara desikame sharanam
> > Vaidya.
> >
> >
> >
_________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at
http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
>
============================================================
> ====================
> > "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
> >
> > To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> > listserv at l... with
> > body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> > If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
> >
>
============================================================
> ====================
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> Get FREE E-Mail at Y...
> http://www.valuemail.net
>
>
============================================================
================
> ====
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
listmaster at a...
>
============================================================
================
> ====
>
>
> The information in this message is confidential and may
be legally privileged. It is
intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message
by anyone else is unauthorized.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of the
message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance
on it, is prohibited and may
be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you
have received this message in
error.
>
>
============================================================
====================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
listmaster at a...
>
============================================================
====================
>
---------------------------------------------
Get FREE E-Mail at Y...
http://www.valuemail.net
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Effective Communication
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:05:19
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV>It is amazing to note that we can get such beautiful messages from our members here. Sri Subramanian has posted a wonderful gist of how we should communicate with others and I thank him for that. This is useful to us in our personal and professional lives too.</DIV>
<P>When I think about this whole issue here with Shubaji postings and Jaladharji postings, I remember a story from the life of Sadasiva Brahmendra. All of you must have heard of Sadasiva Brahman.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Sadasiva Brahmendra was initiated to sannyasa by his guru Paramasivendra Saraswati. Sadasiva was very erudite and he had the habit of involving himslef in arguments. Though, it was done merely for the purpose of knowing the truth in scriptures, his guru felt that it was a great waste of Sadasiva's time. </P>
<P>Paramasivendra Saraswati told Sadasiva, "Sadasiva, will your mouth ever shut?" (in Tamil - Sadasiva Un vaai moodaadhadaa). From that very moment, Sadasiva did not talk and soon realized himself. Later he was known as Sadasiva Brahman. He knew Brahman and he was only THAT for the rest of His life. </P>
<P>Sometimes, we make our points and we want others to listen to our views too. But, when it gets into a non-productive discussion, it may help to keep quiet and refrain from saying something more. It has helped me on several occasions. The more we involve ourselves, the more agitated are our minds. There are a lot of nice things about this forum and we may miss out on the true non-dual Advaita philosophy, when we get into these kinds of altercations. </P>
<P>This is all my opinion and I hope that this adds value in bringing peace to our minds.</P>
<P>Thanks,</P>
<P>Ravi</P>
<P>>From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <SVSUBRAHMANIAN at Y...></P>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara <ADVAITA-L at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Effective Communication
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 05:22:55 -0700
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Sri Jaldharji wrote:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > I'll try but people find the craziest things offensive. The audience has
<DIV></DIV>> > to work with me on this.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > or scared for the oddest reasons and there is a point beyond which it
<DIV></DIV>> > isn't my problem any more. It is pointless to cater to weak-minded
<DIV></DIV>> > people. It is better to help make them stronger.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > Alternatively someone will have to develop a spine and speak up a little.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>In Hindu tradition (based on Vedas) vAk or speech has been given great
<DIV></DIV>>importance. Sarasvati is the presiding deity of vAk. Every word has a meaning
<DIV></DIV>>ie., an associated vR^tti. It is this very speech that is employed in
<DIV></DIV>>communicating wisdom from teacher to the pupil. vAk is a very subtle form of
<DIV></DIV>>our own existence. Our ancestors have always urged us to use vAk only for
<DIV></DIV>>uplifting purposes. Any other use is to have wasted our precious faculty.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Some of the evils uses of vAk are :
<DIV></DIV>>1) Uttering falsehood for a selfish gain
<DIV></DIV>>2) Hurting others (incl. using foul words)
<DIV></DIV>>3) Exaggerating
<DIV></DIV>>4) Twisting facts in an anxiety to please
<DIV></DIV>>5) Plain excessive talk
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>One of the definitions of a shUdra is "kAma vAda:" - ie., one who speaks as his
<DIV></DIV>>mind desires with no discipline in the choice of ideas, words and audience.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Our tradition says: "satyam brooyAt, priyam brooyAt" - the message is "firm in
<DIV></DIV>>principle, but gentle in expression."
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Only when the vR^tti we have in our mind is same as the vR^tti that is created
<DIV></DIV>>by our communication (verbal or nonverbal) is communication effective, else it
<DIV></DIV>>is failed communication. Let us take gItOpadesha.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>In the gItA Krishna answers Arjuna's despondent situation. The following are
<DIV></DIV>>salient points to note:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>0. He does not speak until he is directly asked (shishyA: te aham), until he
<DIV></DIV>>is sure that the seeker is really in want of answer and is not just a curious
<DIV></DIV>>cat.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>1. He berates him ("klaibyam", "xudram hridaya dourbalyam" etc) to wake him up
<DIV></DIV>>from his delusion as a sort of jump start!! But he uses it in limited measures
<DIV></DIV>>and only at the beginning. He does not make it a style of his communication.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>2. In the 2nd chapter most of what needs to be communicated is done. The
<DIV></DIV>>nature of one's own true self is expounded clearly ("nA sato vidyate bhAvah, nA
<DIV></DIV>>bhAvo vidyate sataH etc.). So he presents the synopsis of his teachings first
<DIV></DIV>>and then goes on for another 16 chapters to expand on the theme, in a
<DIV></DIV>>systematic way aided by a dialogue format.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>3. Whereever Arjuna's faculty of understanding fails him, he uses words like
<DIV></DIV>>"you are my friend and hence I teach you" etc to put him at ease because there
<DIV></DIV>>can be communication only when the mind is relaxed. If the other person is
<DIV></DIV>>tensed up, then no matter how right you are, how loud you are, you will never
<DIV></DIV>>"reach" him.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>4. He does not answer questions that are either irrelevant or that would have
<DIV></DIV>>been otherwise been answered in addressing other issues. Even though Arjuna
<DIV></DIV>>raises the issue of "lupta piNDoka kriyA" and "varNa sankara", Krishna never
<DIV></DIV>>bothers with these questions which are out of the scope of His teaching (in the
<DIV></DIV>>context of teaching jnAna).
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>5. He uses a consistent methodology to describe his vision and in the middle
<DIV></DIV>>also gives practical proof of what He is elucidating (vishvarUpa darshanam).
<DIV></DIV>>Practical proofs will always aid in better communication.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>6. He also explains about the fate of those who do not follow what He says
<DIV></DIV>>(all the talk about dark half of the year etc). Here there is a clear
<DIV></DIV>>indication of impending problems of paths contrary to the teaching. One always
<DIV></DIV>>has to answer the question: what happens if what we say is not done/followed.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>7. He also explains the benefits of following what He teaches. That is also
<DIV></DIV>>equally important.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>8. In the end again he summarises what He wanted arjuna to understand in
<DIV></DIV>>essence ie., "sarva dharmAn parityajya, mAmekam sharaNam vraja".
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>9. He then asks arjuna if he has understood everything. A good communicator
<DIV></DIV>>should ask for a feedback. Without feedback He will not know if communication
<DIV></DIV>>has taken place at all or not.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>10. Arjuna asserts that he has understood everything "nashTO moha, gataH
<DIV></DIV>>sandeha:" and says obediently "karishyE vachanam tava". It is possible to say
<DIV></DIV>>that only when the vR^tti in his mind is the same as that of Krishna's which
<DIV></DIV>>means communication is complete.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Thus we see from the method adopted by Sri Krishna, on how we can make our
<DIV></DIV>>communication effective and to do it successfully without harm or hurt to
<DIV></DIV>>others.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Regards.
<DIV></DIV>>S. V. Subrahmanian.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>__________________________________________________
<DIV></DIV>>Do You Yahoo!?
<DIV></DIV>>Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
<DIV></DIV>>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>================================================================================
<DIV></DIV>>"bhava
shankara deshikame sharaNam"
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
<DIV></DIV>>listserv at l... with
<DIV></DIV>>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
<DIV></DIV>>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
<DIV></DIV>>================================================================================
<DIV></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:35:55 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I read somewhere that Bhagvatpada was of Atri gotra but do not remember the
reference. Could someone guide me to the relevant text?
Thank you in advance
Vishal
Homepage- http://www.voi.org/vishal_agarwal/homepage.html
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Stig Lundgren" <slu at C...>
Subject: Culturalindia.com, Philosophy, Institutions, Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:38:26 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0DCA5.10444CC0"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Stig Lundgren" <slu at C...>
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0DCA5.10444CC0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0006_01C0DCA5.104BEDE0"
------=_NextPart_001_0006_01C0DCA5.104BEDE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
Here is a link to a new web-site on Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati and A=
dhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya in Holenarsipur.
http://www.culturalindia.com/karya.html
Best regards
Stig Lundgren
------=_NextPart_001_0006_01C0DCA5.104BEDE0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" http-equiv=3DContent-Type=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Dear all,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Here is a link to a new web-site on Swami Satchidanande=
ndra=20
Saraswati and Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya in Holenarsipur.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.culturalindia.com/karya.html">http://www.culturalindia.c=
om/karya.html</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Best regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Stig Lundgren</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_0006_01C0DCA5.104BEDE0--
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C0DCA5.10444CC0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name="Culturalindia.com, Philosophy, Institutions, Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="Culturalindia.com, Philosophy, Institutions, Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya.url"
[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=http://www.culturalindia.com/karya.html
[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.culturalindia.com/karya.html
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 13:48:26 -0400
Subject: Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Some rare Sanskrit books have been published by the Rashtriya Sanskrit
Sansthan.
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/sanskrit/main/publication.html
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:23:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>I read somewhere that Bhagvatpada was of Atri gotra but do not remember the
>reference. Could someone guide me to the relevant text?
If I remember right, there is a reference in Suresvaracharya's
salutation to his guru, in Naishkarmyasiddhi or perhaps in the
Brhadaranyaka Varrtika. If it is in the former, I'll pull up the
verse and post it here later today or tomorrow.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:31:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
The reference to Atreya gotra is not in Naishkarmyasiddhi. Check the
Brhad Varttika salutation verses for this. There is an excellent edn.
from Sri Mahesanusandhana Samsthan, Mt. Abu, along with Anandagiri's
Tika (in two volumes).
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 22:22:07 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I have found this information in G C Pande's biography a while back but
unfortunately he does not give a textual reference. I wonder if it is in
Anantanadagiri's Shankaravijaya.
I do not have the Sambandha Varttika published from Mt. Abu and will have to
rely on the Madras edition.
Thanks anyways,
VA
----Original Message Follows----
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
<ADVAITA-L at b...>
To: ADVAITA-L at L...
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 18:31:25 -0400
The reference to Atreya gotra is not in Naishkarmyasiddhi. Check the
Brhad Varttika salutation verses for this. There is an excellent edn.
from Sri Mahesanusandhana Samsthan, Mt. Abu, along with Anandagiri's
Tika (in two volumes).
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:28:36 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Do you know if they send books abroad?
Thanks in advance
Vishal
----Original Message Follows----
From: Ashish Chandra
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
To: ADVAITA-L at L...
Subject: Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 13:48:26 -0400
Some rare Sanskrit books have been published by the Rashtriya Sanskrit
Sansthan.
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/sanskrit/main/publication.html
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 04:37:09 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
----Original Message Follows----
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
The woman, since she does not have the right to actually perform the
sacrifice, is therefore not given the choice of marrying again.
VA comments: What if I offer the following counterview from the Shastras -
Atharva Veda XVIII.3.1-4 condemns the practice of sati as follows:
"Choosing her husband's realm, O man! (i.e. the dead man) this widowed woman
lies next to your lifeless body, preserving faithfully the ancient law.
Bestow upon her, both wealth and offspring. "
"O woman! (Since this man cannot bestow upon thee wealth, happiness and
offspring) Come, rise unto the world of the living! Come, the man by whose
side you lie is lifeless! Thy days of wifehood with this man, who wooed thee
as a lover and took your hand (during the wedding ceremony) are over. "
"I (the sage) looked and saw the youthful maiden being escorted from the
living to him who was dead. I saw them (her relatives and girlfriends)
console her. I saw her being blinded by the darkness of sorrow and then, I
turned her back and took her homeward. "
"O ye inviolable one! (the widow) Tread the path of the wise in front of
thee and choose this man (another suitor) as they husband. Joyfully receive
him and may the two of you mount the world of happiness. "
---
Atharva Veda IX.5.27-29 includes a verse that translates as
"Whatever woman, having first married one husband, marries another, she and
the other new husband will not be separated if they offer a goat and five
rice dishes illumined with religious fees. "
Rig Veda X.18.8-9 includes the following verses, the first of which
duplicates one of the previously cited verses from the Atharva Veda:
"Rise O Woman! Come to the world of the living. Come, the man by whose side
you are lying is lifeless. Be united with this man as his wife, who holds
thy hand and seeks to be thy husband. "
"(The new husband says) Taking the bow from the hand of the departed, let us
launch a new life of valour and strength . . . Here are you my beloved, in
front of me. Now we two, with virtuous and valourous children, will triumph
over all who challenge us and compete with us. "
Rig Veda X.40.2 includes the following verse:
"O Ashwins! Where are you in the evening, where at the morning, where do you
sojourn? Where do you dwell? And who is the one that brings you both into
his presence, as a second husband to the couch of the widow, or the groom in
front of his bride? "
—Rig Veda X.40.2
The remarriage of widows is advocated in the Vashista Dharmasutra of the
Rigvedins.
The following verse is cited by P. V. Kane, in his History of Dharmashastra:
"Another man is ordained for women in five calamities: a) When the husband
is missing and is unheard of; b) The husband dies; c) When the husband is
impotent; d) When the husband has become an ascetic; e) The husband has
become depraved."
—Agnipurana 154.5-5; Parashara Smriti IV.30; and Narada Smriti V.97.
To summarize, it appears that various Hindu scriptures give conflicting
viewpoints on the status and proper conduct of widows. What then to do with
these conflicting opinions, especially since there are literally 100's of
verses in the Hindu literature forbidding widow remarriage? I feel that the
Vedas, which are of paramount authority for Hindus, do not forbid remarriage
of widows anywhere but rather advocate. They therefore automatically
abrogate all contrary injunctions of other religious literature. The Purva
Mimamsa rules for the interpretation of scripture clearly state that if two
smritis clash, the two conflicting viewpoints indicate alternative
practices, both being equally valid. Even according to this rule, widow
remarriage is offered as an alternative to the lifelong celibacy of widows
in the Smritis.
Sincerely,
Vishal
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 00:57:22 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
sanAtan dharma lived successfully for several milennia. It was not
maintained after the last reform by Sankara, and it still has a strong hold.
If the system worked for so long peacefully and every section of the society
had the time develop their arts and culture, it couldn't have been so
inhuman.
The modern democratic system is not even 300 years old, and we are seeing
extremes of social tensions world over. There is no comparison here. Any
comparison has to quote statistics of how many people were disadvantaged in
terms of various aspects. I do not wish to discuss beyond this, else the
discussion will proliferate.
>"brAhmaNo.asya mukhamAsId-bAhU rAjanyaH kR^itaH | UrU tadasya vaishyaH
> >padbhyAM shUdro ajAyata||" wherein it differentiates the creation of
> >brAhmaNas from Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and shUdras.
I am not sure if we will understand the true import of purushasUktam fully
in the near future unless some knowledgeable people kindly reveal to us.
But there is no proof that feet are lower than head. There are actually
indications to the contrary. In the vyAkhyAna to first mantra of taittirIya
upaniSat "zaM no mitraH zam varuNaH.... zaM no viSNururukramaH..", Sankara
or the translator says viSNu is famous for his three strides and is
identified with feet, and that the force viSNu may be identified with energy
from the toes etc. According to Ai. Br. i.1 viSNu is the highest of the
gods, and agni is the lowest. Elsewhere in Shruti agni is identified with
head/speech etc.
While Br.U.1.4.11-15 clearly states the supremacy of brAhmaNa, being born of
head may not be the right reason to quote. (manusmRti just copied
word-to-word.) Whatever may be right reason for supremacy of brahmaNa is
besides the point (we may discuss later if necessary), I just want to state
that, determining feet as "lower" than head is not the correct import of
Shruti, and it is also not the right approach for a vedAntin. In fact
meditating on the feet as all-nourishing viSNu is an immense source of
knowledge and kindness.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 05:27:53 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...>
JV: Earlier I had mentioned a rationale for women not being entitled to
upanayana is that they are not mentioned in the texts related to
upanayana. Does this rule invalidate that? No because it describes a
general rule which is always trumped by a more a specific rule.
VA: That is a TOTAL distortion of the Mimamsa Shastra. The non-mention of
something in the Vedas does not imply that it is invalid. Infact, a phrase
in RV and AV goes : "Bhimaa jaayaa brahmasyopanitaa" where 'brahma' = Veda
and so the right of women to Veda is established by Sruti itself and it
trumps all contrary Smritis.
_____
JV: In the
case of upanayana the generic male is not referred to but specifically the
male Brahmanas, Kshatriyas and Vaishya for each of whom a different rule
is prescribed.
VA: You ought to consider the Sutra - 6.1.27 which goes 'nimittarthena
badari...." or 'For a special reason, says Badari..." with regard to the
right of humans to Angnyadhana. Note the words 'special reason'. Why should
Badari say so? This is clarified by the following words of the Shatapatha
Brahmana wherein the symbolism of the 3 seasons is explained:
1.1.3.4 Spring is the Brahmana, summer is Ksatra (Kshatriya) and the rainy
season is Vit (Vaisya). The Brahmin should, therefore, set up (the fires) in
spring; for the Brahman, indeed, is the spring. Th Kshatriya (should set up
the fires) in summer for Kshatra (valor) is summer. The Vaishya (should set
up the fires in the rainy season. Indeed, abundance (plenty) is Vit
(Vaishya); plentiful is the rainy season. What desire one may entertain,
towards that, one may set up (the fires) (in the relevant season).
1.1.3.5 Should the Brahmin wish, “I should become one having holy luster
(Bahmavarcasa)”, he should set up (the fires) in spring. Brahman, indeed, is
Spring and he (the sacrificer) verily becomes one endowed with holy luster.
1.1.3.6 If one (Brahmin) should desire, “I should be equal to Kshatra in
splendor (wealth) and glory”, he should set up (the fires) in summer.
Kshatra, indeed is summer. He (the sacrificer) verily becomes equal of
Kshatra (Kshatriya) in splendor and glory.
1.1.3.7 If one is for nourishment (rich growth), he should set up (the
fires) in the rainy season. ‘Abundance’ is verily Vit (Vaishya) and
‘abundance’ is the rainy season. He (the sacrificer) becomes plentiful with
progeny and cattle. (All) this is in consonance with the seasons.
(Kanva Shatapatha)
Consequently,while only the first 3 varnas are mentioned, the link up with
the seasons is for a special purpose and hence this particular injunction
cannot be used to debar Sudras in general from Vedic rites. If a person born
in a Sudra household shows the ability to perform the Vedic rite in its
totality, he is entitled to Agnyadhana.
_____
6.1.7 (Purvapaksha continued) Moreover, by virtue of a mention of that
> (masculine gender), there is a text which lays down the sin on (the sex)
of
> the unborn foetus not being known.
>
JV: Atreyi means a pregnant woman or
a daughter of Atri Gotra. Because it uses the masculine gender, the
opponent says the sin only applies if she is carrying a male child or if
the sex of the foetus is not known because there is a chance it could be
male. (The implication being it is ok to kill a girl.) Maharshi Jaimini
rejects this view. He says "He" and "him" are used generically and to
kill a male or female baby is equally sinful.
He also notes that this doesn't apply in the case of where for example a
male animal (like a bull) is specifically enjoined to be sacrificed. And
the above example only applies to the daughter of Atri gotra not pregnant
women in general. This is because as I noted above a specific rule
overrides a more generic one.
VA: The above interpretation, although based on a commentatorial tradition,
is wrong. In fact, the Purva Mimamsa commentators often falter in explaining
the Sutras, in my opinion. Atreyi as such here does not mean a 'pregnant
woman' or 'of Atri Gotra'. Rather, it means 'a woman who has aborted or
miscarried'. To quote Kanva Shatapatha again:
2.4.2.14 ….Speech who had been set aside was shocked and her foetus fell out
(aborted)
2.4.2.15 She verily said to Prajapati, “May I not be an oblation-bearer for
you at all, for you spoke against me”. Therefore whatever dedicated to
Prajapati is done, that is performed verily silently (in a low voice); for
the speech became non-oblation-bearer to him. Then, this seed (foetus) that
had been poured out, the gods held in a (piece of) slin or in a small
vessel. Then they asked, “Is it here?” (It answered) “Verily here (atra)”.
Therefore it became Atri (from it Atri was born). Verily therefore they say,
“One becomes a sinner (by intercourse) with an Atreyi (a woman who has
aborted). Indeed from the female, the deity ‘speech’ he (Atri) originated.
Apala Atreyi was Rgvedic Rishika and since she suffered from Svetakushtha,
the word Atreyi is also used to denote a woman suffering from this disease.
The translation ' a woman of Atri lineage' is quite irrelevant here.
Time permitting, I will cite other texts on 'Atreyi' later.
---
> 6.1.9 (Siddhanta continued): Moreover, being enjoined by the Sruti, the
> right of woman to sacrifice is established.
>
JV: Furthermore there are several instances in Shruti and Smrti where women
are specifically asked to perform certain actions. Vishal noted some from
the Atharvaveda and there are several others. Again the specific over
generic principle applies. Even if you accept that women as a rule cannot
do karma, you cannot prevent them from doing specific things they are
enjoined to do.
VA: Look at it the other way. The Yajamana has to be present with his wife
and the two FORM A PAIR as the text says. Therefore, while they might
perform different functions of the Yajna, nevertheless they are conjoint
performers and BOTH obtain the fruit of the sacrifice.
Some sacrifices can be performed by individuals and both women and men can
perform them. Thus, in the Ramayana we see Sita, Kausalya etc. performing
the Agnihotra, a practice which is sanctioned by the additional verses of
Manu (quoted by Kulluka) and Atharvana Sruti (I shall cite these later).
------
Now the opponent tries a different tack:
> 6.1.10 (Purvapaksha): Yajnas are done by material wealth and men alone
> possess material wealth. Women are sold and purchased during wedding and
> therefore are bereft of any property, they are at the same level as
property
> itself. Hence, only men can perform sacrifices.
>
> 6.1.11 (Purvapaksha continued) Likewise, there is Vedic text "she,
though
> purchased by her husband, lives with others"
>
JV: During the wedding ceremony a dowry is given and the father-in-law does
kanyadana or gift of his daughter to her husband. So she is the property
of her husband. Also sacrifices cost money and being property herself she
has no wealth to use for that purpose.
VA: No, the passage rather refers to the practice of 'Strisulka' mentioned
in a passage of the Maitrayani Samhita. Here, the groom 'purchases' the
bride from her father - exact reverse of dowry. Jaimini states that this
'purchase' is merely symbolic, not literal.
_______
> 6.1.14 (Sidhanta continued): Besies, a woman is always connected with
the
> wealth that might even belong to her husband because they are joint
owners
>
JV: Also there is no room for prenuptial agreements or seperate bank
accounts
in our conception of marriage! Whatever the couple posess they posess as
a team. What is hers is his and what is his is hers. So if the wife
wants to spend some of the family resources on sacrifice, the husband has
no right to stop her.
VA: No, the 'Stridhana' belongs only to the woman and the husband cannot use
it. Exception is the Braahmavivaaha where the husband can use his wife's
wealth but with her knowledge and permission. Stridhana is also not
inherited by the couple's sons and it is given only to the daughters after
the mother dies. There is also a verse in Atharva Veda kanda XIV where it is
said : "May the husband not wear the clothes of his wife' which does
not
mean 'may the husband not become a transvestite' but rather it means that
the husband should not usurp the wealth of his wife. In the same kanda, the
wife admonishes the husband that he should not interfere in domestic matters
and in the way she spends her wealth.
----
JV: The other two adhikaranas which you avoided....<SNIP>
VA; Oh well, I avoided these two because again the words in the sutras are
subject a wide range of possible meanings and my interpretations would fly
in the face if Shabaraswamin. For instance, in the sutra you quote below,
the word 'aashih' has several meanings of which several fit the context.
6.1.24 Here the things that are explicitly laid down like cutting nails
and brahmacharya are for her not being equal. (siddhanta)
to be contd.....
Vishal
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From sriram panyam <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: 15 May 2001 06:58:29 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: rigidity of hindu varna dharma
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: sriram panyam <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I would like to know more about the rigidity of the caste system in the vidic
society....as it is said that the varna dharma in the hindu religiion was not at all
rigid..that a kshatriya could become a brahmana by performing penence and
professing mastery over the vedas and the shastras....with special reference to
our great epic mahabharata..in which jayadratha's father who granted him a boon
was originally a kshatriya had later became a brahmin.......!
is it true that a person belonging to any caeste could become a brahimin by his
virtues and knowledge.............?
I would be obliged if someone would enlighten me and my limited scope of
knowledge regarding this issue.
thanking you...!
sriram....!
_________________________________________________
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 14:02:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Tue, 15 May 2001 04:37:09 -0000, Vishal Agarwal
<vishalagarwal at H...> wrote:
>
>To summarize, it appears that various Hindu scriptures give conflicting
>viewpoints on the status and proper conduct of widows. What then to do with
>these conflicting opinions, especially since there are literally 100's of
>verses in the Hindu literature forbidding widow remarriage? I feel that the
>Vedas, which are of paramount authority for Hindus, do not forbid
remarriage
>of widows anywhere but rather advocate. They therefore automatically
>abrogate all contrary injunctions of other religious literature. The Purva
>Mimamsa rules for the interpretation of scripture clearly state that if two
>smritis clash, the two conflicting viewpoints indicate alternative
>practices, both being equally valid. Even according to this rule, widow
>remarriage is offered as an alternative to the lifelong celibacy of widows
>in the Smritis.
>
Vishal,
You are undoubtedly far more learned than I am. I cannot answer the points
you have raised as I don't know of them. However, as per your doubt as to
what should be followed when there are conflicting testimony from the
Shastras, I do have this to say - that there is a conflict may not be that
obvious in the first place. I am talking about their interpretation by a
person who is established in the Shastras, who are verily our
Dharamaacharyas. They are far more qualified in reconciling these
conflicting statements, and they have unanimously, AFAIK, said that widow
remarriage is forbidden.
One of the facets of our Dharma, as you well know, is that it has living
tradition. It is not that we did not know anything about our Dharma and one
day we discovered these passages and said that we have been wrong in our
practices all this time (as the pre-independence reform movements did). We
have always had a tradition that emodies the Shastras, call it Shastras-in-
motion, that has guided mainstream Hindu society. If there has been any
friction within this tradition on these issues, and specifically about
widow remarriage, I am sure I would like to know of it.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 10:50:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
> While Br.U.1.4.11-15 clearly states the supremacy of brAhmaNa, being born of
> head may not be the right reason to quote. (manusmRti just copied
> word-to-word.) Whatever may be right reason for supremacy of brahmaNa is
> besides the point (we may discuss later if necessary), I just want to state
> that, determining feet as "lower" than head is not the correct import of
> Shruti, and it is also not the right approach for a vedAntin. In fact
> meditating on the feet as all-nourishing viSNu is an immense source of
> knowledge and kindness.
My teacher used to say about varNa system. The shUdras as associated with the
feet. But it is neither higher nor lower than any other part of the body.
They are one whole system. The brahmaNas were associated with the face of
purusha. What happens when a thorn pierces the feet, doesn't the eye
automatically water? So also brahmaNas would be impacted if anything wrong
happened to shUdras. So each and every varNa has its position and together the
form the cosmic purusha.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 13:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Self-realisation, a matter of experience
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Article reproduced from "The Hindu", Indian newspaper,
Religion section. It is a treat.
===========================================================
Self-realisation, a matter of experience
CHENNAI, MAY 16. The quest for the Self (Atman) is a
journey within and it becomes evident to one who embarks on
it that there is an underlying
consciousness beyond the levels of the body, mind and the
intellect. It is very subtle and all the human faculties
function because of it. While all the
other faculties are able to act as instruments of
knowledge because of the consciousness of the Self, the
Self is self-luminous. The following doubt is
often raised, ``When an object in the world is known
through perception, why then is the Self which is supposed
to be responsible for the functioning
of the mind, not evident to oneself for perception?''
This is a paradox which every seeker of truth confronts
during the course of his spiritual evolution and the
philosophers explain this by the
relationship between cause and effect. Just as one who
sees curd knows that milk is the cause of curd, so also it
must be understood that it is due to
the Atman that the mind receives the light of knowledge
and is able to function. Another question that is a
corollary of this is, ``What is the use of
the Self since the mind is sufficient to deal with every
sphere of knowledge and activity in the world?''
In his discourse, Sri Goda Venkateswara Sastri said that
the Upanishads explained that the mind was not eternal in
nature. For instance during
sleep it ceased to function. But, the consciousness of the
Self (I) never ceases to be. A person after waking up says,
``I slept well.'' From this it also
becomes clear that the mind and the Self are different.
The mind functions in the waking and dream states but not
in sleep, whereas the ``I''
consciousness is there in all the three states of waking,
dream and sleep. The Self is often referred to as the
fourth state of consciousness.
In the Maitreya Brahmana section of the Brihadaranyaka
Upanishad Sage Yajnavalkya discourses on the question why
if the ``I'' consciousness is
present in all the three states of waking, dream and
sleep, does a person not know the ``I''? The example of the
inseparable nature of a mixture of
water and milk is cited to highlight how the mind acquires
the qualities of the Self in its interactions with the
world. This makes it difficult to know the
Self as distinct from the mind. How then can the Self be
realised? We have to first start with the level of the mind
and get an intellectual grasp that
the Self is different from the mind. But it should not
stop at this level. Since thoughts constantly arise in the
mind it is unable to intuit the Self. When
the mind becomes one-pointed this knowledge becomes a
matter of experience.
============================================================
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:19:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>I have found this information in G C Pande's biography a while back but
>unfortunately he does not give a textual reference. I wonder if it is in
>Anantanadagiri's Shankaravijaya.
Not in the Sankaravijaya texts, as far as I remember. On the other
hand, I distinctly remember seeing a verse from Suresvara, when I
was checking into Naish. and Brhad Varttika a few months ago. But
unfortunately, I didn't copy it down, so I don't have the exact
reference. If it is in the Sambandhavarttika itself, the Madras
edition should have it.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:40:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Tue, 15 May 2001 00:57:22 -0400, Bhadraiah Mallampalli
<vaidix at H...> wrote:
>sanAtan dharma lived successfully for several milennia. It was not
>maintained after the last reform by Sankara, and it still has a strong
hold.
>If the system worked for so long peacefully and every section of the
society
>had the time develop their arts and culture, it couldn't have been so
>inhuman.
>
>The modern democratic system is not even 300 years old, and we are seeing
>extremes of social tensions world over. There is no comparison here. Any
>comparison has to quote statistics of how many people were disadvantaged in
>terms of various aspects. I do not wish to discuss beyond this, else the
>discussion will proliferate.
>
True. Even in the most advanced democracies of the West, we find sections
of the society that feel deprived of enough opportunities, deprived of
civil rights, etc. If not caste-based distinctions, there certainly are
race-based distinctions. The US, for example, is a very race-conscious
society. Even the government reminds everyone of their race on any
information it gathers about individuals. Again, it is also arguable
if the law really treats everyone equally. I too don't want to digress
into this very controversial area which is good material for sociologists.
>>"brAhmaNo.asya mukhamAsId-bAhU rAjanyaH kR^itaH | UrU tadasya vaishyaH
>> >padbhyAM shUdro ajAyata||" wherein it differentiates the creation of
>> >brAhmaNas from Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and shUdras.
>
>I am not sure if we will understand the true import of purushasUktam fully
>in the near future unless some knowledgeable people kindly reveal to us.
>
>But there is no proof that feet are lower than head. There are actually
>indications to the contrary. In the vyAkhyAna to first mantra of taittirIya
>upaniSat "zaM no mitraH zam varuNaH.... zaM no viSNururukramaH..", Sankara
>or the translator says viSNu is famous for his three strides and is
>identified with feet, and that the force viSNu may be identified with
energy
>from the toes etc. According to Ai. Br. i.1 viSNu is the highest of the
>gods, and agni is the lowest. Elsewhere in Shruti agni is identified with
>head/speech etc.
>
>While Br.U.1.4.11-15 clearly states the supremacy of brAhmaNa, being born
of
>head may not be the right reason to quote. (manusmRti just copied
>word-to-word.) Whatever may be right reason for supremacy of brahmaNa is
>besides the point (we may discuss later if necessary), I just want to state
>that, determining feet as "lower" than head is not the correct import of
>Shruti, and it is also not the right approach for a vedAntin. In fact
>meditating on the feet as all-nourishing viSNu is an immense source of
>knowledge and kindness.
It is a matter of interpretation. Among human beings, the head is
in some sense superior to all other parts. Humans have an upright
position as opposed to apes and other mammals. This makes the head
the highest part in the whole body. And the mouth is the organ which
expresses or manifests the knowledge that is in the head. So in this
interpretation, what comes out of the mouth is more important than
what comes out of anywhere else. One may serve the God or Guru by
worshipping His feet but ultimately what comes out of the Guru's
mouth or God's mouth (as the gItA came from Krishna's mouth),
the nectar of VedAnta, is what liberates us! The dharma-shAstras
leave no doubt in anyone's mind regarding whom they consider the most
important among brAhmaNas, Kshatriyas, vaishyas, and shUdras.
Another interpretation I have heard is that brAhmaNas lead the
society in the satya yuga, Kshatriyas in the tretA yuga, vaishyas
in dvApara, and shUdras (and outcastes) in the Kali Yuga. This is
exactly what is happening in India! Even this interpretation recognizes
distinctions among sections of the society, which was the basic
point I was trying to make.
That said, I feel, at least in these degraded times, that birth alone
does not make one a brAhmaNa, KShatriya, vaishya or shUdra. One must
necessarily have the saMskAras and conduct worthy of his claim as a
brAhmaNa, for example.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:57:00 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Anand-ji and others,
Truth is multi-faced, and we need to study all possibilities.
Kindly bear with me re: following example, which is relevant to advaita.
Prof. Peter F. Drucker, talking about social responsibility of business says
that the idea of business as a capitalistic entity where "greedy bees
accumulate honey" is actually misleading. Here is my analysis based on his
inputs. There are several lies here. The first lie is, business is not
capitalism; business is about fulfilling social needs via trade. The second
lie is, capitalism is not greedy bees accumulating honey. Capitalism is to
allocate capital to areas which give best return on investment (greedy
investors don't even know or care if there will be a return). The third lie
is bees don't get greedy, thier younglings really need the honey. By saying
greedy bees accumulate honey, we are actually insinuating business, and
cultivating greed among investing public, and we are actually telling people
to keep accumulate capital just because greed is good.
My idea of the underlying concept behind virAt being birth to different
castes of people is a kind of philosophical capitalism among different kinds
of living cells in ths body. The living cells in the body have been divided
into different castes and somewhere in rAjasUya portion in, Ai. Br. (or is
it K. Br.?) says "..therefore brahmanas and kSatriyas dominate in the
society..". Such domination is a survial need of the organism because it has
to collect necessary food and information to continue to live. In the
process it has to neglect needs of some cells and enrich resources of others
to get its things done.
We will talk more about other interpretations. And at the end when we
deconstruct these subjects we should only see advaita remaining.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 01:38:39 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Apologies for the extra dose of jargon. The advantage of using zrauta
language is that we always think of the gods like agni, pUSaN etc, and
sAdhana becomes simpler.
When Shruti says brAhmaNa is superior, it is usually with regards to a
particular property such as positional power or responsibility in society.
Absolute superiority is contrary to advaita.
The superiority of brahmaNa arises from two reasons: brahmaNa being compared
to agni or bRhaspati. Let us take only agni for now. As agni is related to
speech, and speech is related to gAyatri who protects people, brahmaNa is
placed where he can see the problems in the society and fix them. This way
the society is putting its well trained brains where the problems are.
>From the provisioning point of view, Shudras are the highest because if they
don't produce food, there is nothing for vaishyas to trade, so vaishyas
can't pay taxes to kSatriya, and kSatriya can't support the brahmaNa.
Br.U. 1.4.11-15 mentions that vaishyas are Adityas, vasus, vizvadevas and
maruts. Ai. Br says "vasus are those that bind everything here". The vaishya
gods take care of inter-relationships between different parts of the
body/mind.
puruSa sUktam and Br.U contradict on the creation story, which gives us the
license from Sankara to reject both stories in favor of their respective
intended meanings in each case.
At the end, we need to remember that each one of the gods agni etc is made
up of the letter om. It is just a different way of looking at the letter om
which gives the impressionn of a variety of gods.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 06:53:03 -0400
Subject: Who slept well?
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1222112111==_ma============"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
--============_-1222112111==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
From the postings of Shree Ram Chandran in adviatin and Shree Vivek
Anand Ganesan in adviata-L
>Article reproduced from "The Hindu", Indian newspaper,
>Religion section. It is a treat.
>===========================================================
> Self-realisation, a matter of experience
I wonder if it is really an experience! - But "I do understand" words
are limited to express. Baghavaan Ramana puts this beautifully in
his first sloka of Sat Darshan - "sat pratyayaa kinnu vihaaya santam
--" since it is the very nature of ones own existence itself - where
experience, experiencer and experienced merges into one. - (Hence
Lord is called tripuraantaka!)
>
>................
> In his discourse, Sri Goda Venkateswara Sastri said that
>the Upanishads explained that the mind was not eternal in
>nature. For instance during
> sleep it ceased to function. But, the consciousness of the
>Self (I) never ceases to be. A person after waking up says,
>``I slept well.'' From this it also
> becomes clear that the mind and the Self are different.
>The mind functions in the waking and dream states but not
>in sleep, whereas the ``I''
> consciousness is there in all the three states of waking,
>dream and sleep. The Self is often referred to as the
>fourth state of consciousness.
...............
It is the waking mind that answers saying that "I slept well?" -
Yet it was not there to sleep well in the deep sleep state. Then who
experiences the deep sleep? Or is it an experience at all?
Interesting questions to ponder about. Any experience involves three
aspects - expriencer, experiencing and experienced. From the mind's
point it was present in the dream-state but not in deep sleep state
for it to be a vehicle for an experience. Hence from the mind's point
"I slept well" is only an inferential statement and not an
experiential statement. Consciousness is akartaa and abhoktaa,
neither a doer nor an enjoyer - being consciousness it is ever
present. Then who really sleep? Perhaps nobody, since no-body
consciousness is there! It is one of the nature's Jigsaw puzzles to
teach that the truth lies beyond the mind and intellect - nishaa
tarkena mati raapaneya - one cannot arrive at the truth by logic!
Actually it is "explained" as the consciousness identifies with
kaaraNa shariira or causal body or vaasana, which is pure ignorance
or state of non-apprehension. Misapprehension as "I am this or that"
comes only later when the mind becomes operative. Hence without the
mind and intellect, the plurality is not there - yet ignorance is
still there in the deep sleep state, since I still do not know "who I
am" in that state. Hence avidya or ignorance is associated with two
aspects - aavaraNa and vikshepa, non-apprehension and
misapprehension. Since non-apprehension is there even before mind
becomes active, avidya is also anaadi and anirvachaniiyam -
beginningless and inexplainable since beginning and end are concepts
of time, or cause-effect, hence of the mind and explanations are
also part of the intellect and mind.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
--============_-1222112111==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Who slept well?</title></head><body>
<div>From the postings of Shree Ram Chandran in adviatin and
Shree Vivek Anand Ganesan in adviata-L</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Article reproduced from "The
Hindu", Indian newspaper,<br>
Religion section. It is a treat.<br>
===========================================================</blockquote
>
<blockquote type="cite" cite> Self-realisation, a matter of
experience</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>I wonder if it is really an experience! - But "I do
understand" words are limited to express. Baghavaan Ramana
puts this beautifully in his first sloka of Sat Darshan -
"sat pratyayaa kinnu vihaaya santam --" since it is the very
nature of ones own existence itself - where experience, experiencer
and experienced merges into one. - (Hence Lord is called
tripuraantaka!)</div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>................<br>
In his discourse, Sri Goda Venkateswara Sastri said that<br>
the Upanishads explained that the mind was not eternal in<br>
nature. For instance during<br>
sleep it ceased to function. But, the consciousness of the<br>
Self (I) never ceases to be. A person after waking up says,<br>
``I slept well.'' From this it also<br>
becomes clear that the mind and the Self are different.<br>
The mind functions in the waking and dream states but not<br>
in sleep, whereas the ``I''<br>
consciousness is there in all the three states of waking,<br>
dream and sleep. The Self is often referred to as the</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>fourth state of
consciousness.</blockquote>
<div>...............</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><font color="#000000">It is the waking mind that answers saying
that "I slept well?" - Yet it was not there to
sleep well in the deep sleep state. Then who experiences the
deep sleep? Or is it an experience at all? Interesting
questions to ponder about. Any experience involves three aspects -
expriencer, experiencing and experienced. From the mind's point
it was present in the dream-state but not in deep sleep state for it
to be a vehicle for an experience. Hence from the mind's point "I
slept well" is only an inferential statement and not an
experiential statement. Consciousness is akartaa and abhoktaa,
neither a doer nor an enjoyer - being consciousness it is ever
present. Then who really sleep? Perhaps nobody, since
no-body consciousness is there! It is one of the nature's Jigsaw
puzzles to teach that the truth lies beyond the mind and intellect -
nishaa tarkena mati raapaneya - one cannot arrive at the truth by
logic!<br>
<br>
Actually it is "explained" as the consciousness identifies
with kaaraNa shariira or causal body or vaasana, which is pure
ignorance or state of non-apprehension. Misapprehension as
"I am this or that" comes only later when the mind becomes
operative. Hence without the mind and intellect, the plurality
is not there - yet ignorance is still there in the deep sleep state,
since I still do not know "who I am" in that state.
Hence avidya or ignorance is associated with two aspects - aavaraNa
and vikshepa, non-apprehension and misapprehension. Since
non-apprehension is there even before mind becomes active, avidya is
also anaadi and anirvachaniiyam - beginningless and inexplainable
since beginning and end are concepts of time, or cause-effect,
hence of the mind and explanations are also part of the intellect and
mind.<font face="Times" size="-1"> <br>
</font></font> </div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Hari Om!</div>
<div>Sadananda</div>
<div>-- <br>
K. Sadananda<br>
Code 6323<br>
Naval Research Laboratory<br>
Washington D.C. 20375<br>
Voice
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 07:26:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Fwd: Notes on BSB I-i-4-1H
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Interesting discussions from Shree Jaldhar Vaas, Shree Shirisha Rao,
Shree Stig Lundgren, and Shree Vishal Agarwal regarding the
identification of the two VR^itti kaara-s that Adi Shankara discusses
as puurvapakshii's. Any final conclusion about who they are? My
special thanks to Shree Shirisha Rao providing his input into this.
His perspective on the BSB notes is always welcome.
We will start the notes soon with Shankra's response to the
vR^ittikaara's puurvapaksha.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 07:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Does a person who has taken sannyaasa has gotra etc.? Whatever is the
gotra of their puurvaashramam should not matter after sannyaasa.
Correct me if I am wrong.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 12:19:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
>Does a person who has taken sannyaasa has gotra etc.? Whatever is the
>gotra of their puurvaashramam should not matter after sannyaasa.
>
>Correct me if I am wrong.
>
>
>
>=====
>ambaaL daasan
>
>Ravi
As I understand: In principle that is what it is meant for sannyaasa
or samyak naayasa - jaati niiti kula gotra duuragam ...
Yet one hear stories that some sannyaasiis are proud that they are
brahmin sannyaasiis in contrast to sannyaasiis from other casts. We
had a friend who was great sannyaasin and scholar but was
discriminated by many Hindus since he was a muslim in the
puurvaashrama. Some of the lingering vaasana-s of the puurvashrama
can affect the behavior of the sannyasins as well. It is still an
ashrama and one should follow that ashrama rules to be eligible to be
called as real sannyasins. Otherwise as Shankara himself points out
- jaTilo munDii lunchita keshaH, kaashhaayaambara bahu kR^ita veshaH
.... etc.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: web sites for bhagavad gita with bhashya of Sri Shankara
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:48:16 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C0DDFE.18697510"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C0DDFE.18697510
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Namaskaram.
I was wondering if members know of any web site that gives the bhagavad gi=
ta with bhashya by sri shankara. There are several other translations and c=
ommentaries by various other people and scholars.
Thanks in advance for the help.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C0DDFE.18697510
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4613.1700" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Namaskaram.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I was wondering if members know of a=
ny web=20
site that gives the bhagavad gita with bhashya by sri shankara. There are=20
several other translations and commentaries by various other people and=20
scholars.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks in advance for the help.</FONT></DI=
V>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>bhava shankara desikame sharaNam</FONT></D=
IV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial
>From Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy at m...>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 17:40:56 -0230 (NDT)
Reply-To: Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy at m...>
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Who slept well?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy at m...>
On Wed, 16 May 2001, K. Sadananda wrote:
> From the postings of Shree Ram Chandran in adviatin and Shree Vivek
> Anand Ganesan; in adviata-L
>
>
> Article reproduced from The Hindu, Indian newspaper,
> Religion section. It is a treat.
> ===========================================================
> Self-realisation, a matter of experience
>
> I wonder if it is really an experience! - But I do understand; words
> are limited to express. Baghavaan Ramana puts this beautifully in
> his first sloka of Sat Darshan - "sat pratyayaa kinnu vihaaya santam"
> since it is the very nature of ones own existence itself - where
> experience, experiencer and experienced merges into one. - (Hence
> Lord is called tripuraantaka!)
>
> "In his discourse, Sri Goda Venkateswara Sastri said that
> the Upanishads explained that the mind was not eternal in
> nature. For instance during
> sleep it ceased to function. But, the consciousness of the
> Self (I) never ceases to be. A person after waking up says,
> ``I slept well.'' From this it also
> becomes clear that the mind and the Self are different.
> The mind functions in the waking and dream states but not
> in sleep, whereas the ``I''
> consciousness is there in all the three states of waking,
> dream and sleep. The Self is often referred to as the
> fourth state of consciousness.
> ..............
>
> It is the waking mind that answers saying that "I slept well?" -
> Yet it was not there to sleep well in the deep sleep state. Then who
> experiences the deep sleep? Or is it an experience at all?
> Interesting questions to ponder about. Any experience involves three
> aspects - expriencer, experiencing and experienced. From the mind's
> point it was present in the dream-state but not in deep sleep state
> for it to be a vehicle for an experience. Hence from the mind's point
> "I slept well" is only an inferential statement and not an
> experiential statement. Consciousness is akartaa and abhoktaa,
> neither a doer nor an enjoyer - being consciousness it is ever
> present. Then who really sleep? Perhaps nobody, since no-body
> consciousness is there! It is one of the nature's Jigsaw puzzles to
> teach that the truth lies beyond the mind and intellect - nishaa
> tarkena mati raapaneya - one cannot arrive at the truth by logic!
>
> Actually it is "explained" as the consciousness identifies with
> kaaraNa shariira or causal body or vaasana, which is pure ignorance
> or state of non-apprehension. Misapprehension as "I am this or that"
> comes only later when the mind becomes operative. Hence without the
> mind and intellect, the plurality is not there - yet ignorance is
> still there in the deep sleep state, since I still do not know "who I
> am" in that state. Hence avidya or ignorance is associated with two
> aspects - aavaraNa and vikshepa, non-apprehension and
> misapprehension. Since non-apprehension is there even before mind
> becomes active, avidya is also anaadi and anirvachaniiyam -
> beginningless and inexplainable since beginning and end are concepts
> of time, or cause-effect, hence of the mind and explanations are
> also part of the intellect and mind.
>
namaste shri Sadananda garu,
That is a very good question and the only answer I can think of is
"There is no one (that slept well)".
You observed that brahman is not the one that has "slept well".
The jIvA of the wake-up state is not there while the deep-sleep is
going on, hence the jIvA of the wake-up state is not the one that
has slept well.
The one that is there in all the three states (of wake-up, dream
and deep-sleep) is not speaking and is of course not the one that
is sleeping.
I think it can be argued that the jIvA of the wake-up state is
not the same even throughout the wake-up state. Thus, a statement
like "I am such and such ..." is not a defensible statement.
--------
On a related matter, shri Sadananda garu, you have said in the
thread "Re: brahman - a word of caution" "Just a word of caution-
-Discusser's are discussing from different reference states -
all disagreements are resolved if one is aware of this. ..."
What is the "boundary", or is there a "boundary" between the
vyavahArika and paramArtha? For example, it has been argued
above (correctly in my understanding) that there is no entity
that is sleeping. Is that statement in paramArtha or vyavahArika?
If we say it is in paramArtha, the counter-argument can be
"There is no statement or speaking in paramArtha. Any speaking
has to be relegated to vyavahArika."
Then, if the statement is in vyavahArika, at the general
day-to-day proceedings, that statement is not correct because
jIvA X is usually identified to be the same in sleep, wake-up
and dream states. That is, vyavahArika is stretched right from
complete ignorance to the complete Knowledge of the paramArtha.
Then, is there a "boundary" (either sharp or blurred) between
vyavahArika speaking and paramArthika mounam? [Implicit in
this argument is the thinking that it is the same jIvA that
is 'going' from complete ignorance to full Knowledge as
avidyA is removed layer by layer - that argument may not be
absolutely correct].
Another question - In the "explanation" which you presented -
there is non-apprehension in deep-sleep and mis-apprehension
in the wake-up state and the consciousness identifies with the
kAraNa sharIra (the subtle body) and that consciousness identifying
with the subtle body answers during the wake-up state that "I
slept well". The difference between a jnAni and an ajnAni -
isn't it only in the wake-up state?. Mis-apprehension is there
for the ajnAni and mis-apprehension is not there for the
jnAni and that is only in the wake-up state. The non-apprehension
in the deep-sleep state is the same for both jnAni and ajnAni. The
jnAni does not identify with the deep-sleep state and hence will
not do the mis-apprehension in the wake-up state. The ajnAni,
because of consciousness identifying with the subtle body,
mis-apprehends and says "I slept well" during the wake-up state.
Still, the non-apprehension during deep-sleep is still there
and common for both jnAni and ajnAni. Am I correct in saying that?
>
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
> --
Regards
Gummuluru Murthy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy at m...>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:22:42 -0230 (NDT)
Subject: Re: web sites for bhagavad gita with bhashya of Sri Shankara
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy at m...>
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Vaidya Sundaram wrote:
> Namaskaram.
> I was wondering if members know of any web site that gives the bhagavad gita with bhashya by sri shankara. There are several other translations and commentaries by various other people and scholars.
> Thanks in advance for the help.
> bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
> Vaidya.
>
namaste.
The bhagavadgItA supersite has shri shankara's bhAShya + the
english translations by swami gambhirananda, swami sivananda
and also by Dr. shankaranarayanan, available in sanskrit and
in various other Indian languages. The URL is
www.gitasupersite.org
Regards
Gummuluru Murthy
----------------------------------------------------------------
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 21:39:17 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
The word prANa is missing in the discussion. This is an important item, so I
wish to reword as follows.. kindly correct any mistakes. Hopefully it will
generate more raw material to discuss.
>It is the waking mind that answers saying that "I slept well?" -
>Yet it was not there to sleep well in the deep sleep state. Then who
>experiences the deep sleep? Or is it an experience at all?
The experiencer in deep-sleep is prANa, or the involuntary nervous system.
If you mildly pinch some one who is sleeping, the body reacts but the person
may not wake up. If you shake the person hard then prANa wakes up the mind
and asks it to take care of the situation.
Please refer to ajAtazatru's experiment in Br.U. on this matter when he
wakes up a sleeping person. You can also read a nice commentary on it..
http://www.philo.demon.co.uk/structur.htm
http://www.philo.demon.co.uk/Darshana.htm
>Interesting questions to ponder about. Any experience involves three
>aspects - expriencer, experiencing and experienced.
The prANa is the experiencer, it experiences its own pure consciousness and
unites with it. ana and its food annam unite and become one in deep-sleep.
Everything becomes one in deep-sleep state also (like in turIya). But as
prANa is a causal state it is not the highest.
>From the mind's point it was present in the dream-state but not in >deep
>sleep state for it to be a vehicle for an experience. Hence from >the
>mind's point "I slept well" is only an inferential statement and >not an
>experiential statement.
Absolutely true.
But let us not forget that the prANa which was the experiencer in
deep-sleep, also continues to be an experiencer in the dream and waking
states, though it delegates majority of its tasks to lower entities and
reserves its right to intervene if something is beyond control of mind etc,
and is presently watching us even now while we chat, like a boss who can sit
in his/her room and watch otherss surfing the internet in the office. :-)
The prANa never sleeps; if it sleeps the organism is dead. The prANa is
saguNa Brahman, though its association with the body is limited to one's
life span.
>Consciousness is akartaa and abhoktaa, neither a doer nor an enjoyer -
> >being consciousness it is ever present. Then who really sleep? Perhaps
> >nobody, since no-body consciousness is there! It is one of the >nature's
>Jigsaw puzzles to teach that the truth lies beyond the mind >and intellect
>- nishaa tarkena mati raapaneya - one cannot arrive at >the truth by logic!
Absolutely true, nobody is the sleeper. As prANa never sleeps, it is not the
sleeper. Mind etc got merged (dissolved) into prANa and re-emerge from it as
transformations of the same prANa. Ultimately we will know that prANa itself
doesn't exist apart from Existence.
>Actually it is "explained" as the consciousness identifies with
>kaaraNa shariira or causal body or vaasana, which is pure ignorance
>or state of non-apprehension.
I am hesitant about, even oppose use of the word ignorance for prANa.
Non-apprehension is the perfect word for prANa, because prANa being a causal
state (cause of creation and cause of destruction) it only creates objects
and dissolves them but never plays with objects! just as a professional cook
who only creates food but doesn't care to taste it himself/herself.
>Misapprehension as "I am this or that" comes only later when the mind
> >becomes operative. Hence without the mind and intellect, the plurality
> >is not there - yet ignorance is still there in the deep sleep state,
Please read careless non-apprehension instead of ignorance.
>since I still do not know "who I am" in that state. Hence avidya or
> >ignorance is associated with two aspects - aavaraNa and vikshepa,
>non->apprehension and misapprehension. Since non-apprehension is there even
> >before mind becomes active, avidya is also anaadi and anirvachaniiyam -
>beginningless and inexplainable since beginning and end are concepts
>of time, or cause-effect, hence of the mind and explanations are
>also part of the intellect and mind.
>
I agree avidya is there, but this avidya is not part of prANa. It is part of
the memory of the sleeping person. When a person wakes up, prANa tries to
use the resources of the person/creature hosting it, but prANa can only
activate that much, as much is in the memory of that creature. And what is
stored in the memory is limited, and insufficient to tackle the vast
creation activity prANa is planning to take up. So at the time of waking up,
the creature will not let prANa do the whole creation of the universe, but
only allows the creature to create as much as is deposited in its own
memory, and only those objects it is comfortable to live with and work with.
>namaste shri Sadananda garu,
>That is a very good question and the only answer I can think of is
>"There is no one (that slept well)".
>You observed that brahman is not the one that has "slept well".
>The jIvA of the wake-up state is not there while the deep-sleep is
>going on, hence the jIvA of the wake-up state is not the one that
>has slept well.
Are we talking on behalf of the jIva, or are we talking from our experience
of seeing the jIva going to sleep and waking up in front of us? :-)
If I am talking "about" the jIva, the jIva itself doesn't exist apart from
me.
If I am talking "on behalf of the jIva" then the jIva always exists as
Existence.
>The one that is there in all the three states (of wake-up, dream
>and deep-sleep) is not speaking and is of course not the one that
>is sleeping.
The one that "is" there "in" all the three states is prANa or prajna, which
is the deep-sleep state itself. The one that stands apart in the background
is turIya or nirguNa Brahman.
>I think it can be argued that the jIvA of the wake-up state is
>not the same even throughout the wake-up state. Thus, a statement
>like "I am such and such ..." is not a defensible statement.
Wonderful! The jIva of the wake-up state is actually a khichdi of vizva,
taijasa and prajna in a proportion that depends on the skill level of a
person.
-----------
>On a related matter, shri Sadananda garu, you have said in the >thread "Re:
>brahman - a word of caution" "Just a word of caution-
>-Discusser's are discussing from different reference states -
>all disagreements are resolved if one is aware of this. ..."
>What is the "boundary", or is there a "boundary" between the
>vyavahArika and paramArtha? For example, it has been argued above
> >(correctly in my understanding) that there is no entity that is
> >sleeping. Is that statement in paramArtha or vyavahArika?
.........
Kindly tell us the rest.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 07:26:58 -0400
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Who slept well?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Murthy gaaru thanks for your input.
Underlying in your response is the need for a clear understanding of
the concept of Jiiva to answer whether Jiiva is there or not in the
deep sleep state. I am sure you are aware of this but I will put my
understanding in words for clarification.
Jiiva is Brahman himself or itself but identified with the
upaadhii's, that include kaaraNa shariira, suukshma shariira and
sthuula shariira, the causal, subtle and the gross bodies
respectively. In the waking state all the three bodies are being
identified in one form or the other but gross body becomes an
important vehicle for transaction or vyavahaara. In the dream state
the identification with the gross body ceases but identification with
subtle and causal body remains. In the deep sleep state the
identification with subtle body ceases but identification with the
causal body remains. During the death, the gross body is left behind
hence identification with that particular gross body ceases leaving
the subtle body and causal body identification in tact. As this
proceeds to different fields of experiences (loka-s or bhoga
bhuumii-s), the mind gets cleansed off and jiiva returns back to the
karma bhuumi (kshene punye martyu lokam vishanti).
I am giving this in detail to insure that we understand that Jiiva is
the notion that arises with the identification with the Upaadhiis and
kaaraNa shariira included as a subtle upaadhi.
In the realization that I am Brahman, upaadhi-s do not cease until
death occurs (to put it one way the praarabda karma associated with
those upaadhi-s or to put it differently the forces of samishhTi
vaasana-s such as in the case of avataarapurusha-s cease), but
identification with the upaadhi-s - I am that upaadhi-s ceases. That
is the correct understanding of "I am Brahman" or aham brahmaasmi.
Hence the states and changing of the states which have always been
associated with prakR^iti remain but understanding that I am that
PrakR^iti ceases. The new understanding (or should I say correct
understanding) is that in my presence the prakR^iti manifests is
realized. mayyadhyakshaena prakR^iti suuyate.....
Now we can answer whether j~naani sleeps or not. The correct
understanding is in each of the states, waking, dream and deep sleep
states, the part or parts of the systems are as though taking rest -
gross body to subtle body etc. and this happens to everybody. But
for j~naani, realizing that he not being upaadhi-s, understands that
they are in him but he is not them. Hence even though the
perceptions through the body, seeing, touching, tasting etc goes on,
he also has the correct understanding that he does not see, touch or
taste. The sleeping also comes under the same category. He as
though sleeps but he does not sleep. He awakes, but in reality he is
not awaken since he never slept to start with. He dreams but he does
not dream. Upaadhi-s function in his presence but he is not
upaadhi-s. This is actually true for both j~naani-s as well as
aj~naani-s. The only difference is that j~naani knows that he is not
the upaadhi-s while aj~naani thinks he is the upaadhi-s.
Vyavahaara arises in the identification or adhyaasa. For others,
they see that j~naani is transacting like everyone else. But
understanding of each is different. j~naani knows that all actions
are done by the prakR^iti in his presence - prakR^iti eva ca karmaani
kriyamaanaani sarvashaH - and one who realizes this realizes that he
is akarthaa and abhoktaa.
The issues that you have raised get clarified if one reads your post
with the above understanding.
If there are still unresolved issues let us discuss.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>
>namaste shri Sadananda garu,
>
>That is a very good question and the only answer I can think of is
>"There is no one (that slept well)".
>
>You observed that brahman is not the one that has "slept well".
>
>The jIvA of the wake-up state is not there while the deep-sleep is
>going on, hence the jIvA of the wake-up state is not the one that
>has slept well.
>
>The one that is there in all the three states (of wake-up, dream
>and deep-sleep) is not speaking and is of course not the one that
>is sleeping.
>
>I think it can be argued that the jIvA of the wake-up state is
>not the same even throughout the wake-up state. Thus, a statement
>like "I am such and such ..." is not a defensible statement.
>
>
>--------
>
>On a related matter, shri Sadananda garu, you have said in the
>thread "Re: brahman - a word of caution" "Just a word of caution-
>-Discusser's are discussing from different reference states -
>all disagreements are resolved if one is aware of this. ..."
>
>What is the "boundary", or is there a "boundary" between the
>vyavahArika and paramArtha? For example, it has been argued
>above (correctly in my understanding) that there is no entity
>that is sleeping. Is that statement in paramArtha or vyavahArika?
The apparent (underlined the apparent) boundary between vyavahaara
and paramaarthika is the ignorance. Trying to understand the nature
of this boundary is the same as trying to understand the nature of
ignorance. Shankara left it for a good reason as anirvachaniiyam.
The answer is obvious since "understanding" is with the intellect
which itself is the by-product of ignorance. Your questions borders
in this boundary line! For j~naani everything is paramaarthika and
aj~naani everything is in vyavahaarika. Actually this is nothing in
between! One knows or one does not know and obviously a mere
intellectual understanding is not understanding in the true sense-
hence kena sloka - one who says he understands understands it not!.
>If we say it is in paramArtha, the counter-argument can be
>"There is no statement or speaking in paramArtha. Any speaking
>has to be relegated to vyavahArika."
>
>Then, if the statement is in vyavahArika, at the general
>day-to-day proceedings, that statement is not correct because
>jIvA X is usually identified to be the same in sleep, wake-up
>and dream states. That is, vyavahArika is stretched right from
>complete ignorance to the complete Knowledge of the paramArtha.
>Then, is there a "boundary" (either sharp or blurred) between
>vyavahArika speaking and paramArthika mounam? [Implicit in
>this argument is the thinking that it is the same jIvA that
>is 'going' from complete ignorance to full Knowledge as
>avidyA is removed layer by layer - that argument may not be
>absolutely correct].
I think the boundary aspect is itself is within aj~naana. These
questions get resolved when one realizes or they get sublimated! Any
intellectual answers along with the questions are all muddled with
the same problem - they are aj~naana janakam. born of ignorance.
>Another question - In the "explanation" which you presented -
>there is non-apprehension in deep-sleep and mis-apprehension
>in the wake-up state and the consciousness identifies with the
>kAraNa sharIra (the subtle body) and that consciousness identifying
>with the subtle body answers during the wake-up state that "I
>slept well". The difference between a jnAni and an ajnAni -
>isn't it only in the wake-up state?. Mis-apprehension is there
>for the ajnAni and mis-apprehension is not there for the
>jnAni and that is only in the wake-up state. The non-apprehension
>in the deep-sleep state is the same for both jnAni and ajnAni.
This I have clarified above. j~naani does not have non-apprehension.
He apprehends that he is Brahman and not the upaadhi-s, hence we call
him a j~naani. Ones he understands that there is no more ignorance
left and no more mis-apprehension either. It is not the sleep that
is the problem that is in a way the nature's role - but
identification with the upaadhi-s as I am that is the aj~naana and
that is not there for j~naani. Hence waking dreaming and sleeping
can go on but aj~naani thinks he is waker, dreamer and deep sleeper
while j~naani knows the fact that he is neither a waker, nor dreamer
nor deep-sleeper. Hope this is clear now.
>The
>jnAni does not identify with the deep-sleep state and hence will
>not do the mis-apprehension in the wake-up state.
Yes that is the correct. The fact that he does not identify is
because he has realized or he has no more non-apprehension
that he is
upaadhi-s.
>The ajnAni,
>because of consciousness identifying with the subtle body,
>mis-apprehends and says "I slept well" during the wake-up state.
>Still, the non-apprehension during deep-sleep is still there
>and common for both jnAni and ajnAni. Am I correct in saying that?
The last statement is not right. For a j~naani there is no more
non-apprehension. Here the apprehension is I am Brahman and not I am
samsaari which arises with the adhyaasa that I am these upaadhi-s.
It is a good idea to read the adhyaasa bhaasya again. You can see
Shankara's brilliance in presenting the adhyaasa bhaashya before he
presents the suutra bhaashya.
I urge everyone to read that section again and again.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>
>>
>> Hari Om!
>> Sadananda
>> --
>
>Regards
>Gummuluru Murthy
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 08:12:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
>The word prANa is missing in the discussion. This is an important item, so I
>wish to reword as follows.. kindly correct any mistakes. Hopefully it will
>generate more raw material to discuss.
>
>Kindly tell us the rest.
>
>Regards
>Bhadraiah
Shree Bhadraiah
Thanks for your input.
Your statements about praaNa are interesting.
I have just now responded shree Murthy gaarus discussion where my
understanding of the issues he has raised is presented.
About praaNa, the concept is somewhat unclear to me. From Vedanta
perspective - praaNa is identified as the physiological functions of
the body - praaNa, apaana, vyaana, udaana and samaana as the
expressions of the "life" . What is really life is not understood
and one can equate to Iswara or Brahman. In the kena Up. there is a
statement - yat praaNena na praNati yena praaNa praNiiyate, tad eva
brahma tvam viddhi nedam yadidma upaasate - In analogy with the
previous slokas in the bunch of five, that which speech can not speak
but because of which one has the capacity to speak, that which the
mind cannot think but because of which the mind has the capacity to
think, that which the eyes cannot see or ears cannot hear but because
of which the eyes and ears have the capacity to hear, that alone is
Brahman and not that this that you worship. In the same token praaNa
is also mentioned. In analogy with hearing and seeing etc I presume
that mantra refers to praaNa in the same token as the physiological
function of the body.
In contrast - in the discussion of antaH karaNa, inner instruments or
subtler instruments Shankara identifies as four aspects of it - mind,
intellect, ego and chit. Each of these are defined by Shankara in
Tatva bhodha. Here the psychological functions of the thought process
are classified.
I am not sure the praNa that you refer to corresponds among the
physiological or psychological instruments.
If you identify it with Iswara, there is no problem except Iswara is
the Brahman identified with the samishhTi upaadhi-s not the local
ones. There is of course, micro and macro aspects to differentiate
the local and global upaadhies.
If it is identified with the pratibimba or jiiva in the local
equipment - reflected consciousness - then Jiiva actually does not
sleep but has the notion that he sleeps and that is due to avidya to
use the adviatic terms and that manifests as adhyaasa. Since these
over the years have been used with clear definition as technical
words, I prefer to stick to them since that results in less confusion
in communication. Avidya is the same as Maaya from Iswara's point
since he is maayavi and it is his shakti. Shankara discusses the
duel role of avidya - avaaraNa and vikshepa - ignorance and
projection - It is with reference to these I discussed the
non-apprehension and misapprehension.
I hope I am clear.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 14:11:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>Does a person who has taken sannyaasa has gotra etc.? Whatever is the
>gotra of their puurvaashramam should not matter after sannyaasa.
Does not matter after sannyaasa. I assume Vishal's query was purely
academic, regarding the antecedent details.
However, since the guru-sishya lineage is important, gotra is used
as a codeword among Dasanami Sannyasis. The names of the gotras are
different from the Grihastha gotras, and help identify the particular
teacher lineage of any Sannyasin. They say this has come about only
to eliminate fraudulent representation by people who are not part of
the Dasanami Sannyasa tradition. There is a PhD thesis by Wade Dazey
from U. California, Santa Barbara, which has documented this practice.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 14:43:14 -0400
Subject: ADMIN - changing settings in subscriptions
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Dear Advaita-L members,
This is just to share a few tips on how to manage your subscription
options directly online.
1. Go to http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html
2. There is a link at the top, which says, "Join or leave the list
(or change settings)."
3. This link leads you to a page that allows you to subsribe to or
unsubscribe from our list.
4. If you are already a member, and only wish to change your options,
you can do it the following way -
a. Click on the link that says "login with your LISTSERV password".
b. You will be taken to a screen that asks for your email address and
password. DO NOT enter the password you use to check your private
email. The system is looking for your LISTSERV password. If you do
not already have one, click on "get a new LISTSERV password first".
You will be taken to a page that again asks for your email address
and allows you to create a password for LISTSERV use only.
c. Once you create a new password, you can login using email address
and the new LISTSERV password, to interactively change your settings.
You can choose regular email or digest (MIME or HTML) or index (MIME
or HTML) formats; change the mail header style; change the options
about receiving acknowledgements; or conceal your email address, if
you so wish.
d. You can also temporarily disable mail delivery. This is useful if
you are going to be travelling, and do not want to get a lot of
email in the meantime. It gives you an alternative way of managing
your list subscription, without having to leave the list and join
again later.
e. Finally, if your email address has changed, or if you wish to be
on the list under an alternative email address that you already
have, you can also do this interactively. Enter your new email
address, and click on the button that says "Update options". An
automatic confirmation request will be sent to your new email,
to double-check the request. Once you reply to that with an OK,
your subscription status will be automatically changed from the
old email address to your new one.
Best wishes,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:42:46 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
The other reason for my query was a vese in the Samkshepa Sariraka wherein
Sarvajnatma refers to the gotra of the Vakyakara, calling him a descedant. I
thought that this was also an indirect hint at his kinship with Bhagvatpada.
VA
----Original Message Follows----
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
<ADVAITA-L at b...>
To: ADVAITA-L at L...
Subject: Re: Sri Shankaracharya's Gotra
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 14:11:19 -0400
>Does a person who has taken sannyaasa has gotra etc.? Whatever is the
>gotra of their puurvaashramam should not matter after sannyaasa.
Does not matter after sannyaasa. I assume Vishal's query was purely
academic, regarding the antecedent details.
However, since the guru-sishya lineage is important, gotra is used
as a codeword among Dasanami Sannyasis. The names of the gotras are
different from the Grihastha gotras, and help identify the particular
teacher lineage of any Sannyasin. They say this has come about only
to eliminate fraudulent representation by people who are not part of
the Dasanami Sannyasa tradition. There is a PhD thesis by Wade Dazey
from U. California, Santa Barbara, which has documented this practice.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Subject: ITRANS hint needed
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 12:42:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Dear members,
Please excuse me for posting this on this list.
I am sure there are many ITRANS experts who understand tamil on
this list... I would like to know how to encode "na" NOT the tha-na
but the one in "kanRu" (tamil for calf) for eg., I couldn't find this
character in the ITRANS table given in the sanskrit ftp website. Is
this included in the ITRANS encodings ?
Can someone kindly let me know?
Thanks,
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 17:25:15 -0400
Subject: General
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Is there a possibility of adding a search to the list archives website? I
know we can get it from escribe but sometimes it does not gather all the
posts.
There was some talk of it some two years back I think.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 21:35:08 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>Sri Sadananda wrote..
>From Vedanta perspective - praaNa is identified as the physiological
> >functions of the body - praaNa, apaana, vyaana, udaana and samaana as
> >the expressions of the "life". What is really life is not understood >and
>one can equate to Iswara or Brahman.
prANa appears to be regular physiological stuff, but actually a very high
level entity. There is not much difference between the terms saguNa Brahman,
prANa, prajna, hiraNyagarbha etc. The difference is only some hair splitting
depending on context.
>In the kena Up. ... that which speech can not speak but because of >which
>one has the capacity to speak, that which the mind cannot think >but
>because of which the mind has the capacity to think, ... In analogy with
>hearing and seeing etc I presume that mantra refers to >praaNa in the same
>token as the physiological function of the body.
Kena's quote is a gem. prANa is the boss of body/mind and it comes to the
rescue whenever mind, intellect etc get into trouble. Mind and intellect
never realize this fact, and boast of their success ignoring prANa.
>In contrast - in the discussion of antaH karaNa, inner instruments or
>subtler instruments Shankara identifies as four aspects of it - mind,
>intellect, ego and chit. Each of these are defined by Shankara in
>Tatva bhodha. Here the psychological functions of the thought process
>are classified.
This model is different, as it does not include prANa. Not including prANa
in a model does not make a subject incomplete or any less (even mind alone
is Brahman right?). tatva bodha may be a work which determines Brahman from
regular psychological functions, so it is more suitable for popular
audiences. (Study of prANa etc needs prANAyAma.) The objective of a reformer
is always to make ordinary people do extra-ordinary things, so Shankara
shows the appropriate path in tatva bodha.
There is another possibility why Sankara dropped prANa approach. In the
first verse of last chapter of gauDapAda kArika, where buddha is mentioned
by name, Sankara mentions that Buddhism is the closest approximation to
advaita. In my opinion, the hierarchy is..
1. advaita - nirguNa Brahman
2 advaita - saguNa brahman consisting of -
a)sat-existence
b)cit-intelligence
c)Anandam-happiness.
3. Buddhism - (whose three qualities are opposite of saguNa brahman)
consisting of -
a)non-existence,
b)transience, in the sense no intelligence can figure out the method in the
madness of how things change
c) sorrow
3. prANa (one material that has properties),
4. ... and so on.
Please note that Buddhism does not reject lower items like prANa. Buddhists
also use haMsa, soham etc. So arguments concerning prANa may not be very
effective in rejecting Buddhism, without also decoding the whole ritual.
>I am not sure the praNa that you refer to corresponds among the
>physiological or psychological instruments.
>If you identify it with Iswara, there is no problem except Iswara is
>the Brahman identified with the samishhTi upaadhi-s not the local
>ones. There is of course, micro and macro aspects to differentiate
>the local and global upaadhies.
Alright, you are coming to the point. How do you say that the individual
living cells of a "single" organism do not constitute samiSTi? For an
organism its own body and mind is everything because the organism is
self-consistent.
Consider Ch. U. III. 12.1 gAyatrIvA idam sarvam bhUtam yadidam kiGca vAgvai
gAyatrI, vAgvA idam sarvam bhUtam gAyatica trAyateca. gAyatri is verily all
these beings that there are. Speech is indeed gAyatri. Speech indeed sings
of all these creatures and protects them.
The vyAkhyAnas go for the simpler meaning for gAyatri as the sum of all
living beings in the universe. When somebody is afraid, speech protects this
person saying "What is there to be afraid of this animal?" (You can tackle
such and such way etc.). But if you explain "all these beings that are here"
as all the living cells in the body we get quite a different meaning. When
any of these living cells feels pain, speech cries out, that is gAyatri
singing. So speech is gAyatri. This is just an example how we can consider
the living cells in the organism can be considered as samiSThi. Similar rule
must also apply to single cell beings also, different parts of the single
cell are the samiSThi.
The collection of the living cells does not sleep even in deep-sleep state.
They are very much alive, and fully under the control of the "involuntary
nervous system". (More on logical aspects of this involuntary nervous system
later.)
>If it is identified with the pratibimba or jiiva in the local
>equipment - reflected consciousness - then Jiiva actually does not
>sleep but has the notion that he sleeps and that is due to avidya to
>use the adviatic terms and that manifests as adhyaasa. Since these
>over the years have been used with clear definition as technical
>words, I prefer to stick to them since that results in less confusion
>in communication. Avidya is the same as Maaya from Iswara's point
>since he is maayavi and it is his shakti. Shankara discusses the
>duel role of avidya - avaaraNa and vikshepa - ignorance and
>projection - It is with reference to these I discussed the
>non-apprehension and misapprehension.
I have no dispute with avidya or its association with jIva. But mANDUkya
upaniSat and all its commentaries fully support equality of prANa and prajna
(sorry I don't have the R.K.Mission book) and prANa and prajna have nothing
to do with ignorance, but the relation is this:
When there is a hurricane, oceanic waters swell several feet high and occupy
the lands. But when the sea waters recede only so much water remains in each
pit or lake as much each they can hold. The deep-sleep state (prjna) is the
full high powered creation activity, but it can create only so much as an
organism can accept. Now whatever portion of the prajna the organism has
accepted, is the prANa of that organism.
This prANa in each jIva is what we observe as the involuntary nervous system
(as observed by the reaction of a sleeping person). Now this involuntary
reaction is also present in wake up state because we can successfully steer
when there is something on our way without much conscious thought.
If a drop of water in the sea is also a "sea", why is the same rule not
applicable to the drop of water that is in the pit? The water in the pit
will reach the ocean one day, this summer or next.
More on prANa and its relation to unknown and Brahman later.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:02:32 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
The avidya question & prANa: Let me first give the big equation:
Deep-sleep-state = invountary nervous system = unknown = prANa = prajna
1. Involuntary nervous system alone is active in deep-sleep state, so both
are equal.
2. Involuntary nervous system is the unknown because it protects us by
taking actions unknowingly to the mind/intellect.
3. Unknown is prANa (from Br. U) as well as common sense: prANa is what is
unknown, we can understand rest of everything other than prANa in the world
using our "scientific" knowledge!
4. prANa is also prajna because, prajna also means skill. One who is skilled
had trained his/her involuntary nervous system.
So now, the prANa that is the jIva is unknown, and the larger prajna that is
the caused this creation is also unknown. Two unknowns are always equal. So
it is proved that prANa in the jIva is prajna (saguNa Brahman).
When mind, intellect etc which are driven by prANa do not realize this fact,
but think they are themselves the bosses it leads to avidya.
When we relate deep-sleep state to avidya, we are going deeper into avidya
instead of eliminating it. This is another big adhyAsa factory.
We can discuss more on avidya if we know exact definition. Kinldy help.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 23:38:01 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>Sri Sadananda wrote..
>If it is identified with the pratibimba or jiiva in the local
>equipment - reflected consciousness - then Jiiva actually does not
>sleep but has the notion that he sleeps and that is due to avidya to
>use the adviatic terms and that manifests as adhyaasa.
OK, I got it now! Sorry I was too slow to understand.
The above statement of yours is perfectly correct. The jIva is saying "I
slept" due to avidya.
But what is the nature of this avidya?
The nature of this avidya is that the jIva has not identified itself with
prANa/prajna, the original cause. The jIva is still thinking I am son of so
and so.
prANa never sleeps. It did not sleep in the so-called "deep-sleep state"
because the sleeping person reacts when pinched. prANa does not also sleep
in dream and waking states, but jIva is not aware of the prANa's guidance
and help which comes every minute.
The jIva, ideally speaking, should identify himself with prANa because prANa
is the real self (saguNa Brahman). But instead the jIva identified with
speech etc, so jIva thinks he slept.
(Even if the jIva identifies with (pure) vizva or with (pure) taijasa, the
situation wouldn't be so bad; because vizva and taijasa are also great
entities, almost close to prajna. I think vizva is close to virAt, and
taijasa is close to someone else (I forgot who it is).)
But when jIva identifies with "I am so and so" that is avidya.
>Since these over the years have been used with clear definition as
> >technical words, I prefer to stick to them since that results in less
> >confusion in communication.
I think there should be no confusion now.
>Avidya is the same as Maaya from Iswara's point since he is maayavi >and
>it is his shakti. Shankara discusses the duel role of avidya - >avaaraNa
>and vikshepa - ignorance and projection - It is with >reference to these I
>discussed the non-apprehension and >misapprehension.
I said prajna doesn't care to apprehend anything, because it is the creator.
It can create any number of worlds.
The jIva has non-apprehension of prajna - the creator & the rescuer of
mind/intellect in every instance in life. The jIva also has the
misapprehension that it is the doer, not the prajna which the real inner
drive.
I suppose this fits well with Shruti, logic, experience and advaita
traditon. Please let me know if it doesn't.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:05:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1221938553==_ma============"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
--============_-1221938553==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
>
>I suppose this fits well with Shruti, logic, experience and advaita
>traditon. Please let me know if it doesn't.
>
>Regards
>Bhadraiah
Shree Bhadraiah - Greetings.
Need time to digest. I have a feeling we are saying the same thing
using different terms.
I am sticking to Shankara's advaitic terminology and I have no
problem in accounting the involuntary actions either - including the
physiological process such as digestion, circulation, heartbeat etc
that occur without ones will - medulla oblongata's functions that is
motivated by PraNa or life itself -Krishna says in Giita Ch. 15 -
aham vishvaanaraH.. the cause for all these processes. Hence your
equation to Iswara is perfectly all right.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
--============_-1221938553==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: Who slept well?</title></head><body>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br>
I suppose this fits well with Shruti, logic, experience and
advaita<br>
traditon. Please let me know if it doesn't.<br>
<br>
Regards</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Bhadraiah</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Shree Bhadraiah - Greetings.<br>
</div>
<div><font face="Times" color="#000000">Need time to digest. I
have a feeling we are saying the same thing using different
terms. </font></div>
<div><font face="Times" color="#000000"><br>
I am sticking to Shankara's advaitic terminology and I have no problem
in accounting the involuntary actions either - including the
physiological process such as digestion, circulation, heartbeat etc
that occur without ones will - medulla oblongata's functions that is
motivated by PraNa or life itself -Krishna says in Giita Ch. 15 - aham
vishvaanaraH.. the cause for all these processes. Hence your
equation to Iswara is perfectly all right.</font></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Hari Om!</div>
<div>Sadananda</div>
<div>-- <br>
K. Sadananda<br>
Code 6323<br>
Naval Research Laboratory<br>
Washington D.C. 20375<br>
Voice
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:55:24 -0400
Subject: Ekadashi
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
When does the Ekadashi fast end today?
thanks
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 08:37:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: General
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
On our main server, to add a decent quality search engine with say Perl
or Tcl will take at least 40 hours of work. This search engine can
almost duplicate what standard list server used to do (we have lite
version). This was my estimate. Given that time I could do it with Tcl.
But I do not have that time now.
If you are interested in doing something like that probably Jaldhar can
help you to do that, by setting you up an account etc. You can even do
this on your machine, you can download the LOG files and test the whole
thing on your machine, before uploading it to the server.
I have done some CGI scripting (very prelimnary stuff), it is
reasonably easy.
There free search engines, but they are not good with the LOG files as
they are. To use them, it is better to split the log files into
individual mails and files with subject and Author as title, so that
results of the query will be very meaningful. I thought about these
long ago, and my memory may be rusty on this.
Sincerely,
Ravi
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:41:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: General
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Thu, 17 May 2001, Ashish Chandra wrote:
> Is there a possibility of adding a search to the list archives website? I
> know we can get it from escribe but sometimes it does not gather all the
> posts.
>
I'm sorry, I'm just now slowly returning from involuntary net-exile at the
hands of Comcast.
While I was out I actually did work on the search engine a bit. The big
problem as Ravi mentioned is the free ones out there are not that good.
Sometimes they have optimizations but these are usually optimized for
English which doesn't do us a lot of good.
What I have now (in perl) works but it is horrendously resource-intensive
and I think if three people tried to access it at once, it would take the
server down. So I'm rewriting it in C++ with a database backend. It may
take a while but rest assured we will one day have a proper search engine.
Meanwhile do you still find escribe is missing posts? I recall that used
to be a problem at one time but I thought it got fixed.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:49:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Tue, 15 May 2001, sriram panyam wrote:
> I would like to know more about the rigidity of the caste system in the vidic
>
> society....as it is said that the varna dharma in the hindu religiion
> was not at all rigid..that a kshatriya could become a brahmana by
> performing penence and professing mastery over the vedas and the
> shastras....with special reference to our great epic mahabharata..in
> which jayadratha's father who granted him a boon was originally a
> kshatriya had later became a brahmin.......! is it true that a person
> belonging to any caeste could become a brahimin by his virtues and
> knowledge.............? I would be obliged if someone would enlighten
> me and my limited scope of
> knowledge regarding this issue.
> thanking you...!
> sriram....!
>
Everyone has limited scope of knowledge on this issue. It is too far back
in the past, the evidence is meagre. We can only make guesses.
It should be pointed out that if such a culture ever existed, it is
extinct now. We are the descendents of people who believed cast is based
on birth. It has been this way for a long time. Even the Buddha (6th
century BC) complained that some of the Brahmans of his day were not
living up to their ancestry.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:36:33 -0400
Subject: Re: General
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Fri, 18 May 2001 13:41:36 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas
<jaldhar at B...> wrote:
>
>Meanwhile do you still find escribe is missing posts? I recall that used
>to be a problem at one time but I thought it got fixed.
>
I have taken to using the archive website on your server as opposed to
escribe ever since I found out that they were still dropping messages
randomly. I remember as far back as Jan that it used to be a problem - that
is when I switched.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:00:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Ekadashi
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<On Fri, 18 May 2001, Ashish Chandra wrote:
> When does the Ekadashi fast end today?
>
According to the calendar on the wall, 8:48pm EDT
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:56:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Ekadashi
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Fri, 18 May 2001 15:00:20 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas
<jaldhar at B...> wrote:
><On Fri, 18 May 2001, Ashish Chandra wrote:
>
>> When does the Ekadashi fast end today?
>>
>
>According to the calendar on the wall, 8:48pm EDT
>
That would make it 7:48 PM EDT correct?
Is there a website that gives accurate timings for tithis in the US. I am
also trying to find out for Pradosh.
thanks
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Who slept well?
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 03:00:36 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>I have a feeling we are saying the same thing using different terms.
Yes it was never different at the highest level.
But below the higest level (prANa etc), certain conclusions not intended by
either Shruti or Acharyas are being inferred by general public which go
against Shruti and ultimately lead to what I call "lazy advaita". I am not
saying every one has to take up prANayAma but knowing the precise hierarchy
is important even for logical reasons.
Why should an advaitist accept anything involuntary or automatic, however
helpful for living? Let us say my bank starts depositing $1000 every month
into my account for some unknown reason. I may be pleasantly surprised, and
keep enjoying the money until one fine day when $10,000 will vanish from my
account. I should have inquired on the first day when the strange event
happened.
A true advaitist is like a truth seeking missile (like the heat-seeking
missile). When the advaitist finds anything that is involuntary, he goes up
and inquires about it, and if it is the root cause of everything, he
identifies with it, than just sit and enjoy the benefits it doles out which
are impermanent.
>I am sticking to Shankara's advaitic terminology
>..and I have no problem in accounting the involuntary actions either -
> >including the physiological process such as digestion, circulation,
> >heartbeat etc that occur without ones will - medulla oblongata's
> >functions that is motivated by PraNa or life itself -Krishna says in
> >Giita Ch. 15 - aham vishvaanaraH.. the cause for all these processes.
You quoted it right from gIta, prANa is the cause of all the processes.
But again, just to make sure the message is not lost (non-apprehension) or
misunderstood (mis-apprehension)...
The conclusion is not that prANa controls the involuntary physiological
processes of a list of organs, as if there are other voluntary processes
(mind, intellect etc) that are not motivated by prANa. These other entities
are motivated by prANa even when they disregard prANa. Please note that the
hierarchy starts with Name, speech, mind,.. and ends with prANa as the
highest. All the other organs that seem to think they are independent are
actually being controlled by prANa.
..unless ofcourse one is already meditating on Brahman in which case
everything is voluntary including prANa, and there will be nothing
involuntary from that highest stage.
>Hence your equation to Iswara is perfectly all right.
Also please note the story in Ch.U. in which different sense organs argue
who is great, and each of them leaves the body for a year and returns to
inquire how the body lived without that organ. When the prANa plans to
leave, rest all organs rise up to prevent it from leaving.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 01:15:04 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I heard that a person is a shudra before the upanayanam ceremony
irrespective of birth, but the saMskAra makes him a Brahmin. Is this a valid
tradition?
I will be leaving this list as I have to read some software manuals. Thanks
for the kindness of list admins and members.
Sankara's favorite quote is : One who has a teacher knows. For him the delay
is for that long only.. Ch.U. 6.1.4.2
Following the Guru is the best method. In addition, my suggestion to those
who want further reading, is collect all of Sankara's commentaries on
upaniSats and read them first. Some times reading a subject from top gives a
better view and avoids surprises; it may be better than starting from works
meant for beginners and then branching to works full of logic and hair
splitting. Or just read them in any sequence and follow your instincts.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 08:11:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Vishal Agarwal wrote:
> VA: That is a TOTAL distortion of the Mimamsa Shastra.
Once again, let me note that the view I'm presenting here is the one our
sadguru parampara has held forever. So if there is any distortion going
on it's their fault not mine.
> The non-mention of
> something in the Vedas does not imply that it is invalid.
But it is mentioned. The process for upanayana is given in detail.
Certain types of people however are not in it.
> Infact, a phrase
> in RV and AV goes : "Bhimaa jaayaa brahmasyopanitaa" where 'brahma' = Veda
> and so the right of women to Veda is established by Sruti itself and it
> trumps all contrary Smritis.
>
Come on Vishal we've been through this enough times to know a random
sentence does not Dharma make.
> VA: You ought to consider the Sutra - 6.1.27 which goes 'nimittarthena
> badari...." or 'For a special reason, says Badari..." with regard to the
> right of humans to Angnyadhana. Note the words 'special reason'.
[...]
> Consequently,while only the first 3 varnas are mentioned, the link up with
> the seasons is for a special purpose and hence this particular injunction
> cannot be used to debar Sudras in general from Vedic rites. If a person born
> in a Sudra household shows the ability to perform the Vedic rite in its
> totality, he is entitled to Agnyadhana.
This is a purvapaksha. In 6.1.37, Maharshi Jaimini gives the siddhanta
using almost exactly the same reasoning I did. (Which goes to show the
fidelity of tradition. I wasn't even aware of this text when I made the
argument.)
> JV: Atreyi means a pregnant woman or
> a daughter of Atri Gotra. Because it uses the masculine gender, the
> opponent says the sin only applies if she is carrying a male child or if
> the sex of the foetus is not known because there is a chance it could be
> male. (The implication being it is ok to kill a girl.) Maharshi Jaimini
> rejects this view. He says "He" and "him" are used generically and to
> kill a male or female baby is equally sinful.
>
> He also notes that this doesn't apply in the case of where for example a
> male animal (like a bull) is specifically enjoined to be sacrificed. And
> the above example only applies to the daughter of Atri gotra not pregnant
> women in general. This is because as I noted above a specific rule
> overrides a more generic one.
> VA: The above interpretation, although based on a commentatorial tradition,
> is wrong. In fact, the Purva Mimamsa commentators often falter in explaining
> the Sutras, in my opinion.
Perhaps but I find it wildly implausible to believe that throughout many
centuries people who had mastered the theory and practice of the Vedic
rituals could have made such a mistake. There would have to be very
strong evidence and as per my comments below I don't think you're
providing it.
> Atreyi as such here does not mean a 'pregnant
> woman' or 'of Atri Gotra'. Rather, it means 'a woman who has aborted or
> miscarried'. To quote Kanva Shatapatha again:
> 2.4.2.14 ….Speech who had been set aside was shocked and her foetus fell out
> (aborted)
> 2.4.2.15 She verily said to Prajapati, “May I not be an oblation-bearer for
> you at all, for you spoke against me”. Therefore whatever dedicated to
> Prajapati is done, that is performed verily silently (in a low voice); for
> the speech became non-oblation-bearer to him. Then, this seed (foetus) that
> had been poured out, the gods held in a (piece of) slin or in a small
> vessel. Then they asked, “Is it here?” (It answered) “Verily here (atra)”.
> Therefore it became Atri (from it Atri was born). Verily therefore they say,
> “One becomes a sinner (by intercourse) with an Atreyi (a woman who has
> aborted). Indeed from the female, the deity ‘speech’ he (Atri) originated.
>
> Apala Atreyi was Rgvedic Rishika and since she suffered from Svetakushtha,
> the word Atreyi is also used to denote a woman suffering from this disease.
> The translation ' a woman of Atri lineage' is quite irrelevant here.
> Time permitting, I will cite other texts on 'Atreyi' later.
>
In the Madhyandina Shatapatha Brahmana the order is slightly different.
This story occurs in 1.5.4.8-15. The context is as follows: mana
(mind -- a masculine noun) and vAk (speech -- a feminine noun) argued as
to who was greater. mana said "I am because I provide the thoughts which
you utter." vAk said "I am because without me your thoughts would not
be known publicly." They asked Prajapati for a decision. Prajapati
agreed mana is superior because vAk only copies what is produced by
mana. Then the rest is as you said. The whole story is primararily an
arthavada to explain why we say the offering to Prajapati mentally rather
than out loud like the rest. Almost as a paranthetical remark it also
mentions at the end that one who kills (actually injures is probably a
better translation following Sayanacharya) a pregnant women is guilty of
murder of the foetus.
Your translation doesn't make sense. A parallel is drawn between the
events of the story and the rule. ("Therefore they say") The "sinner" in the
story is obviously Prajapati. He does not have intercourse with vAk but
he does through his harsh words cause her to miscarry which is why she
curses him.
> VA: Look at it the other way. The Yajamana has to be present with his wife
> and the two FORM A PAIR as the text says. Therefore, while they might
> perform different functions of the Yajna, nevertheless they are conjoint
> performers and BOTH obtain the fruit of the sacrifice.
Ok.
> Some sacrifices can be performed by individuals and both women and men can
> perform them.
The crucial difference is, as the sutras point out, a woman has to do the
mechanics of the yajna _through_her_husband_ .
Thus, in the Ramayana we see Sita, Kausalya etc. performing
> the Agnihotra, a practice which is sanctioned by the additional verses of
> Manu (quoted by Kulluka) and Atharvana Sruti (I shall cite these later).
>
I have the Manvarthamuktavali, can you tell me where those verses are?
Ditto for Ramayana references.
> JV: During the wedding ceremony a dowry is given and the father-in-law does
> kanyadana or gift of his daughter to her husband. So she is the property
> of her husband. Also sacrifices cost money and being property herself she
> has no wealth to use for that purpose.
> VA: No, the passage rather refers to the practice of 'Strisulka' mentioned
> in a passage of the Maitrayani Samhita. Here, the groom 'purchases' the
> bride from her father - exact reverse of dowry. Jaimini states that this
> 'purchase' is merely symbolic, not literal.
Ok.
> JV: Also there is no room for prenuptial agreements or seperate bank
> accounts
> in our conception of marriage! Whatever the couple posess they posess as
> a team. What is hers is his and what is his is hers. So if the wife
> wants to spend some of the family resources on sacrifice, the husband has
> no right to stop her.
> VA: No, the 'Stridhana' belongs only to the woman and the husband cannot use
> it. Exception is the Braahmavivaaha where the husband can use his wife's
> wealth but with her knowledge and permission. Stridhana is also not
> inherited by the couple's sons and it is given only to the daughters after
> the mother dies. There is also a verse in Atharva Veda kanda XIV where it is
> said : "May the husband not wear the clothes of his wife' which does not
> mean 'may the husband not become a transvestite' but rather it means that
> the husband should not usurp the wealth of his wife. In the same kanda, the
> wife admonishes the husband that he should not interfere in domestic matters
> and in the way she spends her wealth.
I think such a view rather flies in the face of 6.1.17.
>
> JV: The other two adhikaranas which you avoided....<SNIP>
>
> VA; Oh well, I avoided these two because again the words in the sutras are
> subject a wide range of possible meanings and my interpretations would fly
> in the face if Shabaraswamin. For instance, in the sutra you quote below,
> the word 'aashih' has several meanings of which several fit the context.
> 6.1.24 Here the things that are explicitly laid down like cutting nails
> and brahmacharya are for her not being equal. (siddhanta)
>
Which is why I'm surprised you didn't mention it. At least one possible
meaning (though not the right
one :-) of aashih is the shantipatha.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Rajesh Venkataraman <rajesh_venk at y...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 06:11:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Rajesh Venkataraman <rajesh_venk at y...>
--- Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at H...> wrote:
> I heard that a person is a shudra before the
> upanayanam ceremony
> irrespective of birth, but the saMskAra makes him a
> Brahmin. Is this a valid
> tradition?
>
The verse from smriti is
janmanA jAyate sudrah karmaNA jAyate dvijah |
vedAdhyAyi bhavedvipro brahma jAnAti brAhmaNah ||
By birth all are dull(sudra), and only by nobility of
action is born the smart (dvijah). By studying Veda he
becomes learned (viprah), and only when one realises
Brahman does he become a brAhmaNah.
-- The verse and translation are from Swami
Chinmayananda's (Chinmaya Mission) commentary of
manIshA panchakam. It doesn't say which smriti it is
from though..
Hari Om..
=====
Rajesh Venkataraman
5309 N.MacArthur Blvd. #1022
Irving TX 75038
Phone: 972 550 1715 (Home)
510 543 4211 (Cell)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From siva siva <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 07:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sivarahasyam
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: siva siva <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Mr.Vyas,
Sivarahaya is a voluminous work with more than 50,000
verses. It is quoted as an authority in the
Dharmasastra work, "Nirnaya Sindhu" and referred to by
Sri Paramasivendra Saraswati,in his "Dahara Vidya
Prakasika".
The 16th chapter (46verses) of the ninth section of
Sivarahasya, presents succint account of the Acharya's
life.
While commenting on verse 103 of canto 16 of Madhava's
Sankaradigvijaya , Acyuta Raya modak, in his "Advaita
Rajyalakshmi" commentary, quotes this chapter fully.
(Anadashrama seeies 22-1891, pp 622-624)
Professor H. Krishna Sastry, a former epigraphist of
the Government of India, in his foreword to the
"Sivatatva Ratnakara" remarks, that "had it not been
for Sivarahasya, the Sringeri mah will have to admit
that Sri Vidyaranya was a disciple of Lingayats".
Sivarahasya has been printed as No.32 of the
Jayachamarajendra Granthamala, in Canarese script, by
the Mysore palace. The Saraswati Mahal Library has
also brought out some parts of the work in Devanagari
charecters.
Manuscript copies of Sivarahasya exist in the
Government Oriental Manuscript Library,Adyar Library,
Madras,Saraswati Mahal Library, Tanjore, Oriental
manuscripts Library, Mysore, Oriental institute,
Baroda and in the Raghnath temple Library - Jammu.
Regards
BGS
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 14:05:57 -0400
Subject: Sivarahasyam II
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
A small booklet named "Karnataka Sankara Vijaya Visesha sanchika", was
published in 1935, by one Varanasi Saligrama Srikanta Sastri.(Sankaravijaya
karyalaya Press, Mysore).
Therein,he states that he intended to translate Madhaviya Sankaravijayam
into Kanarese and with the Blessings of the Sringeri Acharya.
While engaged in this work he found that there was no reference in the
madhaviya Sankaravijayam, to the Chandramouleeswara Lingas, which were
being worshipped at the Mathas established by Sankara.
Persons belonging to the other schools of philosophy (especially Lingayats)
were giving out various versions as to how the Linga came to be worshipped
in the Matha. (Even the Guruvamsa Kavya of the Sringeri Matha, written
under the instructions of an acharya of the matha, in verse 33 of Chapter 3
says that Sankara obtained Chandramouleeswara Linga from a siddha -Revana
Siddha). Hence, he referred the issue to the Acharya of the Sringeri
Matha.
The Acharya, who recognised the authority of Sivarahasyam, sent a reply
directing Srikanta Sastri to refer to Chapter 16, Amsa 9 of the
Sivarahasya. Later Sastri got a copy of of the Sivarahasyam, from the
Government Oriental manuscripts Library, Mysore, (written in balabindu
script). He published the relevant portion with kanarese sangraha. Had it
not been for the Sivarahasya, they would be in a quandry to explain how
Chandramouleeswara Linga came to be worshipped at the matha.(SRI
SANKARACHARYA AND SANKARITE INSTITUTIONS - By ANANTANANDENDRA SARASWATI,
Page 20)
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 15:18:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Pancheekarana (fwd)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Again, please send posts intended for the list directly to
advaita-l at l... or you risk a possibly long delay in
getting an answer.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: RAMASWAMY BALU <jsrswamy at h...>
To: listmaster at l...
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 17:25:13 +0530
Subject: Pancheekarana
what is Pancheekarana? what is the process and how it is described in
vedanta?
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 15:42:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
> what is Pancheekarana? what is the process and how it is described in
> vedanta?
>
Panchikarana is a small work by Shankaracharya. It has a varttika by
Sureshwaracharya. It describes upasana on various groups of 5 (i.e. 5
eleements, 5 senses, 5 internal organs etc.) with a view to transcending
them.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:09:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
>From: RAMASWAMY BALU <jsrswamy at h...>
>To: listmaster at l...
>Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 17:25:13 +0530
>Subject: Pancheekarana
>
>what is Pancheekarana? what is the process and how it is described in
>vedanta?
>
>
You can find a description here:
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/phil/phil_06f.html
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Ekadashi
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:58:25
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV>Jaldhar,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I see that you said it ended in the evening (8:48 p.m.). Are you calculating the time in India and saying this?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My understanding is that you fast throughout the day and night and break your fast the next morning on Dwadashi. People in the U.S. have to do the same thing, right?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ravi</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <JALDHAR at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara <ADVAITA-L at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: Ekadashi
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:00:20 -0400
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>><ON DIV < wrote: Chandra Ashish 2001, May 18 Fri,>>
<DIV></DIV>> > When does the Ekadashi fast end today?
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>According to the calendar on the wall, 8:48pm EDT
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>--
<DIV></DIV>>Jaldhar H. Vyas <JALDHAR at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>================================================================================
<DIV></DIV>>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
<DIV></DIV>>listserv at l... with
<DIV></DIV>>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
<DIV></DIV>>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
<DIV></DIV>>================================================================================
<DIV></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 13:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Hello :
--- ShrI Rajesh Venkataraman wrote:
> --- Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at H...> wrote:
> > I heard that a person is a shudra before the
> > upanayanam ceremony
> > irrespective of birth, but the saMskAra makes him a
> > Brahmin. Is this a valid
> > tradition?
> >
>
> The verse from smriti is
> janmanA jAyate sudrah karmaNA jAyate dvijah |
> vedAdhyAyi bhavedvipro brahma jAnAti brAhmaNah ||
>
> By birth all are dull(sudra), and only by nobility of
> action is born the smart (dvijah). By studying Veda he
> becomes learned (viprah), and only when one realises
> Brahman does he become a brAhmaNah.
>
> -- The verse and translation are from Swami
> Chinmayananda's (Chinmaya Mission) commentary of
> manIshA panchakam. It doesn't say which smriti it is
> from though..
>
> Hari Om..
Here is a similar verse from Manu Smriti which was quoted
by ShrI Anand Hudli in a a different discussion.
The discussion was about the meaning of "viprata" which has
traditionally been interpreted as referring to a brahmin.
I quote a relevant portion of the post below :
**** <BEGIN QUOTE> ****
In the Manu Smriti, it is stated, janmanA jAyate shUdraH
saMskArair
dvija uchyate | vidyayA yAti vipratvaM tribhiH shrotriya
uchyate ||.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From this it is clear that one is a shUdra when born. By
the perform
ance of the saMskAra's such as the upanayana (the sacred
thread
ceremony) one becomes a "dvija", a twice born one. By
learning,
vidyA, one becomes a "vipra" (vipratvaM = vipratA), and by
knowing
the three Vedas, one becomes a shrotriya.
**** <END QUOTE> ****
The URL for the post is :
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m4150.html
-Vivek
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:49:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Sankar Narayanan
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I am a Sales Executive in a multinational company working in
Combatore. I am devotee of the Jagadguru of Sringri Sharada Peetam. I want
to learn a lot about Advaita vedanta hence I want to become a member of
Listserv.
Thanking You
Yours Faithfully
J.R. SANKARANARAYANAN
_____________________________________________________
Chat with your friends as soon as they come online. Get Rediff Bol at
http://bol.rediff.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 17:52:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Sriram Ganeshan
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Namaskarams
I am a Chartered Accountant from Chennai currently working in Dubai. I
have been initiated into a few mantra-japams recently and also have a
fairly stablised morning prayer session.
I would owe a lot of my limited knowledge to my late grandfather Sri G
Swaminatha Iyer (of Delhi), who was an ardent devotee of Paramacharyal of
Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam and also very close to Him. My grandfather was the
Deputy CAG of India.
I request that i be admitted to the egroup so that i
may stand to benefit from the experiences of the
senior members of the group.
Best regards
Sriram
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:29:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Sivarahasyam
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>Professor H. Krishna Sastry, a former epigraphist of
>the Government of India, in his foreword to the
>"Sivatatva Ratnakara" remarks, that "had it not been
>for Sivarahasya, the Sringeri mah will have to admit
>that Sri Vidyaranya was a disciple of Lingayats".
Don't you think Prof. Krishna Sastry got it completely wrong? Does
one need anything more than the Pancadasi and Jivanmuktiviveka, to
deduce what tradition Sri Vidyaranya Swami belonged to?
In fact, if you check the history of Lingayat Nayakas of Ikkeri/
Keladi, many of them were disciples of the successive Sringeri
Sankaracharyas. The Sivatattva Ratnakara was composed by Basava
Nayaka of Keladi. Swami Vidyaranya could have never been a disciple
of the Lingayats, except in the imaginations of a few research
scholars, who got totally confused about the pUrvASrama name of
mAdhava. It was the other way round. In the 15th-16th centuries,
soon after Vidyaranya, many Lingayats in Karnataka were disciples
of the Sringeri Sankaracharyas. Nothing very remarkable there, I
should think.
Yours,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:40:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>> what is Pancheekarana? what is the process and how it is described in
>> vedanta?
>>
>
>Panchikarana is a small work by Shankaracharya. It has a varttika by
>Sureshwaracharya. It describes upasana on various groups of 5 (i.e. 5
The chAndogya upanishad describes how fire, water and earth (the
three elements, tejas/agni, ap and pRthvI) evolve from Brahman and
then get intermixed by a process of trivRtkaraNa.
pancIkaraNa is an analogous description of intermixing of all the
five elements, space, air, fire, water and earth (adding AkASa and
vAyu to the three mentioned in chAndogya). In Sankaracharya's text
called pancIkaraNa, the process is described as
"pancAnAM bhUtAnAM ekaikaM dvidhA vibhajya svArdhabhAgam vihAya,
ardhabhAgam caturdhA vibhajya, itareshu yojite, pancIkaraNam
mAyArUpa-darSanam. adhyAropApavAdAbhyAM nishprapancam prapancyate."
Each element is divided into two halves, and one half is further
divided into four parts. These are then intermixed, with one half
of each element being added to a one-eighth part of each of the
other four. This is the process by which the subtle elements
(sUkshmabhUta or tanmAtra) become the material elements (sthUla
bhUta or mahAbhUta).
The entire process is described as mAyArUpa, and as an adhyAropa
(superimposition), which is to be cast aside (apavAda) through a
meditation on the praNava. The pancIkaraNa text then describes
the meditation on a-kAra, u-kAra and ma-kAra, which is prescribed
for sannyAsins. The pancIkaraNa-vArttika is therefore also called
the praNava-vArttika.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:21:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Ekadashi
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Ravishankar Venkatraman wrote:
> Jaldhar,
>
> I see that you said it ended in the evening (8:48 p.m.). Are you
> calculating the time in India and saying this?
>
No this is from a calendar put out by a local Vaishnava temple and
calculated for US Eastern Daylight Time. (GMT -4) It is the time the
actual tithi ends.
> My understanding is that you fast throughout the day and night and break
> your fast the next morning on Dwadashi. People in the U.S. have to do the
> same thing, right?
>
Yes, you do the samkalpa on the evening of the 10th. Fast on the 11th and
break the fast on the morning of the 12th with something sweet.
"fast" can be observed in several ways.
The minimum necessary to fulfill the ekadashi vrata is to eat normally but
refrain from anything containing grains.
A medium observance is to eat once and the one meal should also avoid
grains.
The best is to not eat at all for the duration of the vrata.
It's been my observation that a lot of people in the US observe the second
kind (no doubt due to their hectic lifestyles) and they eat their one meal
after the actual 11th tithi ends. That's what I assumed the question was
about.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 19:35:14 -0400
Subject: Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Mon, 21 May 2001 13:07:17 -0700, Vivek Anand Ganesan
<v_ganesan at Y...> wrote:
>Here is a similar verse from Manu Smriti which was quoted
>by ShrI Anand Hudli in a a different discussion.
>The discussion was about the meaning of "viprata" which has
>traditionally been interpreted as referring to a brahmin.
>I quote a relevant portion of the post below :
>**** <BEGIN QUOTE> ****
> In the Manu Smriti, it is stated, janmanA jAyate shUdraH
>saMskArair
> dvija uchyate | vidyayA yAti vipratvaM tribhiH shrotriya
>uchyate ||.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> From this it is clear that one is a shUdra when born. By
>the perform
> ance of the saMskAra's such as the upanayana (the sacred
>thread
> ceremony) one becomes a "dvija", a twice born one. By
>learning,
> vidyA, one becomes a "vipra" (vipratvaM = vipratA), and by
>knowing
> the three Vedas, one becomes a shrotriya.
>**** <END QUOTE> ****
>
I am afraid I may have given the incorrect reference here. The quote
is probably not in the Manu smR^iti, because I could not find it in
the e-text version I have. It could be in some other version, but I
am not sure. I did, however, find a reference to a slightly
different verse which is attributed to Brahma purANa. Clearly,
the point of such verses is that birth in a BrAhmaNa family alone
does not make one brAhmaNa. One needs saMskAras, such as the upanayana
to become eligible for Vedic study. Next, one must study the Vedas under
a qualified AchArya. At that point one becomes fit to be called a
vipra or brAhmaNa. If one further masters the three Vedas, the
title of shrotriya is earned.
Even if the verse is not in the Manu smR^iti, it effectively
agrees with the above verse, for example regarding the dvija status.
A boy even though born in a brAhmaNa family and whose upanayana is
not done by his sixteenth year becomes a "sAvitrIpatita", one who
has fallen from the position of eligibility for learning the
gAyatrI mantra and hence the Vedas, as per the Manu SmR^iti. Such a
person becomes a vrAtya, one who has lost his caste, and is condemned
by the Arya society. (Manu 2.39)
In modern times, this warning from Manu has fallen on deaf years.
Many people wait too long to get their upanayana done and even if
they get it done, there is no follow up Vedic study; even the
sandhyAvandana gets neglected. And the sacred thread, the yajnopavIta,
has become a mere symbol to either show off to others that one is
a brAhmaNa or one avoids wearing it altogether because it is not
thought to be "cool" to be wearing one, ie. an embarassment.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: trayii (Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
--- Anand Hudli <anandhudli at H...> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2001 13:07:17 -0700, Vivek Anand Ganesan
> <v_ganesan at Y...> wrote:
>
> >saMskArair
> > dvija uchyate | vidyayA yAti vipratvaM tribhiH shrotriya
> >uchyate ||.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > the three Vedas, one becomes a shrotriya.
> >**** <END QUOTE> ****
> >
>
> a qualified AchArya. At that point one becomes fit to be called a
> vipra or brAhmaNa. If one further masters the three Vedas, the
> title of shrotriya is earned.
>
Why is the word tribhiH translated as three veda-s? And what about the
fourth one? The three in tribhiH or trayii corresponds to the three
divisions in each veda, samhita, brahmaNa and AraNyaka-s. And there is
no reason to ignore atharva veda.
This explanation of trayii was given by shrI rangapriya swamiji. Audio
file is available in the following site. Lecture is English.
http://www.ramanuja.org/svss/rangapriya.html
Ravi
http://members.nbci.com/miinalochanii
http://www.ambaa.org/
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:42:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Sivarahasyam
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>While commenting on verse 103 of canto 16 of Madhava's
>Sankaradigvijaya , Acyuta Raya modak, in his "Advaita
>Rajyalakshmi" commentary, quotes this chapter fully.
>(Anadashrama seeies 22-1891, pp 622-624)
Forgot to mention in my previous response -
Please note that Acyutaraya Modak, the commentator on Madhaviya,
attributes this particular quotation to a bRhat Sankaravijaya of
Anandagiri. He says, "bRhacchankaravijaya eva Srimad AnandajnAna-
Akhya-Anandagiri-viracite."
However, note also that no text called bRhat Sankaravijaya of
Anandagiri is currently available. W. R. Antarkar (paper in 1960/61
in Journal of Univ. of Bombay) and G. C. Pande (book on Sankara's
life, 1994), who have both tried to obtain manuscripts of these
texts, report total failure in their attempts.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 04:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Online Sanskrit Dictionary
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/indologie/tamil/mwd_search.html
(This is search engine for Monier Williams Sanskrit English dictionary). Only
problem seems to be that you have provide the anga (stem word).
For eg., devaH will not get any reply, but deva gets the appropriate text. A
little problem with the fonts too.
But very useful, I think.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From vaidya_sundaram at i...
Subject: New member introduction: Prasanna Kumar
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:11:52 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0058FA2786256A54_="
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: vaidya_sundaram at i...
--=_alternative 0058FA2786256A54_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 05/22/01 11:10 AM -----
"prasanna Kumar" <vvpk at h...>
05/21/01 10:45 PM
Re: ADVAITA-L: vvpk at H... requested to join
Hi,
Thankyou for considering me part of list.
I am Prasanna Kumar VV, Software Engineer currently working for
Tata Elxsi. I am greatly inspired by Jagath Guru Sri Adi Shanakara from
my
childhood. My father Sri Virupaksha Iyer was involved in construction of
Sri
Sharadambal Temple in Pondicherry and we are assocated
with Srigeri Sivaganga Mutt near Tumkur, Karnataka.
While browsing through net, i came accorss this list .. and
it always my interest to know more about Advaida. I have some
introductory ideas about this subject by reading
few books from my college libray and my role
here will be only lister and if at all I may ask few questions.
Being a liberal and inocous character, I enjoy reading, understanding (if
not blinking!!) and (try!) reflecting little bit principle of
this great, infinate philosophy.
Thankyou
Regards
Prasanna
--=_alternative 0058FA2786256A54_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<br><font size=1 color=#800080 face="sans-serif">----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 05/22/01 11:10 AM -----</font>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>"prasanna Kumar" <vvpk at h...></b></font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">05/21/01 10:45 PM</font>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: ADVAITA-L: vvpk at H... requested to join</font></table>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Hi,<br>
<br>
Thankyou for considering me part of list.<br>
I am Prasanna Kumar VV, Software Engineer currently working for<br>
Tata Elxsi. I am greatly inspired by Jagath Guru Sri Adi Shanakara from my <br>
childhood. My father Sri Virupaksha Iyer was involved in construction of Sri <br>
Sharadambal Temple in Pondicherry and we are assocated<br>
with Srigeri Sivaganga Mutt near Tumkur, Karnataka.<br>
While browsing through net, i came accorss this list .. and<br>
it always my interest to know more about Advaida. I have some<br>
introductory ideas about this subject by reading<br>
few books from my college libray and my role<br>
here will be only lister and if at all I may ask few questions.<br>
Being a liberal and inocous character, I enjoy reading, understanding (if<br>
not blinking!!) and (try!) reflecting little bit principle of<br>
this great, infinate philosophy.<br>
<br>
Thankyou<br>
Regards<br>
Prasanna<br>
</font>
--=_alternative
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Ekadashi
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:21:00
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV>
<P>Thanks for the explanation. </P>
<P>Ravi</P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <JALDHAR at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara <ADVAITA-L at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: Ekadashi
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 18:21:10 -0400
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>On Mon, 21 May 2001, Ravishankar Venkatraman wrote:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > Jaldhar,
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > I see that you said it ended in the evening (8:48 p.m.). Are you
<DIV></DIV>> > calculating the time in India and saying this?
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>No this is from a calendar put out by a local Vaishnava temple and
<DIV></DIV>>calculated for US Eastern Daylight Time. (GMT -4) It is the time the
<DIV></DIV>>actual tithi ends.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > My understanding is that you fast throughout the day and night and break
<DIV></DIV>> > your fast the next morning on Dwadashi. People in the U.S. have to do the
<DIV></DIV>> > same thing, right?
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Yes, you do the samkalpa on the evening of the 10th. Fast on the 11th and
<DIV></DIV>>break the fast on the morning of the 12th with something sweet.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>"fast" can be observed in several ways.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>The minimum necessary to fulfill the ekadashi vrata is to eat normally but
<DIV></DIV>>refrain from anything containing grains.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>A medium observance is to eat once and the one meal should also avoid
<DIV></DIV>>grains.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>The best is to not eat at all for the duration of the vrata.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>It's been my observation that a lot of people in the US observe the second
<DIV></DIV>>kind (no doubt due to their hectic lifestyles) and they eat their one meal
<DIV></DIV>>after the actual 11th tithi ends. That's what I assumed the question was
<DIV></DIV>>about.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>--
<DIV></DIV>>Jaldhar H. Vyas <JALDHAR at B...>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>================================================================================
<DIV></DIV>>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
<DIV></DIV>>listserv at l... with
<DIV></DIV>>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
<DIV></DIV>>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
<DIV></DIV>>================================================================================
<DIV></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
Subject: Re: Online Sanskrit Dictionary
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 12:12:28 -0600 (MDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
> http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/indologie/tamil/mwd_search.html
>
> (This is search engine for Monier Williams Sanskrit English
> dictionary). Only problem seems to be that you have provide the
> anga (stem word).
Try
http://www3.aa.tufs.ac.jp/~tjun/sktdic/index.html
(Apte's) also.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> But very useful, I think.
>
> Regards.
> S. V. Subrahmanian.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:39:10 -0400
Subject: Re: trayii (Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Mon, 21 May 2001 16:49:32 -0700, Ravisankar S. Mayavaram
<miinalochanii at Y...> wrote:
>Why is the word tribhiH translated as three veda-s? And what about the
>fourth one? The three in tribhiH or trayii corresponds to the three
>divisions in each veda, samhita, brahmaNa and AraNyaka-s. And there is
>no reason to ignore atharva veda.
>
>This explanation of trayii was given by shrI rangapriya swamiji. Audio
>file is available in the following site. Lecture is English.
I bow to the AchAryas who are capable of knowing the true
meanings of shruti.
Traditionally, the atharva veda was not counted among the other
three vedas because it is not typically used in the shrauta yajnas.
The bhagavAn while listing the vedas in the gItA, says
"R^iksAma yajureva cha." For some reason, the atharva veda was
treated differently, perhaps because it has a number of hymns
devoted to what has incorrectly been termed "blackmagic."
The presence of hymns that are supposed to be spells of various
kinds (eg. spells over enemies, spells over a woman with a view to
win her love), hymns for curing numerous ailments and disorders of the
human body, hymns to be used with herbal medicines, hymns for victory
over enemies, etc. seem to indicate that the atharva veda is used to
achieve personal or domestic ends as opposed to the grand and
large-scale ceremonies that use the three other vedas.
But the fact that the atharva was used in great and important events such
as the rAjya-abhiSheka puts it on an equal footing with the other vedas.
Besides, there are many profound hymns such as the bhUmi-sUkta of the
12th kANDa devoted to bhUmi-mAtA, the Earth, and the hymn to the VrAtya,
in the 15th kANDa which I am inclined to believe is an equivalent of
some sort to the shrI Rudra of the Yajur Veda. There is also an atharva
veda equivalent of the PuruSha sUkta.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Subject: lyrics needed for two songs
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:42:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Dear members,
Can someone please provide the lyrics for these two songs?
1. saadhO saadhO (composer: Meera)
2. dheenanu dhukku (composer: Surdas)
I would greatly appreciate anybody's response in this
regard. Any pointers also would help.
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 05:13:17 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: Online Sanskrit Dictionary
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I would request one and all to please check a site
named www.slokas.com and send me your comments and
suggestions about it as to how we can improve the site
as far as content is concerned.
Regards
padmanabhan
--- Shrisha Rao <shrao at N...> wrote: > >
>
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/indologie/tamil/mwd_search.html
> >
> > (This is search engine for Monier Williams
> Sanskrit English
> > dictionary). Only problem seems to be that you
> have provide the
> > anga (stem word).
>
> Try
>
> http://www3.aa.tufs.ac.jp/~tjun/sktdic/index.html
>
> (Apte's) also.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shrisha Rao
>
> > But very useful, I think.
> >
> > Regards.
> > S. V. Subrahmanian.
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 02:24:14 -0400
Subject: www.slokas.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Dear Sri Padmanabhan Sundaresan,
Most of the site www.slokas.com is not yet up. Almost every link now leads
to a "site under construction" message, so I am puzzled about what
suggestions to offer at this stage. However, two questions ...
I was under the impression that the site was in some way affiliated to the
Kanchi Matham, and was therefore geared towards an Advaita viewpoint.
However, in the pages on Upanishads, all the material seems to be dedicated
towards proving the position of Madhvacharya. May I ask the reason for this?
For example, there are passages like
"It is only the lack of utilisation of the guidelines fully and properly
that has led many commentators to derive Monism and Absolutism out of
Vedanta. Traditional monistic commentators had a committed approach towards
"proving" their school irrespective of the actual correct meanings derived
from Vedanta texts. Modern neo-Vedantic scholars have very limited equipment
in terms of knowledge and intelligence ..."
Then,
"However, the Niravakaashatva and Upajiivyatva criteria are not strictly
followed in the Advaita tradition, leading to undue priority being accorded
therein to Monistic-looking texts or passages, and the relegating of others
to secondary positions. This has led to another criteria being evolved by
the Advaita school, viz., tatvaavedaka and atatvaavedaka."
All of this looks very much like what I have read elsewhere, e.g. on
www.dvaita.org. May I also ask who is the author of the essay on slokas.com?
Yours,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:03:57 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Mr Sundaresan
Thank you very much for your reply.The site is not
attached to any particular Mutt or religious trust.It
has the blessings of almost all the religious leaders
in India.It is trying to bring together all the
rituals, all the slokas, the vedic chantings and the
various philosophies under one platform.
The author of various articles and text that will be
published in the site will be basically by nominees
from each of these various trusts and philosophies.
The suggestions that were solicited were basically on
topics to be covered.We are asware that the site is
still under construction and is expected to be
launched only by early July 2001.
However, you would have noticed in the site that a
huge area has been covered in terms of topics.
It is a site basically meant for users to log in and
take advantage of regular religious needs of any Hindu
during his day to day life.Like audios of devotional
music and slokas with text and meanings, rituals on
real video enabling person to perform sitting at home
with all instructions etc, Platform for person to
learn Vedic chantings online, online classes for
Karnatic Music etc and special prayers and education
for children.
Any more areas to be covered, your suggestions are
welcome.
Regards
Padmanabhan
--- Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
wrote: > Dear Sri Padmanabhan Sundaresan,
>
> Most of the site www.slokas.com is not yet up.
> Almost every link now leads
> to a "site under construction" message, so I am
> puzzled about what
> suggestions to offer at this stage. However, two
> questions ...
>
> I was under the impression that the site was in some
> way affiliated to the
> Kanchi Matham, and was therefore geared towards an
> Advaita viewpoint.
> However, in the pages on Upanishads, all the
> material seems to be dedicated
> towards proving the position of Madhvacharya. May I
> ask the reason for this?
>
> For example, there are passages like
>
> "It is only the lack of utilisation of the
> guidelines fully and properly
> that has led many commentators to derive Monism and
> Absolutism out of
> Vedanta. Traditional monistic commentators had a
> committed approach towards
> "proving" their school irrespective of the actual
> correct meanings derived
> from Vedanta texts. Modern neo-Vedantic scholars
> have very limited equipment
> in terms of knowledge and intelligence ..."
>
> Then,
>
> "However, the Niravakaashatva and Upajiivyatva
> criteria are not strictly
> followed in the Advaita tradition, leading to undue
> priority being accorded
> therein to Monistic-looking texts or passages, and
> the relegating of others
> to secondary positions. This has led to another
> criteria being evolved by
> the Advaita school, viz., tatvaavedaka and
> atatvaavedaka."
>
> All of this looks very much like what I have read
> elsewhere, e.g. on
> www.dvaita.org. May I also ask who is the author of
> the essay on slokas.com?
>
> Yours,
> Vidyasankar
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 07:10:12 -0400
Subject: Any volunteers?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Greetings to all advaitin and ADVAITA-L members:
I have been blessed by the help of Shree Sunder and Shree Dennis in
getting the Notes on Brahmasuutra. It was really a cooperative
endeavor involving all three of us. I have been mailing the first
draft to Shree Sunder who does the painful job of proof reading,
correct the transliteration and find any missing references and
mail the corrected version to Dennis who sorts out the Sanskrit words
for glossary while making any final corrections. Sunder used to find
the meaning and prepare the final glossary after it is checked by
Dennis and myself. My job was only to post the corrected version to
the list. Sunder expressed that he is going to be very busy and will
not be able to do the function for some time.
While we all got the benefit of his excellent service, I am going to
miss him. I would need a volunteer who can proof read making any
corrections in transliteration as well as in English. It is a public
secret that I am very bad speller and very bad proof reader. Sunder
promised to continue the service until the end of this fourth suutra
that we are discussing now - which should be over in couple of weeks.
Any Volunteers to help the smooth flow of these notes?
What is involved as follows:
1. proof read the first draft of the notes making all corrections and
possible references.
2. Mail the corrected version to Shree Dennis Waite
3. Find the meaning for the Sanskrit words that Dennis provides and
post the glossary.
4. Finally Sunder also was helping me to put these corrected version
of the notes and glossary in the archives files of advaitin list.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
Dear Dennis and Sada,
I have really enjoyed my participation in the postings and
learned a great deal [I hope]. I thank you both for the splendid
team-work and co-operation. I shall continue to enjoy the fruits of
your labors, and make suggestions as an observer on the periphery.
Hopefully, at some future date I may be able offer more time to this
project.
With very best wishes,
sunder
> Sorry to hear you will not be able to do the
>editing any more, Sunder, but I do understand. It does mean, of course, that
>I cannot really contribute much help either in the future. All that I was
>really doing was providing the new words. If no one is translating these, it
>makes that task somewhat redundant! If you can find anyone else to do this,
>Sada, I will be happy to continue with my meagre input. If not, I will still
>continue trying to follow the posts, despite the seemingly increasing
>Sanskrit content.
>
>Dennis
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:00:49 -0400
Subject: Notes on BSB I-i-4-1i
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1221499637==_ma============"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
--============_-1221499637==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Notes on BSB I-i-4-1i
sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h |
asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h ||
I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who
is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all
the way up to my own teacher.
vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM
aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .|
shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM
sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h ||
Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the
three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source of
purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree Chinmayaananda, to
his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate.
---------------------------------------------------
samanvaya adhyaaya - I
spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya paada- i
samanvaya adhikaraNam.h .-4
suutra: tat tu samanvayaat.h .-1i
We are currently discussing vR^ittikaara matam as a part of
puurvapaksha. This matam differs from puurvamiimaa.nsaka-s in that it
accepts the existence of Brahman. However, it subscribes to the
theory that by just knowing Brahman one cannot gain Brahman. After
brahmaj~naanam one has to do upaasana to gain Brahman. There is some
similarity between this vR^ittikaara philosophy and Ramanuja's
vishishhTaadvaita in terms of saadhanaa where emphasis on upaasanaa
in addition to surrender or nyaasa to the Personified God-form is
emphasized as means for moksha. The similarity is only with reference
to the need for upaasanaa for moksha.
Shankara refutes this puurvapakshii. Shankara approaches this by
defining clearly the nature of moksha from different angles. He shows
that if one accepts the moksha definitions given, then one has to
conclude that such a moksha is never possible through upaasanaa ,
whatever be the upaasanaa. Here we are going to heavily criticize
upaasanaa just as Gaudapada does in
Mandukya-karika: III:1
upaasanaashritaH dharmaH, jaate brahmaNi vartate |
praagutpatteH ajam sarvam, tena asau kR^ipaNaH smR^itaH ||
Goudapada says every upaasaka (one who does upaasanaa) is an
unfortunate one. When we criticize upaasanaa, it should be understood
in the correct spirit. We are not criticizing upaasanaa totally. We
are criticizing upaasanaa presented as a means of moksha which comes
after brahma j~naanam. But we glorify upaasanaa before brahma
j~naanam as a means of mental purification. This has to be understood
clearly. What is criticized is vR^ittikaara's philosophy that states
upaasanaa as a means of moksha after acquiring brahma j~naanam.
According to Shankara, brahma j~naana anantaram kartavyam kimapi na
asti - after acquiring the brahma j~naanam there is no obligation to
do anything. Gita says:
Na eva tasya kR^itena arthaH na akR^itena iha kaschana |
na cha asya sarva-bhuuteshu kaschit artha-vyapaashrayaH || III:18
Because for that brahma j~naani there is no gain by performing any
action, there is no loss by not performing any action. Since he does
not depend on anything for his happiness, he has no self-centered
motivation to perform any action amidst all beings.
karmaNi akarma yaH pashyet akarmaNi cha karma yaH |
saH buddhimaan manushhyeshhu saH yuktaH kR^itsna-karma-kR^it.h || IV:18
One who sees inaction in action, action in inaction, he is the most
knowledgeable and yogi among men and he is fulfilled in terms of all
actions.
Hence j~naaana anantara upaasanaa we criticize but j~naana puurva
upaasanaa we glorify. Hence Shankara is going to criticize upaasanaa
as presented by the vR^ittikaara.
The definitions of moksha: The first one, which is normally given, is
a-shariirataa hi mokshaH - moksha is freedom from shariira
sambandhaH, freedom from body-relationships.
Naturally the opposite of that is sa.nsaara: sa-shariirataa hi
sa.nsaaraH - shariira sambandha is sa.nsaara. Where does Shankara
find these definitions? - From Chandogya Up. 4-12-1:
- nahhavai sa shariirasya sataH priyaapriayayoH apahatiH asti |
- ashariiram vaa va santaM na priyaa priye spR^ishataH||
When atmaa is embodied due to the notion of ego it suffers from likes
and dislikes. Along as one is embodied the likes and dislikes do not
leave. When there is no shariira, the likes and dislikes do not
touch that aatma. Hence Shankara says as long as shariira sambandha
is there sukha
and duHkha opposites cannot be avoided and that is sa.nsaara.
The moksha is - ashariiraM vaa va santaM na priyaapriye spR^ishataH |
One for whom there is no shariira sambandha the priya and apriyaa
will not touch. Having given the definition, Shankara says - both
karma and upaasanaa are actions, one is kaayikaM karma, physical
action and the other is maanasaM karma, mental action. Wherever
actions are there, there will be both quantitative and qualitative
gradations, taaratamyam, in those actions. Hence there will be
taaratamya or gradations in the puNya or merits produced also. Hence
the results also will have taaratamya or gradations in the
puNyaphala. The type of bodies that one gets depending on the puNya
phalam. Hence puNyaM can only improve sa-shariiratvam but cannot make
you a-shariiraH that is improvement in the body that one does not go
beyond the body. One can get human body or even divine body of Indra
or bR^ihaspati or prajaapati etc. Any amount of karma and upaasanaa
will keep one only with sa-shariiratvam wherein gradations cannot be
avoided - priya and apriya or likes and dislikes cannot be avoided -
hence sa.nsaara cannot be avoided. Hence Shankara says four things
are interrelated - karma or upaasanaa, puNyam or merits,
sa-shariiratvam or acquiring a body, and
sa.nsaaraH. One will get caught up in this cycle as long as karma or
upaasanaa is there. That is the reason we never accept moksha that
involves going to some loka or field of experience. In other systems
of philosophy the moksha is defined as going to some loka where God
is residing. Advaita
never accepts this as moksha as long as it is a loka and as long as
the jiiva retains their individuality -he will have sa-shariiratvam.
There will then be gradations that will lead to comparisons, some are
more fortunate being close to the Lord compared to the other etc.
(First class versus business class versus economy seats depending on
ones upaasana phala or credit card balance!) Hence Shankara's first
argument is upaasanaa phalam mokshaH na bhavati - Moksha cannot be
the result of a upaasanaa.
tasmaat upaasana phalam sa-sariiratvam eva bhavati naiva
a-shariiratvam. As a result of upaasanaa one gets only field of
experience with different types of bodies and as long as there is a
body there will be gradations in phalam - as Tai. Upa. says:
II:viii:1 :
te ye shatam manushhya gandharvaaNaam anandaaH |
sa eko deva gandharvaaNaam aanandaH| ..
te ye shatam deva gandharvaaNaam aanandaaH |
... sa eka indrasyaanandaH |
te ye shatam indrasyaanandaaH |
sa eko bR^ihaspate aanandaH |
te ye shatam bR^ihaspateH annandaaH |
sa ekaH prajaapateH aanandaH |
One is happier than the other. The happiness of Gandharva-s is
hundred times that of human. Deva's happiness is hundred times that
of Gandharva-s. Indra's happiness is hundred times that of deva-s,
and Prajapati's ananda is hundred times that of Indra. Hence as long
as one has body, there are gradations in types of bodies and
gradations in happiness that one gets. Hence moksha is obtained not
by karma not by upaasanaa, but by knowledge alone.
But one can say all other upaasanaa-s can give better sa-shariiratvam
whereas brahma upaasanaa can be so powerful that it can give moksha
with a-shariiratvam that is without a body. Shankara says no.
A-shariirataa cannot be result of any
karma or upaasanaa. This is
because a-shariiratvam
is the very intrinsic nature of aatmaa or the self. Whatever is the
intrinsic nature (swadhrama) of a thing, it should be there always.
That is the definition of intrinsic nature, that is intrinsic swataH
siddham, just as the heat is the intrinsic nature of the fire.
Shankara says a-shariirataa is the very intrinsic nature of every
jiiva, and being nature, it is nitya siddha swaruupam, eternally
accomplished thing. On the other hand, any karma or upaasanaa phalam
is not available now but it will come later after the completion of
that karma or upaasanaa. Hence karma or upaasanaa phalam is not
siddham (already acquired) but saadhyam (yet to be acquired). Hence
a-shariirataa which is a nitya siddham of jiiva cannot be equated to
saadhyam which is yet to be acquired. Therefore a-shariirataa ruupa
mokshaH, liberation that is free from any body, cannot be the result
of upaasanaa phalam.
This raises the question that on what basis one can say that
a-shariirataa is the very nature of aatmaa. The shruti [Katha
I:ii:22] says:
a-shariiram shariireshhu anavastheshhu avasthitaM mahaantaM vibhuM
aatmaanaM matvaa dhiiro na shocati |
Thus upanishads clearly state that aatmaa is a-shariiram. In Mundaka
Upa. 2-1-2 says:
divyo hi amuurtaH purushhaH sa baahyaabhyantaro hi ajaH |
apraaNo hi amanaaH shubhro aksharaat parataH paraH ||
amuurtaH means sthuula shariira rahitaH (without gross body), apraaNa
amaNaaH means suukshma shariira rahitaH (without subtle body) and
shubhraH means kaaraNa shariira rahitaH (without causal body) - Thus
upanishads says aatmaa is shariira-traya varjitaH, without the three
bodies. In the Mundaka, I:i:6 it says :
yat tat adreshyam agraahyam agotram avarNam achakshuH-shrotram tat
apaaNi- paadam -
it cannot be seen, it cannot be grasped, from relations, and color
or caste etc. and no eyes, ears, hands and legs etc.- thus
emphasizing a-shariirataa.
In Ishaavaasya Upa. mantra 8:
sa paryagaat shukram akaayam avraNam asnaaviram shuddham apaapaviddham -
thus says aatmaa is all pervading consciousness and is akaayam -
meaning a-shariiram, without a body. asnaaviram, shuddham apaapa
viddham - means shariira-traya rahitaH aatmaa -free from gross,
subtle and causal bodies. Hence a-shariirataa is not a goal to be
accomplished by karma or upaasanaa but it is a fact to be recognized.
Hence it cannot be upaasanaa phalam. - expressing this in anumaana
vaakyam (Refer to Ch. II of the notes for anumaana) - mokshaH na
upaasanaa saadhyaH, siddhatvaat, chaitanyavat.
There comes a side objection from a secondary puurvapakshii (a
madhyasthaH) - how can an advaitin define a-shariirataa as moksha -
if he does that then he cannot accept jiivanmukti, that is a
liberation while living in the body, that is he is liberated yet
sa-shariiraH. Hence moksha will be only after death when the body
falls down. Shankara says jiivanmukti is possible. jiivamukta is
a-shariira only. The others around him may think he is sa-shariira.
It is their problem. The upanishad-s reveal a-shariiratvam as our
very nature or swa-swaruupam. Then when am I
a-shariira? The upanishad-s point out that I am a-shariiraH all the
time, it is swa-swaruupam, one's very intrinsic nature - nitya
a-shariiraH as stated by the upanishad-s above. Secondly aatmanaH
asa~NgaH - asa~NgaH na hi sajyate - asa~NgaH hi ayam purushhaH (Bri.
Up III:ix:26) - It cannot have any relationship with any object -
like aakaasha - like space. Hence aatma asa~Ngatvaat nityam
a-shariiraH - It is eternally formless since it is not related to any
thing, like space. shariira sambandha (relationship with body) comes
as a result of karma phalam. Karma-phalam comes only to a kartaa or
doer. aatma being ever a-kartaa - there is no question of karma and
hence karma phala and hence body to experience karma-phalam - hence
aatmaa nitya akartR^itvaat shariira sambandhaH na eva bhavati -
aatmaa being non-doer has no relation to body. Hence aatmanaH
a-shariiratvam nitya siddham.
If so then how can one say sa-shariiratvam is sa.nsaara - since there
will never be a sa.nsaara since aatmaa is eternally a-shariiraH. For
that Shankara says although aatmaa is nitya a-shariiraH, it can be
mistaken as sa-shariiraH. aatmaa cannot become sa-shariiraH but it is
mistaken as
sa-shariiraH - as Murphy's Law states (Murphy's upanishadic mantra!)
that what can go wrong will go wrong! - Hence sa-shariiratvam is
adhyaasa siddham - hence Shankara says that is the reason why I wrote
first adhyaasa bhaashhyam! If sa-shariiratvam is due to error then
how does one get
a-shariiratvam? If rope is mistaken for a snake then how can one get
the snake converted back to rope? There is no conversion process - it
is only understanding or knowledge that, there was, there is and
there will be rope only all the time and never a snake to start with.
Hence sa-shariiratvam is
adhyaasa or error and it is not by dying one gets a-shariiratvam but
by knowing that aham aatmaa nitya shariiraH sambandha varjitaH asmi -
I was, I am and I will ever be aatmaa without a body or without any
body-relations. I am ever free from shariira sambandha.
Hence jiivanmukta is a-shariiraH only. So is aj~naani a-shariiraH or
sa-shariiraH? He is also a-shariiraH but he does not know that -He
thinks he is sa-shariiraH and hence he is aj~naani. Shankara quotes
Bri. Up.IV:iv:7 that says:
tat yathaa ahinirlvayanii valmiike mR^itaa pratyastaa shayiita evam evedam
shariiragm shete | athaayaM ashariiraH amR^itaH praaNaH brahma eva
tejaH eva saH aham.h |
It gives the example of the snake and its skin. The snake removes its
skin and skin continues to be there close to the snake. But snake has
no attachment to its discarded skin. Hence whatever happens to the
skin the snake is not affected. In the same way the j~naani continues
to be in the
body but whatever happens to the body he does not claim that it is
happening to him. It is not that the body becomes free from karma -
it undergoes its own course (praarabdha-karma) but j~naani never
claims those pleasures and pains as his pleasures and pains. He says
aham nitya ashariiraH.
Giita says: II:56
duHkheshhu anudvignamanaaH sukheshhu vigata-spR^ihaH |
viita-raaga-bhaya-krodhaH sthita-dhiiH muniH uchyate ||
Hence a-shariiratvam is moksha and moksha is nitya siddha. By j~naana
it is owned-up and it is not a product of upaasanaa.
That completes the first argument for why moksha cannot be the result
of upaasanaa.
Shankara provides a few more arguments, which we will discuss in the next post.
-----------------------
End of the post.
Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/files/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/
for personal study.
***Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected.***
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
--============_-1221499637==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Notes on BSB I-i-4-1i</title></head><body>
<div><font
color="#000000"
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> Notes on BSB I-i-4-1i</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya
madhyamam.h |<br>
asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h ||<br>
<br>
I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who is
ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all the
way up to my own teacher.<br>
<br>
vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM<br>
aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .|<br>
shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM<br>
sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h ||<br>
<br>
Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the
three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source
of purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree
Chinmayaananda, to his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate.<br>
---------------------------------------------------<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
>
samanvaya adhyaaya - I<br>
<span
></span> spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya
paada- i<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span> samanvaya
adhikaraNam.h .-4<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span> suutra: tat tu
samanvayaat.h .-1i<br>
<br>
<br>
We are currently discussing vR^ittikaara matam as a part of
puurvapaksha. This matam differs from puurvamiimaa.nsaka-s in that it
accepts the existence of Brahman. However, it subscribes to the
theory that by just knowing Brahman one cannot gain Brahman. After
brahmaj~naanam one has to do upaasana to gain Brahman. There is some
similarity between this vR^ittikaara philosophy and Ramanuja's
vishishhTaadvaita in terms of saadhanaa where emphasis on upaasanaa in
addition to surrender or nyaasa to the Personified God-form is
emphasized as means for moksha. The similarity is only with reference
to the need for upaasanaa for moksha.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Shankara refutes this
puurvapakshii.
Shankara approaches this by defining clearly the nature of moksha from
different angles. He shows that if one accepts the moksha definitions
given, then one has to conclude that such a moksha is never possible
through upaasanaa , whatever be the upaasanaa. Here we are going to
heavily criticize upaasanaa just as Gaudapada does in</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Mandukya-karika: III:1<br>
<br>
upaasanaashritaH dharmaH, jaate brahmaNi vartate |<br>
praagutpatteH ajam sarvam, tena asau kR^ipaNaH smR^itaH ||</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Goudapada says every upaasaka (one who does
upaasanaa) is an unfortunate one. When we criticize upaasanaa, it
should be understood in the correct spirit. We are not criticizing
upaasanaa totally. We are criticizing upaasanaa presented as a means
of moksha which comes after brahma j~naanam. But we glorify upaasanaa
before brahma j~naanam as a means of mental purification. This has to
be understood clearly. What is criticized is vR^ittikaara's philosophy
that states upaasanaa as a means of moksha after acquiring brahma
j~naanam. According to Shankara, brahma j~naana anantaram kartavyam
kimapi na asti - after acquiring the brahma j~naanam there is no
obligation to do anything. Gita says:<br>
<br>
Na eva tasya kR^itena arthaH na akR^itena iha kaschana |<br>
na cha asya sarva-bhuuteshu kaschit artha-vyapaashrayaH ||
III:18</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Because for that brahma j~naani there is no
gain by performing any action, there is no loss by not performing any
action. Since he does not depend on anything for his happiness, he has
no self-centered motivation to perform any action amidst all
beings.<br>
<br>
karmaNi akarma yaH pashyet akarmaNi cha karma yaH |<br>
saH buddhimaan manushhyeshhu saH yuktaH kR^itsna-karma-kR^it.h ||
IV:18</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">One who sees inaction in action, action in
inaction, he is the most knowledgeable and yogi among men and he is
fulfilled in terms of all actions.<br>
<br>
Hence j~naaana anantara upaasanaa we criticize but j~naana puurva
upaasanaa we glorify. Hence Shankara is going to criticize upaasanaa
as presented by the vR^ittikaara.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">The definitions of moksha: The first one,
which is normally given, is a-shariirataa hi mokshaH - moksha is
freedom from shariira sambandhaH, freedom from
body-relationships.</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Naturally the opposite of that is
sa.nsaara: sa-shariirataa hi sa.nsaaraH - shariira sambandha is
sa.nsaara. Where does Shankara find these definitions? - From
Chandogya Up. 4-12-1:</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"> <br>
- nahhavai sa shariirasya sataH priyaapriayayoH apahatiH asti |<br>
- ashariiram vaa va santaM na priyaa priye spR^ishataH||</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">When atmaa is embodied due to the notion of
ego it suffers from likes and dislikes. Along as one is embodied
the likes and dislikes do not leave. When there is no shariira,
the likes and dislikes do not touch that aatma. Hence Shankara
says as long as shariira sambandha is there sukha<br>
and duHkha opposites cannot be avoided and that is
sa.nsaara.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">The moksha is - ashariiraM vaa va santaM na
priyaapriye spR^ishataH | One for whom there is no shariira sambandha
the priya and apriyaa will not touch. Having given the definition,
Shankara says - both karma and upaasanaa are actions, one is kaayikaM
karma, physical action and the other is maanasaM karma, mental action.
Wherever actions are there, there will be both quantitative and
qualitative gradations, taaratamyam, in those actions. Hence there
will be taaratamya or gradations in the puNya or merits produced also.
Hence the results also will have taaratamya or gradations in the
puNyaphala. The type of bodies that one gets depending on the puNya
phalam. Hence puNyaM can only improve sa-shariiratvam but cannot make
you a-shariiraH that is improvement in the body that one does not
go beyond the body. One can get human body or even divine body of
Indra or bR^ihaspati or prajaapati etc. Any amount of karma and
upaasanaa will keep one only with sa-shariiratvam wherein gradations
cannot be avoided - priya and apriya or likes and dislikes cannot be
avoided - hence sa.nsaara cannot be avoided. Hence Shankara says four
things are interrelated - karma or upaasanaa, puNyam or merits,
sa-shariiratvam or acquiring a body, and</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">sa.nsaaraH. One will get caught up in
this cycle as long as karma or upaasanaa is there. That is the reason
we never accept moksha that involves going to some loka or field of
experience. In other systems of philosophy the moksha is defined as
going to some loka where God is residing. Advaita</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">never accepts this as moksha as long as it
is a loka and as long as the jiiva retains their individuality -he
will have sa-shariiratvam. There will then be gradations that will
lead to comparisons, some are more fortunate being close to the Lord
compared to the other etc. (First class versus business class
versus economy seats depending on ones upaasana phala or credit card
balance!) Hence Shankara's first argument is upaasanaa phalam
mokshaH na bhavati - Moksha cannot be the result of a
upaasanaa.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">tasmaat upaasana phalam sa-sariiratvam eva
bhavati naiva a-shariiratvam. As a result of upaasanaa one gets only
field of experience with different types of bodies and as long as
there is a body there will be gradations in phalam - as Tai. Upa.
says: II:viii:1 :<br>
<br>
te ye shatam manushhya gandharvaaNaam anandaaH |<br>
sa eko deva gandharvaaNaam aanandaH| ..<br>
te ye shatam deva gandharvaaNaam aanandaaH |<br>
... sa eka indrasyaanandaH |<br>
te ye shatam indrasyaanandaaH |<br>
sa eko bR^ihaspate aanandaH |<br>
te ye shatam bR^ihaspateH annandaaH |<br>
sa ekaH prajaapateH aanandaH |</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">One is happier than the other. The
happiness of Gandharva-s is hundred times that of human. Deva's
happiness is hundred times that of Gandharva-s. Indra's happiness is
hundred times that of deva-s, and Prajapati's ananda is hundred times
that of Indra. Hence as long as one has body, there are gradations in
types of bodies and gradations in happiness that one gets. Hence
moksha is obtained not by karma not by upaasanaa, but by knowledge
alone.</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">But one can say all other upaasanaa-s can
give better sa-shariiratvam whereas brahma upaasanaa can be so
powerful that it can give moksha with a-shariiratvam that is without a
body. Shankara says no. A-shariirataa cannot be result of any karma or
upaasanaa. This is because a-shariiratvam</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">is the very intrinsic nature of aatmaa or
the self. Whatever is the intrinsic nature (swadhrama) of a thing, it
should be there always. That is the definition of intrinsic nature,
that is intrinsic swataH siddham, just as the heat is the intrinsic
nature of the fire. Shankara says a-shariirataa is the very intrinsic
nature of every jiiva, and being nature, it is nitya siddha swaruupam,
eternally accomplished thing. On the other hand, any karma or
upaasanaa phalam is not available now but it will come later after the
completion of that karma or upaasanaa. Hence karma or upaasanaa phalam
is not siddham (already acquired) but saadhyam (yet to be acquired).
Hence a-shariirataa which is a nitya siddham of jiiva cannot be
equated to saadhyam which is yet to be acquired. Therefore
a-shariirataa ruupa mokshaH, liberation that is free from any body,
cannot be the result</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">of upaasanaa phalam.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">This raises the question that on what basis
one can say that a-shariirataa is the very nature of aatmaa. The
shruti [Katha I:ii:22] says:<br>
<br>
a-shariiram shariireshhu anavastheshhu avasthitaM mahaantaM vibhuM
aatmaanaM matvaa dhiiro na shocati |</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Thus upanishads clearly state that aatmaa
is a-shariiram. In Mundaka Upa. 2-1-2 says:<br>
<br>
divyo hi amuurtaH purushhaH sa baahyaabhyantaro hi ajaH |<br>
apraaNo hi amanaaH shubhro aksharaat parataH paraH ||</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">amuurtaH means sthuula shariira rahitaH
(without gross body), apraaNa amaNaaH means suukshma shariira rahitaH
(without subtle body) and shubhraH means kaaraNa shariira rahitaH
(without causal body) - Thus upanishads says aatmaa is shariira-traya
varjitaH, without the three<br>
bodies. In the Mundaka, I:i:6 it says :<br>
<br>
yat tat adreshyam agraahyam agotram avarNam achakshuH-shrotram tat
apaaNi- paadam -</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"> it cannot be seen, it cannot be
grasped, from relations, and color or caste etc. and no eyes, ears,
hands and legs etc.- thus emphasizing a-shariirataa.<br>
<br>
In Ishaavaasya Upa. mantra 8:<br>
<br>
sa paryagaat shukram akaayam avraNam asnaaviram shuddham apaapaviddham
-</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">thus says aatmaa is all pervading
consciousness and is akaayam - meaning a-shariiram, without a body.
asnaaviram, shuddham apaapa viddham - means shariira-traya rahitaH
aatmaa -free from gross, subtle and causal bodies. Hence a-shariirataa
is not a goal to be accomplished by karma or upaasanaa but it is a
fact to be
recognized. Hence it cannot be upaasanaa phalam. -
expressing this in anumaana vaakyam (Refer to Ch. II of the notes for
anumaana) - mokshaH na upaasanaa saadhyaH, siddhatvaat,
chaitanyavat.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">There comes a side objection from a
secondary puurvapakshii (a madhyasthaH) - how can an advaitin define
a-shariirataa as moksha - if he does that then he cannot accept
jiivanmukti, that is a liberation while living in the body, that is he
is liberated yet sa-shariiraH. Hence moksha will be only after death
when the body falls down. Shankara says jiivanmukti is possible.
jiivamukta is a-shariira only. The others around him may think he is
sa-shariira. It is their problem. The upanishad-s reveal
a-shariiratvam as our very nature or swa-swaruupam. Then when am
I</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">a-shariira? The upanishad-s point out that
I am a-shariiraH all the time, it is swa-swaruupam, one's very
intrinsic nature - nitya a-shariiraH as stated by the upanishad-s
above. Secondly aatmanaH asa~NgaH - asa~NgaH na hi sajyate - asa~NgaH
hi ayam purushhaH (Bri. Up III:ix:26) - It cannot have any
relationship with any object - like aakaasha - like space. Hence aatma
asa~Ngatvaat nityam a-shariiraH - It is eternally formless since it is
not related to any thing, like space. shariira sambandha (relationship
with body) comes as a result of karma phalam. Karma-phalam comes only
to a kartaa or doer. aatma being ever a-kartaa - there is no question
of karma and hence karma phala and hence body to experience
karma-phalam - hence aatmaa nitya akartR^itvaat shariira sambandhaH na
eva bhavati - aatmaa being non-doer has no relation to body. Hence
aatmanaH a-shariiratvam nitya siddham.</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">If so then how can one say sa-shariiratvam
is sa.nsaara - since there will never be a sa.nsaara since aatmaa is
eternally a-shariiraH. For that Shankara says although aatmaa is nitya
a-shariiraH, it can be mistaken as sa-shariiraH. aatmaa cannot become
sa-shariiraH but it is mistaken as</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">sa-shariiraH - as Murphy's Law states
(Murphy's upanishadic mantra!) that what can go wrong will go wrong! -
Hence sa-shariiratvam is adhyaasa siddham - hence Shankara says that
is the reason why I wrote first adhyaasa bhaashhyam! If
sa-shariiratvam is due to error then how does one get</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">a-shariiratvam? If rope is mistaken for a
snake then how can one get the snake converted back to rope? There is
no conversion process - it is only understanding or knowledge that,
there was, there is and there will be rope only all the time and never
a snake to start with. Hence sa-shariiratvam is</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">adhyaasa or error and it is not by dying
one gets a-shariiratvam but by knowing that aham aatmaa nitya
shariiraH sambandha varjitaH asmi - I was, I am and I will ever be
aatmaa without a body or without any body-relations. I am ever free
from shariira sambandha.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Hence jiivanmukta is a-shariiraH only. So
is aj~naani a-shariiraH or sa-shariiraH? He is also a-shariiraH but he
does not know that -He thinks he is sa-shariiraH and hence he is
aj~naani. Shankara quotes Bri. Up.IV:iv:7 that says:<br>
<br>
tat yathaa ahinirlvayanii valmiike mR^itaa pratyastaa shayiita evam
evedam<br>
shariiragm shete | athaayaM ashariiraH amR^itaH praaNaH brahma eva
tejaH eva saH aham.h |</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">It gives the example of the snake and its
skin. The snake removes its skin and skin continues to be there close
to the snake. But snake has no attachment to its discarded skin. Hence
whatever happens to the skin the snake is not affected. In the same
way the j~naani continues to be in the<br>
body but whatever happens to the body he does not claim that it is
happening to him. It is not that the body becomes free from karma - it
undergoes its own course (praarabdha-karma) but j~naani never claims
those pleasures and pains as his pleasures and pains. He says aham
nitya ashariiraH.<br>
<br>
Giita says: II:56<br>
<br>
duHkheshhu anudvignamanaaH sukheshhu vigata-spR^ihaH |<br>
viita-raaga-bhaya-krodhaH sthita-dhiiH muniH uchyate ||</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Hence a-shariiratvam is moksha and moksha
is nitya siddha. By j~naana it is owned-up and it is not a product of
upaasanaa.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">That completes the first argument for why
moksha cannot be the result of upaasanaa.</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">Shankara provides a few more arguments,
which we will discuss in the next post.<br>
-----------------------<br>
End of the post.<br>
<br>
Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed
at<br>
<font
face="Times"><u
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/files/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/<br
>
</u></font>for personal study.<br>
<br>
***Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright
protected.***</font><br>
<font color="#000000"></font></div>
<div>-- <br>
K. Sadananda<br>
Code 6323<br>
Naval Research Laboratory<br>
Washington D.C. 20375<br>
Voice
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <msr at c...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:56:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Fwd: Kanchi Paramacharya's 108th Jayanthi - An Appeal
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <msr at c...>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: Kanchi Paramacharya's 108th Jayanthi - An Appeal
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 03:54:24
From: "chithra rangarajan" <rchithra at h...>
To: msr at c...
>From: Manikantan Srinivasan
>To: mahaperiyava_charanam at y...
>CC: manikantan.srinivasan at m..., may20th1894 at y...
>Subject: Kanchi Paramacharya's 108th Jayanthi - An Appeal
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 22:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
>
> Hara Hara Shankara Jaya Jaya Shankara
> Sri Gurubhyo Namaha
>
>Words are neither necessary nor sufficient to expound the greatness of
His
>Holiness Sri Kanchi Paramacharya - Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati
>Mahaswami, the 68th pontiff of Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam. "Born" in
1894,
>this lighthouse of knowledge and incarnation of the Almighty Himself,
>attained Siddhi in 1994 after imparting nearly 100 years of invaluable
>spiritual guidance to mankind. Many a family knows no other form of God
>other than the Mahaperiyava (as he is also called) Himself, the mere
>thought of whom creates a charging vibration for many. Many have not
even
>seen Him once (and they consider themselves so unfortunate) but still
have
>such devotion to Him - thanks to His attraction power - thanks to His
>tapas and anushtaanam. The 20th century itself was so fortunate to have
>hosted this Thrikala Gnyani, who however had transcended time and space
>and is eternal in the hearts of us devotees.
>
>This year marks the 108th Jayanthi of Paramacharya and devotees all
over
>are celebrating it with great pomp in the Vedic sense. One such place
is a
>town in Tamil Nadu called Govindapuram which ( I think ) boasts of
being
>the birth place of one of the earlier Acharyas of the Kanchi Kamkoti
>Peetam - Sri Bodhendra Saraswathi, who exposed the potence of Rama-nama
to
>mankind.
>
>Every year the Jayanthi celebrations at Govindapuram are conducted
>grandly. This year being the 108th, the Jayanthi celebrations are for
11
>days, from June 1st to June 11th, with His Jayanthi falling on June
5th,
>[ Vaigaasi month Anuradha(Anusham) nakshathram ] and marking almost a
>center point of the celebrations. Scores, if not hundreds, of Veda
Pandits
>and Upanyaasakaas are participating in this rare occasion. Needless to
>say, funds are needed to make this happen - from conducting the yaagas
>and homams, to annadhanam, to doing Sambavana to the Veda Brahmanas who
>would be doing long stretches of Veda Paaraayanam, to what not. These
are
>people who have dedicated their lives to the Vedic study, the value of
>which, interestingly, is being realized more and more by many in the
last
>decade or so !! The importance of supporting such activities and
>preventing Vedic studies from dwindling any further than it already
has,
>cannot be overemphasized. Upholding the Sanatana Dharma, the roots of
>which lie in the Vedas, has been the central theme in Paramacharya's
>teachings to us devotees.
>
>This is an appeal to raise funds for this noble cause. Today (Wed, May
>9th) being Anuradha Nakshthram, I am sending this out to almost
everyone
>in my mail list. Paramacharya's janma-nakshthram falls on next Anuradha
>Nakshthram, June 5th 2001. Please make very effort to contribute and
>please do so soon so that the organizers ( one of whom I am fortunate
to
>know very well and hence this mail ) are able to plan out their budget
>more easily. I especially urge the folks in this mail group from US to
>contribute whatever little they can and make a big difference thanks to
>the conversion rate. Many of you would probably be contributing to
various
>good causes..try your best to include this also in that list. You can
make
>the checks (cheques) payable to
>
> Acharya Baktha Jana Kainkarya Sabha
>
>and mail it to either ..
>
>Sri V. Narayanaswami,
>Acharya Baktha Jana Kainkarya Sabha (Regd.)
>"Gokul" F-3, Door No. 69,
>Plot No. 71-72, 7th Avenue,
>Ashok Nagar, Chennai - 600 083
>
>..or for those in the US, if convenient, to me:
>
>S. Manikantan
>160 Evergreen Road,
># 10 A,
>Edison, New Jersey
>NJ - 08837.
>
>I want to end this long mail by thanking you for taking time to read it
>and in advance for forwarding it to your friends and for your
>contributions .. and more importantly to sincerely realize and
understand
>along with me that - how much ever funds we raise or don't raise, the
>celebrations are going to happen per Paramacharya's Sankalpam. If He so
>desires, He will give us an opportunity to be an instrument .. nothing
>more than that.
>
> Apaara Karunaa Sindhum Gnyaanadam Shaantaroopinam
> Sri Chandrasekhara Gurum Pranamaami Mudhaanvaham
>
>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
Subject: Maha Rudra Yagna
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:30:51 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
Namaste to all,
I got this message from another group and thought of passing on to this list
also, as I don't recall seeing it here. Hope many of you can join and
receive the infinite grace of Devi Sharadamba and Sri Chandramouleeshwara.
They conducted a Ati Rudra (14,641 times) Maha Yagna a couple of years ago
with the grace of jagadGuru Sri Bharathi Teertha Swamiji of Sringeri and 121
R^itviks from India attending it. It was truely divine.
Savithri
There will be a Maha Rudra Yagna at Sringeri Vidya Bharathi Foundation,
Stroudsburg, PA on Sunday, May 27.
The schedule of the events is as follows:
6:00am Maha Ganapathy puja/Homa, Kalasa sthapana
7:00am Maha Sankalpa, Guru Vandana, Mahanyasam
8:30am Sri Rudram chanting and abhisheka (1331 times)
12:30pm Rudra, chamaka homa, vasordhara homa, pUrNAhuti (133 times)
1:30pm Arati, prasadam
5:00pm Lalitha sahasranaama
6:30pm Arati, prasadam
Address: Rd 8, Cays Road, Stroudsburg, PA 18360, USA
Phone: (570) 629 7881 / 1-800-45HINDU
Directions: Take US route 80 in PA to exit 45(Tannersville) to Rd 715 South.
After 3 miles, turn right to Mountain Spring Rd (Christine's Reeders Inn on
your left). Follow Mountain Spring Rd to Miller drive and turn left at Stop
sign to Cays Rd. You will be at the center with in 50 feet.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:53:57 -0400
Subject: KALADY - NEW INFO.
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
It is said that the location of this village - birth place of Sankara was
identified by one Diwan Seshagiri Iyer in the 1900s.(The Throne Of
Transcendental Wisdom by K.R.Venkatraman,Revised Third Edn. p.123).
Some Indologists are of the view that Sri Sacchidananda Sivabhinava
Narasimha Bharati, the 33rd Sankaracharya of Sringeri Sarada Peetham,
identified the village.
Prof.Mu.Raghva Iyengar, a Vidwan of Ramnad,in his article "Cerar vanjiyum
silaasaasana vazhakkum" - "Annals of Oriental Research of the University of
Madras", Vol. I, says that his uncle, Mahavidwan R.Raghva Iyengar of
Madurai Tamil Sangam, earlier informed him about the location of this
village ( in the 1890s). Mu.Ra. gives various details to confirm the exact
location of kalady (Kalati).
This article was again published in "Aaraaici Togudi" p.244 on the occasion
of Mu.Ra's Shashtiabdapoorthi celebrations by his sons (in 1938).
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:57:42 -0400
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>The author of various articles and text that will be
>published in the site will be basically by nominees
>from each of these various trusts and philosophies.
If there are going to be different authors of different essays,
I would suggest that the author's name be mentioned under each
one. Without that, a general user would not know whose thoughts
and opinions he is reading. I just found it a little strange that
the photo gallery has pictures only of the Kanchi Acharyas, and
the currently available material on the Upanishads is only from
a Madhva pundit. I presume you still have lots of things to put
online, so I'll visit the site after a few weeks.
As for learning Vedic chanting online, I am skeptical about it.
Even music can be taught by tapes and internet connections, but
I don't think effective vedAdhyayana can be conducted this way.
Call me old-fashioned, but I think the person-to-person learning
is important.
Anyway, my best wishes for your effort,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 14:03:23 -0600 (MDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
> >The author of various articles and text that will be
> >published in the site will be basically by nominees
> >from each of these various trusts and philosophies.
>
> If there are going to be different authors of different essays,
> I would suggest that the author's name be mentioned under each
> one. Without that, a general user would not know whose thoughts
> and opinions he is reading. I just found it a little strange that
> the photo gallery has pictures only of the Kanchi Acharyas, and
> the currently available material on the Upanishads is only from
> a Madhva pundit. I presume you still have lots of things to put
> online, so I'll visit the site after a few weeks.
At this time, for some reason I am unable to see the website at all;
it shows up blank with a black background on both Netscape and IE. I
am thus trusting Vidyasankar's comments (personal mail and here) in
the following.
I notice that the promoter/webmaster of www.slokas.com tried to
solicit support for the website on the mailing list BGita at Yahoo!
(see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BGita/message/94) in a somewhat
corny fashion. That itself is merely silly and not perhaps wrong, but
it is wrong for him to be lifting material from dvaita.org without
asking anyone about it. We got specific written permission from
Prof. Pandurangi for his Upanishad essay, and have no intention of
allowing others to plagiarize the material. May I thus ask that it be
removed? In any event, if the purpose of the site is to promote
ecumenical faith and understanding, what is gained by using the
polemical writings of one denomination? There is enough possibility
of non-dialectical material to go around that would not be
unacceptable to anyone, but to get it cleanly requires a significant
effort beyond cut-and-paste.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 20:09:47 -0400
Subject: Re: KALADY - NEW INFO.
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
On Wed, 23 May 2001 14:53:57 -0400, BGS <sivabgs at Y...> wrote:
>Prof.Mu.Raghva Iyengar, a Vidwan of Ramnad,in his article "Cerar vanjiyum
>silaasaasana vazhakkum" - "Annals of Oriental Research of the University of
>Madras", Vol. I, says that his uncle, Mahavidwan R.Raghva Iyengar of
>Madurai Tamil Sangam, earlier informed him about the location of this
>village ( in the 1890s). Mu.Ra. gives various details to confirm the exact
>location of kalady (Kalati).
>
>This article was again published in "Aaraaici Togudi" p.244 on the occasion
>of Mu.Ra's Shashtiabdapoorthi celebrations by his sons (in 1938).
Dear Sri Sivabgs,
So what is your point? It was based on prior research work in the 1890s
that temples and the Sringeri Math at Kaladi were built in the 1900s.
Do you have any information on people who knew about the exact location
of Kaladi in say, the 1850s or earlier?
Did you know, for example, that there were other places which claimed to
be the birthplace of Sankaracharya? Did you also know that controversy
about the location of Kaladi had been started from certain quarters, and
that it required the efforts of the Dewans of Mysore, Travancore, Cochin,
Pudukkottai and Ramnad, to identify the place unambiguously? Once some
dispute starts, how do you think they are resolved? Don't you think that
the Kerala inscriptions that you have discovered anew in a secondary
reference played a role in deciding the issue?
Were you aware that the Setupati kings of Ramnad were disciples of Sri
Narasimha Bharati Swamigal of Sringeri? Did you know that Vidwans from
Ramnad regularly visited Sringeri and vice versa, to participate in the
Vidwat sadas discussions? Were you aware that when a Government Oriental
Manuscripts Library was established in Madras, under the dispensation
of the then University of Madras, the Sringeri Matha donated a large
number of manuscripts to it? Don't you think that there was information
flow from one Vidwan to another in the process?
I have noticed your posts on a few other online forums too, but have
refrained from responding beyond a point. For reasons best known only to
you, there is a particular implicit theme behind them. It would be far
better for everybody if you were to state your concerns explicitly. I
hope your presence here is not motivated solely by a desire to contest
the acknowledged status and achievements of the Sringeri Matha and its
Sankaracharyas.
Yours,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:33:52 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Ashwin Hattiangadi
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Hi
Thank you for considering me for the list. I am interested in the study
and knowledge of the advaita vedanta. Guess my interest is more to the
order of "learning" from the members of the list of this omniscient
philosophy. I have been interested in this ancient concept since a few
years now. Some personal contacts with saints and monks have triggered
this interest. Hence my understanding of this philosophy is by experience
along with some knowledge of the scriptures.
Although religous studies and activities probably form my main interest, I
am involved in completing a PhD in mechanical engg. at Purdue University.
Regards,
Ashwin
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:38:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Shrisha Rao wrote:
> At this time, for some reason I am unable to see the website at all;
> it shows up blank with a black background on both Netscape and IE.
You probably don't have the shockwave plugin. Neither do I but at least I
see a grey rectangle on the black background. :)
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Upanishads are Barren
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 03:51:10 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
In an earlier instalment of the Brahmasutrabhashya of Sri Shankaracharya,
Sri Sadanand had quoted the views of a Vrttikara according to whom the
Upanishads are barren portions of Sruti. Could Sri Sadanand/other memebers
of the list tell me where this view is quoted in Advaita/other Vedanta
texts? I found this in Brahmasiddhi, but not in Panchapaadika. I still have
to look up other texts.
This view is attributed to Bhartrmitra, who wrote several prakarana-lakshana
texts on Purva and Uttaramimamsa. In the PM sampradaya, he is reviled as a
Naastika Mimamsaka (see Umveka Bhatta's and Parthasarathi Misra's comment on
Slokavarttila 1.1.1.10). I was completing a webpage on Bhartrmitra (quoted
in Nyamanjari etc, as well) and so any help is welcome. The webpage is
become longer and longer, but I want to make it as complete as possible.
Hence, please do not hesistate to list as many Vedantic citations as you can
- I have already completed the Purva Mimamsa sources, Vishishtadvaita texts.
Bhagvad Datta points that such views are attributed to 'some Mimamsakas' in
Skandamahesvara commentary on Nirukta, and Udayvira Shastri has found
similar views attributed to 'Taarkika' school of ritualists in Hariswami's
commentary (contemporary of 'Vikramaditya') on the Shatapatha Brahmana.
Regards and thanks in advance.
Vishal
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Just visited the website. It is barely ready, I guess. Nice effort.
I saw this as the first line in the description of Vedas:
"The hymns of the Rig Veda are considered the oldest and most important of the
Vedas, having been composed between 1500 BC and the time of the great Bharata
war about 900 BC."
Where did you get all these dates from? I have never come across these dates.
Also, "composing" may not be the right term for Vedas right? It vitiates the
"apourusheya" nature of Vedas.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 02:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: apourusheya
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Namaste,
I am always waiting for 'tomorrow' when I will have
enough material to contribute substantially but you
lot keep coming up with new threads to follow and I am
forever chasing rainbows...very beautiful ones.
Therefore putting limitations aside I will leap in
while apologising because I know that this topic will
bring us back to many previous threads. One area of my
interest is the soteriological potential of language
so the recent use of the word 'apourusheya'....slokas
site comment........attracted my attention and I then
followed a previous thread from 1996.
The following is from an account of a spiritual
experience...(I am trying to explain these from an
advaitin perspective in my study):
'I sat down among the waving grasses on the turf and
suddenly I was received into the embrace of a powerful
force. This force seemed to welcome and enfold me and
give me strength. It also seemed to smile invisibly.'
This is from someone with no past experience of
Vedanta.
Who is the author of these words? At one level it is
the person giving the account in words from her past.
But the words indicate something much greater than the
limitations of past learning. Note the similarity
between the 'smile' and that of Lord Krishna in
Chapter Two of the Bhagavad Gita as he responds to
Arjuna's willingness to be quiet.
In the experience there is the impulse, the desire to
give expression to it. In this I am reminded of
Bhartrihari's Vakyapadiya as well as Shankara's
teaching on shabda. But may I use the words of Dr
Gopinath Kaviraj:
'Pratibha otherwise known as parasamvit or citi sakti
in the agama, is the power of slef-revelation or
self-illumination of the Supreme Spirit, with which it
is essentially and eternally identical.'
Dr. Kaviraj claimed that there was no essential
conflict between Shankara and the sphota theory.
So may I please ask for your comments on this
question:Although we use words while acknowledging
their limited forms, is their real authorship in the
unlimited Word, Vac, and are they a reflection of a
fundamental desire,iccha, for Self expression?
Many thanks for your attention
Ken Knight
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:16:38 -0400
Subject: KALADY - NEW INFO
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
To Shri.Vidyasankar
>So what is your point?
My point is that Prof. Mu.Ra. had been informed by his uncle Mahavidwan.
Raghva Iyengar about the location of kaladi in the 1890s. I intend to
highlight the efforts made by Raghava Iyengar in identifying Kalady.
>Were you aware that the Setupati kings of Ramnad were disciples of Sri
Narasimha Bharati Swamigal of Sringeri? Did you know that Vidwans from
Ramnad regularly visited Sringeri and vice versa, to participate in the
Vidwat sadas discussions?
I would be happy if u could quote the instance which could show the
participation of prof.Mu.Ra and Raghava Iyengar in the sadas conducted
by the Matha (in Sringeri and other places).
Could you please give the names of the Gurus for the Setupatis of Ramnad
prior to HH Narasimha Bharati Swamy?
>Were you aware that when a Government Oriental Manuscripts Library was
established in Madras, under the dispensation of the then University of
Madras, the Sringeri Matha donated a large number of manuscripts to it?
Don't you think that there was information flow from one Vidwan to another
in the process?
I would like to Know the exact manuscript(donated by sringeri ) which could
have been the basis for the identification of the Village.
Please note that Prof.Mu.Ra's conclusions are based only on the Tamil
Literature and topography.
> For reasons best known only to you, there is a particular implicit theme
behind them.
users.erols.com/ramakris/sringeri/kaladi.html
"...It was Jagadguru Sri Sacchidananda Sivabhinava Narasimha Bharati, the
33rd Sankaracharya of Sringeri Sarada Peetham, who identified the village".
(The contents of this page have been excerpted from an article by Sri V. R.
Gowrishankar, the administrator of the Sringeri matha, from the Oct/Nov
1995 issue of Tattvaloka)
K.R.Venkatraman, a sishya of the Sringeri matha says that the birth place
of Sankara was identified by one Diwan Seshagiri Iyer.
Could you see any implicit theme behind this statement?
>I hope your presence here is not motivated solely by a desire to contest
the acknowledged status and achievements of the Sringeri Matha and its
Sankaracharyas.
Nanri. KAMAALAI KAARANUKKU KANDATELLAAM MANJAL.
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:35:48 -0600 (MDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
Jaldhar Vyas wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Shrisha Rao wrote:
>
> > At this time, for some reason I am unable to see the website at all;
> > it shows up blank with a black background on both Netscape and IE.
>
> You probably don't have the shockwave plugin.
I don't (is it there for Unix/HP-UX?). I've also heard that it is not
advisable for a website to get too fancy, which is why most commercial
sites do not use Shockwave or such. A user is liable to just leave if
you ask him to do something first before he can view your content.
> Neither do I but at least I
> see a grey rectangle on the black background. :)
That's something else. Isn't it recommended that backgrounds be white
or near-white? I remember having read that other colors or images can
look different on various monitors.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:11:11 -0400
Subject: Re: KALADY - NEW INFO
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Dear Mr. BGS,
I have no intention of getting into a slanging match with you. Whether
things are really yellow, or whether it is I that has a jaundiced eye is not
the point. One can respond with a pat cliche about how it takes one to know
one.
When I created the website for Sringeri Matha, my explicit intention was to
put material online, based on whatever print sources I had with me. There is
and was no other goal, implicit or otherwise. If I have pointed out that
Sringeri Matha has a place of primacy, from a historical and traditional
standpoint, that has been based on a good number of attested sources. If
that has irked you for whatever reason, I'm sorry, it is your problem.
Nobody but yourself can do anything about it.
Please get hold of one of the old catalogs of the GOML and look at the
manuscript identifiers, to trace what came from where. I cannot do it right
now, sitting here in Los Angeles. You, on the other hand, seem to have
access to rare books. Best wishes for your research. I laud your intention
of bringing to light the contributions of little known scholars in the past.
A little unsolicited, but believe it or not, friendly advice - it is not
very polite in mixed company to use a language that most readers will not
understand. It is a different matter if we were to use Tamil while
discussing a Tamil text like Ulladu Narpadu or Kaivalya Navanitam. And using
all-capitals is not netiquette. It is the written equivalent of shouting.
Please do not convert the Advaita-L mailing list to some free-for-all thing
like soc.culture.indian or worse.
I do not wish to use my position as a moderator of this forum to silence
you. I am all for a polite discussion, even if it is to become political,
and even if we take opposite stands on any issue. However, I will not put up
with innuendo and unwarranted attacks. Till such time as you intend to do
just that, this will be my last direct one-to-one exchange with you, on any
forum whatsoever. If I largely ignore any of your future posts that has
anything to do with Sringeri, Kaladi, Kudali, Kanchi or Kumbhakonam, please
be informed that I will be ignoring them deliberately.
Namaskarams,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Sankaran Aniruddhan <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:28:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Upanishads are Barren
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Shri Vishal,
> Naastika Mimamsaka (see Umveka Bhatta's and Parthasarathi Misra's comment on
Is Umveka Bhatta the same as Shri Sureshwaracharya in his
pre-sannyasin life? Swami Tapasyananda, in his translation
of the Madhaviya Sankara Digvijayam, has mentioned that
one of Shri Sureshwaracharya's pre-monastic names was
'Oomveka'.
thanks,
Aniruddhan
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam lokaSam.karam
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 15:17:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Upanishads are Barren
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at E...> wrote:
>Is Umveka Bhatta the same as Shri Sureshwaracharya in his
>pre-sannyasin life? Swami Tapasyananda, in his translation
>of the Madhaviya Sankara Digvijayam, has mentioned that
>one of Shri Sureshwaracharya's pre-monastic names was
>'Oomveka'.
A number of pre-monastic names are found in various sources for
Sureswaracharya, including Mandana Misra, Visvarupa and Umveka.
We have available even today, Brahmasiddhi, Sphotasiddhi etc of
Mandana Misra; Balakrida (commentary on Yajnavalkya Smriti) of
Visvarupa; and Umveka Bhatta's Mimamsa commentary. It is a big
question whether all these authors were the same person.
As Sureswara is said to have been a Purva Mimamsaka before he
became an Advaitin, it seems that different people thought he
must have been one or all of the above. Apparently, by the time
the Sankaravijaya was written, many such variant traditions had
developed. The Madhaviya has been accused of spinning its own
stories about these things. However, the author of Madhaviyam
explicitly tells us that he is recording variant traditions
about Sankara's disciples. There are always statements like
"Some say (iti kecit)" and "others say (ity aparaiH)" in his
descriptions of Padmapada, Sureswara and others.
We will always find major and minor variations within traditional
accounts, and we need to take what is called a "text-critical"
attitude towards them. This does not mean that we should simply
criticize something, but that we should carefully examine the
sources in an objective and comparative manner. It is possible
that errors have crept in here and there, during the process of
transmission.
Best,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 17:45:38 -0400
Subject: Re: KALADY - NEW INFO
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 16:31:10 PDT
>Sender: Indology <INDOLOGY at L...>
>From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
>Subject: Re: Madhava, Vidyaranya, Sringeri, and Kulke
>I am sorry to say this, but the Kanchi Acharyas have always been into it.
>You just have to read a few articles from the commemoration volume on Sri
>Chandrasekharendra Saraswati at www.kamakoti.org, to see the level of
>involvement the Kanchi Acharyas have traditionally brought to this game.
>See especially, http://www.kamakoti.org/souv/4-12.html, and
>http://www.kamakoti.org/souv/5-59.html. In the latter page, the criticism
>is disguised as if it were praise, but this is what Tamilians refer to as
>"vAzhaippazhattil Uci". One has to be exceedingly naive, not to see it for
>what it is.
Re: "vAzhaippazhattil Uci"
It is not very polite in mixed company to use a language that most readers
will not understand. It is a different matter if we were to use Tamil while
discussing a Tamil text like Ulladu Narpadu or Kaivalya Navanitam.
Regards,
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:29:48 -0400
Subject: Re: KALADY - NEW INFO
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
An old posting of mine on the INDOLOGY mailing list has been quoted on this
list, selectively with respect to content but also indiscriminately with
respect to time and place. I would like to remind everybody that this list
is different from the Indology list.
If any reader is interested in reading what I said there, when I said it,
and why, please go to the URL http://www.indology.co.uk and see that
discussion list's archives from May and June 2000. This was a long-winded
topic, to which many different people contributed, not just I. Be warned
that the discussion may be distasteful to many.
Yes, I will be seen as a biased person, and yes, I exchanged heated words
with some people and stated my position strongly. However, I did it up
front, without carping and cavilling.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:56:09 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: KALADY - NEW INFO
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
dear VSundaresan
Its good that u pointed out that slandering isnt
allowed here.I think whether it is sringeri or Kanchi
or any other religious leaders, they are all much
above us.Hence we dont have any right to even talk
about them.Each may follow a different style of
preaching but all talk about devotion, love for all
humanity and seeking of the Ultimate.
Padmanabhan
--- Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
wrote: > Dear Mr. BGS,
>
> I have no intention of getting into a slanging match
> with you. Whether
> things are really yellow, or whether it is I that
> has a jaundiced eye is not
> the point. One can respond with a pat cliche about
> how it takes one to know
> one.
>
> When I created the website for Sringeri Matha, my
> explicit intention was to
> put material online, based on whatever print sources
> I had with me. There is
> and was no other goal, implicit or otherwise. If I
> have pointed out that
> Sringeri Matha has a place of primacy, from a
> historical and traditional
> standpoint, that has been based on a good number of
> attested sources. If
> that has irked you for whatever reason, I'm sorry,
> it is your problem.
> Nobody but yourself can do anything about it.
>
> Please get hold of one of the old catalogs of the
> GOML and look at the
> manuscript identifiers, to trace what came from
> where. I cannot do it right
> now, sitting here in Los Angeles. You, on the other
> hand, seem to have
> access to rare books. Best wishes for your research.
> I laud your intention
> of bringing to light the contributions of little
> known scholars in the past.
>
> A little unsolicited, but believe it or not,
> friendly advice - it is not
> very polite in mixed company to use a language that
> most readers will not
> understand. It is a different matter if we were to
> use Tamil while
> discussing a Tamil text like Ulladu Narpadu or
> Kaivalya Navanitam. And using
> all-capitals is not netiquette. It is the written
> equivalent of shouting.
> Please do not convert the Advaita-L mailing list to
> some free-for-all thing
> like soc.culture.indian or worse.
>
> I do not wish to use my position as a moderator of
> this forum to silence
> you. I am all for a polite discussion, even if it is
> to become political,
> and even if we take opposite stands on any issue.
> However, I will not put up
> with innuendo and unwarranted attacks. Till such
> time as you intend to do
> just that, this will be my last direct one-to-one
> exchange with you, on any
> forum whatsoever. If I largely ignore any of your
> future posts that has
> anything to do with Sringeri, Kaladi, Kudali, Kanchi
> or Kumbhakonam, please
> be informed that I will be ignoring them
> deliberately.
>
> Namaskarams,
> Vidyasankar
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:54:03 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: www.slokas.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Probably u dont have flash plug ins that why u are not
able to view the site.Kindly download flash plug in
from www.macromedia.com and then view the site.
padmanabhan
--- "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Shrisha Rao wrote:
>
> > At this time, for some reason I am unable to see
> the website at all;
> > it shows up blank with a black background on both
> Netscape and IE.
>
> You probably don't have the shockwave plugin.
> Neither do I but at least I
> see a grey rectangle on the black background. :)
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Apastamba's warning
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:00:36
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Since there's been a lot of discussion on the shastric injunctions of late,
I thought I should point out something in the Apastamba Sutra. Most of the
South Indian brahmanas of the Krishna Yajur Veda are followers of Apastamba.
Apastamba in one place remarks that there are instances in the Veda where
acts of adharma and violence are done by the sages of yore. He says that
such acts by the sages did not adversely affect them (the sages who
committed them) since they had great "powers". But he warns that if people
in later ages were to try to copy these acts by justifying that they are
only doing what was done by the sages of yore, they would perish.
So here conscience and the advice of wise men of the age, play a vital part
in the interpretation of the dharma for the age.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ramkumar N.S.M." <nramkuma at A...>
Subject: general question
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:00:15 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ramkumar N.S.M." <nramkuma at A...>
Namaskaaram!
I have a question. Is it true that a bramhin should not go abroad and If he
goes he has to perform prayaschittam? Does this have sastraic basis?(any
references will be helpful). Answer for this is quite important for me as I
am preventing my self going abroad for the past three years. Now there is
increased pressure on me to go abroad for professional reasons and a debate
arose between me and my coleagues.
Any help with appropriate references will be grately appreciated.
Regards,
Ramkumar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 07:35:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Harih Om!
Namaste,
I am posting this message to inform the members with the facts that know.
Sri Padmanabhan has recently posted a similar request at the advaitin list
(http://www.groups.yahoo.com/advaitin). My communication with Sri
Padmanabhan indicates that the site is developed with commercial motive. The
site subscription (for user service) will cost $30 per month. Sri
Padmanabhan says some profit may go for supporting religious institutions
and the rest will be divided among investors.
When I first saw the message of Sri Padmanabhan, I also thought the service
is free and will benefit the universal community. Though such a commercial
service may still be useful but Sri Padmanabhan fails to provide all the
details. It seems that the commercial site wants to take free help from
members of spiritual mailing lists to establish a materialistic venture.
I tried to post this message to the list at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l. When I posted there, it seems that
the mail went to Sri Vidyasankar instead of the list. The moderators should
change the settings appropriately so that when an article posted through the
Yahoogroups site, it should also get posted at advaita-l listserve. I will
be more than happy to help the moderator to change the set up appropriately.
regards,
Ram Chandran
regards,
Ram Chandran
Note: It is very easy for any commercial website to get the support of
Indian political leaders and their endorsement doesn't necessarily imply the
site's credibility.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 08:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
--- Ram Chandran <rchandran at C...> wrote:
> Harih Om!
>
> Namaste,
>
> I am posting this message to inform the members with the facts that
> know.
> Sri Padmanabhan has recently posted a similar request at the advaitin
> list
> (http://www.groups.yahoo.com/advaitin). My communication with Sri
> Padmanabhan indicates that the site is developed with commercial
> motive. The
> site subscription (for user service) will cost $30 per month. Sri
> Padmanabhan says some profit may go for supporting religious
> institutions
> and the rest will be divided among investors.
>
This is one of the reasons those who voluntarily contribute their work
as in Jaguar Site, ambaa-L or here or in Advaitin, should protect
their work with some kind of good copy{right/left}.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#DocumentationLicenses
I personally prefer GNU's FDL, even though it allows scope for somebody
commercially selling the document, becauses it places the same
restriction on them by demanding them give the same rights to others.
My 2c.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:35:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
From: "Ram Chandran" <rchandran at C...>
> I tried to post this message to the list at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l. When I posted there, it seems
that
> the mail went to Sri Vidyasankar instead of the list. The moderators
should
> change the settings appropriately so that when an article posted through
the
> Yahoogroups site, it should also get posted at advaita-l listserve. I
will
> be more than happy to help the moderator to change the set up
appropriately.
We are trying to keep the yahoo groups list for advaita-l as a back up
server only, so that message may be archived etc, as well as for server down
times for the braincells server on which advaita-l server now resides. The
members' options for yahoo groups are set as web-only, and postings made
tehre come to the list moderators. We have set it up that when a posting is
made on listserv, the posting also goes to yahoo groups. Setting it up for
the reverse as well, where a posting made on yahoo groups to go to listserv,
will set up a loop and will flood the mail boxes.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:11:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Harih Om!
Thanks Raviji for bringing an important point regarding copyrights.
Fortunately, the Internet copyright laws do protect the original authors
even without a formal statement on the copyright. If commercial sites such
as "Sloka.com" undertake 'adharmic' activities by misusing the internet
privileges, Lord Krishna will certainly appear in the form of a smart lawyer
to establish 'dharma'. (Bhagavad Gita Chapter 4 Vesrse 7) Let us hope that
the developers of 'sloka.com" become aware of this and act accordingly.
warmest regards,
Ram Chandran
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: general question
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:14:52 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
From: "Ramkumar N.S.M." <nramkuma at A...>
> I have a question. Is it true that a bramhin should not go abroad and If
he
> goes he has to perform prayaschittam? Does this have sastraic basis?(any
> references will be helpful). Answer for this is quite important for me as
I
> am preventing my self going abroad for the past three years. Now there is
> increased pressure on me to go abroad for professional reasons and a
debate
> arose between me and my coleagues.
Namaskaaram.
I had a discussion about this with some scholars the last time I was in
India, and I was told that there was a prayaschittam called "prAjApatyam"
that one would do to get over the dosham of crossing the oceans. I don't
have the references with me now to where this is specified, but will try to
find out soon.
prAjApatyam, as I was told, is predominantly a four day fasting ritual,
where the first day you eat twice, the second day you eat once, the third
day you drink water only, and the fourth day, you eat nothing. The other
aspects are some specific homams, the details of which I do not have.
Interestingly, I was told by the people I consulted, that I could do it in
the US as soon as I come here every time, and so feel a little bit easier in
the day to day performance of rituals. I would then do it every time I cross
any ocean.
Hope this helps.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:40:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
On Fri, 25 May 2001 10:35:02 -0500, Vaidya Sundaram
<vaidya_narayanan at Y...> wrote:
>From: "Ram Chandran" <rchandran at C...>
>
>> I tried to post this message to the list at
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l. When I posted there, it seems
>that
>> the mail went to Sri Vidyasankar instead of the list. The moderators
>should
>> change the settings appropriately so that when an article posted through
>the
>> Yahoogroups site, it should also get posted at advaita-l listserve. I
>will
>> be more than happy to help the moderator to change the set up
>appropriately.
>
>We are trying to keep the yahoo groups list for advaita-l as a back up
>server only, so that message may be archived etc, as well as for server
down
>times for the braincells server on which advaita-l server now resides. The
>members' options for yahoo groups are set as web-only, and postings made
>tehre come to the list moderators. We have set it up that when a posting is
>made on listserv, the posting also goes to yahoo groups. Setting it up for
>the reverse as well, where a posting made on yahoo groups to go to
listserv,
>will set up a loop and will flood the mail boxes.
>
>bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
>Vaidya.
>
Dear Sri Vaidya:
Namaste,
Please check and see why my original post at the internet set for
yahoogroups.com didn't appear in the list. One of the possibility is that
Sri Vidyasankar may not be familiar with the set up and arrangment. He
replied me separately in a private email and my original post never
appeared at advaita-L.
I know what you are trying to do and it is a nice backup arrangement.
regards,
Ram Chandran
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 09:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: general question
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Dear Ramkumar,
I really admire your attitude. I wish I had this bit of sense in the
past.
We have discussed this matter in length and as usual without any
definite conclusion in the past and probably more than once. And I am
confident that we will discuss this all over again many times in the
future :-)) Please look into the archives and enjoy our agitations
:-)) on this matter.
I do not know about shastra-s, from (some) shishhTaachara, yes you
should not go abroad and you have to do prayashchittam for that. But
shishhTaachara is an *unreliable* indicator, there quite a few
variations even inside a small circle. [When I got a shalagrama blessed
by shrii shrii shankara vijayendra saraswathy, i asked three different
iyengars about their mode of worship, two of them (priests) right
inside the kanchi varadaraja swamy temple, I got three different
answers. Of course I try to do what Acharya told me]. Unreliability of
shishhTaachara is not just my view, but also of shrii nilakaNTha
diixita in AnandasagarastavaH (a great work on shrii miinaaxii).
Coming back, my view on this subject (now) is very simple and it is
based on
guhaayaaM gehe vaa bahirapi vane vaa.adrishikhare
jale vaa vahnau vaa vasatu vasateH kiM vada phalam.h |
sadaa yasyaivaantaHkaraNamapi shaMbho tava pade
sthitaM chedyogo.asau sa cha paramayogii sa cha sukhii || 12||
of shivAnandalaharI.
My suggestion would be, if it is a short term trip (less than 3 months)
please do undertake these trips. You will learn a lot. For you kind
information, shankarAcharya of pUri visited the U.S. to honor the
invitation given to him by Paramahansa Yogananda (but he could come
only after Paramahansaji attained mahAsamadhi, and SRF sponsored his
visit). If it is for a long term, then be prepared for the possibility
that you may never go back to India again permanently.
And all these things like where we stay (guhaayam ...), even whether we
are human or not (naratvam ...) , and what ashrama we are in( vaTurvaa
...) do not really matter at all, only thing that matters is how well
our thoughts flow towards God. shivAnandalaharI is a great practical
guide to life.
My 2c.
With respects,
Ravi
AUM shivAbhyAm namaH
--- "Ramkumar N.S.M." <nramkuma at A...> wrote:
> Namaskaaram!
>
> I have a question. Is it true that a bramhin should not go abroad and
> If he
> goes he has to perform prayaschittam? Does this have sastraic
> basis?(any
> references will be helpful). Answer for this is quite important for
> me as I
> am preventing my self going abroad for the past three years. Now
> there is
> increased pressure on me to go abroad for professional reasons and a
> debate
> arose between me and my coleagues.
>
> Any help with appropriate references will be grately appreciated.
>
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Sankaran Kartik Jayanarayanan <kartik at e...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:57:02 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: general question
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Sankaran Kartik Jayanarayanan <kartik at e...>
<nramkuma at A...> wrote:
> Namaskaaram!
>
> I have a question. Is it true that a bramhin should not go abroad and If he
> goes he has to perform prayaschittam? Does this have sastraic basis?(any
> references will be helpful). Answer for this is quite important for me as I
> am preventing my self going abroad for the past three years. Now there is
> increased pressure on me to go abroad for professional reasons and a debate
> arose between me and my coleagues.
>
> Any help with appropriate references will be grately appreciated.
>
Sometime ago in this list, I had quoted the Bodhayana Dharma Sutra
2.1.2.2 which says that one who crosses the sea (samudrasaMyAnaM) has lost
his caste. For this, the commentator Govinda gives a praayashchitta (I'm
not so certain about this, but you can look it up). But Anand Hudli
pointed out cases of Brahmin priests in the temple, and of BrAmhaNas who
had come to America to perform the ati-rudra homa. Ravi also gave the
example of a Shri Venugopal who was asked by the Sringeri Acharya to
officiate as priest at SVBF (http://www.svbf.org/), which is located in
Pennsylvania, USA.
But one must also remember that Bodhayana says that one who is born as a
Brahmin but doesn't perform the saMdhya prayers is a shudra. There are
several other similar rules to be adhered to. The mentality nowadays is,
"if you've already broken a few rules, breaking a few others doesn't
matter much."
> Regards,
> Ramkumar
>
Regards,
Kartik
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 13:25:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Fri, 25 May 2001 12:11:24 -0400, Ram Chandran <rchandran at C...>
wrote:
>Harih Om!
>
>Thanks Raviji for bringing an important point regarding copyrights.
>Fortunately, the Internet copyright laws do protect the original authors
>even without a formal statement on the copyright. If commercial sites such
>as "Sloka.com" undertake 'adharmic' activities by misusing the internet
>privileges, Lord Krishna will certainly appear in the form of a smart
lawyer
>to establish 'dharma'. (Bhagavad Gita Chapter 4 Vesrse 7) Let us hope that
>the developers of 'sloka.com" become aware of this and act accordingly.
I am only speaking for myself here but I am all for free distribution
of any material that volunteers such as those on the Sanskrit site or
other forum (such as this list) contribute. However, the person who
does the "cut and paste" should at least have the courtesy of
acknowledging the original author(s). We need to spread the message
of our AchAryas who themselves never bothered about copyright laws.
Imagine what would be the situation if we were forced to obtain
permission or a license to quote passages from Shankara's bhAShyas
in the original from some authority, say the Shankara Mathas for
example.
Making money from "cut and paste" efforts is a different matter and
illegal as you have pointed out. But I have related question. What
happens if a company in a third world country, if it has/hasn't signed
the Berne Convention or Universal Copyright Convention, establishes a
website by plagiarizing material from elsewhere? Where is your
"smart lawyer" going to fight the company? In the third world country,
where there may not be enough protection from copyright violations?
Or in some international legal forum. I am asking this because it is
common knowledge that software piracy goes in a big way, especially
(although not exclusively) in third world countries and not much can be
done about it in those countries. This very fact, ie. the hurdles
against swift and effective justice, may encourage such commercial
ventures based on questionable methods.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. Veeraghanta" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 13:17:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Any volunteers?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. Veeraghanta" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Sadananda
while i am not a pundit of sanskrit, i would like to offer my
services.. let me know if i can be of any help.
S. Veeraghanta
At 07:10 AM 5/23/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Greetings to all advaitin and ADVAITA-L members:
>
>I have been blessed by the help of Shree Sunder and Shree Dennis in
>getting the Notes on Brahmasuutra. It was really a cooperative
>endeavor involving all three of us. I have been mailing the first
>draft to Shree Sunder who does the painful job of proof reading,
>correct the transliteration and find any missing references and
>mail the corrected version to Dennis who sorts out the Sanskrit words
>for glossary while making any final corrections. Sunder used to find
>the meaning and prepare the final glossary after it is checked by
>Dennis and myself. My job was only to post the corrected version to
>the list. Sunder expressed that he is going to be very busy and will
>not be able to do the function for some time.
>
>While we all got the benefit of his excellent service, I am going to
>miss him. I would need a volunteer who can proof read making any
>corrections in transliteration as well as in English. It is a public
>secret that I am very bad speller and very bad proof reader. Sunder
>promised to continue the service until the end of this fourth suutra
>that we are discussing now - which should be over in couple of weeks.
>
>Any Volunteers to help the smooth flow of these notes?
>
>What is involved as follows:
>1. proof read the first draft of the notes making all corrections and
>possible references.
>2. Mail the corrected version to Shree Dennis Waite
>3. Find the meaning for the Sanskrit words that Dennis provides and
>post the glossary.
>4. Finally Sunder also was helping me to put these corrected version
>of the notes and glossary in the archives files of advaitin list.
>
>
>Hari Om!
>Sadananda
>
>
>
>Dear Dennis and Sada,
>
> I have really enjoyed my participation in the postings and
>learned a great deal [I hope]. I thank you both for the splendid
>team-work and co-operation. I shall continue to enjoy the fruits of
>your labors, and make suggestions as an observer on the periphery.
>Hopefully, at some future date I may be able offer more time to this
>project.
>
> With very best wishes,
>
>sunder
>
>
>> Sorry to hear you will not be able to do the
>>editing any more, Sunder, but I do understand. It does mean, of course, that
>>I cannot really contribute much help either in the future. All that I was
>>really doing was providing the new words. If no one is translating these, it
>>makes that task somewhat redundant! If you can find anyone else to do this,
>>Sada, I will be happy to continue with my meagre input. If not, I will still
>>continue trying to follow the posts, despite the seemingly increasing
>>Sanskrit content.
>>
>>Dennis
>--
>K. Sadananda
>Code 6323
>Naval Research Laboratory
>Washington D.C. 20375
>Voice (202)767-2117
>Fax:(202)767-2623
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
Dr. S. V. Veeraghanta
Rural Sociology
University of Kentucky
500, Garrigus Building
Lexington, KY 40546-0215
Ph: 859-257-3404
Fax: 859-257-4354
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:37:36 -0400
Subject: kAlAti and cidambaram
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
In the pArthavana mahAtmyam, a part of cidambara sAra (a work of
purAnic nature),it is stated that sankarA was born in the
tillavipra kulam (cidambara dIkshitAs).
tillaviprakulE jAta: parivrat s.ankarO mahAn
advaitabhAshyamakarOdityuktam bhavatApurA
(poushkara samhitA-jnAnapAda, ambalanAvala and rAmA sAstri,
cidambaram, 1925)
No information is found regarding the birth place of sankarA in
this work.
HH brahmavidyAnanda bharati of Avani math confirms this information,
in his sri sankaravijaya dindimam. He says that king rAjasekharA
invited sankarA's ancestors to his country. He established a village
(sasala grAmam) near vrshabhacalam which was later renamed as kAlAti
(kAlAti- natarAjA).
(sankaravijayadindimam - brahmavidhyAnanda bhArati swAmi of Avani
Math, published by Giri Press, Chennai , 1946)
This book contains some information about sankarA's family.
sarvagnamuni dIkshita and kAmAkshi
I
visishtA dEvi
gOvinda Dikshita vidyatirAja (brother of kAmAkshi) and vimalAmbhikA
I
visvajit sarman
vis.vajit sarman (srivatsa gOtra) and visishtA dEvi (AtrEya gOtra)
I
sankarA
( In the manuscripts of Anandagiri sankaravijaya found in Mysore
etc., and in the edition printed in the sArasudhAnidhi press and
published by jIvAnanda vidyAsAgar in Calcutta, in 1881 A.D., the
place of sankarA's birth is given as cidambaram and names of
sankarA's parents are stated to be visvajit and visishtA.)
Another popular legend is also cited in the periapurAnam, a 12th
century epic.
kUtruvar, a kalabrA king who defeated several kings, approached the
dikshitars of cidambaram to perform his pattabhishEkam ceremony.
They refused saying that they would crown only a person of the
cola dynasty and migrated to KEralA.
Regards
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:44:07 -0400
Subject: kAlAti and cidambaram
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
In the pArthavana mahAtmyam, a part of cidambara sAra (a work of
purAnic nature),it is stated that sankarA was born in the
tillavipra kulam (cidambara dIkshitAs).
tillaviprakulE jAta: parivrat s.ankarO mahAn
advaitabhAshyamakarOdityuktam bhavatApurA
(poushkara samhitA-jnAnapAda, ambalanAvala and rAmA sAstri,
cidambaram, 1925)
No information is found regarding the birth place of sankarA in
this work.
HH brahmavidyAnanda bharati of Avani math confirms this information,
in his sri sankaravijaya dindimam. He says that king rAjasekharA
invited sankarA's ancestors to his country. He established a village
(sasala grAmam) near vrshabhacalam which was later renamed as kAlAti
(kAlAti- natarAjA).
(sankaravijayadindimam - brahmavidhyAnanda bhArati swAmi of Avani
Math, published by Giri Press, Chennai , 1946)
This book contains some information about sankarA's family.
sarvagnamuni dIkshita and kAmAkshi
I
visishtA dEvi
gOvinda Dikshita vidyatirAja (brother of kAmAkshi) and vimalAmbhikA
I
visvajit sarman
vis.vajit sarman (srivatsa gOtra) and visishtA dEvi (AtrEya gOtra)
I
sankarA
( In the manuscripts of Anandagiri sankaravijaya found in Mysore
etc., and in the edition printed in the sArasudhAnidhi press and
published by jIvAnanda vidyAsAgar in Calcutta, in 1881 A.D., the
place of sankarA's birth is given as cidambaram and names of
sankarA's parents are stated to be visvajit and visishtA.)
Another popular legend is also cited in the periapurAnam, a 12th
century epic.
kUtruvar, a kalabrA king who defeated several kings, approached the
dikshitars of cidambaram to perform his pattabhishEkam ceremony.
They refused saying that they would crown only a person of the
cola dynasty and migrated to KEralA.
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:30:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: general question
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Sri Ramkumar,
I am replying in 2 parts:
1. Whenever I return to India for a vacation, my father asks me to change my
upanayam as I have crossed the oceans and perform some gAyatrI. This is what I
do.
2. Recently there was a convention in the UN where a lot of AchAryAs had come
from India. The SankarAchArya from JyothirmaTha had also come. Initially all
these AchAryAs had refused to come because they did not want to cross the
oceans. The person who encouraged them was Swami Dayananda Sarasvati (Arsha
Vidya Gurukulam fame). He said "Hanuman and subsequently Sri Rama crossed the
ocean to bring back Sita" - why not you people do it today to save sanAtana
dharma. They all conceded to come!
[Anyway, it was a nice sight to see so many AchAryAs. One of them spoke in
fluent Sanskrit as fast as one could speak English. Another had a jaTA (matted
locks) that was more than 5 feet long. If he stood and unwound it, it would
reach the floor - he demonstrated it. He said that the last time he had
visited America, the jaTA broke when he was taking shower - may be due to the
quality of water, he said].
May be one can read Ramayana to see what Hanuman or Sri Rama did as a
purificatory rite when the came back after crossing the ocean. Ofcourse, I
understand Sri Rama does not need purificatory rites, but on the same token, he
did not need vidya either from Sri VasishTa.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re:Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri AH wrote:
I am only speaking for myself here but I am all for free distribution
of any material that volunteers such as those on the Sanskrit site or
other forum (such as this list) contribute. However, the person who
does the "cut and paste" should at least have the courtesy of
acknowledging the original author(s). We need to spread the message
of our AchAryas who themselves never bothered about copyright laws.
Imagine what would be the situation if we were forced to obtain
permission or a license to quote passages from Shankara's bhAShyas
in the original from some authority, say the Shankara Mathas for
example.
SVS:
I too agree with this part. To impose copyright violations on spiritual
material is not a good thing to do. It makes us narrow minded now instead of
the person who is copying. What can people do with discussion of Shankara's
philosophy except to understand it. If by copying it, they benefit, so be it.
Anyway, that knowledge is the universal knowledge not one person's or others.
A book company let us say prints a book on Sankara's works and sells them for a
price. It does not have any commentaries in English just Sanskrit poems of
Sankara. Now he is also making money out of a body of knowledge that belongs
to everybody. He can do that right?
People who copy, even if you prevent them from copying from ourselves, will
copy from somebody else, some book published somewhere in Himalayas and the
sAdhus will never even know about it.
We constantly talk of renunciation. Now we are being possessive of our own
knowledge. I am reminded here, what Paramahansa Yogananda says in His prayer
at dawn:
"....(end)...and what I receive, teach me to share with others".
If by using our knowledge he is earning his bread and feeding his family, be
happy that you have helped somebody. In the software world, people jealously
guard their skills and new technologies, so that they can appear more wanted in
a job situation. We should not become like that.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 19:47:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>Please check and see why my original post at the internet set for
>yahoogroups.com didn't appear in the list. One of the possibility is that
>Sri Vidyasankar may not be familiar with the set up and arrangment. He
>replied me separately in a private email and my original post never
>appeared at advaita-L.
Dear Sri Ram Chandran,
As Vaidya had said, postings made to the yahoogroups.com site get
sent to the moderators, not to the list. I usually get such mails
in the bulk mail folder on my hotmail account, because it is not
directly addressed to me. To post to this list, please send mail
only to the advaita-vedanta.org address.
However, I am not sure if the other moderators get mails sent to
the Yahoo account, like the one you had sent me yesterday. That is
why I replied to you in private, cc'ing it to the others, using the
advaita-vedanta.org address. Jaldhar, Vaidya and Ravi, can you
please confirm if you get mails sent through the Yahoo interface?
If not, we may need to fix the settings there.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: general question
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 03:39:26
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Ravishankar Mayavaram wrote:
>Coming back, my view on this subject (now) is very simple and it is
>based on
>
>
>guhaayaaM gehe vaa bahirapi vane vaa.adrishikhare
>jale vaa vahnau vaa vasatu vasateH kiM vada phalam.h |
>sadaa yasyaivaantaHkaraNamapi shaMbho tava pade
>sthitaM chedyogo.asau sa cha paramayogii sa cha sukhii || 12||
>
>of shivAnandalaharI.
>
Ravi,
What does this sloka mean? Could you please elaborate on this?
My cousin is in Madras and he finished his Ph.D in Computer Science from
I.I.T Madras. He does not want to travel abroad inspite of several requests
from many universities in the U.S. He has taken a nice job there and he is
very happy.
Lately, so many acharyas and swamijis have been visiting the Western
countries and building temples over there. I think that the other part of
the world is also getting the same sanctity which remains in India.
I know that AryaBhatta, the famous astronomer (and the first one to make an
almanet) from India, undertook a voyage crossing the oceans to see a
special solar eclipse. After his return, he was asked to do Prayaschitta and
he was treated the same he was treated as before. I cannot remember where I
read this, as it was a while ago.
My uncle used to tell me that the reason for not crossing the seas was to
avoid polluting them while we travel for several days. But these days, we
fly between places and the same logic does not apply.
I do not know the exact reason, but this seems to make sense. There was
certainly concerns for environment in our sastras.
I think that we have to make a choice here of what is important to us in our
lives. Some of us have certainly broken some rules while others still want
to hold on to them as much as they can. We want to go abroad and still live
up to those rules by balancing our life between religion and profession.
Please do not go by what I say here as I am not an authority in these
things.
Some thing more to chew on...
Ravi
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 00:12:15 -0400
Subject: Re: KALADY - NEW INFO
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Thu, 24 May 2001 18:29:48 -0400, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<vsundaresan at H...> wrote:
>If any reader is interested in reading what I said there, when I said it,
>and why, please go to the URL http://www.indology.co.uk and see that
>discussion list's archives from May and June 2000. This was a long-winded
>topic, to which many different people contributed, not just I. Be warned
>that the discussion may be distasteful to many.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I would imagine so. A supposedly scholar based list discussing everything
from whether we get a better harvest of grains with the ash of Agnihotra or
not, all from their leather cushioned chairs in Indological or other
anthropological departments, having none of the training that goes on to
make a Vedic pundit but reserving all the rights to call the
Vedas "pastoral hip hop". It is not for nothing that our Gurus have laid
down the best of things to be Satsanga and the worst of things to be the
company of men who see nothing beyond themselves.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 05:10:29 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Sir
Your sarcasim is well taken.Be assured that we are not
fools sitting here and this site has taken care of
everything
All coyrights problems etc.
And for your information if your gurus can give you
adharmic advice only then it will come on the site
because each religious trust has deputed a nominee who
is editing the text.
Secondly, the company promoting the site is
distributing the profitas towards maintenance of
delapitaed temples in India which are not being
maintained because of lack of funds. And secondly it
doesnt speak well of any person to comment adversely
about anything without verifying its authenticity.
Thank you very much
Padmanabhan
--- Anand Hudli <anandhudli at H...> wrote: > On
Fri, 25 May 2001 12:11:24 -0400, Ram Chandran
> <rchandran at C...>
> wrote:
>
> >Harih Om!
> >
> >Thanks Raviji for bringing an important point
> regarding copyrights.
> >Fortunately, the Internet copyright laws do protect
> the original authors
> >even without a formal statement on the copyright.
> If commercial sites such
> >as "Sloka.com" undertake 'adharmic' activities by
> misusing the internet
> >privileges, Lord Krishna will certainly appear in
> the form of a smart
> lawyer
> >to establish 'dharma'. (Bhagavad Gita Chapter 4
> Vesrse 7) Let us hope that
> >the developers of 'sloka.com" become aware of this
> and act accordingly.
>
> I am only speaking for myself here but I am all for
> free distribution
> of any material that volunteers such as those on the
> Sanskrit site or
> other forum (such as this list) contribute. However,
> the person who
> does the "cut and paste" should at least have the
> courtesy of
> acknowledging the original author(s). We need to
> spread the message
> of our AchAryas who themselves never bothered about
> copyright laws.
> Imagine what would be the situation if we were
> forced to obtain
> permission or a license to quote passages from
> Shankara's bhAShyas
> in the original from some authority, say the
> Shankara Mathas for
> example.
>
> Making money from "cut and paste" efforts is a
> different matter and
> illegal as you have pointed out. But I have related
> question. What
> happens if a company in a third world country, if it
> has/hasn't signed
> the Berne Convention or Universal Copyright
> Convention, establishes a
> website by plagiarizing material from elsewhere?
> Where is your
> "smart lawyer" going to fight the company? In the
> third world country,
> where there may not be enough protection from
> copyright violations?
> Or in some international legal forum. I am asking
> this because it is
> common knowledge that software piracy goes in a big
> way, especially
> (although not exclusively) in third world countries
> and not much can be
> done about it in those countries. This very fact,
> ie. the hurdles
> against swift and effective justice, may encourage
> such commercial
> ventures based on questionable methods.
>
> Anand
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 05:14:21 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Mr Ram
I dont know why its always Hindus who consider any
good thing happening only first as bad.
Thanks for your sarcasim
This site has nominees from each of the religious
trusts to edit the content.It has been selected by
various universities in the Us for training of their
faculty.
Each of the religious gurus have given me their
blessings and active participation in the site
The company out of the profits from this venture are
diverting the profits to maintain temples in India
which are dilapitaed and not being maintained because
of lack of funds.
It doesnt suit people of your stature who discuss
about dharma and philosophy to show sarcasim instead
of helping me in creating a better site by means of
advice and suggestions
Thanks
padmanabhan
--- Ram Chandran <rchandran at C...> wrote: > Harih
Om!
>
> Thanks Raviji for bringing an important point
> regarding copyrights.
> Fortunately, the Internet copyright laws do protect
> the original authors
> even without a formal statement on the copyright. If
> commercial sites such
> as "Sloka.com" undertake 'adharmic' activities by
> misusing the internet
> privileges, Lord Krishna will certainly appear in
> the form of a smart lawyer
> to establish 'dharma'. (Bhagavad Gita Chapter 4
> Vesrse 7) Let us hope that
> the developers of 'sloka.com" become aware of this
> and act accordingly.
>
> warmest regards,
>
> Ram Chandran
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 05:15:58 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sorry its $ 30 per annum and not $ 30 per month
Padmanabhan
--- "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram"
<miinalochanii at Y...> wrote: > --- Ram Chandran
<rchandran at C...> wrote:
> > Harih Om!
> >
> > Namaste,
> >
> > I am posting this message to inform the members
> with the facts that
> > know.
> > Sri Padmanabhan has recently posted a similar
> request at the advaitin
> > list
> > (http://www.groups.yahoo.com/advaitin). My
> communication with Sri
> > Padmanabhan indicates that the site is developed
> with commercial
> > motive. The
> > site subscription (for user service) will cost $30
> per month. Sri
> > Padmanabhan says some profit may go for supporting
> religious
> > institutions
> > and the rest will be divided among investors.
> >
>
>
> This is one of the reasons those who voluntarily
> contribute their work
> as in Jaguar Site, ambaa-L or here or in Advaitin,
> should protect
> their work with some kind of good copy{right/left}.
>
>
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#DocumentationLicenses
>
> I personally prefer GNU's FDL, even though it allows
> scope for somebody
> commercially selling the document, becauses it
> places the same
> restriction on them by demanding them give the same
> rights to others.
>
>
> My 2c.
>
>
>
>
>
> =====
> ambaaL daasan
>
> Ravi
>
> sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti
> mInAxI
>
> http://www.ambaa.org/
> http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great
> prices
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 02:36:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Dear Sri Padmanabhan,
I think you will find that confidence in your site will increase if
you share information regarding which gurus have encouraged you, which
trusts have nominated writers, and who those writers are.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 04:59:19 -0400
Subject: Various websites
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
List members might be interested in visiting the following websites -
www.webxchange.com/Koviloor/
Koviloor is near Karaikudi, in Tamil Nadu. The Matha there is
about two hundred years old, and has spearheaded the teaching
of traditional Advaita Vedanta in Tamil.
www.ramachandrapuramata.org
Ramachandrapura is in Shimoga district in Karnataka. The Matha
is associated with the Havyaka community, many of whom live
near Gokarna, and are Samaveda scholars.
www.chitrapurmath.org
Chitrapur (Shirali) Math is associated with a group of Konkani
speaking Saraswats in Karnataka. There was a break in succession
for a short period after 1991, but a new Acharya was anointed in
1997 there. A number of members on our list have traditional
family affiliations with this Math.
www.culturalindia.com/karya.html & www.indiawebsites.com/karyalaya.htm
Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya is the institution established by
Swami Saccidanandendra Saraswathi of Holenarsipur. I believe
the webmaster of the former site is on our list. (?)
There used to be a website for the Shakatapuram Math, but that site has
now disappeared. The old URL now goes to some other site. If any member
of the list knows of an online presence for Shakatapuram, please share
the information here. This Math is also called the Srividya Peetham, and
is an old branch of the Badrinath Math established by Sankaracharya
himself. In the south, it is Shakatapuram Sankaracharya who is usually
called the Badari Swamigal.
If any other websites related to the Advaita tradition are sighted,
please inform the rest of the list.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 09:07:10 -0400
Subject: mahAvAkyAs
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Some scholars are of the view that the mahAvAkyAs pertaining
to upadEsa to ascetics (at the time of their initiation into
the ascetic order) as found in the upanishads, are only four.
The mahAvAkya ratnAvali, an authority on mahAvakyAs gives
as many as 1008 mahAvAkyAs.
sankarAshrama swAmi, a former AcAryA of the dvArakA math,in
his "mahAvAkya vivaranam",published by kshemraj sri krishnadAs
sresti in sakA year 1834(1912 A.D), concludes that by certain
combination of AtmA with sound, air, fire etc., twenty two
mahAvakyAs are in the shape of vEdic sayings.
In the "viswEswara smriti", it is said that any one who is to
enter the sanyAsAshrama, should get initiated in the four
principal mahAvAkyAs. So, there is no meaning in saying that
for the ascetic head of each one of the sAnkara peethAs, one
mahAvAkyA has been prescribed.
In the sukarahasyOpanishad, it is narrated that Lord Siva
taught sukA the pranava mantrA and then * ALL * mahAvAkyAs.
According to the mAdhavIya and cidvilAsIya sankaravijayams
and nIlakantha's sankarAbhyudayam, sankara bhagavatpAdA has
been taught the four mahAvAkyAs, by his preceptor, gOvinda
bhagavatpAdA.
SankaracAryA and his paramEshti guru (great grand preceptor)
sukAcArya were not taught one mahAvakyA alone.
"nirnaya sindhu" prescribes that one entering into ascetic
order has to be taught by the preceptor, not one mahavAkyA,
nor even four,but many mahAvAkyAs.
Therefore the idea of "One mahAvAkyA for the head of one
mathA," runs counter to accepted sAstric and traditional
precepts and practices.
The "mathAmnAyA" passes an injunction that only persons
belonging to atharva vEdA can become the heads of the pIthA
for the north, at badrinAth. But today in the whole India,
the number of those who have studied atharva vEdA will not
be more than a dozen or two! Where to go searching for a
brahmacari belonging to the atharva vEdA for the headship
of the sankarite institution in the North?
The mahAvAkyA for the sankarite institution for the South
(dakshinAmnaya pIthA) is "aham brahmAsmi". This mahAvAkyA
is from the sukla yajurvEdA. So, only sukla yajur vEdins
can be heads of the dakshinAmnAya pIthA and not krishna
yajurvEdins!
The successive heads of the pIthA for the West, at dvArakA,
ought to belong to the sAma vEdA alone, according to the
mahAvAkyA and mathAmnAyA theory. But, many rigvEdins and
yajur vEdins have also been the heads of the western math
during certain periods.
Hence, counting sAnkara pIthAs as four on the wrong basis
of the number of mahavAkyAs being counted as four alone,
is illogical and contrary to sAstric principles.
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 14:46:06 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
It will all be there in the site when it gets launched
Kanchi Shankaracharya
Sringeri Shankaracharya
Dwaraka & Badrinath ashram
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
dvaita Research centre
Chinmaya Mission
Iskcon
Swami Narayan Trust.
Ahobila Mutt.
WE are also getting in touch with other mutts for
their support.
Padmanabhan
--- Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
wrote: > Dear Sri Padmanabhan,
>
> I think you will find that confidence in your site
> will increase if
> you share information regarding which gurus have
> encouraged you, which
> trusts have nominated writers, and who those writers
> are.
>
> Vidyasankar
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: kAlAti and cidambaram
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:02:34
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>In the pArthavana mahAtmyam, a part of cidambara sAra (a work of
>purAnic nature),it is stated that sankarA was born in the
>tillavipra kulam (cidambara dIkshitAs).
>
> tillaviprakulE jAta: parivrat s.ankarO mahAn
> advaitabhAshyamakarOdityuktam bhavatApurA
Dear BGS, thanks for all this fascinating information. Yes, "Kaaladi -
Nataraaja" makes sense.
I was under the impression that the Sankara dig vijayam was actually only by
Anantaanandagiri and not the great Advaitic commentator Anandagiri. And in
that text Sankara is supposed to be born of a mother whose husband was not
known - or something doubtful about his ancestry. So what "manuscript of
Anandagiri found in Mysore" are you talking about?
Also, are you aware of a history of the Kaanchi matham written sometime in
the 17th century? It is said to be authored by a famous advaitin - might
have been Sadhaasiva Brahmendra - but I'm not too sure about this. I think
it was Prof VK on the Advaitin list who brought it to my attention - maybe
Ram Chandran can help get this information for us.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Nyayamanjari
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 17:53:43 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Could list members recommend any particular edition of this text of Jayanta
Bhatta?
Thanks
VA
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 15:45:22 -0400
Subject: Re: kAlAti and cidambaram
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 26 May 2001 13:24:42 -0400, nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...>
wrote:
>I was under the impression that the Sankara dig vijayam was actually only
>byAnantaanandagiri and not the great Advaitic commentator Anandagiri. And
in
>that text Sankara is supposed to be born of a mother whose husband was not
>known - or something doubtful about his ancestry. So what "manuscript of
>Anandagiri found in Mysore" are you talking about?
Scholars like H.H. Wilson, K.T.Telong and Anantanadendra Saraswati
often mention this work as "Anandagiri's sankaravijayam". In the
Guruvamsakavya commentary,Chapter 6 of the first sarga, the name
"Anandagiri" is found.
In Chapter I of the biography, the name of the author is given as
"Anantanandagiri"("..anantAnandagiriraham...").
Anantanandagiri states that sankaracarya is his paramaguru.
>Also, are you aware of a history of the Kaanchi matham written sometime in
>the 17th century? It is said to be authored by a famous advaitin - might
>have been Sadhaasiva Brahmendra - but I'm not too sure about this.
Sadasiva Brahmendra's "Gururatnamalika" consists of 86 verses.
He gives the Guruparampara upto his Guru Parasivendra Saraswati.
Atmabhoda, a disciple Atmaprakasendra saraswati, the 60th Peethadhipati
of the Kanchi Math wrote a lucid commentary "Sushama",for this work.
Sarvagna sadasiva Bodhendra saraswati, the 56th Peethadhipati wrote
"Punyaslokamanjari" . This work was followed by "Punyaslokamanjari
makarandam and "Parisishta" of Atmabhoda.
Regards
BGS
_______________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
============================================================================
===
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>
============================================================================
===
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Stig Lundgren" <slu at C...>
Subject: Re: Various websites
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 01:14:39 +0200
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Stig Lundgren" <slu at C...>
On Saturday, 26 May 2001, Vidyasankar Sundaresan wrote:
>
> If any other websites related to the Advaita tradition are
sighted,
> please inform the rest of the list.
>
www.swamiakhandanandji.org
This is a website (in Hindi) on Swami Akhandananda Saraswati
(1911-1987). Swami Akhandananda was born in Benares, but founded
an ashram in Vrindavan. He was initiated to sannyasa by the
then Sankaracharya of Jyotirmath, Swami Brahmananda Saraswati.
Best regards
Stig Lundgren
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 20:04:12 -0400
Subject: Sankaravijaya texts - I
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>From
Message-Id: <.>
May 26, 2001 - Post made by Vidyasankar Sundaresan, from Pasadena, USA,
to the Advaita-L mailing list. Archives hosted at Advaita Vedanta
Anusandhana Kendra (www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html)
.____________________.
| Part I of a series |
=========================================================================
At the suggestion of Ravisankar, the co-moderator of this list, and its
founder, I was planning on a translation of Sankaracharya's Isopanishad
commentary, and on resuming my old attempt at translating the Bhagavad Gita
commentary. However, before getting to it, I would prefer that the
atmosphere on the list be conducive to such pursuits. Currently, there
seems to be a fresh bout of interest in mundane historical issues with
respect to Sankaravijaya literature, and the corresponding bickering among
different parties, dating back to the 19th century. Very well then, let us
first take a look at the Sankaravijaya texts from the perspective of mere
chronology. Those who don't want to read about this can ignore this series
or hit the delete button right now!
Here I will be presenting brief summaries of what is known about various
texts. Those who want to read a more exhaustive study may please refer to
my forthcoming article on the topic, in IJHS (the International Journal of
Hindu Studies - http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/gthursby/ijhs/).
We begin with Sankaracharya, who lived in the 8th century CE, according to
the predominant south Indian tradition, and also according to most careful
studies of internal evidence in his texts. Many people think that he lived
much earlier, in the 5th century BCE, but that does not materially affect
the rest of this discussion. Whenever Sankaracharya himself must have
lived, we know for certain that he lived before such people as Suresvara
and Padmapada, his direct disciples, as also Vacaspati Misra, the author of
Bhamati, Jnanottama, the author of the Candrika commentary on Suresvara's
Naishkarmyasiddhi, and Prakasatman, the author of the Vivarana on
Padmapada's Pancapadika.
Among post-Sankaran authors, there are two about whose geographical
location and dates we can be absolutely sure. These are Bharati Tirtha and
Vidyaranya, who lived between the years 1330 and 1380. Indeed, we can be as
sure of these dates as we are sure that this forum is Advaita-L, that this
month is May and that this year is 2001. We know all this, because the
founders of the Vijayanagara empire in the 14th century have left numerous
inscriptions and records, paying homage to these two Acharyas of the
Sringeri Matha.
It is usually said that Vidyaranya was called Madhava before he became a
Sannyasin. There is a Sankaravijaya text called Madhaviya Sankaravijaya,
also called Samkshepa Sankarajaya. The first verse of this text salutes
Vidyatirtha (praNamya paramAtmAnaM SrI vidyAtIrtha rUpiNam). Vidyatirtha is
known to have been a guru of Bharati Tirtha and Vidyaranya. This reference,
along with the attribution of this Sankaravijaya text to Madhava, has led
to the conclusion that the Madhaviya Sankaravijaya was written by none
other than Vidyaranya himself. There are some who fiercely dispute this
attribution, but that is an entirely different subject.
For the present, we note that the first verse of Madhaviya Sankaravijaya
also mentions that it is meant to give the "sAra" (essence) of the old
Sankarajaya (prAcIna Sankarajaye sAraH sangRhyate sphuTam).
Now, all other references to a Pracina Sankarajaya attribute that text to
one Anandagiri. This is seen in the two commentaries on Madhaviya, and also
in the commentary on the Guruvamsakavya of the Sringeri Matha. From this,
it may be inferred that the Pracina Sankaravijaya is an old text, and that
its author, Anandagiri, lived earlier than the author of the Madhaviya.
Acyutaraya Modak, a commentator on Madhaviya, explicitly identifies
Anandagiri, the author of Pracina Sankarajaya, with Anandagiri, the author
of numerous sub-commentaries on Sankaracharya's texts.
Thus, he says, "... ye hi sUtrabhAshyAdi TIkAkArAH SuddhAnanda
bhagavatpUjyapAda SishyAH bhagavad-AnandajnAnAkhyAH Anandagiritvena
prasiddhAH tad racito yaH prAkkRta granthaH prAcInaH cirantanaH
SankaravijayaH tatra ity arthaH ... evamapi prAcInaSankaravijayasyaiva
sAroddhAreNa ..."
Rough translation -
"... the old Sankaravijaya text, which was written earlier by the author of
the Tikas on the Sutrabhashya and other works, who was a disciple of
Suddhananda Bhagavatpujyapada, who was called Bhagavad Anandajnana, and who
was well known by the name Anandagiri. This is the meaning. ... This text
presents only the essence of this Pracina Sankaravijaya ..."
Now, here is a common confusion among many people, who falsely assume that
this Anandagiri was a direct disciple of Sankaracharya himself. However, as
Acyutaraya Modak says, Anandagiri was a disciple of an Advaita teacher
called Suddhananda. This is confirmed 100% when we check the Tikas written
by Anandagiri. In all these works, Anandagiri mentions his own guru's name
as Suddhananda, and pays his homage to him. It may therefore be concluded
that Anandagiri was not a direct disciple of Sankaracharya.
There seems to be a false identification of Anandagiri with Totakacharya,
which is at the root of the abovementioned common confusion. The latter was
also called Giri, according to traditional accounts, and was the author of
the beautiful Totakashkatam in praise of Sankaracharya, and also a short
Advaita work called SrutisArasamuddharaNam. In fact, both these works use
the Totaka meter throughout, and that is the reason why its author came to
be called Totakacharya. As Totakacharya pays homage to Sankaracharya, while
Anandagiri pays homage to Suddhananda, it is clear that they are two
different personalities, who lived in different periods of time. The
confusion is entirely unnecessary, and has been caused by people peripheral
to the tradition, whose superficial enthusiasm acts as a substitute for
involved scholarship.
So, when did Anandagiri live? Again, we cannot be sure of exact dates, but
we can see from his works that he lived after Vachaspati Misra, and after
Prakasatman (see the second paragraph in this post). It seems possible that
Anandagiri must have lived after Citsukhacharya, author of Tattvapradipika,
and that he was perhaps a contemporary of Sriharsha. He does not refer to
Bharati Tirtha and Vidyaranya, but they seem to refer to some works of
Anandagiri. Therefore, we can say with good confidence that Anandagiri must
have lived before the 14th century.
Unfortunately, the Sankaravijaya of Anandagiri seems to have been lost
forever. To date, all attempts to trace out manuscripts of the text have
failed. One Indian scholar, W. R. Antarkar of Mumbai, who investigated
numerous Sankaravijaya texts, writes in 1960, that he has not been able to
obtain manuscripts [1]. Writing in 1994, G. C. Pande of the Indian
Institute of Advanced Studies, Shimla, says the same thing [2]. Even more
reently, Jonathan Bader of the Australian National University, who has also
written a thesis on Sankaravijaya texts, also failed to obtain manuscripts
of Anandagiri's Sankaravijaya [3].
The other Sankaravijaya texts will be discussed in parts II and III.
____________________________________________________________
Notes
-----
1. W. R. Antarkar. Journal of the University of Bombay. XXIX: 113-121, 1960.
2. G. C. Pande. Life and Thought of Sankaracharya. 1994. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.
3. Jonathan Bader. Conquest of the four quarters - traditional accounts of
the life of Sankara. 2000. Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
============================================================================
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 20:22:05 -0400
Subject: Re: Nyayamanjari
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Vishal,
The 1982 edition from Sampoornanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya should be
good. I haven't seen it myself, but their other publications are of high
standard.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: trayii (Re: rigidity of hindu varna dharma)
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 05:48:18 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
The word 'Traiyividya' does not mean '3 vidyas'. According to Kaiyyata's
Pradipa, it rather means ONE vidyaa that has 3 limbs. The Vedas are called
Trayi or trayividya because they comprise of 3 types of mantras:
Richas
Yajus
Samans
A shloka in the Harivamsha Purana (cannot find it now) says that the Vedas
have three types of mantras which comprise the four vedas- RV, YV, SV and
Atharvangirasa.
In South India, I am told that most Atharvana Brahmins have adopted the
Taittiriya YV. The AV always had fewer followers than the remaining three,
and even Alberuni records this fact. However, Atharvaveda is mentioned as
'Chhandaveda' ('Chhaamsi jagyire tasmaat') in the Purusha Sukta which is
found in all the RV, YV as well. In addition, AV is distinctly mentioned in
Kathaka YV ('atharvavedena japanti'), in Taittiriya Samhita, Maitrayani
Samhita, Chhandogya Upanishad, Brihadaranyaka Upanishad etc. and of course
there are the Atharvana Upanishads (Mundaka, Mandukya, Prashnaka). Numerous
Atharvana Rishis are seers of Mantras in RV etc. as well.
The AV had 50, 9 or 5 Sakhas according to varying accounts. According to AV
charanavyuha, which gives the most reliable account, there were 9 Sakhas of
which only Saunaka and Paippalada survive.
Saunaka Samhita has 5977 mantras (6014 in Gangeswaranand's edition).
Paippalada Samhita is available in an incomplete Kashmiri manuscript
containing approx 6500 mantras and almost complete Orissan manuscripts
containing approx 7950 mantras.
The two Samhitas share approx 75% of their material.
According to the Brahmanda Purana, the Samhita of the Charanavidya Sakha had
6024 mantras.
According to AV charanavyuha, the Atharvaveda has 12300 mantras. This is
explained as follows:
The AV has 5 kalpas, and according to tradition, each is accorded a mantra
number of 500. So we have 2500 mantras here.
The remaining 9800 mantras can perhaps be coonstructed by adding the unique
material of the Saunaka AV to Paippalada Samhita.
As of now, the AV tradition is alive at Sinore (Gujarat), Gokarna
(Karnataka), Sitanagaram (AP) etc. although it is uncertain if it is the old
tradition or a new invention. It is known, for instance, that the Peshwas
offered incentives for the maintainance of Vedic traditions and some
Rigvedins revived AV oral tradition.
Some other texts of AV available today are:
1. Purusha Sukta of Jajala Sakha Samhita (solitary, accented manuscript at
Baroda)
2. Gopatha Brahman (11 prapathakas, other 89 lost).
3. Five Kalpas (Kausika Grhya, Vaitana Srautasutra, Santikalpa, Angirasa
Kalpa and Nakshatra Kalpa). The Angirasa Kalpa was recovered from Orissa
recently but the extant form has a lot of interpolations
4. Atharvana Vidhana - a short text
5. Atharvaprayaschittani sutras in 6 chapters
6. The Upanishads
7. Lakshana Texts: Panchapatalika, Manduki Shiksha, Atharvana Pratisakhya,
Saunakiya Chaturadhyayika (aka Kautsa Vyaakarana)
8. Parisistas (72 in number)
9. AV Brihatsarvanukaramani
10. Atharvana Jyotisha
In addition, there are reports of existence of manuscripts of the Paithinasi
Grhya/Dharma sutras (or atleast paddhatis on them). We also have mutilitated
copies of the Kashyapa and Sumantu dharmasutras although it is uncertain if
they are AV texts. (I had made copies from a 1930's volume of the JOR
journal but lost them !! But for these, I have a copy of all the published
literature on AV including Bhashyas and Tikas).
Regards
Vishal
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at Y...>
Why is the word tribhiH translated as three veda-s? And what about the
fourth one?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 06:13:40 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
See the article:
D R Bhandarkar; "Were Women Entitled to Perform Srauta Sacrifices?"; PAIOC
XII, Benaras; 1946
The Nanaghat inscription mentions that NaagaNikaa, the wife of Sri sAtakarNi
performed Vedic sacrifices.
VA
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...>
Btw, my questions on this thread are still studiously being ignored. If
there is Vedic support for women studying and practising them, why is our
history so eerily empty of actual examples? If women already have set of
practices which are ancient and honored, why should they give them up for
something alien?
Could somebody tell me please?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Upanishads are Barren
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 06:19:20 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
The question has already been addressed by Vidyasankar. The issue has been
dealt with in great detail in the intros of numerous works - Tatparyatika of
Umbeka, Brahmasiddhi with Sankhapani's commentary and so on.
A compelling reason for distinguishing Umbeka and Mandana is this - Umbeka
has written a commentary on the Bhavanaviveka of Mandana in which he records
many textual variants in the text of Bhavanaviveka that was available to
him.
Obviously, an author will not find textual variants in his own text while
writing an auto-commentary.
This also shows that there is a signficant chronological gap between Mandana
and Umbeka.
Regards
VA
----Original Message Follows----
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at E...>
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
<ADVAITA-L at b...>
To: ADVAITA-L at L...
Subject: Re: Upanishads are Barren
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:28:48 -0700
Shri Vishal,
> Naastika Mimamsaka (see Umveka Bhatta's and Parthasarathi Misra's comment
on
Is Umveka Bhatta the same as Shri Sureshwaracharya in his
pre-sannyasin life? Swami Tapasyananda, in his translation
of the Madhaviya Sankara Digvijayam, has mentioned that
one of Shri Sureshwaracharya's pre-monastic names was
'Oomveka'.
thanks,
Aniruddhan
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam lokaSam.karam
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Bhartrmitra - Upanishads are Barren
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 06:33:58 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Since it is taking me some time to get some publications, the uploading of
Bhartrmitra's biography will take some time. Nevertheless, let me post here
the (relatively short) section on Bhartrmitra's views on the utility of
Upanishads, the references excepted and notes added (although not in the
desirable order)
VA
__________
On the Utility of Upanishads
An additional reason why Bhartrmitra was reviled as a follower of Lokayata
school could be his dismissive attitude about the utility of the Upanishads
– texts par excellence of Hindu spirituality. Right at the start of his
Brahmasiddhi [Kuppuswami Shastri 1937:1], Mandana Misra quotes a set of two
arguments that state that the Upanishads are useless. According to
commentator Anandapurna [Chandrasekharan 1963:7], these arguments are from
Bhartrmitra’s work. Mandana states the arguments as follows [Pandey
1974:367-369]:
“Is the existence of the Self established by any Pramana other than the
Sruti of not? If the former, then the Sruti is merely explanatory and
therefore not a Pramana. If the latter, then the Sruti is uninformative in
as much as it does not throw the light upon the relation of the statement
and its object. Thus in the latter case too, the Sruti is not a Pramana at
all.”
Elaborating the second argument, Mandana quotes-
“ The meaning of the sentence is a special fact (padartha). If the fact
referred to in a sentence is not known independently of that sentence, the
meaning of that sentence cannot be grasped. Likewise, the Sruti which refers
to Brahman is inexpressive if there is no knowledge of Brahman independent
of the Sruti.”
Let us understand the second argument of Bhartrmitra first, and the relation
it bears to the utility of Vedanta. The Vedantins declare (vide Brahmasutra
1.1.3) that since Brahman cannot be perceived or comprehended by our sense
organs, the first two pramanas (pratyaksha and anumaana) are of no use in
Brahmajijnasa (or an enquiry into the nature of Brahman). Therefore, on the
Sabda Pramana can help in Brahmajijnasa. Bhartrmitra argues that such a
viewpoint is absurd. This is because, the object of a sentence can be
comprehended only if it is known beforehand from other means of knowledge.
For instance, if someone says- “Bring a peacock”, then the sentence will
make sense to the listener only if he knows what a peacock is, from some
other source beforehand. But if Brahman cannot be known from any other means
except Vedantas, then the Vedantas themselves become inexpressive, or
worthless. This is because their statements on Brahman will not make any
sense to the reader because he does not know Brahman beforehand from any
other source, nor can be know Brahman from any other source.
The first argument can be explained as follows – Some Vedantins state that
the Vedantas/Upanishads or the Jnankanda portions of the Veda aren’t really
comprised of injunctions and prohibitions, as the karmakanda portions are.
Rather, the Vedantas merely discuss the nature of Brahman. If the Vedantin
admits that the Vedantas are not the only means of comprehending Brahman,
and that Brahman can be known from other pramanas like pratyaksha and
anumaana as well, then what special purpose do the Vedantas serve? If we can
know Brahman by pratyaksha and anumaana, the Vedantas become redundant.
Mandana Mishra summarizes the views of Bhartrmitra in a verse at the
beginning of the 4th chapter of Brahmasiddhi as well [Pandey, pp. 369]. The
crux of the two arguments is that whether the Vedantin considers the Sruti
as the exclusive source of information on Brahman or not, he is in an
uncomfortable position. In the latter case, he renders the Vedantas
redundant. And in the former, (wherein Brahman is said to be knowable only
via the Vedantas), he again renders the Vedantas inexpressive and useless.
How does this argument of Bhartrmitra fit in with his views on Purvamimamsa?
If we refer to the previous section wherein I have discussed his proximity
to certain views of the Lokayata school, the relationship between his
Mimamsa and Vedantic views will be clear. Bhartrmitra emphasizes that Dharma
comprises only of commands inherent in the Vedic statements. Likewise, even
in the sphere of jnanakanda, Bhartrmitra apparently rejects the Vedantas if
they are said to be devoid of commands (chodanaa). Bhatrmitra rejects the
fruit of the nitya karmas like Agnihotra and also of prohibited acts
probably because their result is not seen. He admits that the kaamya-karmas
like the Citra sacrifice bear fruit. But again, he rejects the notion that
the fruit could accrue in some future life. He holds that the fruit accrues
in this life itself. In subscribing to such an opinion, Bhartrmitra is
negating the importance of after-life, of things that are supra-sensuous, of
the ideas and objects which defy rational explanations based on observable
facts. For this reason, he has little patience with the Vedantins who speak
of an object ‘Brahman’ that cannot be comprehended by rational means and is
known only from the Vedantas. Bhartrmitra argues that this will render the
Vedantas themselves meaningless and will make the existence of Brahman
un-provable. He also argues that if other pramanas are admitted to be useful
in knowing Brahman, then again the Vedantas are rendered redundant.
How can the Vedantas then, be made useful portions of the Vedas just like
the karmakanda portions are? A possible solution is to admit the possibility
that the Vedantas also have injunctions and commands. However, even this
possibility was apparently unacceptable to Bhartmitra because the fruit of
these Vedantic injunctions, namely communion with Brahman, could not
necessarily be realized in this very life. Moreover, the object of Vedantic
injunctions, if any, was supra-sensuous, unlike the object and the fruit of
Vedic rites, which was very much visible and tangible.
Relevant Notes:
1. The notion that nitya-karmas produce no fruit is however not peculiar to
Bhartrmitra alone. An ancient, theistic commentator of Bhagvadgita quoted by
Shankaracharya on verse 18.6 is also said to have subscribed to this notion.
Elsewhere, under verse 4.18, Shankaracharya quotes an ancient commentary
according to which, the nitya karmas do not bear any fruit provided they are
performed for the sake of Isvara, and therefore they might be considered as
inaction (akarma).
2. Interestingly, Bhagvad Datta [1976:218] refers to a passage in
Skanda-Maheshvara’s commentary on Nirukta 3.13 which echoes similar views.
He states that some Mimamakas hold that Upanishads are the barren portion of
the Vedas. This is because the Upanishads merely discuss Brahman who cannot
be described in reality. Therefore, they are redundant and sacrificial rites
alone are the true import of the Vedas. Datta estimates that
Skanda-Maheshvara’s work was written around 687 AD.
3. Among the Vedantins who admitted the presence of injunctions in the
Upanishads, we can include Brahmadatta, Vakyakara Brahmanandin,
Dramidacharya (all pre-Shankaracharya) and Ramanuja and his followers. The
Advaitins reject this possibility completely.
4. Anandapurna Muni states that the subsequent section of Brahmasiddhi
counters the views of the followers of the Mimamsaka Prabhakara.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 03:05:12 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
In my opinion atharva veda may be an intermediate step before a mantra may
qualify to be a Rk, yajus or sAma (what we call QA or staging library in
computers).
As for place of women in yajna, there are three possibilities:
1. Ideally any one who has knowledge can take up any work. Ch.U. I.10-11 has
the story of uSasti cAkrAyaNa who goes to a yajna and asks the priests if
they had the knowledge underlying their respective duties, and tells them to
stop or their heads will fall. Sankara argues that the prohibition does not
apply in general to every one doing their rites, but only in case when a
knowledgeable person says so. Otherwise there is no way rites will be ever
done. Now if a woman has the knowledge of the rites (or knowledge of self)
and if she does see something other Rtviks do not see, then what she says
becomes an injunction or prohibition irrespective of her place in the
ritual.
2. If nobody (man or woman) has the knowledge, then it is better to be
practical and arrange the ritual in such a way that knowledge is continued
as far as possible, instead of going for democracy.
3. There are specific tasks (such as cleaning the victim) that were to be
done by women as told by Shruti due to theological reasons.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 07:14:54 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Seems unlikely.
1. The AV Saunaka Samhita has 1200 mantras from RV, more than 50 from YV
(Madhyandina). Are these less hallowed than the same mantras in the RV, YV?
2. A person who has studied RV, SV, YV has to undergo a second Upanayan
before he can study AV. Whereas one who has studied AV first need not
undergo a second Upanayan before proceeding to the next Veda. (See the
initial sutras of Vaitana Srautrasutra).
VA
----Original Message Follows----
From: Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at H...>
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
<ADVAITA-L at b...>
To: ADVAITA-L at L...
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 03:05:12 -0400
In my opinion atharva veda may be an intermediate step before a mantra may
qualify to be a Rk, yajus or sAma (what we call QA or staging library in
computers).
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 03:53:24 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
bhavAn Vishal Agarwalji
>Seems unlikely.
>1. The AV Saunaka Samhita has 1200 mantras from RV, more than 50 from YV
>(Madhyandina). Are these less hallowed than the same mantras in the RV,
> >YV?
These mantas may have been upgraded to RV or YV but may still be left in AV
for further investigations or research. Or some traditions may not be aware
of their promotion to RV/YV. Or those mantras may be needed for the context
of other respective sections in AV and abrupt removal may disturb the
context. At some point when further development ceased, the AV remained as
is.
>2. A person who has studied RV, SV, YV has to undergo a second Upanayan
>before he can study AV. Whereas one who has studied AV first need not
>undergo a second Upanayan before proceeding to the next Veda. (See the
>initial sutras of Vaitana Srautrasutra).
This may support the idea that AV may be a research-in-progress (or call it
beta version mantras). A second upanayanam may be required because this is
additional study. RV/YV/SV may be a proven knowledge, hence safer to
distribute to all students with just one upanayanam.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 16:29:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>These mantas may have been upgraded to RV or YV but may still be left in AV
>for further investigations or research. Or some traditions may not be aware
>of their promotion to RV/YV. Or those mantras may be needed for the context
>of other respective sections in AV and abrupt removal may disturb the
>context. At some point when further development ceased, the AV remained as
>is.
That does not seem likely. Usually, the Rk verses are of prime
importance. When we find hymns from the Rgveda in the other
Vedas, they are normally introduced as Rks only. When these
verses are quoted along with the stobhAksharas required for
sAmagAna, they are introduced as sAmans. So, when we find Rk
verses in the YV pATha or in the AV pATha, it is safe to
assume that they have been taken over from the Rgveda, and
not the other way round.
This question of the status of atharvaNaveda is a long-standing
one. The simple reason for the usual references to the triad of
Rk-yajus-sAma is what Anand Hudli pointed out. Only these are
utilized for the major Zrautayajnas and for most gRhya rituals.
There are only special instances where atharva expertise were
required. The coronation of a king was not a daily occurrence,
for example. Correspondingly, the Rk-yajus-sAma vedas have also
been better preserved and handed down.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 13:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: shrii miinaaxii stotram.h of sha.nkara - Corrected file
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
shrii miinaaxii stotram.h
##of shrii shankara ##
shrIvidye shivavAmabhAganilaye shrIrAjarAjArchite
shrInAthAdigurusvarUpavibhave chintAmaNiipIThike |
shrIvANiigirijAnutA.nghrikamale shrIshAMbavi shrIshive
madhyAhne maladhvAjAdhipasute mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 1||
chakraste.achapale charAcharajagannAthe jagatpUjite
ArtAliivarade natAbhayakare vaxojabhArAnvite |
vidye vedakalApamaulividite vidyullatAvighrahe
mAtaH pUrNasudhArasaardrahR^idaye mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 2 ||
koTiraaN^gadaratnakuNDaladhare kodaNDabANa~nchite
kokAkArakuchadvayoparilasadprAlambahArA~nchite |
chi~njannUpurapAdasArasamaNishrIpAdukalaMkR^ite
maddaaridryabhuja~NgagAruDakhage mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 3||
brahmeshAchyutagIyamAnacharite pretAsanAntasthite
pAshoda.ngushachApabANakalite bAlenduchUDA~nchite |
bAle baalakura.ngalolanayane bAlArkakoTyujjvale
mudrAraadhitadevate munisute mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 4 ||
gandharvAmarayaxapannaganute gaN^gAdharAli~Ngite
gAyatriigaruDAsane kamalaje sushyAmale susthite |
khAtiite khaladArupAvakashive khadyodakoTyujjvale
mantrArAdhitadevate munisute mAM pAhI mInAmbike || 5 ||
nAde nAradatumburAdyavinute nAdAntanAdAtmike
nitye nIlalatAtmike nirupame nIvArashUkopame |
kAnte kAmakale kadambanilaye kAmeshvarAN^kasthite
madvidye madabhIShTakalpalatike mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 6 ||
vINAnAdanimiilitArdhanayane visrastachUliibhare
tAmbUlAruNapallavAdharayute tATankahArAnvite |
shyAme chandrakalAvatamsakalite kastUrikAphAlike
pUrNe pUrNakalAbhirAmavadane mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 7||
shabdabrahmamayI charAcharamayI jyotirmayI vA~NmayI
nityAnandamayI nira~njanamayI tattvaMmayI chinmayI |
tattvAtitamayI pAratparamayI mAyAmayI shrImayI
sarvaishvaryamayI sadAshivamayI mAM pAhi mInAmbike || 8||
|| iti sriisha.nkarabhagavataH kR^itau shrimiinaxii stotraM
saMpuurNam.h ||
--
There are some minor differences (paaTha bhedam) between the two
different texts I have (such as praalambike - praalambake, daivate --
devate and so on). Later when I post the translation, I will highlight
them.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 13:53:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Namaste
According to my translation of Madhava-Vidyarana,
Govindapada initiated Adishankara with the four
MahAvAkyas as PrajnAnam Brahma, aham brahmAsmi, tat
tvam asi and ayamAtmA brahma. In my reading these are
linked respectively with: lakshanavakya ( definition
of Brahman), anusandhAnavAkya (sentence of practice),
upadesavAkya (sentence of instruction) and
anubhavavAkya (sentence of direct experience).
I have found that some people switch the second and
third as a change from this order.
I do not have any background to these four
explanations of the functions of the MahAvAkyas and
although , using the order given above, I can
understand the second and the fourth in the light of
tuition/intuition practice, but I do not understand
the real difference between 'a definition' and 'a
sentence of instruction'. The English is not clear on
this. I can make some progress with the Sanskrit but
could someone please help clarify the different
function? I guess that there is a tradition here that
I have not come across except with reference to the
MahAvAkyas.
Thank you
Ken Knight
--- BGS <sivabgs at Y...> wrote:
> Some scholars are of the view that the mahAvAkyAs
> pertaining
> to upadEsa to ascetics (at the time of their
> initiation into
> the ascetic order) as found in the upanishads, are
> only four.
>
> The mahAvAkya ratnAvali, an authority on mahAvakyAs
> gives
> as many as 1008 mahAvAkyAs.
>
> sankarAshrama swAmi, a former AcAryA of the dvArakA
> math,in
> his "mahAvAkya vivaranam",published by kshemraj sri
> krishnadAs
> sresti in sakA year 1834(1912 A.D), concludes that
> by certain
> combination of AtmA with sound, air, fire etc.,
> twenty two
> mahAvakyAs are in the shape of vEdic sayings.
>
> In the "viswEswara smriti", it is said that any one
> who is to
> enter the sanyAsAshrama, should get initiated in the
> four
> principal mahAvAkyAs. So, there is no meaning in
> saying that
> for the ascetic head of each one of the sAnkara
> peethAs, one
> mahAvAkyA has been prescribed.
>
> In the sukarahasyOpanishad, it is narrated that Lord
> Siva
> taught sukA the pranava mantrA and then * ALL *
> mahAvAkyAs.
>
> According to the mAdhavIya and cidvilAsIya
> sankaravijayams
> and nIlakantha's sankarAbhyudayam, sankara
> bhagavatpAdA has
> been taught the four mahAvAkyAs, by his preceptor,
> gOvinda
> bhagavatpAdA.
>
> SankaracAryA and his paramEshti guru (great grand
> preceptor)
> sukAcArya were not taught one mahAvakyA alone.
>
> "nirnaya sindhu" prescribes that one entering into
> ascetic
> order has to be taught by the preceptor, not one
> mahavAkyA,
> nor even four,but many mahAvAkyAs.
>
> Therefore the idea of "One mahAvAkyA for the head of
> one
> mathA," runs counter to accepted sAstric and
> traditional
> precepts and practices.
>
> The "mathAmnAyA" passes an injunction that only
> persons
> belonging to atharva vEdA can become the heads of
> the pIthA
> for the north, at badrinAth. But today in the whole
> India,
> the number of those who have studied atharva vEdA
> will not
> be more than a dozen or two! Where to go searching
> for a
> brahmacari belonging to the atharva vEdA for the
> headship
> of the sankarite institution in the North?
>
> The mahAvAkyA for the sankarite institution for the
> South
> (dakshinAmnaya pIthA) is "aham brahmAsmi". This
> mahAvAkyA
> is from the sukla yajurvEdA. So, only sukla yajur
> vEdins
> can be heads of the dakshinAmnAya pIthA and not
> krishna
> yajurvEdins!
>
> The successive heads of the pIthA for the West, at
> dvArakA,
> ought to belong to the sAma vEdA alone, according to
> the
> mahAvAkyA and mathAmnAyA theory. But, many rigvEdins
> and
> yajur vEdins have also been the heads of the western
> math
> during certain periods.
>
> Hence, counting sAnkara pIthAs as four on the wrong
> basis
> of the number of mahavAkyAs being counted as four
> alone,
> is illogical and contrary to sAstric principles.
>
> BGS
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 14:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Vedas in Tapes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I came across this in Bhavan’s Journal of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan June 30, 2000
issue. It is quite possible that many of you know of this. I am writing this
for the benefit of those who have not heard about it yet.
This is about a Danish woman named Guni Hesting Kirchcheiner. She is a scholar
of Oriental studies from Denmark. She came to India first in 1971 and her
primary interest at that time was Ayurveda. When she was in Pune she met Sri
Karambalekar Shastri and was fascinated by his chanting of Rig Veda. On
further enquiry she found that this hallowed tradition of chanting Vedas is
slowly disappearing from India. In an effort to preserve the oral renditions
of the Vedas, she undertook a mammoth task of recording them for posterity.
She went back to Denmark applied for funds and was was granted. With the help
of some noble people in Pune, she found the experts in different shakas of
Vedas and started recording them.
She started the work in 1983 and completed in 2000. She successfully recorded
complete chantings of many sections of Vedas and it runs to about 224 tapes,
round about 332 hrs of chanting. I give below the shakhas that she has
recorded alongwith the name of the scholars:
Rig Veda Samhita – Sri Kinjavadekar Shastri (Pune)
Krishna Yajur Veda – Sri Gokhale Shastri
Shukla Yajur Veda (Kanva shakha) – Sri Kavishwar Shastri
Shukla Yajur Veda (Madhyandina shakha) – Sri Bhate Shastri
Rig Veda Brahmana – Sri Keshav Joglekar Shastri (Gokarna, Karnataka)
Atharva Veda – Sri Pancholi Shastri (Sinor, Gujarat)
Sama Veda, Jaimini tradition – Sri Ittervai Namboodri and Narayan Namboodri
(Kerala)
The recordings have been transferred to Danish Royal Library in Copenhagen.
Another copy of it has been given to Veda Shastrotejak Sabha in Pune. The
article also says that the Danish Royal Library has the world largest
collection of Sanskrit works outside of India. Ms. Guni Hesting is planning to
bring out the chantings in CD format soon.
Postscript:
I just thought I would share the information above. It is a very happy news to
note that somebody has put in more than 15 years of effort to accomplish the
above. We can all benefit from such a work.
But at the same time, there is a twinge of pain that I am also not able to
conceal. Mother India, today is more like Devaki of the yore. Devaki gave
birth to Sri Krishna. But Sri Krishna grew up elsewhere, not with Devaki.
Mother India gave birth to Vedas and it is strangely flourishing everywhere
except India. Her plight is much like Devaki. This kind of effort could have
been made by Indians themselves, as scholars might have been available locally.
Do we always have to wait for the West to tell us what to do? Can’t we
discover it ourselves?
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 19:41:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Sun, 27 May 2001 16:29:02 -0400, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<vsundaresan at H...> wrote:
>
>This question of the status of atharvaNaveda is a long-standing
>one. The simple reason for the usual references to the triad of
>Rk-yajus-sAma is what Anand Hudli pointed out. Only these are
>utilized for the major Zrautayajnas and for most gRhya rituals.
>There are only special instances where atharva expertise were
>required. The coronation of a king was not a daily occurrence,
>for example. Correspondingly, the Rk-yajus-sAma vedas have also
>been better preserved and handed down.
>
Jan Gonda in his book on Vedic literature mentions a time when
brAhmaNas from other Vedas refused to dine with atharva vedins
and also did not allow inter-marriages between atharva vedins
and others. It is hard to verify this primarily because very
few pure atharva vedins are left in India. I know of some rare
scholars who *know* the atharva veda but their shAkhA is not
an atharva vedic one. Has this situation arisen because of the
conditions that Gonda mentions? In other words, have the atharva
vedins been driven to near extinction? We may never know.
In support of atharva veda's being important in the coronation
ceremony, two references are mentioned - 1) referring to the
coronation of the son of Raghu, aja, the RaghuvaMsha says
"guruNA-atharvavidA kR^ita-kriyaH", where the sage vasiShTha blesses
the king with verses from the atharva veda.
2) nIlakaNThabhaTTIya rAjyAbhiSheka-prayoga has this -
"rAjyAbhiSheke upAdhyAyaH atharvaNIyAni AshIrvachAMsi vadet.H"
which prescribes that the King should be blessed with the verses
of the atharva veda.
The introduction to the Krishna Yajur Veda edited by Vidvan
Rameshvara Avadhani (Kannada script, Jyoti Samskritika Pratishthana,
Bangalore) says that yajnas require the R^itvik called
BrahmA who should be knowledgeable in the atharva veda, although
he may not belong to an atharva veda shAkhA per se. I think, the
BrahmA needs to use the atharva veda only if he feels the need
to protect the performance of the Yajna from enemies, demons,
evil spirits, etc.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 20:02:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Vedas in Tapes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Sun, 27 May 2001 14:57:28 -0700, S. V. Subrahmanian
<svsubrahmanian at Y...> wrote:
>
>But at the same time, there is a twinge of pain that I am also not able to
>conceal. Mother India, today is more like Devaki of the yore. Devaki gave
>birth to Sri Krishna. But Sri Krishna grew up elsewhere, not with Devaki.
>Mother India gave birth to Vedas and it is strangely flourishing everywhere
>except India. Her plight is much like Devaki. This kind of effort could
have
>been made by Indians themselves, as scholars might have been available
locally.
>
>
>Do we always have to wait for the West to tell us what to do? Can’t we
>discover it ourselves?
The pain is especially acute because the *decrease* in the number of
people who know the Vedas in India is occurring at the same time
when there is *increase* in population of India, projected to be
the most populous country in future by some estimates at least. If you
are interested in studying the Veda in the country where there are
a billion people, you will feel very lonely! This, I feel, is hard to
comprehend.
Even in the Veda pAThashAlAs, I heard that most of the few parents who
send their children there do so only if they find their son(s) is not
"bright" enough to study the usual secular subjects. So the pAThashAlAs
are probably not getting the "cream of the crop". The "cream of the crop"
is probably headed for the IIT's or similar institutions enroute to a
"bright" future in a well-developed part of the world.
The bottom line here is funding and sponsorship. During its heyday,
Vedic learning used to be supported by Kings. The democratization of
India coupled with the numerous other factors such as degrading of
the brAhmaNa caste, the westernization, etc. has been the cause for
the decline of the crucial support needed for such study.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Vedas in Tapes
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 20:19:15 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I suppose supporting a number of commercial ventures (like sloka.com) and
guiding them properly may be the best choice.
There is a wide spread propaganda that sanAtana dharma is the cause of
social problems in India, but actually it is not true. Reversing the tide
and using sanAtana dharma to solve social problems will generate demand for
dharmic products, and send enough money into circulation for vedas and other
scriptures, rituals etc. Why not give a list of vedic mantras that can be
suggested for regular hearing to achieve success in career, life etc? There
is lot of demand in US for pUja cassettes of different vratams.
Hindu Temple funds are getting diverted to government coffers, whereas it is
otherway round in the rest of the world. In US government money will go to
religious groups under Compassionate conservatism, and even tax benefits
from donations will be greater if they are given to compassionate programs.
Many other countries have state sponsored religion or religion controlled
states. Hindus should protest and redesign their religious products and ways
of donations.
Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 01:12:44 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
----Original Message Follows----
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at H...>
AH: Jan Gonda in his book on Vedic literature mentions a time when
brAhmaNas from other Vedas refused to dine with atharva vedins
and also did not allow inter-marriages between atharva vedins
and others. It is hard to verify this primarily because very
few pure atharva vedins are left in India. I know of some rare
scholars who *know* the atharva veda but their shAkhA is not
an atharva vedic one. Has this situation arisen because of the
conditions that Gonda mentions? In other words, have the atharva
vedins been driven to near extinction? We may never know.
VA: Atharvavedins of the Paippalada Sakha exist in Orissa and the followers
of other Vedas (Taittiriya, Kanva, Ranayaniya and Rk) do not dine or
intermarry with them.
AH: In support of atharva veda's being important in the coronation
ceremony, two references are mentioned - 1) referring to the
coronation of the son of Raghu, aja, the RaghuvaMsha says
"guruNA-atharvavidA kR^ita-kriyaH", where the sage vasiShTha blesses
the king with verses from the atharva veda.
2) nIlakaNThabhaTTIya rAjyAbhiSheka-prayoga has this -
"rAjyAbhiSheke upAdhyAyaH atharvaNIyAni AshIrvachAMsi vadet.H"
which prescribes that the King should be blessed with the verses
of the atharva veda.
VA: Vidyasankar was correct. AV Paippalada Samhita (Kanda X) contains
details of the coronation ritual and likewise some AV Parisistas are
concerned with Rajyabhisheka. In fact the Thai coronation ceremony is even
today conducted by Brahmins who are descendant from AV Brahmins of eastern
India. Within the royal palace at Bangkok, there are a few Hindu temples for
these Brahmins. However, followers of Jalada and Mauda Sakhas of AV are,
according to a Parisista, barred from this ritual. It is said that a king
who is crowned by the followers of these Sakhas will see his kingdom come to
ruin.
Regards
Vishal
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From kartik at K...
Subject: Re: Vedas in Tapes
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 23:47:13 GMT
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: kartik at K...
OM
GURUR BRAHMA GURUR VISNU GURUR DEVO MAHESHVARAH
GURUH SAKSHAT PARAM BRAHM TASMAI SRI GURVE NAMAH
OM NAMAH SIVAYA
OM NAMAH SIVANANDAYA
Blessed Self,
I have been told by my master that the only class still
doing their duty is the Vaishya class.
Brahmin and Kshratiyas are not doing their duty anymore....
Pranam
OM
> I came across this in Bhavan’s Journal of Bharatiya Vidya
Bhavan June 30, 2000
> issue. It is quite possible that many of you know of
this. I am writing this
> for the benefit of those who have not heard about it yet.
>
> This is about a Danish woman named Guni Hesting
Kirchcheiner. She is a scholar
> of Oriental studies from Denmark. She came to India
first in 1971 and her
> primary interest at that time was Ayurveda. When she was
in Pune she met Sri
> Karambalekar Shastri and was fascinated by his chanting
of Rig Veda. On
> further enquiry she found that this hallowed tradition of
chanting Vedas is
> slowly disappearing from India. In an effort to preserve
the oral renditions
> of the Vedas, she undertook a mammoth task of recording
them for posterity.
> She went back to Denmark applied for funds and was was
granted. With the help
> of some noble people in Pune, she found the experts in
different shakas of
> Vedas and started recording them.
>
> She started the work in 1983 and completed in 2000. She
successfully recorded
> complete chantings of many sections of Vedas and it runs
to about 224 tapes,
> round about 332 hrs of chanting. I give below the
shakhas that she has
> recorded alongwith the name of the scholars:
>
> Rig Veda Samhita – Sri Kinjavadekar Shastri (Pune)
> Krishna Yajur Veda – Sri Gokhale Shastri
> Shukla Yajur Veda (Kanva shakha) – Sri Kavishwar Shastri
> Shukla Yajur Veda (Madhyandina shakha) – Sri Bhate Shastri
> Rig Veda Brahmana – Sri Keshav Joglekar Shastri (Gokarna,
Karnataka)
> Atharva Veda – Sri Pancholi Shastri (Sinor, Gujarat)
> Sama Veda, Jaimini tradition – Sri Ittervai Namboodri and
Narayan Namboodri
> (Kerala)
>
> The recordings have been transferred to Danish Royal
Library in Copenhagen.
> Another copy of it has been given to Veda Shastrotejak
Sabha in Pune. The
> article also says that the Danish Royal Library has the
world largest
> collection of Sanskrit works outside of India. Ms. Guni
Hesting is planning to
> bring out the chantings in CD format soon.
>
> Postscript:
>
> I just thought I would share the information above. It
is a very happy news to
> note that somebody has put in more than 15 years of
effort to accomplish the
> above. We can all benefit from such a work.
>
> But at the same time, there is a twinge of pain that I am
also not able to
> conceal. Mother India, today is more like Devaki of the
yore. Devaki gave
> birth to Sri Krishna. But Sri Krishna grew up elsewhere,
not with Devaki.
> Mother India gave birth to Vedas and it is strangely
flourishing everywhere
> except India. Her plight is much like Devaki. This
kind of effort could have
> been made by Indians themselves, as scholars might have
been available locally.
>
>
> Do we always have to wait for the West to tell us what to
do? Can’t we
> discover it ourselves?
>
> Regards.
> S. V. Subrahmanian.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
============================================================
====================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
listmaster at a...
>
============================================================
====================
>
---------------------------------------------
Get FREE E-Mail at Y...
http://www.valuemail.net
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 05:55:04 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: Vedas in Tapes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Padmanabhan=20Sundaresan?= <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Sir
Thank you very much for your kind response.Im glad
that at least some people are seeing the true reasons
behind this venture slokas.com.It has been made
commercial only for directing and channelising funds
to worthy causes.In fact for the information of
people, we are fighting against lack of funds but
still want to somehow put up this project as fast a
spossible.No support has been coming from Venture
capital companies or individuals who would like to
invest.We have ourselves put in more than $100,000
just to create this project.Slow people have to excuse
for the slow progress which this site maybe making
since funds are a big constraint.
However, we are trying to put all chantings of all the
4 vedas in this site together with day to day poojas
and slokas for listening pleasure.
Regards
Padmanabhan
--- Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at H...> wrote:
> I suppose supporting a number of commercial ventures
> (like sloka.com) and
> guiding them properly may be the best choice.
>
> There is a wide spread propaganda that sanAtana
> dharma is the cause of
> social problems in India, but actually it is not
> true. Reversing the tide
> and using sanAtana dharma to solve social problems
> will generate demand for
> dharmic products, and send enough money into
> circulation for vedas and other
> scriptures, rituals etc. Why not give a list of
> vedic mantras that can be
> suggested for regular hearing to achieve success in
> career, life etc? There
> is lot of demand in US for pUja cassettes of
> different vratams.
>
> Hindu Temple funds are getting diverted to
> government coffers, whereas it is
> otherway round in the rest of the world. In US
> government money will go to
> religious groups under Compassionate conservatism,
> and even tax benefits
> from donations will be greater if they are given to
> compassionate programs.
> Many other countries have state sponsored religion
> or religion controlled
> states. Hindus should protest and redesign their
> religious products and ways
> of donations.
>
> Regards
> Bhadraiah
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Vedas in Tapes
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 01:33:46 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Padmanabhan
You might need some professional help with marketing, financing etc. Please
check with people who are in the same boat in the same or related areas like
Indological publishers etc. These vedAnta boards may not be of much help in
that direction. We will try to resolve adhyAtamic and sAmAjic issues, and
you may stay on to get some ideas on social products. We are not concerned
with business but vedas say "yazo jane~sAni svAha, zreyAn vasyaso~sAni
svAha" (Tai. Up) "Let me become famous, let me be wealthy". Kindly let us
continue with the discussions.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - I
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 09:03:19
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>It seems possible that Anandagiri must have lived after Citsukhacharya,
> >author of Tattvapradipika, and that he was perhaps a contemporary of
> >Sriharsha.
But Vidya, isn't Citsukhiyam a commentary on the Khandana? If so how could
Anandagiri be later than Citsukha and still be a contemporary of Sri Harsha?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 17:40:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - I
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>>It seems possible that Anandagiri must have lived after Citsukhacharya,
>> >author of Tattvapradipika, and that he was perhaps a contemporary of
>> >Sriharsha.
>
>But Vidya, isn't Citsukhiyam a commentary on the Khandana? If so how could
>Anandagiri be later than Citsukha and still be a contemporary of Sri
Harsha?
>
Sorry, my mistake. You are right, Citsukha wrote a commentary on
Sriharsha's Khandanakhandakhadya, so he must have lived later than
Sriharsha. Anandagiri seems to be aware of the Khandana text, but
it is unclear whether he specifically refers to Citsukha's comm.
on the Khandana.
I should have written "It seems possible that Anandagiri must have
lived after Sriharsha, and that he was perhaps a contemporary of
Citsukha, author of Tattvapradipika". The phrases got mixed up,
which I should have caught before sending to the list. Thanks for
pointing out the error in a timely fashion.
Note that this is still tentative. I am basing this on secondary
references to Anandagiri's Tikas. I have found that conclusions
about chronology can often be error-prone, so it is necessary to
directly check Anandagiri's texts to verify the conclusions that
others have drawn. As far as Sankaravijaya texts are concerned,
my major conclusion would still hold, i.e. Anandagiri must have
lived prior to Vidyaranya.
Part II of the Sankaravijaya discussion will be sent out in a
couple of days.
Regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 23:43:14 -0400
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>According to my translation of Madhava-Vidyarana,
>Govindapada initiated Adishankara with the four
Are you reading the translation by Swami Tapasyananda or the one by
K. Padmanabhan?
>MahAvAkyas as PrajnAnam Brahma, aham brahmAsmi, tat
>tvam asi and ayamAtmA brahma. In my reading these are
>linked respectively with: lakshanavakya ( definition
>of Brahman), anusandhAnavAkya (sentence of practice),
>upadesavAkya (sentence of instruction) and
>anubhavavAkya (sentence of direct experience).
Actually, this is a carry-over from a pre-Sankaran tradition called
prasaMkhyAna vAda, according to which, a meditation has to be carried
out till such time as the Atman is experienced. However, it is not
exactly correct to call "ahaM brahmAsmi" an anusandhAna-vAkya.
Sankaracharya and Sureswaracharya present numerous arguments to show
why merely repeating ahaM brahmAsmi, within one's mind, is not the way
to obtain brahman-knowledge. It has to be the other way round.
In practice, only the person who has had the anubhava can say with
authority, "ahaM brahmAsmi" and really mean it. In other words, the
mahAvAkyas are not mantras for japa (recitation/repetition).
There is another version of the first sentence that is commonly used.
Instead of prajnAnaM brahma, many Advaita texts give it as prajnAnam
AnandaM brahma. The former sentence is found in aitareya upanishad
3.3, while bRhadAraNyaka upanishad 3.9.28.7 has the sentence vijnAnam
AnandaM brahma. The reason prajnAna and Ananda are put together when
discussing the mahAvAkyas may be inferred from brahmasUtra 3.3.11-12
(AnandAyaH pradhAnasya; priyaSirastvAdy aprAptir upacayApacayau hi
bhede). AnandaM brahma (taittirIya upanishad) is also a lakshaNavAkya,
and so Ananda is also to be taken as a definition, although the earlier
description of the Anandamaya in terms of priya, moda, pramoda etc.
should not be indiscriminately applied to all meditations on Brahman.
The word prajnAna encompasses sat, cit, ananta and all words derived
from jnAna. aitareya upanishad tells us that vijnAna etc. are all
forms of prajnAna. Therefore, even in the mANDUkya upanishad, we see
prajnAnaghana, Anandamaya and Anandabhuk put together.
There is a detailed discussion of all these issues in the 15th chapter
of Pancadashi of Bharati Tirtha & Vidyaranya. This chapter is titled
mahAvAkya-viveka, and it is clear that only these four sentences are
being discussed. There is a nice accessible translation of Pancadashi
by Swami Swahananda of the Ramakrishna Math.
There is a lot of controversy in certain circles, regarding the number
and traditional usage of the four mahAvAkyas. Most of these debates are
"much-ado-about-nothing," being only exercises in constructing strawman
arguments and proceeding to refute them. The latest post by one of our
newest members is quite on par with this trend. I will touch upon this
issue in part III of the Sankaravijaya series. Perhaps in a week or so.
Regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 01:27:47 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Sundaresan
Thank you for clarification re: AV.
I refer to your somewhat related topic..
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m5203.html
>Now, vAcaspati miSra explicitly says in bhAmatI that Sruti (chAndogya
> >upanishad) supports only the theory of trivRtkaraNa and does not >support
>pancIkaraNa.
I wish to refer to tai.up. 1.7.1 which has a slightly different form of
pancheekaraNa in which three sets of five elements are chosen to represent
the universe at cosmic level and another three sets of give elements at
personal level to make up total of 30 elements. pancheekaraNa is not
entirely without support of Shruti.
tai.up 1.7.1 also mentions pankti, which is a metre of vedic sanskrit.
Shatapatha BrahmaNa mentions that metres are ancient sAdhya gods, meaning
they are born even before regular vedic gods are born. The connection to
pankti metre is yet unexplored. I appreciate if any one could post any
original Rk mantra in pankti metre to help in further investigation,
preferably with markers for accent etc.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 03:38:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at H...> wrote:
>I wish to refer to tai.up. 1.7.1 which has a slightly different form of
>pancheekaraNa in which three sets of five elements are chosen to represent
>the universe at cosmic level and another three sets of give elements at
>personal level to make up total of 30 elements. pancheekaraNa is not
>entirely without support of Shruti.
I fail to see how that passage in TU is a statement of pancIkaraNa.
There is a specific description of trivRtkaraNa in CU, whereby the
elements are divided and then intermixed. Four examples are given
(fire, sun, moon and lightning), to demonstrate the presence of the
subtle components of ap and anna in these material forms of tejas.
That is what the controversy in kalpataru (commentary on bhAmatI)
is all about. After writing that earlier mail that you quoted, I
have investigated this issue in greater detail, and have come to
the conclusion that bhAmatI does not explicitly reject the idea
of pancIkaraNa. However, kalpataru explicitly rejects it, whereas
Anandagiri, madhusUdana sarasvatI and others explicitly accept
the theory, on the grounds that there is an upalakshaNa support
in the Sruti.
Regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 10:41:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Tue, 29 May 2001 03:38:02 -0400, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<vsundaresan at H...> wrote:
>
>There is a specific description of trivRtkaraNa in CU, whereby the
>elements are divided and then intermixed. Four examples are given
>(fire, sun, moon and lightning), to demonstrate the presence of the
>subtle components of ap and anna in these material forms of tejas.
>
May I chip in here with some more information from the R^igVeda.
The ViShNu-sUkta R^ik 1.154.4 says "...ya u tridhAtu prithivIM
uta dyAmeko dAdhAra bhuvanAni vishvA" which is interpreted by
sAyaNa as support for the trivR^itkaraNa theory of the chhAndogya up.
I am somewhat surprised (or I am unaware of it) that no reference to this
R^ik is made in the bhAmati, kalpataru, and other texts.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 13:43:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Pancheekarana (fwd)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>I am somewhat surprised (or I am unaware of it) that no reference to this
>R^ik is made in the bhAmati, kalpataru, and other texts.
In general, references to Rgveda hymns are sparse in the bhAshyas and
their sub-commentaries. A reference is made usually when the source
text, e.g. gItA or kaTha upanishad, itself quotes a particular Rk.
Re: trivRtkaraNa and pancIkaraNa, Sankara sees them as equivalent ways
of describing the subtle and the material elements. What is important
is not so much the process of intermixing as the fact that in either
case, the theory points to non-dual being (ekam sat, advitIyam) as the
sole source.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:02:21 -0400
Subject: The Bystander problem
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
I ask the pardon of list members if what I write below appears
to be indulgence in rambling.
On Sun, 27 May 2001 14:57:28 -0700, S. V. Subrahmanian
<svsubrahmanian at Y...
COM> wrote:
>But at the same time, there is a twinge of pain that I am also not able to
>conceal. Mother India, today is more like Devaki of the yore. Devaki gave
>birth to Sri Krishna. But Sri Krishna grew up elsewhere, not with Devaki.
>Mother India gave birth to Vedas and it is strangely flourishing everywhere
>except India. Her plight is much like Devaki. This kind of effort could
h
ave
>been made by Indians themselves, as scholars might have been available
>loca
lly.
One of several explanations of the apathy towards the decline in dharma,
Vedic study, etc. shown by Indians in general may be found in the
Bystander problem. This Bystander problem can be used to give
a fairly accurate description of apathy towards important and urgent
issues.
The Bystander problem has been studied by New York City psychologists
Bibb Latane of Columbia University and John Darley of New York University.
Essentially, the Bystander problem is one where a number of bystanders
who are witnessing a crime/accident/something terrible (such as the decline
of sanAtana dharma) do not come to the rescue. For example, Malcolm
Gladwell's book "The Tipping point" mentions one crime in Queens, NY
where a woman was chased and repeatedly attacked on the street right in
front of 38 of her neighbors while they simply watched. Not a single
neighbor even took the trouble of calling the police. One may argue here
that this happenend because people in big cities tend to get de-sensitized
to crime and don't think much of a crime. While this may be true, there is
something else that the psychologists found that may be important.
They conducted a series of experiments. In one experiment, a student was
asked to fake an epileptic fit while there was just one person in the
next room. That person came forward to help the student about 85% of the
time. But when the same experiment was conducted where the person who
was supposed to help knew that there were four other people in the
vicinity, emergency help was provided only 31% of the time. Again,
in another experiment, a person was put in a situation where there was
smoke coming from under the door of a room (indicating a fire). The
person called for help 75% of the time. But in the same situation facing
a group of people, calls for help were made only 38% of the time.
The question here is a big WHY? One reason could be that each person
tried to shift responsibility of providing help to others when in a
group. Or, it could be that each person saw the situation as being
less than critical because no one was coming forward to help. In any
case, when the person was alone, he/she was more likely to help because
he/she felt *personally* responsible to provide help. Without this sense
of *personal* responsibility and *personal* obligation, it is difficult
to get help.
Although the studies were done in New York, the Bystander problem has
parallels in acute problem facing sanAtana dharma in India. The problem
is one of apathy. Everyone knows in a general sense that Vedic study is
declining rapidly. But no one does much about it. Why? Because, the sense
of personal responsibility is missing. We think that we Indians as a
whole are responsible for maintaining the dharma. But we do not conceive
of the personal responsibility that each one of us has towards dharma.
That is why general "Appeal for help" messages that get posted on just
about every forum do not get an overwhelming response, if at all they
do get a response. Such messages are impersonal and general. Not many
people would be lofty-minded to come forward and act in response to
such appeals.
So what is a solution? The appeal for help must be personal rather than
general. It should try to involve the person who sees/hears the appeal
in a personal way. Let us take an example. Suppose you are from a
Vedic shAkhA that is on the decline. For example, one could collect
information and statistics on how rapidly the number of people who study
it has declined in *your* own town/village/neighborhood. Would you not
then find the appeal much more urgent, something that you feel should
be responded to? You know that not many "other" people will be interested
in doing something about the critical situation. Another way to personalize
appeals is to collect anecdotal evidence if statistics
are a problem. A friend of mine is a classic example. His father knows
one Veda completely, and most of the other three Vedas. But he knows
a tiny tiny bit of his own Veda and has studied absolutely nothing in
the other Vedas. We can clearly see a rapid decline from one generation to
the next. Also, it is a misconception that this decline should always
be gradual. It can and has declined rapidly more than in just linear
fashion in the majority of cases.
In the case of the Danish woman who took the initiative to record
the Vedas too, the explanation is that she felt somehow *personally*
obliged to do something about the problem that very few people in
her own country would care about.
The idea of personalization is not new in e-business. E-commerce websites
know the value of establishing a *personal* touch with their prospective
customers. The same can be done to attempt to solve the Bystander problem.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: Re: Sloka.com
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:50:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <vsundaresan at H...>
> However, I am not sure if the other moderators get mails sent to
> the Yahoo account, like the one you had sent me yesterday. That is
> why I replied to you in private, cc'ing it to the others, using the
> advaita-vedanta.org address. Jaldhar, Vaidya and Ravi, can you
> please confirm if you get mails sent through the Yahoo interface?
> If not, we may need to fix the settings there.
Yes. We get the emails sent to the yahoo groups account too. As I mentioned
earlier, the yahoo groups account is set up only as a back up server.
Postings made there will be sent only to the moderators. Kindly send
postings to the list to the advaita-l.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
--- Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
wrote:
> Are you reading the translation by Swami
> Tapasyananda or the one by
> K. Padmanabhan?
Dear Sir,
That of Swami Tapasyananda but I also have an
excellent....I think...book by G.C.Pande on the 'Life
and Thought of Shankaracharya'.
> >MahAvAkyas as PrajnAnam Brahma, aham brahmAsmi, tat
> >tvam asi and ayamAtmA brahma. In my reading these
> are
> >linked respectively with: lakshanavakya (
> definition
> >of Brahman), anusandhAnavAkya (sentence of
> practice),
> >upadesavAkya (sentence of instruction) and
> >anubhavavAkya (sentence of direct experience).
>
> Actually, this is a carry-over from a pre-Sankaran
> tradition called
> prasaMkhyAna vAda, according to which, a meditation
> has to be carried
> out till such time as the Atman is experienced.
> However, it is not
> exactly correct to call "ahaM brahmAsmi" an
> anusandhAna-vAkya.
>
> Sankaracharya and Sureswaracharya present numerous
> arguments to show
> why merely repeating ahaM brahmAsmi, within one's
> mind, is not the way
> to obtain brahman-knowledge. It has to be the other
> way round.
Thank you for this as it is very helpful in guiding me
to the source of the tradition that I had first come
across when searching under 'Mahavakyas' a year ago
and came across the answer to a question given by
Sivananda.
I am aware of traditions in the UK that try to get
people to repeat Aham Brahmasmi as japa but I know
that it has to be the other way round. First the
experience then the statement which gives the
teaching. We could follow this line of argument into
paradox but only if we ignore the understanding that
comes with initial anubhava or pratibha. This is what
was behind my recent question on apourusheya.
I have searched the Web today for info. on
prasaNkhyAna VAda but without success. My only
references at home are in the vartikka on the Brihad.
Up. by Suresvara.
My translation of Upadesa Sahasri...Trans. A J
Alston...has an interesting comment on 18v202. He
refers to Vimuktamam's 'Ishta Siddhi':
'Even verbal knowledge can be direct knowledge,
because it can concern that which is immediately and
directly known, as in the case of a human sentence
proclaiming the self-luminosity of the Self'. An
obvious reference here to the story of the 'Tenth
man'.
Unfortunately I do not have a copy of Ishta Siddhi to
hand to follow this up yet. However the Word of one
who knows is different to the word of one who does not
know and this distinction needs to be made.
>
> In practice, only the person who has had the
> anubhava can say with
> authority, "ahaM brahmAsmi" and really mean it. In
> other words, the
> mahAvAkyas are not mantras for japa
> (recitation/repetition).
>
> There is another version of the first sentence that
> is commonly used.
> Instead of prajnAnaM brahma, many Advaita texts give
> it as prajnAnam
> AnandaM brahma. The former sentence is found in
> aitareya upanishad
> 3.3, while bRhadAraNyaka upanishad 3.9.28.7 has the
> sentence vijnAnam
> AnandaM brahma.
Again thank you for this which I am following up.
There is a detailed discussion of all these issues
> in the 15th chapter
> of Pancadashi of Bharati Tirtha & Vidyaranya.
This should be the 5th. chapter but I enjoyed reading
both chapters. I have had the book on the shelf for
some time but not looked at it recently.
I have some knowledge of Sanskrit but could you please
explain how the English word 'experienced' comes from
the tadekyamanuyatam at the end of verse 6, as
translated by Swami Sahananda, as well as in verse 7.
I will not explain all this now but my question
relates to a Society which I 'chair' in London to
which I hope to bring Shankara's advaita. It is a
society centred upon the examination of
'spiritual/religious experiences' by means of science
and true philosophy. I do not want to pursue this at
the moment as it will be a diversion from the
immediate topic but I mention it here to give a part
of the context for this study.
Finally I have a very informative little book just
called 'Mahavakyas' by Dr Ganapathy from Chennai. He
uses grammatical analysis purely from a kevalAdvaita
viewpoint. Do you know of this?
Thank you for your guidance
Ken Knight
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 19:28:44 -0400
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>I have searched the Web today for info. on
>prasaNkhyAna VAda but without success. My only
>references at home are in the vartikka on the Brihad.
>Up. by Suresvara.
There is also an extensive refutation of the prasaMkhyAna vAda
in the tattvamasi prakaraNa of upadeSasAhasrI.
>There is a detailed discussion of all these issues
>> in the 15th chapter
>> of Pancadashi of Bharati Tirtha & Vidyaranya.
>
>This should be the 5th. chapter but I enjoyed reading
>both chapters. I have had the book on the shelf for
>some time but not looked at it recently.
Yes, 5th chapter. Too many such errors in my recent postings!
>I have some knowledge of Sanskrit but could you please
>explain how the English word 'experienced' comes from
>the tadekyamanuyatam at the end of verse 6, as
>translated by Swami Sahananda, as well as in verse 7.
I'm afraid I will have to pass on this for now. I don't have
the text and translation at hand. I will keep it in mind for
a later response, however.
>Finally I have a very informative little book just
>called 'Mahavakyas' by Dr Ganapathy from Chennai. He
>uses grammatical analysis purely from a kevalAdvaita
>viewpoint. Do you know of this?
No, I haven't seen this. Please share details from this if
possible. Does the author get into anvaya-vyatireka type of
grammatical analysis?
Best,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:07:08 -0400
Subject: Sankaravijaya texts - II
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>From
Message-Id: <.>
May 29, 2001 - Post made by Vidyasankar Sundaresan, from Pasadena, USA,
to the Advaita-L mailing list. Archives hosted at Advaita Vedanta
Anusandhana Kendra (www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html)
.________________________.
| Part II(a) of a series |
=========================================================================
In Part I, we saw that there is a Sankaravijaya by Madhava, who is
usually identified with Vidyaranya (14th century). We also saw that an
older text called Pracina Sankaravijaya is referred to by later authors,
which now seems to have been lost. The author of Pracina Sankaravijaya
is said to be Anandagiri, who is known to have composed sub-commentaries
on many of Sankara's texts. Anandagiri must have lived in the 13th cent.
(approximately) as it is quite probable that he was pre-Vidyaranya. We
also saw that it is often mistakenly thought that Anandagiri was a direct
disciple of Sankara himself, based on a confusion with Totakacharya.
This part will cover the numerous twists and turns in the history of
another text, namely the Sankaravijaya of Anantanandagiri. As this is
going to be too long, I will be splitting part II of this series into
II(a), II(b) and II(c). Those who want to know about textual details
can read only II(a), and skip the next two parts, without losing much
in the process. Those who are interested in controversial topics may
want to carefully read II(b) and II(c) also.
At the outset, one enormous confusion about this text needs to be
cleared. Almost every scholar who has hitherto investigated this text
refers to its author as Anandagiri. This is either genuinely mistaken
or deliberately misleading, depending on the motivations of each such
person. The author names himself as anantAnandagiri, and says either
that he is a direct disciple of Sankara or that Sankara was his guru's
guru (paramaguru). There is a sentence in the first chapter of this
text, which reads,
anantAnandagirir aham apratihatAjnasya bhagavataH SishyaH ...
paramaguror avatAra kathAM ...
Throughout the text, the name anantAnandagiri is included numerous
times, in the list of disciples who accompanied Sankaracharya, during
his many tours of the country. The name of the author is consistently
given as anantAnandagiri in the chapter colophons in the text also.
The name Anandagiri is never used; only anantAnandagiri is used.
We already saw that Anandagiri gives his own guru's name as Suddhananda,
and never as Sankara. On the other hand, anantAnandagiri always refers
to himself only by the full name, and tries to convey the impression
that he saw Sankara alive and travelled with him. Therefore, there is
more than sufficient reason to conclude that the two persons,
anantAnandagiri and Anandagiri should not be identified with each other.
Among the ranks of those who have not distinguished between Anandagiri
and Anantanandagiri, for whatever reason, must be counted H. H. Wilson
[1] ("Orientalist" of the 19th century), A. C. Burnell [2] (British
colonial administrator, author of the first catalogue of the Tanjore
Sarasvati Mahal library), Polakam Rama Sastri [3] (a pundit with close
affiliations to the Kanchi Matha), R. Krishnaswamy Aiyar and K. R.
Venkataraman [4] (followers of the Sringeri matha, the first of whom
became a Sannyasin named Jnanananda Bharati) and William Cenkner [5]
(contemporary American scholar).
As far as I have been able to make out, Wilson may have thought that
the text was indeed by Anandagiri. Burnell names the author as
Anandagiri, but his remarks (to be discussed in Part II(b)) show that
he did not believe that the author was the same as Anandagiri.
Rama Sastri, on the other hand, knows very well that the two authors
and the two texts are different, because he repeatedly refers to the
lost Pracina text of Anandagiri. Now, Anandagiri's Pracina Sankaravijaya
is either "lost" or it is "available". If it is lost, then the text that
IS available has to be by some other author. Nevertheless, when Sastri
refers to anantAnandagiri's text, he never explicitly makes the
distinction. Aiyar and Venkataraman, for their part, are also well
aware of the distinction, but they also fail to explicitly make a
distinction. Most of their discussion is meant as a refutation of the
far-fetched claims made by Polakam Rama Sastri, and in the midst of a
polemical discussion, neither party is careful to make the distinction
consistently. However, it is clear that all three of them are well aware
of the distinction between Anandagiri and anantAnandagiri as authors, and
the Pracina Sankaravijaya and Anantanandagiri's Sankaravijaya as texts.
William Cenkner [5] also fails to make a distinction, but I have pointed
out elsewhere [6] that he seems to be rather deeply confused about many
aspects of the contemporary Sankaracharya traditions and texts. As far
as the texts are concerned, this may perhaps be excused, because he is
more of a "field-researcher" than a "textual scholar". W. R. Antarkar
[7] distinguishes between Anandagiri and Anantanandagiri, but not very
consistently, while N. Veezhinathan and T. M. P. Mahadevan [8] make a
nominal distinction, but at the same time, they also attempt to blur
it out. This will be discussed in part II(c) of this series.
__________________________________________________________________________
Notes -
-----
1. H. H. Wilson. A sketch of the religious sects of the Hindus. 1977.
New Delhi: Cosmo Publications; [reprint of a text originally published
in the year 1861].
2. A. C. Burnell. A classified index to the Sanskrit mss. in the palace
at Tanjore. 1880. London: Truebner and Co.
3. Polakam Rama Sastri. Aticankara mutal Kanciyil totarntuvarum
kuruparamparai. 1976. Madras: Liberty Patippakam.
4. R. Krishnaswamy Aiyar and K. R. Venkataraman. The truth about the
Kumbhakonam Mutt. 1977. Madurai: Ramakrishna Press.
5. William Cenkner. A tradition of teachers: Sankara and the Jagadgurus
today. 1983. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
6. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html - an essay
on the succession dispute at the Jyotirmatha Sankaracharya seat.
7. W. R. Antarkar. Journal of the University of Bombay. 1961. XXX. 2: 73-80.
8. N. Veezhinathan. ed. Anantanandagiripranitam Srisankaravijayam. 1971.
Madras: University of Madras; [with a foreword by T. M. P. Mahadevan].
=========================================================================
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 23:25:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 26 May 2001, [iso-8859-1] Padmanabhan Sundaresan wrote:
> I dont know why its always Hindus who consider any
> good thing happening only first as bad.
>
Sorry but it's not clear that this is a good thing. The first
introduction many of us had to you and your site was unsolicited email
asking for money (spam) Ramchandran was quite right to be suspicious of
your intentions. There are many scams being run on the Internet. Not
that either of us think you have fraud in mind but your method of
presentation did not inspire trust. And the unauthorized use of
copyrighted material didn't help either.
Shrisha and I cannot download the flash plugin because it simply isn't
available for our computers (not everyone runs Windows.) It is a cardinal
rule of web design that you don't make users jump through hoops to view
your content. Same with the black background. It's hard to look at and
considered bad design. Again, none of these things are criminal but they
betray a lack of understanding of web principles.
Also I seriously doubt charging $30 a year will fly. Take it from someone
who was right in the middle of the dot-com explosion. It is very
difficult to get Internet users to pay even modest amounts of money. Most
companies who have based their business plans around subscription have
either had to find alternatives or gone bankrupt. You face a particular
challenge in that your "competition" already makes a lot of high quality
content available for free. For instance the Kanchi Matha already has a
very nice, informative site. If I want information on Madhva Sampradaya,
www.dvaita.org is already in my bookmarks etc.
I don't doubt your sincerity but it seems to me your plans are not well
thought out.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:07:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Krishna Yajur Veda
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 12 May 2001, S. V. Subrahmanian wrote:
> Learned Members,
>
> I belong to the Krishna Yajur Veda shAkhA. I would like to get a good
> book that contains K. Y. Veda with Yajus, brAhmaNas (araNyakAs) and
> upanishads. I want it to be both in Sanskrit and translated in either
> English or Tamil (the 2 languages I am equally comfortable with).
>
> Please give some good publications. It does not matter whether it is available
> in India or USA. Also, please give me some good recommendations on bhAshyAs on
> this.
>
Butalas' Emporium (Indo-US Books) in Jackson Heights and Edison have
Sanskrit books. I'm sure they've had Taittireya Samhita in the past.
Taittireyopanishad is also pretty widely available. The Brahmana and the
Aranyaka are not so easy to find but I'm sure they can help you get them
from India (albeit at a huge markup.)
> Even though my family is K. Y. Veda, my immediate ancestors have not
> taken much interest in them excepting my grand uncle. I would like to
> revive the tradition of a brahmaNa reading/understanding his shAkhA.
When I first became interested in such things, I immediately rushed out
and bought everything I could find of my shakha, even the Arya Samajist
edition. Nowadays except for occasional instances like the recent
discussion with Vishal, they gather dust on my shelves. Because I lost
interest? No on the contrary I'm more interested than ever but I realize
that books are not the proper way to learn. In fact learned Pandits
consider a person semi-retarded if he has to rely on books. Of course
this means things are going a lot slower. I estimate I know about 10% of
my shakha (mostly the "practical" parts related to nitya karmas) But by
cultivating the spirit not just the letter of the Vedas, I hope that my
children and grand-children will be able to go much further than me.
> Ofcourse I am in search of a teacher also, who can teach this.
The suggestion to ask the priests at the Ganesh Temple is a good one.
> Please give suggestions as to which schools/teachers teach them. I
> may not have time to learn the sasvara recitation,
Then make time or don't bother. I'm serious, it a great sin to
mispronounce the Vedic mantras. In the front of my copy of the Vajasaneyi
Samhita of the Shuklayajurveda, there is a picture of the murtis of the
four Vedas. Shiksha (the Vedanga related to pronounciation) is also
depicted as a Goddess wielding a club. This is to beat people who
mispronounce the Vedas.
> but I would like to
> learn atleast their meaning.
>
> I want to try to whatever extent I can to revive it in my generation
> and pass it on further.
>
If you're serious about this you need to do it the right way. As Shri
Balakrishnan said, it takes about 15 years full-time to learn the whole
thing. Realistically, you are probably not going to be able to achieve
this. But if you learn enough for nityakarmas and establish a household
suffused with the Vedic spirit, your future generations will advance
further step by step. But if you take shortcuts, it won't help and may
actually hasten the death of Vedic culture.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:13:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Vedas in Tapes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Fri, 27 May 101, Kartik Vashishta wrote:
> I have been told by my master that the only class still
> doing their duty is the Vaishya class.
>
> Brahmin and Kshratiyas are not doing their duty anymore....
>
Assuming this is true (it isn't but lets assume) what do you intend to do
about it?
Each one of us should ask ourselves: are we doing our duty?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:23:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 27 May 2001, Vishal Agarwal wrote:
> See the article:
>
> D R Bhandarkar; "Were Women Entitled to Perform Srauta Sacrifices?"; PAIOC
> XII, Benaras; 1946
> The Nanaghat inscription mentions that NaagaNikaa, the wife of Sri sAtakarNi
> performed Vedic sacrifices.
>
I had a chance to look at this article today, I'm afraid it doesn't really
add much to the discussion. Most of it covers the Mimamsasutra
adhikaranas we have already talked about.
As for Naganika, Prof. Bhandarkar mentions the possibility that she only
did so in the capcity of regent for her young son Vedashri. He himself
previously held this view but seems to have changed his mind after reading
the Mimamsasutras. He says it is not clear that Naganika was just acting
as regent. But by the same token, it is not clear that she wasn't. If
this meagre scrap is all the historical record can come up with, I'm
afraid it does little to challenge my assertion.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: The Bystander problem
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 02:26:25 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
It may be mischievous to say this, but can we translate the word bystander
as sAkSImAtra? I know it is wrong but somehow people have been brainwashed
to think that peace and inaction are the highest reality and people have to
somehow neutralize their thoughts to achieve it.
Neutralizing thoughts mechanically may be a good idea for starters but one
should use reason as sAdhana progresses. Every thought comes into the mind
with a purpose, and the purpose of each thought (even within the mind of an
adhArmic person) is to establish dharma. This is the natural law. But people
do adhArmic actions because they misunderstand what is going on and limit
their view to what is immediately useful to them. A dhArmic person should
know this and act in such a way to neutralize the adhArmic persons, instead
of neutralizing one's own thoughts.
While it is true that in nirguNa there is no action, there is extreme action
in the close viscinities of nirguNa, namely the creative activity of prajna.
In my opinion, this is the Astika viewpoint. nirguNa is not achieved by
dissolving known objects into non-existence to achieve a make-believe peace.
As for decline in vedic practice, fire fighting is necessary to stop the
decline; but the root causes are structural and these issues must also be
tackled.
Vedas are getting discarded because their inclusiveness is forgotten. When
it is re-established that Vedas include the new social structures and new
technology as a special case, the interest can be rekindled.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 00:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
- >Finally I have a very informative little book just
> >called 'Mahavakyas' by Dr Ganapathy from Chennai.
> He
> >uses grammatical analysis purely from a
> kevalAdvaita
> >viewpoint. Do you know of this?
>
> No, I haven't seen this. Please share details from
> this if
> possible. Does the author get into anvaya-vyatireka
> type of
> grammatical analysis?
Yes very much so. I obtained a copy for a few rupees
from the Ramakrishna Centre in Chennai. Dr T N
Ganapathy wrote this while at the Department of
Philosophy, Ramakrishna Mission, Vivekananda College
in Chennai in 1982. It is a mongraph and densely
packed with grammatical detail. I could present it
here if you wish but I will be away from home and
computers for about ten days as from Friday,
Many thanks for your guidance
Ken
>
> Best,
> Vidyasankar
>
>
================================================================================
> "bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
> To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail
> to
> listserv at l... with
> body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
> If you need any other help please contact
> listmaster at a...
>
================================================================================
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: Sloka.com
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:09:03 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ram Chandran" <rchandran at C...>
> Fortunately, the Internet copyright laws do protect the original authors
> even without a formal statement on the copyright. If commercial sites such
> as "Sloka.com" undertake 'adharmic' activities by misusing the internet
> privileges, Lord Krishna will certainly appear in the form of a smart
lawyer
> to establish 'dharma'. (Bhagavad Gita Chapter 4 Vesrse 7) Let us hope
that
> the developers of 'sloka.com" become aware of this and act accordingly.
I understand that using material prepared by others without permission is a
crime. However, we should also realize that when it is done with the
permission of the authors, it is completely ok. Also, when the material is
only used as a reference, and it's contents not used in toto, and suitable
reference s have been provided, it is ok to do it.
In as much as the fact that the site did not mention its commercial
intentions, and the list member did not give that information up front
either, it is a mistake. However, having gotten myself in the past in some
un-necessary copyright violations problems without realizing it, I don't
find anything "adharmic" about the use of publicly available material for
material gain, so long as ample references are given. If using publicly
available material for personal gain is adharmic, then every person who
wrote a commentary on the bhagavad gita and "sold" the book is just as
adharmic.
Just my two cents. I have no affiliation to the site or to its creators - I
am just a little sensitive to issues of compyright violations and the
accustations of "adharmic activity" - thats all :)
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 12:39:36 -0400
Subject: Re: Women and Vedic Karmakanda - 3
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
>On Sun, 27 May 2001, Vishal Agarwal wrote:
>
>> See the article:
>>
>> D R Bhandarkar; "Were Women Entitled to Perform Srauta Sacrifices?";
PAIOC
>> XII, Benaras; 1946
>> The Nanaghat inscription mentions that NaagaNikaa, the wife of Sri
sAtakarNi
>> performed Vedic sacrifices.
>>
>
I have recently come in contact with a Gujarati Sanskrit scholar whose
father is a Mahamohamopadhyaya, one of two from Gujarat. This past Sat, we
were all sitting an talking about doing prANAyAm. He showed us the method
of 1:3:2 i.e. using Gayatri mantra and reciting it once for pUrak
(inhalation), twice for kumbhaka (holding the breath) and twice for rechaka
(exhalation). Of course, one has to recite mentally. Since there was a
woman present, she remarked that she does the prANAyAma reciting Hare
Krishna as women are not allowed to chant the gayatri. At this, some people
wondered why and this scholar remarked that the gayatri mantra generates
heat and energy in the body and that this energy kills the motherhood of a
woman if done for a prolonged period. I was wondering if anyone here has
heard of such an explanation, or that it might be one of the reasons why
women should not chant Vedic mantras.
thanks
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: general question
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
--- Ravishankar Venkatraman <sunlike at h...> wrote:
> Ravishankar Mayavaram wrote:
> >Coming back, my view on this subject (now) is very simple and it is
> >based on
> >
> >
> >guhaayaaM gehe vaa bahirapi vane vaa.adrishikhare
> >jale vaa vahnau vaa vasatu vasateH kiM vada phalam.h |
> >sadaa yasyaivaantaHkaraNamapi shaMbho tava pade
> >sthitaM chedyogo.asau sa cha paramayogii sa cha sukhii || 12||
> >
> >of shivAnandalaharI.
> >
>
> Ravi,
>
> What does this sloka mean? Could you please elaborate on this?
>
In brief, where you heart is, is more important than where your body
is. The place of residence of the body is not so important.
guhaayaam - in a cave
gehe vaa - or in a house
bahirapi - or outside
vane vaa - or in a forest
adri shikare - on a mountain top
jale vaa - or in water
vahnau vaa - or in fire
vasatu - (let one) live
vasateH - having lived (there)
kim - what
phalam - fruit or benefit
vada - tell
sadaa - always
yasya - whose
eva - (emphasis)
antaH karaNam - inner organ (manas, chitta, buddhi and ahaN^kaara)
api - (emphasis)
shambho - O Lord shiva
tava pade - at your feet
sthitam chet - firmly established
asau - that is
yogaH - yoga (or supreme union)
sa cha - he alone
parama yogi - is a supreme yogi
sa cha - he alone
sukhii - is the true enjoyer
The key is one has to train one's mind to flow towards God no matter
where he is. That alone will bring true joy. We all carry a portable
paradise within us. sahasranAma calls ambaaL as daharAkAsha ruupiNii.
One has to turn within and contemplate on the Lord. One can sit inside
a great temple like in chidambaram or madurai, and still get agitated
by the beautiful women who have come there to worship the Lord. Being
in India does not alone do any great help. One can contemplate on God
while he is in a remote corner of Alaska or inside a cubicle in a
office in downtown Manhattan. Things like aupAsana or samidhAdaana may
be easier to perform in India, but tell me who does these things
anyway?
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Arjuna vs Nachiketa
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Ravishankar Mayavaram wrote:
> In brief, where you heart is, is more important than where your body
> is. The place of residence of the body is not so important.
> The key is one has to train one's mind to flow towards God no matter
> where he is. That alone will bring true joy. We all carry a portable
> paradise within us. sahasranAma calls ambaaL as daharAkAsha ruupiNii.
> One has to turn within and contemplate on the Lord. One can sit
> inside a great temple like in chidambaram or madurai, and still get
> agitated by the beautiful women who have come there to worship the
> Lord. Being in India does not alone do any great help. One can contemplate
on God
> while he is in a remote corner of Alaska or inside a cubicle in a
> office in downtown Manhattan. Things like aupAsana or samidhAdaana
> may be easier to perform in India, but tell me who does these things
> anyway?
Sri Ravishankar,
I read your response to the question of going abroad. The shloka, the
translation and your advice was illuminating. But this advice can be a cause
of lot of confusion and I would like to take this opportunity to highlight what
I feel could go wrong.
Dharma vs moksha
================
Dharma and moksha are 2 separate purushArthas. In our scriptures we have 2
characters – Arjuna and Nachiketa. The 2 approached their respective teachers
and asked 2 different questions. Arjuna was confused as to what he was
supposed to do in the battlefield, as to what his dharma was? Nachiketa on the
other hand asked Lord Yama that which is beyond dharma and adharma (anyatra
dharmAt, anyatra adharmAt). The 2 questions are different and the answers are
also different. Even though there is tremendous overlap in the teaching,
because of the way both the teachers structured it, the object is different.
(B. Gita’s 2nd chapter is practically is a replica of Kathopanishad). But the
conclusions that both students arrive at are different because of the questions
they asked. That is why in Gita you find Krishna now and then telling Arjuna
“tasmAt yuddhyasva” – therefore (your duty is to) fight. Whereas Lord Yama
never asks Nachiketa to do anything after he asks him to teach that which is
beyond “dharma and adharma”. Even though Gita can be a moksha-sAdhana-bhUtam,
for Arjuna the seeker it was a dharma-shAstra, a dharma-pramANa. That is why
he says at the end "karishyE vachanam tava" (I will DO as you bid).
The teachers gave their respective disciples the answers pertinent to their
question.
Popular Confusion
=================
That which is a teaching for a mumukshu is not the same as the that of one
pursuing dharma. Dharma has to be derived from Sruti, Smriti and purANas (I
seek the forgiveness of whoever might be offended by the inclusion of purANas –
but I consider them a dharma-pramANa). One has to follow the injunctions
specified in them. But a mumukshu is not interested in that (as a response to
what he is searching). His question itself is different. He is seeking the
non-dual Brahman.
Dharma is within the realm of duality. Moksha is advaita for which Vedanta is
a means. One cannot use the teachings for instructing one in jnAna to derive
the rules of dharma. So also the rules of dharma do not apply for moksha.
Though a dharmic life prepares one for moksha the goal is not moksha, otherwise
they would have been clubbed as one purushArtha. There is a trend of people
using the teachings of moksha to derive rules for what is dharma and adharma.
For eg., a brahmaNa son (modern educated) tells his father that he is in love
with a woman who is a shUdra. The father says that it is against the
sampradAya to do so. Now if the son says “Didn’t you say that God is present
equally in all beings, so why can’t I marry a shUdra” – this clearly a
confusion of substituting answers of one question to another ie., giving
Nachiketa’s answer to Arjuna.
Reverse eg., a patriotic Indian telling another who is going abroad – “Since
the purANas say that one should not cross the borders of India, therefore it
implies God can be realized only in India”. This the reverse, where a dhArmic
injunction is extended to answer a mumukshu’s question.
Wrong application
=================
The shloka that you quoted was very good. But I am skeptical of the use you
have put it to. The meaning of the shloka is in response to questions like
"Can God be found anywhere or only in such a place?" or "Should I go to the
Himalayas to find God" or as a retort to a person who says that "God is present
only here or by doing this or that" etc. But to derive what one can do and not
do from that shloka is the kind of confusion that I have explained above. To
say that since God can be found in our hearts wherever we are, we can do/go
whatever/wherever we want is a wrong conclusion. The contents of the shloka
are moving, but only in response to a question by a mumukshu. A person seeking
dharma or trying to find what his dharma is, cannot decide based on that.
2 questions – 2 answers
=======================
Q1: Can I go to America and live there?
A1: If you accept purANas as pramANa, then you cannot desert your motherland
as Sri Rama exemplified in his life.
Q2: Can God be found even in America ?
A2: Yes God can be found in America too.
Q1 is a question of dharma. Q2 is a question of moksha. A2 should not be used
to derive the answer for Q1. That is we cannot say that since God can be found
even in America, we can leave India and settle in America.
Similary A1 cannot be used to derive answer for Q2. That is one cannot say –
since the purANas ask us to serve the motherland, moksha can be attained only
in India. This is also wrong.
A1 for Q1 and A2 for Q2. 2 different questions, 2 different answers.
Conclusion
==========
As long as we are in duality we have to follow dharma. The teachings of
advaita are only for the realm of moksha ie., a teaching, an answer to the
quest our true SELF. But without being "there" to use the teachings to derive
what is dharma and adharma can lead to ruin. If we are discussing dharma, then
we ARE in duality and all the vidhis (do’s) and nishedas (do not’s) apply.
"vyavahAre bhaTTanayaH".
My opinion
==========
We have granthas that teach us what is dharma and adharma. We have to follow
that to identify what is right and wrong. We have the example of Sri Rama who
taught us “jananI janma bhUmischa svargAdapi garIyasi” (mother and motherland
are superior to heaven). This is clearly a dharmic injunction. But he himself
went out for a mission. So long as we are leaving the nation only for a
mission to finish and comeback (ie., in American lingo – entering with a proper
"exit strategy"), it seems from Sri Rama’s life that is acceptable. But having
gone there to be lured by the comforts and settling there is what is wrong.
Lanka was a bigger empire than ayodhyA. The entire daNDakAraNya was under
Ravana. He had a beautiful kingdom and palace. Everything lay at the feet of
Sri Rama at the end of the war. But he spurned them for his only intention of
going there was Sita Devi. Having got her back he returned without any delay.
“rAmo vighrahavan dharmaH” Sri Rama was the embodiment of dharma. We can learn
from his life. True God can be realized even in America, but that cannot be
used as a justification for giving up India.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
PS:
1. I live in US and I think about it everyday. I feel guilty. But I am not
deluding myself in thinking that I am doing the right thing.
2. Sri Ravi, if I have at any point of time above sounded disrespectful of
you, I apologize. I might have been forceful, but that is more the force of
conviction and emphasis rather than disrespect. My advance apologies.
3. Above all, if I have misunderstood your posting, I owe an apology to all.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:25:07 -0400
Subject: Re: The Bystander problem
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at H...> wrote:
>It may be mischievous to say this, but can we translate the word bystander
>as sAkSImAtra? I know it is wrong but somehow people have been brainwashed
>to think that peace and inaction are the highest reality and people have to
>somehow neutralize their thoughts to achieve it.
I would definitely object to using the word sAkshImAtra here. As the
AcAryas have consistently done, we must not mistake the inaction due
to lethargy and inertia for the peace and silence of naishkarmya. The
bystander problem is merely one of inertia and laziness, arising out
of the assumption that somebody else will do the required work. This
is tAmasic in origin, while true naishkarmya is beyond the guNas. The
one should not be confused for the other.
There is one reference in gItAbhAshya (don't remember the exact verse
number), where Sankaracarya compares the sAkshImAtra with the brahmA
priest in a yajna. This is totally apt. The brahmA priest keeps silent
and merely observes the act, so long as the yajna is progressing well.
However, he breaks his silence and does specific actions when he sees
that the yajna is not progressing well. He does not remain silent when
things go wrong, but neither does he take on the roles of the other
priests. He advises corrective action. And if we think about it, that
is what contemporary Advaita Acaryas have been doing with respect to
Vedic studies. It is up to those who call themselves followers, to
listen to the advice and act accordingly.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: Arjuna vs Nachiketa
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:54:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
NamaskAram.
I would like to respond to sections of your mail I disagree with - ...
----- Original Message -----
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <svsubrahmanian at Y...>
> Dharma vs moksha
> ================
> Dharma and moksha are 2 separate purushArthas.
[ ---]
> Popular Confusion
> =================
> That which is a teaching for a mumukshu is not the same as the that of one
> pursuing dharma.
Are they different? How so? We ask for, in almost all our prayers, the four
fold purushArthas of dharma, artha, kama and moksha. If they were not part
of the same group, although different, they would not be clubbed together
now, would they?
> Dharma has to be derived from Sruti, Smriti and purANas (I
> seek the forgiveness of whoever might be offended by the inclusion of
purANas -
> but I consider them a dharma-pramANa).
You also have to include sishtAchAra, the dharma followed by the family
elders.
> One has to follow the injunctions
> specified in them. But a mumukshu is not interested in that (as a
response to
> what he is searching). His question itself is different. He is seeking
the
> non-dual Brahman.
However, just because the goal is different, it does not mean that the path
is different. THe following and observance of dharma is exactly for the
purpose of making one fit for moksha, in other words, make one a mumukshu. A
mumukshu who does not have to follow dharma is a contradiction in terms ...
let me explain a little more - the mumukshu first starts by asking - what is
atma, and what is anatma. Then he goes to ask - how can I understand it and
realize it? In the answer that is given, the process of understanding it is
not given in positive terms, but only in negative terms. Also, the answer is
given as, when you purify yourself through the strict observance of dharma,
then IT will shine of its own accord.
> Dharma is within the realm of duality. Moksha is advaita for which
Vedanta is
> a means. One cannot use the teachings for instructing one in jnAna to
derive
> the rules of dharma. So also the rules of dharma do not apply for moksha.
There are rules of dharma for a householder just as much there are rules of
dharma for a sanyasi. The two do not always mix; but it would be
inapproriate to say that they are divorced from each other. IF one uses the
teachings for a sanyasi - then one is only restricting one self more. Thats
all.
> Though a dharmic life prepares one for moksha the goal is not moksha,
otherwise
> they would have been clubbed as one purushArtha. There is a trend of
people
> using the teachings of moksha to derive rules for what is dharma and
adharma.
But they are grouped together under the same category, are they not? That of
being a purushArtha, meaning that which is to be obtained? And is it not
also true that without dharma, artha and kama and moksha as well, are not to
be found?
In general, my understanding is that the rules for a sanyasi is far more
rigid than that for a householder. So in essence, it would mean that one is
restricting oneself much more by "deriving" the rules of house holder dharma
from the teachings for a mumukshu, than would actually be permitted. For
example, it has been said that there are certain lies that a house holder is
pardoned for speaking when it is said for the protection of his family. This
is not permissible for a sanyasi, even at the cost of his life.
> For eg., a brahmaNa son (modern educated) tells his father that he is in
love
> with a woman who is a shUdra. The father says that it is against the
> sampradAya to do so. Now if the son says "Didn't you say that God is
present
> equally in all beings, so why can't I marry a shUdra" - this clearly a
> confusion of substituting answers of one question to another ie., giving
> Nachiketa's answer to Arjuna.
But that is not the argument here is it? Is it not one of livelihood in a
householder sense? The confusion is not in the teaching for a mumukshu
versus teaching for a house holder, but the confusion between explanations
of vyavahArika and pAramArtika. God is present is every thing and every
thing is in Him and He IS every thing is just an explanation of the
pAramartika.
> Reverse eg., a patriotic Indian telling another who is going abroad -
"Since
> the purANas say that one should not cross the borders of India, therefore
it
> implies God can be realized only in India". This the reverse, where a
dhArmic
> injunction is extended to answer a mumukshu's question.
Given that certain prAyaschitas have been prescribed for the crossing of
the ocean, how is it a "reverse" - I fail to see the point here. Could you
elaborate please?
> 2 questions - 2 answers
> =======================
> Q1: Can I go to America and live there?
> A1: If you accept purANas as pramANa, then you cannot desert your
motherland
> as Sri Rama exemplified in his life.
Did Raamaa not cross the ocean when he went to Lanka to defeat Ravana? He
did not "desert" His dharma, He just lived upto one He felt was more
important, namely, that of saving His wife from the cluthces of a wicked
person who had kidnapped Her. The validity of the pramANa is not violated by
crossing the ocean because the pramANa itself provides the prAyaschittam for
it - right?
> Q2: Can God be found even in America ?
> A2: Yes God can be found in America too.
I guess the point of the shloka is not whether God can be found in America
or India - it is whether being in India is going to help any more in the
pursuit of the inner bliss as compared to being in the US or other places
where one would have to go ONLY by crossing the oceans.
> Q1 is a question of dharma. Q2 is a question of moksha. A2 should not be
used
> to derive the answer for Q1. That is we cannot say that since God can be
found
> even in America, we can leave India and settle in America.
> Similary A1 cannot be used to derive answer for Q2. That is one cannot
say -
> since the purANas ask us to serve the motherland, moksha can be attained
only
> in India. This is also wrong.
But the two questions are not so separated after all! If living in a place
is divorced from the part of searching within for Him, then again, it is a
contradiction in terms right?
> A1 for Q1 and A2 for Q2. 2 different questions, 2 different answers.
If may revert back to the original subject of your email, Arjuna vs
Nachiketa, the Bhagavad Gita is itself separated into several chapters
depending on the teaching contained therein. Also, Arjuna's original
question was only with respect to what his duty at that time and place was.
But if what you are saying is true, that is, the teachings for dharma is
different from the teachings for moksha, why then did Shri Krishna tell that
to Arjuna as well?
> Conclusion
> ==========
> As long as we are in duality we have to follow dharma. The teachings of
> advaita are only for the realm of moksha ie., a teaching, an answer to the
> quest our true SELF.
This seems to imply that the teachings of advaita are not dharma. The
teachings do hold dharma as its basis.
> But without being "there" to use the teachings to derive
> what is dharma and adharma can lead to ruin. If we are discussing dharma,
then
> we ARE in duality and all the vidhis (do's) and nishedas (do not's) apply.
> "vyavahAre bhaTTanayaH".
>
> My opinion
> ==========
> We have granthas that teach us what is dharma and adharma. We have to
follow
> that to identify what is right and wrong.
If the teachings were in black and white with nothing in between, we would
not be in this quandry would we?
> We have the example of Sri Rama who
> taught us "jananI janma bhUmischa svargAdapi garIyasi" (mother and
motherland
> are superior to heaven). This is clearly a dharmic injunction.
Pardon the satire here, but how would you define "motherland"? I was born
into a family whose mother toungue is Tamil - does it mean that any place
not speaking Tamil is not my motherland? I was born in the south of the
vindhyas, so does it make that my motherland? I could go on and on ...
And I fail to see how
one man's life and one statement like "home sweet
home" is made an "injunction"? Just as with all of Sruti, the Ramayana is
also full of "apparent" contradictions. Like when Raama kills Vaali from
hiding, when Vaali had not actually caused Raama any direct harm. Could it
not be argued that the partnership between Sugriva and Raama was one of
convenience? So, does it make "any partnership of convenience" a dharmic
"injunction"?
> But he himself went out for a mission.
[ --- ]
> "rAmo vighrahavan dharmaH" Sri Rama was the embodiment of dharma. We can
learn
> from his life. True God can be realized even in America, but that cannot
be
> used as a justification for giving up India.
Why would it be giving up?
> 1. I live in US and I think about it everyday. I feel guilty. But I am
not
> deluding myself in thinking that I am doing the right thing.
You would give it up and have to feel guilty only if you fail to follow your
svadharma. If you felt that you could have done your samidhAdhanam or
aupAsanam if you were in India, whereas you are not able to do it only
because you are in the US, then you are right, and you have to feel guilty -
not otherwise.
I am not trying to belittle the significance of your opinion, I am only
voicing a counter point. Having been in the midst of a situation in
September of last year, where a nitya agni hotri was literally threatened
for his life so that a local hooligan can start living in that house and
sell it for profit after stealing it, I wonder which dharma is more
important - the dharma that says I have to do my nitya karma daily (period),
or live in constant fear of persecution in my "motherland" and perform the
same nitya karmas with less mental satisfaction and perhaps less attention
to detail than if I were in this country, where I can observe my nitya
karmas without that level of fear and distrust of even my own neighbours.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 22:57:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - II
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
May 30, 2001 - Post made by Vidyasankar Sundaresan, from Pasadena, USA,
to the Advaita-L mailing list. Archives hosted at Advaita Vedanta
Anusandhana Kendra (www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html)
.________________________.
| Part II(b) of a series |
========================================================================
Part I covered the Sankaravijaya of Madhava and the references to a
Pracina Sankaravijaya of Anandagiri. We saw that Anandagiri, the author
of sub-commentaries on Sankara's works must have lived prior to the
14th century.
The Sankaravijaya attributed to one Anantanandagiri was covered in Part
II(a), where it was pointed out that this author should not be confused
with Anandagiri. We saw that Anantanandagiri claims to be either a direct
disciple of Sankara or a disciple's disciple, while Anandagiri gives his
guru's name consistently as Suddhananda. We also saw that Anantanandagiri
often includes his own name among the people who accompanied Sankara on
his various travels.
This creates an impression that Anantanandagiri's text gives an eye-
witness account of Sankara's life, or at least that he lived during an
early period of time. This misled H. H. Wilson [1], who also failed to
distinguish between Anandagiri and this author. Wilson did not hesitate
to say that the author "must be an unblushing liar, or the book is not
his own." However, he assumed that it must be of a sufficiently early
date, and therefore referred to it in his study of Hindu history.
Writing in 1880, A. C. Burnell [2] says about this text,
"This seems to be a quite modern work written in the interests of
the schismatic mathas on the Coromandel Coast, which have renounced
obedience to the Sringeri matha, where Sankaracarya's legitimate
successor resides. This book has been indifferently printed in the
B.I. and at Madras."
This comment is explicit enough, and has been criticized by followers
of the Kanchi Matha in recent times, but that will be discussed in
Part II(c). For the present, I will merely discuss other problems with
this text.
It is clear that Anantanandagiri must have lived later than the 14th
century. If his text is the output of a single person who was called
Anantanandagiri, then that Anantanandagiri was merely a liar, as noted
earlier by Wilson. It is indeed surprising that his text is cited as
an authority by numerous people who should know better. Chapter 11 of
Anantanandagiri's text has a long section beginning with the verse,
pAriplavArtham AkhyAnaM kiM vA vidyAstutiH stuteH |
jyAyo 'nushThAnaSeshatvaM tena pAriplavArthatAH ||
and ending with the line, tad upAsanAyAH phalam apy uktam eva bhAshye.
This entire section is given as part of Sankara's own refutation of a
leader of a minor sect. It is a verbatim quotation from a text called
adhikaraNa ratnamAla (also called vaiyAsika ratnamAlA), written by the
famous Bharati Tirtha of the 14th century. Chapter 47 of the text goes
a step further, and quotes this text even with its name, saying, ata
Aha adhikaraNaratnamAlAyAm ... Another long quotation from this text
follows, and is again presented as if they were Sankara's own words.
These two instances clearly show that
1. Anantanandagiri could not have been either a direct disciple or a
disciple's disciple. Between Sankara and Bharati Tirtha, there are
at least six centuries. Anantanandagiri could have lived only in
the 14th century, at the earliest.
2. Anantanandagiri claims to write a Sankaravijaya, to glorify Sankara,
but seems quite ignorant of the textual tradition of Advaita. It is
simply ridiculous to quote a text written by Bharati Tirtha and then
present it as Sankara's own composition.
Moreover, there are numerous instances in which Anantanandagiri gives a
very unflattering picture of Sankaracarya. In this aspect, this text is
rather similar to a few texts produced by the Madhva tradition.
For example, debates are won not by fair arguments, but by resorting to
physical violence. Even in the story where Vyasa debates with Sankara,
Anantanandagiri tells us that Sankara slapped Vyasa on the cheeks, and
ordered Padmapada to hit the old man further, and to drag him away by
his feet. What tactics are these, to win debates? Does Anantanandagiri
intend to glorify Sankara or to ridicule him? Such stories would seem
more in tune with the Dvaita school's Manimanjari than with a text that
is supposed to give a positive account of Sankaracarya.
It is for these reasons that Sringeri Matha rejects this Sankaravijaya
text. When the author of its Guruvamsakavya and its commentary refer to
Anandagiri as a Pracina author, they absolutely do not refer to
Anantanandagiri's unreliable text. It is also probably for these same
reasons that N. Venkataraman, a follower of the Kanchi Matha, also
rejected this text, and claimed that it was a "valueless forgery." [3]
However, almost all other followers of the Kanchi Matha refer to this
text. In 1971, N. Veezhinathan of Madras produced a "critical" edition
of this text, with a foreword by T. M. P. Mahadevan [4]. The level of
trust and reliance placed on this text by Kanchi Matha followers has
been so significant that David Lorenzen [5] says that Anantanandagiri's
text represents an "independent tradition of the Kanchi Matha".
I am still at a loss to see why the Kanchi Matha pundits and its lay
followers quote Anantanandagiri's text so frequently. Even the website
(http://kamakoti.org/peeth/aboutpeetham.html) quotes the text, and gives
Anantanandagiri's date as 1119-1199 AD. I don't know how this date was
arrived at, and I don't see how a 12th century author could have quoted
from a text written in the 14th century. Still, I am saddened to see that
a text that describes the Sankara-Vyasa debate in such a crass and low
manner is cited as an authority by a contemporary institution that
derives authority from Sankara. I hope Kanchi Matha followers like
Mr. Sivabgs, whose postings have sparked this series, realize that my
statements are based on careful reading of the texts and that I am not
being merely prejudiced about things.
The 1971 edition by Veezhinathan and Mahadevan will be discussed in
Part II(c), which will also cover the confusion about Sankara's birth-
place (Kaladi or Chidambaram?). Other things like the issue of four
Mahavakyas, the textual references to establishment of Mathas etc will
be covered in Part III. With that, I hope I will never again have to
discuss this issue.
___________________________________________________________________________
Notes -
-----
1. H. H. Wilson. A sketch of the religious sects of the Hindus. 1977.
New Delhi: Cosmo Publications; [reprint of a text originally published
in the year 1861].
2. A. C. Burnell. A classified index to the Sanskrit mss. in the palace
at Tanjore. 1880. London: Truebner and Co.
3. N. Venkataraman. Sankaracarya, the great, and his successors at Kanchi.
1923. Madras: Ganesh & Co.
4. N. Veezhinathan. ed. Anantanandagiripranitam Srisankaravijayam. 1971.
Madras: University of Madras; [with a foreword by T. M. P. Mahadevan].
5. David N. Lorenzen. Sankara. In, The Encyclopedia of Religion, XIII:
64-65. 1987. New York: Macmillan.
========================================================================
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 22:44:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Apastamba's warning
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Fri, 25 May 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> Apastamba in one place remarks that there are instances in the Veda where
> acts of adharma and violence are done by the sages of yore. He says that
> such acts by the sages did not adversely affect them (the sages who
> committed them) since they had great "powers". But he warns that if people
> in later ages were to try to copy these acts by justifying that they are
> only doing what was done by the sages of yore, they would perish.
>
> So here conscience and the advice of wise men of the age, play a vital part
> in the interpretation of the dharma for the age.
It is a surprise to many but the Rshis are not necessarily to be
considered moral role models. They are mantradrashtas and that's it as
far as the Mimamsakas are concerned. After they saw the mantras, the
Rshis began wondering what they meant. This process was continued for
generations by their students and the end result of that debate and
analysis (mimamsa) is Dharma. For instance in the section of the
Mimamsasutras we discussed earlier, Aitishayana is considered honorable to
be mentioned by name. But ultimately his views are rejected.
Unlike other sampradayas, ours is not named after a God or person. It is
called Smarta because it is that whole process of Dharma we consider an
authority.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 20:36:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Arjuna vs Nachiketa
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
Are they different? How so? We ask for, in almost all our prayers, the four
fold purushArthas of dharma, artha, kama and moksha. If they were not part of
the same group, although different, they would not be clubbed together now,
would they?
SVS:
There is a further grouping among them. The first 3 are called preyas that
lead to pravR^tI and moksha is Sreyas that leads to nivR^tI. Clearly dharma is
categorized under the group alongwith artha and kama that will continue our
bondage to samsAra.
Regarding asking for all 4 purushArthas: a mumukshu asks only for one moksha.
It is the others who ask for the other 3. Infact if one looks deeply even in
the other arthas a person seeks only moksha. I _guess_, it is this underlying
fact though running as an undercurrent is never brought to the fore for active
consideration, that our ancestors have added it just to remind us about it.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
You also have to include sishtAchAra, the dharma followed by the family elders.
SVS:
Yes, it was an omission.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
However, just because the goal is different, it does not mean that the path is
different. THe following and observance of dharma is exactly for the purpose of
making one fit for moksha, in other words, make one a mumukshu. A mumukshu who
does not have to follow dharma is a contradiction in terms ... let me explain a
little more - the mumukshu first starts by asking - what is atma, and what is
anatma. Then he goes to ask - how can I understand it and realize it? In the
answer that is given, the process of understanding it is not given in positive
terms, but only in negative terms. Also, the answer is given as, when you
purify yourself through the strict observance of dharma, then IT will shine of
its own accord.
SVS:
I think my wording might have caused confusion. When I say a teaching for a
mumukshu, I mean the kind of instruction that Yama was giving Nachiketa. He is
telling Nachiketa about the Self using various means, basically instructions of
jnAna.
I am not comparing the dharma of a mumukshu and the dharma of a householder. I
am only comparing instructions of jnAna and injunctions of dharma. They cannot
be confused. That is my point.
Both positive and negative are used. What is "satyam jnAnam anantam brahma"
(TaittirIya Up.) postive or negative?
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
There are rules of dharma for a householder just as much there are rules of
dharma for a sanyasi. The two do not always mix; but it would be inapproriate
to say that they are divorced from each other. IF one uses the teachings for a
sanyasi - then one is only restricting one self more. Thats all.
SVS:
The answer to the previous question about what I am comparing should address
this, I think.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
But they are grouped together under the same category, are they not? That of
being a purushArtha, meaning that which is to be obtained? And is it not also
true that without dharma, artha and kama and moksha as well, are not to be
found?
SVS:
Please see my response to your first one above, regarding grouping. Yes dharma
leads to chitta -shuddi. One should pursue dharma for chitta-shuddhi. But
dharma stops there. That way all experiences eventually point us to moksha
only. If you really enquire why are we pursuing artha, we will realize that it
is to seek security - security from what - ... this kind of vichara will lead
us towards moksha.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
In general, my understanding is that the rules for a sanyasi is far more rigid
than that for a householder. So in essence, it would mean that one is
restricting oneself much more by "deriving" the rules of house holder dharma
from the teachings for a mumukshu, than would actually be permitted. For
example, it has been said that there are certain lies that a house holder is
pardoned for speaking when it is said for the protection of his family. This is
not permissible for a sanyasi, even at the cost of his life.
SVS:
Again, sorry for the confused wording. The comparison is between the
instruction for jnAna and the injunctions for dharma.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
But that is not the argument here is it? Is it not one of livelihood in a
householder sense? The confusion is not in the teaching for a mumukshu versus
teaching for a house holder, but the confusion between explanations of
vyavahArika and pAramArtika. God is present is every thing and every thing is
in Him and He IS every thing is just an explanation of the pAramartika.
SVS:
"kshetrajnam chApi mAm viddhi sarva kshetreshu bhArata" is clearly an
instruction of jnAna. It crosses the boundaries of duality. This cannot be
used to derive a dharmic rule. If this were to be taken literally in the world
of duality then there should no varNa system etc. Which is what I was saying
the brAhmaNa's son was mistakenly using to determine what he will do in the
dual world.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
>(SVS) Reverse eg., a patriotic Indian telling another who is going abroad -
"Since > the purANas >say that one should not cross the borders of India,
therefore it > implies God can be realized only in India". This the reverse,
where a dhArmic > injunction is extended to answer a mumukshu's question.
Given that certain prAyaschitas have been prescribed for the crossing of the
ocean, how is it a "reverse" - I fail to see the point here. Could you
elaborate please?
SVS:
My example does not clarify the point. I agree. I wanted to tell how if a
person who is following a dharmic injunction, derives an instruction on jnAna
from it, would be totally misled - that's all. The example is probably not
driving the point.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
Did Raamaa not cross the ocean when he went to Lanka to defeat Ravana? He did
not "desert" His dharma, He just lived upto one He felt was more important,
namely, that of saving His wife from the cluthces of a wicked person who had
kidnapped Her. The validity of the pramANa is not violated by crossing the
ocean because the pramANa itself provides the prAyaschittam for it - right?
SVS:
I have alluded to this, in the section "My Opinion", where I said I interpret
the pramANa as saying that we can go out for a mission, provided we don't
settle there. Once the mission was accomplished he came back, right?
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
I guess the point of the shloka is not whether God can be found in America or
India - it is whether being in India is going to help any more in the pursuit
of the inner bliss as compared to being in the US or other places where one
would have to go ONLY by crossing the oceans.
SVS:
The example was not a direct take on the shloka, but only to amplify the
confusion between the two I have stressed above.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
But the two questions are not so separated after all! If living in a place is
divorced from the part of searching within for Him, then again, it is a
contradiction in terms right?
SVS:
I intentionally drove a wedge between the 2 questions to amplify the nature of
the two questions and that one should not misuse the information in one for the
justification of a convenient answer for the other.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
If may revert back to the original subject of your email, Arjuna vs Nachiketa,
the Bhagavad Gita is itself separated into several chapters depending on the
teaching contained therein. Also, Arjuna's original question was only with
respect to what his duty at that time and place was. But if what you are saying
is true, that is, the teachings for dharma is different from the teachings for
moksha, why then did Shri Krishna tell that to Arjuna as well?
SVS:
Yes, very good. This was one question that I had thought about myself too.
Arjuna's vision of what was real and unreal was the cause of hesitation to
fight. So he had to be instructed about it. Once the vision was rectified, he
had to be also told that it was dharma to fight. You might say that the former
is an insturction in jnAna and it influenced his ability to follow dharma. But
that "he is a kshatrIya and hence had to fight" is not derived from the
teachings of jnAna. That was his say varNa-dharma. After knowing that about
the true nature of self, there is a separate set of injunctions that Sri
Krishna for what his dharma is, about daivi qualities, asuric qualities, about
guNas everything. All the latter fall under the category of dharma right?
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
This
seems to imply that the teachings of advaita are not dharma. The teachings
do hold dharma as its basis.
SVS:
An instruction for jnAna does not have any "dharma" component in it. "tat tvam
asi", "aham brahmAsmi", "satyam jnAnam anantam brahma" etc does not teach
anything about what our nityakarmas are, how we should behave with our parents
etc. Vichara into what is "sat", "asat" etc. does not have any discussion of
dharma and adharma. "na puNyam, na pApam" etc of Sri Sankara all fall under
that category.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
If the teachings were in black and white with nothing in between, we would not
be in this quandry would we?
SVS:
Confusion is due to misunderstanding, right?
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
Pardon the satire here, but how would you define "motherland"? I was born into
a family whose mother toungue is Tamil - does it mean that any place not
speaking Tamil is not my motherland? I was born in the south of the vindhyas,
so does it make that my motherland? I could go on and
SVS:
Whatever at the time one lives is generally accepted by wise men as motherland
is one's motherland.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
on ... And I fail to see how one man's life and one statement like "home sweet
home" is made an "injunction"?
SVS:
That is why I said in my posting that I treat purANas as a dharma-pramANam. In
rAmAyaNa, it is one man's life that is of most importance to us. It can be
used to decide what needs to be done at a particular time.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
Just as with all of Sruti, the Ramayana is also full of "apparent"
contradictions. Like when Raama kills Vaali from hiding, when Vaali had not
actually caused Raama any direct harm. Could it not be argued that the
partnership between Sugriva and Raama was one of convenience? So, does it make
"any partnership of convenience" a dharmic "injunction"?
SVS:
Yes, this question is raised in all meetings. In my case, I can tell you that
I equate Sri Rama with Ishvara. So I have accepted that what he did was right.
It is very difficult to understand the motives of avatars. So you will surely
ask, as to how we can learn keeping his life as a pramANam? Where he clearly
specifies his intentions, or has been highlighted by wise men on his
intentions, we can learn from it.
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
You would give it up and have to feel guilty only if you fail to follow your
svadharma. If you felt that you could have done your samidhAdhanam or aupAsanam
if you were in India, whereas you are not able to do it only because you are in
the US, then you are right, and you have to feel guilty - not otherwise.
SVS:
There is more to svadharma than aupAsanam and samidhAdanam. What about one's
Guru's instructions? They are also part of one's dharma to follow right?
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
I am not trying to belittle the significance of your opinion, I am only voicing
a counter point. Having been in the midst of a situation in September of last
year, where a nitya agni hotri was literally threatened for his life so that a
local hooligan can start living in that house and sell it for profit after
stealing it, I wonder which dharma is more important - the dharma that says I
have to do my nitya karma daily (period), or live in constant fear of
persecution in my "motherland" and perform the same nitya karmas with less
mental satisfaction and perhaps less attention to detail than if I were in this
country, where I can observe my nitya karmas without that level of fear and
distrust of even my own neighbours.
SVS:
Life of a dhArmic person has never been a smooth sail. Look at the life
Harischandra.
Anyway coming the main portion of your above para. So there is a confusion in
the mind as to what is your dharma right? Now tell me will an instruction of
jnAna help you decide or will a dhArmic text that discusses do's and dont's
help?
I think I have attempted to answer the points you have raised. Please let me
know if inspite of clarifications you still find flaws in the argument. I will
be more than happy learn/share.
Also, the poem that Sri Ravi quoted was a beautiful poem. But I am just weary
of it being misused. I understood it as thus:
By removing all limitations on time and space it gives an idea of how to find
one's self. If true knowledge is independent of time, space and all material
elements, then where is it, what is it. It also states that such a person is
the true enjoyer. So there is an indication of both permanent and highest
happiness. How is it possible if truth is attached to material elements - so it
cannot be ....
My mind started thinking in such ways. To me it was a pointer to the highest
wisdom itself.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 00:08:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - II
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
I <vsundaresan at H...> wrote earlier:
> Chapter 11 of
>Anantanandagiri's text has a long section beginning with the verse,
>
>pAriplavArtham AkhyAnaM kiM vA vidyAstutiH stuteH |
>jyAyo 'nushThAnaSeshatvaM tena pAriplavArthatAH ||
>
The above verse is from adhikaraNa ratnamAlA, but is found in
chapter 47 of Anantanandagiri's text, not in chapter 11. The
adhikaraNa ratnamAlA verse quoted in chapter 11 is as follows,
avicAryaM vicAryaM vA brahmAdhyAsAnirUpaNAt |
asandehAphalatvAbhyAM na vicAram tad arhati ||
Chapter 47 says, ata Aha adhikaraNaratnamAlAyAM - pAriplavArthaM ...
Sorry for the error in quotation,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Apparent Contradictions
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Vaidya Sundaram:
Just as with all of Sruti, the Ramayana is also full of "apparent"
contradictions.
SVS:
This is not related to the main theme of the thread from where I took it, but I
thought I will share a line or two about the above remark you made. In Sruti,
normally teachers use the word paradox as opposed contradiction. Paradoxes are
not to be treated as hurdles in one's understanding. But instead they
represent transition points where the seeker has to undo one way of thinking
and replace it with a better/more right way of thinking. The Truth behind the
Sruti is in effective use/understanding of these paradoxes.
I had mentioned it before. Just to keep it short, known words, words used in
common parlance have to be used to mean something unknown like "tat", "sat"
etc. So when the unknown is expressed through known means all kinds of hints
should be employed to help the seeker transcend from one kind of thinking to
another that is closer to Truth. And thus the seeker is led closer and closer
to Truth slowly.
Paradoxes are one such means.
I say what I learnt. Obviously I have a long way to go.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:38:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- BGS <sivabgs at Y...> wrote:
> Some scholars are of the view that the mahAvAkyAs
> pertaining
> to upadEsa to ascetics (at the time of their
> initiation into
> the ascetic order) as found in the upanishads, are
> only four.
I have been wondering whether to reply to any of BGS's
"monologue mails". There are so many factual errors in
his mails and delivered in a strident and confident
tone, that makes me reluctant. This will probably be
my first and last, and hopefully will make list
members consult original sources and take BGS's mails
with a grain of salt.
For example:
> In the sukarahasyOpanishad, it is narrated that Lord
> Siva
> taught sukA the pranava mantrA and then * ALL *
> mahAvAkyAs.
The incident Mr BGS quote is not at all present in the
upanishhad. Where did you get this info Mr BGS?
A perusal of the upanishhad shows something else.
shuka asks shiva for "tatvamasyAdi-vAkyAnAm". shiva
says "chaturNAmapi vedAnAM yathopanishhadaH shiraH"
while describing the mahAvAkya-s, implying *four*
mahAvAkya-s.
Later, he's quite *explicit* about *four* mahAvAkya-s
in page 434 Adyar Library edition, sAmAnya vedAnta
upanishhad-s with the commentary of upanishhad brahma
yogin:
(shrIsadAshiva uvAcha)
atha mahAvAkyAni *chatvAri* | yathA praGYAnaM brahma |
ahaM brahmAsmi | tattvamasi | ayamAtmA brahma |
The commentary says:
atha chaturveda-gata-mahAvAkya-chatushhTayasya when
commenting on the dhyAna sholkas. It is quite clear to
anyone actually reading the upanishhad that it talks
about only *four* mahAvAkya-s, one associated with
each veda. It is actually quite explicit - note
chatvAri.
> The "mathAmnAyA" passes an injunction that only
> persons
> belonging to atharva vEdA can become the heads of
> the pIthA
> for the north, at badrinAth. But today in the whole
> India,
> the number of those who have studied atharva vEdA
> will not
> be more than a dozen or two! Where to go searching
> for a
> brahmacari belonging to the atharva vEdA for the
> headship
> of the sankarite institution in the North?
Mr BGS has a nice mocking tone here and in all his
posts. But the mathAmnAya says no such thing. The
affiliation of each maTha to a veda is symbolic only.
Contrary to wishful thinking, four mahAvAkya-s has the
explicit support of shruti. The same is also to be
found in the pa.nchIkaraNa.
BTW, Mr BGS, I couldn't find your introduction. I
searched for your's till mid 1999 and was unable to
find it. I asked for it because we have had problems
in the past with people posting from multiple
hotmail/yahoo accounts. Can you point me to your
intro?
Rama
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 16:40:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Thu, 31 May 2001, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
> BTW, Mr BGS, I couldn't find your introduction. I
> searched for your's till mid 1999 and was unable to
> find it. I asked for it because we have had problems
> in the past with people posting from multiple
> hotmail/yahoo accounts. Can you point me to your
> intro?
>
That may be my fault. When I signed him up I may have forgotten to post
the intro and now unfortunately I don't have it.
But I don't see what it has to do with the current discussion which seems
to be proceeding quite nicely on facts alone.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: The Bystander problem
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 20:56:03 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Thank you Sri Sundaresan, the example by Shankaracharya, of Brahma priest
being sAkSImAtra, is unbeatable.
It may not be proper for me to make arguments against Buddhism, without
permission of moderators, especially on a board where Buddhists can not
reply back. My intention was only to caution advaitists that there are some
possible Buddhistic influences which need to be identified and gotten rid
off from sAdhana. I hope this is fine.
This approach has its parallel! On a Buddhist board I asked a question why
Buddhists use a lot of sanskrit words, whether most neo-Buddists of Buddha's
time were Brahmins who converted. The brilliant reply I got was: the
arguments were containing vedic/Hindu words because they were trying to 'get
out of' vedic fold! So if a Christian is converting to Buddhism will it
contain arguments containing Christianity, but devoid of vedic terminology?
I guess so.
I am not fully against the idea of neutralizing thoughts, but the word
"neutralize" may be a misnomer. We may find a better word later, probably
'balancing' or 'dharma' whatever. A lot of this balancing happens on its
own, but we can improve the process with knowledge, yoga practice etc. I
suspect this may fall under adhvaryu's domain. We may discuss later about
this.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 21:29:08 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
While it is true that merely repeating the mahAvAkyAs is not the way to
obtain brahmajnAnam, there should be no reason why the mahAvAkyas don't work
either.
One important thing to be noted is the context in which they are prescribed.
Let us take the easy one first: tattvam asi. This teaching can only be given
first of all, by a person who knows Brahman. Otherwise it is null and void.
What if someone who reads it from a book? For this the answer is, the Rsi is
the guru, and the entire story in which it occurs (svetaketu & AruNi) must
be read from beginning to end. The story begins with the question: What is
that teaching, by which the unheardof becomes heard, unseen becomes seen and
unknown becomes known? Also one has to study the conclusion which answers
these original questions. Just picking a statement from the middle of the
story may not help.
prjnAnam brahma: This is often explained as prkAshaneti jnAnam, prAyeti
ajnAnam. I agree with the first part, but the second part can create a lot
of confusion. This is how: As such everything can be termed as ignorance,
and that makes ignorance itself trivial. One can always argue that viSNu,
agni, indra etc are themselves born of ignorance because they are not
perceiving Brahman. But the problem with this argument is that it can only
be made by a person who has transcended those deities. Not by us. Similarly
we have no right to say prAyeti ajnAnam when we are ruled by prajna every
fraction of second in our life. But one can always say prAyeti ajnAnam after
saying prakAshaneti jnAnam because with the first sentence you already got
the jnAnam with with you can kick the ladder of prajna! I would rather
ignore the second part and make it a "secret teaching". :-)
aham brahmAsmi: This has always been a question among sAdhakAs, and here is
some canned logic regarding this: If Shruti says 'aham brahmAsmi' it must be
true no matter what. If aham means this self-concept or what we call ego
which has sense of body and mind and outside world and which thinks I am son
of so and so, even then it must be same as that Brahman. How?
Br. U. 2.2.4 (defines atri as tongue and also masala for the Atreyi
question):
"These two (the two ears) are the Rishis Gautama and Bharadvaga; the right
Gautama, the left Bharadvaga. These two (the eyes) are the Rishis
Vvisvamitra and Gamadagni; the right Visvamitra, the left Gamadagni. These
two (the nostrils) are the Rishis Vasishtha and Kasyapa; the right
Vasishtha, the left Kasyapa. The tongue is Atri, for with the tongue food is
eaten, and Atri is meant for Atti, eating. He who knows this, becomes an
eater of everything, and everything becomes his food."
Also Ai. Br. says something like.. "aindra vAyava cup is taken
front-to-front therefore eyes are in the front;... it is taken around
therefore ears are on the sides."
Therefore the parts of the body and sense organs are actually Rsi's, and
these are themselves formed by interactions of vedic gods such as indra and
vAyu, and the vedic gods themselves being different views of that letter om,
are made of pure knowledge; hence 'aham brahmAsmi' is true as always. The
only thing pending is to understand the details of Br.U and Ai. Br verses.
In the absence of this logic, if the instruction is given in an
airconditioned resort at $500 a day there is no way it will be understood.
Those who listen to temple lectures are better off because they atleast
listen to purANas which also have stories of jamadagni etc which might
explain same logic in a way common people understand (this area needs to be
explored). As the teaching aham brahmAsmi is generally given after one goes
through study of vedas (including aindravAyava etc) it may work perfectly
fine.
I do not know about 'ayamAtma brahma'. Kindly tell me where it occurs and
what it means.
Kindly correct any errors.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 22:10:48 -0400
Subject: Question on atharvaveda, PaippalAda saMhitA
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Of the two (barely) surviving shAkhas of the atharvaveda, shaunakIya
and paippalAda, the former shAkhA has accents (svaras) like the
R^ig Veda, although I am aware some parts such as the GaNapaty-atharva-
shIrsha are chanted in accents similar to the Krishna Yajur Veda.
The paippalAda is claimed by modern scholars to be the more "original"
of the two (if there is such a term as "original shAkhA"). The late
Durgamohan Bhattacharya discovered several palm-leaf manuscripts of
the paippalAda saMhitA in Oriya script in and around Puri. He could
complete a critical edition of the first four kANDas of the saMhitA.
Fortunately, his son Dipak Bhattacharya continued the critical edition
and completed it. The entire paippalAda saMhitA has recently been
published by the Asiatic Society (1997). In his introduction the
editor says that the numbers of the paippalAda followers in Orissa is
ever dwindling. One note of interest is that he mentions that the
atharvavedins in and around Puri are referred to as "daxiNashreNI"s,
meaning the Southern class.
One thing that one cannot fail to notice is the lack of accents (svaras)
in the paippalAda saMhitA. What does this mean? Does it mean that
the paippalAda saMhitA is traditionally chanted without accents? Or,
was there a tradition with accents that was lost? One can infer that
the present day atharvavedins around Puri must be reciting their veda
without accents, else the editor of the critical edition would have
included them.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Question on atharvaveda, PaippalAda saMhitA
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 02:10:24 -0000
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV>
<P><BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>----Original Message Follows----
<DIV></DIV>From: Anand Hudli <ANANDHUDLI at H...>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Fortunately, his son Dipak Bhattacharya continued the critical edition
<DIV></DIV>
<P>and completed it. The entire paippalAda saMhitA has recently been published by the Asiatic Society (1997).</P>
<P>VA: Actually the edition covers only the first 15 Kandas and the last 5 still have to appear. The last five have more than 1/2 of the text but a concordance between the S and P is available and so we can determine what unique mantrasSuktas are still unpublished.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> AH: In his introduction the </P>
<DIV></DIV>editor says that the numbers of the paippalAda followers in Orissa is
<DIV></DIV>ever dwindling. One note of interest is that he mentions that the
<DIV></DIV>atharvavedins in and around Puri are referred to as "daxiNashreNI"s,
<DIV></DIV>
<P>meaning the Southern class. </P>
<P>VA: Durgamohan had argued very forcefully that these Paippaladins had migrated from Karnataka. However, Michael Witzel argues that the oral tradition of Paippaladins in Orisan and Kashmir was resuscitated from a written text procured from Gujarat. These arguments were then countered by Dipak Bhattacharya. A reply to this has been attempted by Carlos Lopez in his PhD thesis (June 2000) that is a critical edition plus translation of Kandas 13-14 of the Samhita. Lopez was a student of Witzel and very infortunately, has resorted to the most cheap, personal level attacks on Dipak Bhattacharya in his thesis.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>AH: One thing that one cannot fail to notice is the lack of accents (svaras)
<DIV></DIV>
<P>in the paippalAda saMhitA. What does this mean? </P>
<P>VA: It only means that the Samhita has lost its accents. Some portions of the Kashmiri text are however accented but the accentuation is very corrupt. Apparently, as Durgamohan opines, the Paippaladins lost their Srauta tradition and in the Grhya rites one recites the text only in ekasruti, So the accents were lost.</P>
<P>AH: Does it mean that </P>
<DIV></DIV>the paippalAda saMhitA is traditionally chanted without accents? Or,
<DIV></DIV>
<P>was there a tradition with accents that was lost? </P>
<P>VA: The Paippaladins had a very rich and widespread tradition and would have been accented. In fact, they probably set the standard for other schools since the Mahabhasya records that the Mauda Sakha followers imitated (anuvadate) the Paippaladins.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>Sincerely,</P>
<P>VA</P><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 23:03:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Tue, 29 May 2001, ken knight wrote:
> I have some knowledge of Sanskrit but could you please
> explain how the English word 'experienced' comes from
> the tadekyamanuyatam at the end of verse 6, as
> translated by Swami Sahananda, as well as in verse 7.
tad = that
aikyam = oneness
anubhUyatAm = is to be experienced.
anubhava is a direct or immediate experience as opposed to something
experienced from memory or inference etc.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 23:16:37 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: general question
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Ravisankar S. Mayavaram wrote:
> But shishhTaachara is an *unreliable* indicator, there quite a few
> variations even inside a small circle. [When I got a shalagrama blessed
> by shrii shrii shankara vijayendra saraswathy, i asked three different
> iyengars about their mode of worship, two of them (priests) right
> inside the kanchi varadaraja swamy temple, I got three different
> answers.
This doesn't necessarily mean the shishtachara was unreliable. Maybe
there are several equally valid methods of shaligrama worship. We should
definitely avoid the "anything goes" mentality but at the same time the
other extreme that there is only one true way to do everything is also
wrong. Sometimes Dharma does give us latitiude in what to do.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 23:47:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: The relationship betwen Karma and Jnana
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
As most of us are Grhasthas, a frequent topic of discussion in the list is
the nature of Dharma and what is appropriate Karma. Then again, this is
an Advaita Vedanta list so we are also interested in the nature of Jnana.
So a question that may be on many peoples minds is what is the
relationship between Karma and Jnana? We would not be the first to ask
such questions, it has been a preoccupation of followers of the Vedas from
the beginning.
There are several forms the relationship can take:
I. Karma is important, Jnana is unimportant.
This position was held by Purva Mimamsakas. The entire body of the
shastras consists of either injunctions to do something (vidhi),
injunctions to avoid doing something(nishedha), or explanatory material
giving more details about injunctions (arthavada.) Such a person believes
that yes the upanishads are part of Shruti, and yes the do talk about the
"self" but because they do not contain injunctions, they are only
arthavada. The "self" they praise is only the ego, the doer of actions.
Mukti is everlasting life in Heaven where there is no pain or suffering.
It is achieved by scrupulously performing the required actions and
avoiding the prohibited ones.
II. Karma and Jnana are both important.
This in turn can be divided into two views:
IIa. Karma is primary and Jnana is secondary.
The person who follows this view also believes that the proper performance
of actions is the key to Mukti but further adds these actions cannot be
done mechanically, but must also be done with the right intentions.
Meditation creates true knowledge which guides the performance of right
actions.
IIb. Jnana is primary and Karma is secondary.
Mukti comes from true knowledge. However in order to gain this knowledge,
certain meditative rituals (upasana) have to be performed. Such rituals
are different from everyday karma but are still nonetheless actions.
III. Jnana is important, Karma is unimportant.
This is the view of Advaita Vedanta. Dharma and Moksha are two seperate
purusharthas because there subjects are as far apart as the bottom of the
sea and the top of Mount Everest. Moksha or Mukti is through true
knowledge alone. And yet Advaita Vedantins do take a lot of interest in
the proper performance of Karma. This seeming paradox will be explained
in my next article.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 00:24:21 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>Let us take the easy one first: tattvam asi. This teaching can only be
> >given first of all, by a person who knows Brahman. Otherwise it is >null
>and void.
That may be too harsh. If the teaching was done in good faith it should work
just fine. Sorry about that error.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 01:06:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - II
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>From
Message-Id: <.>
May 31, 2001 - Post made by Vidyasankar Sundaresan, from Pasadena, USA,
to the Advaita-L mailing list. Archives hosted at Advaita Vedanta
Anusandhana Kendra (www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html)
.________________________.
| Part II(c) of a series |
=========================================================================
Continuing from Part II(b), this part discusses the 1971 edition of
Anantanandagiri's text published by N. Veezhinathan of Madras, with
an introduction by T.M.P. Mahadevan [1].
The first thing that one notices is the extremely partisan nature of
what is supposed to be a "critical" edition. Normally, editors look
at various manuscripts, note variant readings, reconstruct a possible
manuscript history, look for old linguistic features vs. new, and try
to put together what they think to be the oldest version of the text.
All variants are nevertheless given in footnotes, along with brief
explanations. While it is clearly recognized that a critical edition
may not succeed in reconstructing THE ORIGINAL text, the exercise has
to be an honest one, and if done well, it presents in one locus, all
known variant readings of the text. Veezhinathan fails singularly in
achieving this goal.
Two other editions were published almost a century ago, from Calcutta,
one under the Bibliotheca Indica series [2], and another independently
[3]. The Bibliotheca Indica edition has been reprinted recently, from
Europe [4]. Note that these editions have been mistakenly attributed
to Anandagiri. However, a comparison of the text shows that it is only
that of Anantanandagiri. Moreover, the colophon in each chapter gives
the name as Anantanandagiri, which places the matter beyond doubt. The
following comparative points from the 1971 edition would be of interest.
1. Two authors, V. s. Ghate [5] and J. N. Bhattacharya [6], who refer
to the old Calcutta editions, mention Sringeri, Puri, Dvaraka and Badri
mathas established by Sankara. No other monastic institution is named.
These authors also note that in Anantanandagiri's text, the birthplace
of Sankara is given as Chidambaram in Tamil Nadu, instead of Kaladi in
Kerala. I will return to this point in the next part of this series.
2. Throughout the introduction, T.M.P. Mahadevan never explicitly
mentions the Sringeri Matha. All he deigns to say is the phrase, "the
institution on the banks of the Tungabhadra."
3. Each chapter has a title, given once in the index, a second time at
the head of the chapter, and a third time in a colophon at the end of
the chapter. The sole exception is chapter 62, which is given at the
head of the chapter merely as "dvishashTi prakaraNam" i.e. "Chapter 62".
The index and chapter colophon read "guroH sarasavANyASca SRngagiri-
sthAna nivasanam". I find it more than a little strange, and more than
a little amusing, that the only chapter that gets such step-motherly
treatment is the one that mentions Sringeri in the title.
4. Within chapter 62, the phrase SRngagiri-samIpe (near Sringeri) is
found in the 1971 edition. Both the older editions from Calcutta do
not have the word samIpa (near). Veezhinathan does not elucidate the
reasons behind his reading of the text. In any case, what is the name
of this place that is samIpa to Sringeri? No answer is to be found in
this edition. Furthermore, Veezhinathan uses the word ASraya, whereas
both the older Calcutta editions say ASrama. Now, an ASrama can be
interpreted as a Matha, but not so with ASraya. In effect, Veezhinathan
has made Sringeri all but disappear from Anantanandagiri's text.
Apparently, Sankara only visited some place NEAR Sringeri, but did not
put up an ASrama even at this unspecified place! What makes this reading
most ridiculous is that Sringeri's only claim to fame is the Sankara
Matha there. Otherwise, it would be merely some nondescript village
amidst thousands of other villages. No author would choose to leave
unspecified some OTHER place which Sankara visited, by pointing to
Sringeri as a landmark.
5. Chapter 67 in the older Calcutta editions has the words,
"SRngagiri-sthAnasthAM kRtvA". This has been replaced by "kAncIpIThAdi
tattat-paTTaNa sthAyinIM kRtvA" in Veezhinathan's edition. Veezhinathan
gives us a highly curious "explanation" for this. He says that Sringeri
has already been mentioned in chapter 62, so it does not need to be
mentioned again, and that specifying Kanchipuram is more appropriate.
I am sorry, but as pointed out earlier, what chapter 62 mentions in his
edition is only some unspecified place near Sringeri. As things stand,
chapter 62 of his edition does not mention Sringeri directly. Chapter
67 also does not mention Sringeri now. Although the Sringeri matha is
not going to vanish, to suit Veezhinathan's purposes, his own intention
should be clear, crystal-clear.
6. We had seen earlier that Anandagiri and Anantanandagiri should not be
confused with each other. Veezhinathan's edition carries the title,
"anantAnandagiri praNItaM". Nevertheless, Mahadevan's introduction tries
to identify this text with the Pracina text of Anandagiri. He cites in
support, the statement found in Acyutaraya's commentary on the mAdhavIya.
Elsewhere in the same edition, Acyutaraya is quoted as having said,
"anantAnandagiry ukta Sankaravijaye tu kAlaTyAkhya grAmavarya iti".
Now, a careful analysis is required. Acyutaraya explicitly tells us that
Anandagiri is the author of TIkAs, and a disciple of Suddhananda. If he
also explicitly refers to the Sankaravijaya of Anantanandagiri, it should
be obvious that Acyutaraya was also aware of the difference between the
two authors, Anandagiri and Anantanandagiri. He cannot be cited in support
of the claim that Anantanandagiri's Sankaravijaya is identical with the
Pracina Sankaravijaya of Anandagiri.
An attempt to confuse the issue still further is clearly evident in the
fact that although the title gives the author's name as Anantanandagiri,
the index at the beginning, the index at the end, and the references in
the appendices, all give the author's name only as Anandagiri. This is
the first "critical" edition I have read, in which the editor and his
teacher cannot even make up their minds about the name and identity of
the author.
Meanwhile, the quotations from the adhikaraNaratnamAlA, written in the
14th century, cry out for an explanation. Veezhinathan's answer is
simple. He simply claims that these sections have been interpolated into
the text at a later time. He does not tell us why he thinks so. Again,
this is the first critical edition I have read, where an editor does not
explain why he thinks something is original and something else is a late
interpolation.
7. Chapter 63 says that Padmapada was installed as the head of the
Matha at Sringeri. Veezhinathan's footnote says, "iti sarvAsu
mAtRkAsu" (in all manuscripts). Unfortunately for this explanation,
both the older Calcutta editions say that it was Suresvara who was
installed as the head of the Matha at Sringeri. What happened to the
reading found in the manuscripts that the editors used a century ago?
Moreover, when we turn to another reliable source of information, we
see that Veezhinathan is simply lying. Veezhinathan had obtained copies
of the manuscripts preserved at the Government Oriental Mansucripts
Library, Madras. Two well-known Sanskrit scholars, P.P. Subrahmanya
Sastri and S. Kuppuswami Sastri, had once served as curators of the
GOML earlier in the 20th century. Kuppuswami Sastri has published an
edition of Mandana Misra's Brahmasiddhi, along with the commentary by
Sankhapani [7], and Subrahmanya Sastri has written a preface to it.
This preface explicitly informs us that chapter 63 of Anantanandagiri's
texts gives Suresvara's name as the first head of the Sringeri Matha.
What happened to the reading in the GOML manuscript that Subrahmanya
Sastri must have seen himself? Did Veezhinathan refer to manuscripts
from GOML or did he not? Whither "sarvAsu mAtRkAsu"? What is his role
here? Is Veezhinathan a "critical editor" or is he taking the liberty
to manipulate the text according to his own convenience? And T.M.P.
Mahadevan, the head of the Radhakrishnan Institute of Philosophy at
the University of Madras endorses Veezhinathan's effort, with a lengthy
introduction full of praise.
Whenever contemporary staunch followers of the Kanchi Matha bring up
the topic of competition between Sringeri Matha and Kanchi Matha, they
try to present it as if the Kanchi Matha has been unfairly treated in
the past. However, given the academic
positions of Mahadevan and his
student, and their status as supposedly critical scholars and experts of
Advaita thought, impartial readers can judge the actual state of affairs.
It is my sincere opinion that Mahadevan and Veezhinathan have done a
disservice to the Kanchi Matha, by producing such an edition, with the
intention of displaying their anti-Sringeri sentiment. I have said this
before on this list, in an earlier response to Nanda Chandran, and I
will say so again now. This entire topic has grown extremely distasteful
to me, and I sincerely regret having to go over it all over again.
Part II of this series concludes. Part III will cover other problems with
Anantanandagiri's text, including the reading of Chidambaram as Sankara's
birthplace, and also other miscellaneous topics, like the issue of four
mahAvAkyas, the legends of Sivalingas at the various Mathas, and the
traditions of the sarvajnapITha.
_________________________________________________________________________
Notes -
-----
1. N. Veezhinathan. ed. Anantanandagiripranitam Srisankaravijayam. 1971.
Madras: University of Madras; [with a foreword by T. M. P. Mahadevan].
2. Jayanarayana Tarkapancanana and Nabadweep Goswami, eds. Sankaravijaya.
1868. Calcutta: Asiatic Society (Bibliotheca Indica No. 46, 137 and 138).
3. Jibananda Vidyasagara Bhattacharya. ed. Sankaravijaya. 1881. Calcutta:
Sarasudhanidhi Press.
4. Same as 2 above, reprinted 1982. Osnabruck: Biblio Verlag.
5. V. S. Ghate. Sankaracarya. In, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,
XI: 185-186. 1924. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
6. J. N. Bhattacharya. Hindu Castes and Sects. 1968. Calcutta: Editions
Indian (reprint of 1869 edition).
7. S. Kuppuswami Sastri. ed. Brahmasiddhi. 1982. Delhi: Sri Satguru
Publications, Sri Garibdas Oriental Series No. 16 (reprint of 1937 ed).
=========================================================================
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 13:20:26 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
This is the correct wording.
The cups for two deities (aindra vAyava) ii.25 to ii.28.
AB ii.27
(...) He partakes of (the cup) for Indra and Vayu front-to-front; therefore
exhalation and inhalation are in the front; he partakes of (the cup) for
Mitra and Varuna front-to-front; therefore eyes are in the front; he
partakes of (the cup) for Ashvins carrying round; therefore both men and
beasts hear speech speaking on all sides.(...)
This also indicates that the vaidic version of intelligent design was lot
more advanced than what we are left with today (the sUkSma sarIra, sthUla
sarIra etc). It is not really difficult to reconstruct if we get the right
leads.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 10:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2001, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian
> wrote:
>
> > BTW, Mr BGS, I couldn't find your introduction. I
> > searched for your's till mid 1999 and was unable
> to
> > find it. I asked for it because we have had
> problems
> > in the past with people posting from multiple
> > hotmail/yahoo accounts. Can you point me to your
> > intro?
> >
>
> That may be my fault. When I signed him up I may
> have forgotten to post
> the intro and now unfortunately I don't have it.
>
> But I don't see what it has to do with the current
> discussion which seems
> to be proceeding quite nicely on facts alone.
You are right, a discussion needs only facts.
Normally, I too wouldn't ask for such details. It's
just that the tone of Mr BGS's post and replies to
Vidyasankar seemed a little odd. Moreover, the so
called facts he had listed were mostly wrong. Such a
strident style of writing with wrong facts plus his
transliteration of certain words resembled the mails
of another list member. So I became a little
suspicious. It still doesn't explain how the name was
different in the intro to advaita and ambaa lists. Are
multiple people using this account to air their
thinking on various topics? C'set la vie, eh?.
Thanks Ravi, for the pointer. I went through the other
mails of Mr BGS in the ambaa list. It's interesting
when someone joins the list claiming that he can
supply the details of original research on BhaTTar and
then the only contribution seems to be a monlogue on
why Kudali and not Sringeri was the maTHa established
by sha.nkara. One is certainly justified in wondering
what the motives here are.
Re: ayamAtmA brahma - someone had asked about this.
ayam-this(immediate) AtmA-self (is) brahma-brahman. It
is found in the mANDUkya and also the bR^ihadAraNyaka.
sha.nkara says in his commentary that ayam is
accompanied with a gesture towards the heart. I.e.,
the Atman in the heart is the same as brahman once the
limiting adjuncts are removed.
Rama
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From msr at c...
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 16:25:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Arjuna vs Nachiketa
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: msr at c...
On Wed, 30 May 2001 17:55:34 -0700, S. V. Subrahmanian
<svsubrahmanian at Y...> wrote:
>
>I read your response to the question of going abroad. The shloka, the
>translation and your advice was illuminating. But this advice can be a
cause
>of lot of confusion and I would like to take this opportunity to highlight
In the first post I did I give some suggestions (not advice) and in the
second (on verse guhaayam) it was a comment and not even a suggestion. The
original verse and meanings were given (to the best of my ability), it is
upto others on how they take it.
On a personal note, I do wish to go back to Tamil Nadu and settle down. Not
for any patriotic or matriotic reasons. But now I do not desire anything
strongly. My feelings on that and any other matter is summarized by
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ambaa-l/message/882
At least this is something I am striving for.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 13:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Arjuna vs Nachiketa
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I read your note below and the URL that you pointed.
I respect what you have expressed.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
Sri Ravishankar wrote:
In the first post I did I give some suggestions (not advice) and in the
second (on verse guhaayam) it was a comment and not even a suggestion. The
original verse and meanings were given (to the best of my ability), it is
upto others on how they take it.
On a personal note, I do wish to go back to Tamil Nadu and settle down. Not
for any patriotic or matriotic reasons. But now I do not desire anything
strongly. My feelings on that and any other matter is summarized by
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ambaa-l/message/882
At least this is something I am striving for.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Subject: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 16:33:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Dear members,
Sorry for touching this distasteful subject... But would like
to clarify...
Sri Vidyashankar's recent article on "Shankaravijaya" mentioned about
wrong anecdotes of Shankara using aggression to subdue his philosophical
adversaries. As Vidyashankar pointed out, these have to be hoax. But it
seems there is a widely held belief that disciples of Shankara used physical
aggression to drive away jains and bhuddhists from their caves in Kerala
and other places as per the behest of their teacher. Have people come across
these...? In fact I have read Jain debators once conspired and pushed
bhaskara bhatta (?? pls. correct) from atop a building with an intention to
kill him when latter was found in jain disguise trying to learn jainism to
debate against jains later. The story goes that bhaskara loses eye sight
but survives the fall. Are these also hoax? One can't easily believe that
philosophers would do such things..., be it a jain or an advaitin or any.
But we also have such ones as yaadhava prakaasha (bhedaabhedin) trying to
kill
his student, Ramanuja by drowning, which is held as true by almost everyone
aware of these personalities. It's still disgusting to note many atrocities
done by Kings to followers of minority religions esp. in South India (TN).
May be I am extrapolating and mixing up too many things.. but I am not
comparing one with the other in terms of their individual anecdotal
authenticity.
There is always an agitation in our minds when we recollect such
anecdotes not knowing how to reconcile and abide. In the end it is a
Truth that Religion/Philosophy is much bigger than the individual and
even bigger is Supreme.
Regards,
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 13:39:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
This email mistakenly went to advaita-l-owner at yahoogroups.com
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
>In fact I have read Jain debators once conspired and pushed
> bhaskara bhatta (?? pls. correct) from atop a building with an
intention to
> kill him when latter was found in jain disguise trying to learn
jainism to
> debate against jains later. The story goes that bhaskara loses eye
sight
> but survives the fall.
This was actually the story of Kumaarillaa and the Bauddhaas and not
Bhaaskaraa and the Jainaas. And it is not that Kumaarilla was
pretending to be a Bauddha - he was a bauddha having converted to
Buddhism. He learnt bauddha philosophy from a Bauddha Achaarya - but
later defeated him in debate which lead to the Achaarya committing
suicide of out shame! This so enraged the other disciples that they
threw him off a cliff - where Kumaarilla survives but loses an eye.
Kumaarilla's jumping into a funeral pyre when Shankara meets him, was
actually his way of expiation for causing the death of his ex-guru.
This is shown in the film Shankaraachaarya by GV Iyer with
Kumaarillaa looking grotesque with a large fake eye!
Did such things happen? I wouldn't be surprised - because though
teachers might be great, disciples most often lack the greatness of
their teachers.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 13:40:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 vpcnk at H... wrote:
>
> >In fact I have read Jain debators once conspired and pushed
> > bhaskara bhatta (?? pls. correct) from atop a building with an
> intention to
> > kill him when latter was found in jain disguise trying to learn
> jainism to
> > debate against jains later. The story goes that bhaskara loses eye
> sight
> > but survives the fall.
>
> This was actually the story of Kumaarillaa and the Bauddhaas and not
> Bhaaskaraa and the Jainaas. And it is not that Kumaarilla was
> pretending to be a Bauddha - he was a bauddha having converted to
> Buddhism. He learnt bauddha philosophy from a Bauddha Achaarya
No he wanted to defeat the Bauddhas so in order to learn their teachings
he entered a vihara in disguise.
>- but
> later defeated him in debate which lead to the Achaarya committing
> suicide of out shame! This so enraged the other disciples that they
> threw him off a cliff - where Kumaarilla survives but loses an eye.
After Kumarila was discovered, he and the Bauddha acharya made a
challenge. They would jump off the roof of the vihara and if the Vedas
were true Kumarila would escape unscathed but if the Buddhist teachings
were true, the opponent would survive. The Bauddha was killed and
Kumarila survived but because he had doubted (*if* the Vedas are valid) he
lost an eye.
> Kumaarilla's jumping into a funeral pyre when Shankara meets him, was
> actually his way of expiation for causing the death of his ex-guru.
> This is shown in the film Shankaraachaarya by GV Iyer with
> Kumaarillaa looking grotesque with a large fake eye!
>
That person was never his "guru" but he did give knowledge and therefore
deserved respect.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:14:12
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>No he wanted to defeat the Bauddhas so in order to learn their teachings he
>entered a vihara in disguise.
>After Kumarila was discovered, he and the Bauddha acharya made a
>challenge. They would jump off the roof of the vihara and if the Vedas
>were true Kumarila would escape unscathed but if the Buddhist teachings
>were true, the opponent would survive. The Bauddha was killed and
>Kumarila survived but because he had doubted (*if* the Vedas are valid) he
>lost an eye.
>That person was never his "guru" but he did give knowledge and therefore
>deserved respect.
Hmmm...this implies 1. Kumaarilla thought that the Buddhist teachings were
false and 2. the Veda or some supernatural force behind "the truth
of its teachings" was capable of saving the life of Kumaarilla - but also
blinded him in one eye.
But if point 1 was true, why would Kumaarilla, an orthodox Mimaamsakaa
and the champion of brahminism declare in his Shlokavaartikam that
1. the teachings of the Buddha are derived from the Upanishads and
2. the Buddhist texts are to be considered as authoritative.
A cross combination of the above four points would invariably lead to
the conclusion that the teachings of the Upanishads are false!
Also if the Veda had the power to save Kumaarilla's life or blind him,
then would it not have the power to make fire cold? Is this what
Shankaraachaarya teaches? "Even the shruti cannot make fire cold".
Just because reality is beyond the intellect that doesn't mean that
anything goes. Truth being what it is the minimum criterion for it is
that it cannot be disproved as false by reason - so all that which fails
the test of reason is to be rejected as false. Else why would Shankara
launch an extensive dialectical attack *based on reason* against other
schools of philosophy and prove their doctrines as false?
If we are to believe in supernatural events like Bhagavan saving lives
or bestowing boons - then we along with the bhakti Vedaantists have
to give up the quest for jnaana and start praying to God to liberate us.
The distinction between jnaana yoga and bhakti yoga is often misunderstood.
Even for the bhakti Vedaantists it is only knowledge which liberates. But
their contention is that self effort is not really necessary and devotion
(bhakti) to the Lord will result in his grace which will give rise to saving
knowledge. But for us, self-effort is essential - we have to probe inwards
(atma vichaaram) and know the truth. Even Ramana teaches that there's no
other way - only atma vichaaram can lead to Atma jnaanam.
We're not Mimaamsakaas to believe that karma has an end in itself and that
the shruti is capable of anything. For us karma only helps us develop purity
of mind (chitta shuddhi) and even the shruti is only in the realm of
ignorance for it implies duality. Nor are we bhakti Vedaantists to believe
that devotion to God will result in liberation. As Gaudapaadaachaarya
teaches, devotion is for the simple minded and karma is for those of
middling intellect - while jnaana is only taught to those of higher
intellect. But ultimately only jnaana can lead to liberation. If you've a
good intellect, you've to put it to use.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 20:28:21 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> Hmmm...this implies 1. Kumaarilla thought that the Buddhist teachings were
> false and 2. the Veda or some supernatural force behind "the truth
> of its teachings" was capable of saving the life of Kumaarilla - but also
> blinded him in one eye.
>
> But if point 1 was true, why would Kumaarilla, an orthodox Mimaamsakaa
> and the champion of brahminism declare in his Shlokavaartikam that
> 1. the teachings of the Buddha are derived from the Upanishads and
*He* may have thought that but did the Buddhists? If they denied the
authority of the Vedas (and all evidence suggests they did) then they are
nastikas and worth of condemnation.
And please don't use the word "Brahminism" it's a woefully inadequate
label for Sanatana Dharma.
> 2. the Buddhist texts are to be considered as authoritative.
>
I'm sorry but I have great difficulty in believing that. Can you give a
quote? If you are referring to the discussion of the validity of Agamas,
I think you have it backwards. Even though they are old, the Bauddhagamas
are not authoritative because they are not based on the Vedas.
> A cross combination of the above four points would invariably lead to
> the conclusion that the teachings of the Upanishads are false!
>
For a Mimamsaka that would be quite an adequate conclusion. (Actually he
would probably say that the teachings of the Upanishads are true but
they are about something other than Brahman.)
> Also if the Veda had the power to save Kumaarilla's life or blind him,
> then would it not have the power to make fire cold? Is this what
> Shankaraachaarya teaches? "Even the shruti cannot make fire cold".
>
In the case of fire not being cold, it is an obvious fact which can be
confirmed by the testimony of our senses. How do you know that
Kumarilas' life was not saved by his faith in the Vedas? You weren't
there. All you know is from the Madhaviya Shankara Digvijaya. How do you
know there was even such a person called Kumarila Bhatta? For all you
know Madhavacharya could have made him up. You may have some plausible
reasons for believing as you do, but a guess is no more "truth" than
faith.
> Just because reality is beyond the intellect that doesn't mean that
> anything goes. Truth being what it is the minimum criterion for it is
> that it cannot be disproved as false by reason - so all that which fails
> the test of reason is to be rejected as false. Else why would Shankara
> launch an extensive dialectical attack *based on reason* against other
> schools of philosophy and prove their doctrines as false?
>
What is the test of reason in this case? What objective criteria would
you use to determine that the life of Kumarila Bhatta (if indeed there was
such a person) was saved by the Vedas or not?
> If we are to believe in supernatural events like Bhagavan saving lives
> or bestowing boons - then we along with the bhakti Vedaantists have
> to give up the quest for jnaana and start praying to God to liberate us.
Or we can search for Jnana *and* pray to God to liberate us. God as the
Guru teaches us, God as the indwelling atman contemplates and understands.
What are Bhakti Vedantists anyway? You sem to accept the old canard that
Advaita Vedanta is against or indifferent to Bhakti. A review of the
thoughts of Advaitins through the centuries would suggest that isn't true.
> The distinction between jnaana yoga and bhakti yoga is often misunderstood.
Indeed.
> Even for the bhakti Vedaantists it is only knowledge which liberates. But
> their contention is that self effort is not really necessary and devotion
> (bhakti) to the Lord will result in his grace which will give rise to saving
> knowledge. But for us, self-effort is essential - we have to probe inwards
> (atma vichaaram) and know the truth. Even Ramana teaches that there's no
> other way - only atma vichaaram can lead to Atma jnaanam.
>
True but I fail to see the relevance to this case. Whether not a
particular incident in the life of a particular person occurred or not is
vyavaharic and therefore irrelevant to atmajnana.
> We're not Mimaamsakaas to believe that karma has an end in itself and that
> the shruti is capable of anything. For us karma only helps us develop purity
> of mind (chitta shuddhi) and even the shruti is only in the realm of
> ignorance for it implies duality. Nor are we bhakti Vedaantists to believe
> that devotion to God will result in liberation.
Neither are you or I Advaita Vedantins except at the most basic levels as
we have not taken sannyasa. Until such time as we do, the practice
of Karma and Bhakti is imperative.
> As Gaudapaadaachaarya
> teaches, devotion is for the simple minded and karma is for those of
> middling intellect - while jnaana is only taught to those of higher
> intellect. But ultimately only jnaana can lead to liberation. If you've a
> good intellect, you've to put it to use.
Swami Madhusudan Saraswati put his intellect to use wouldn't you say?
Yet evidently he considered himself simple-minded enough for Bhakti too.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:43:38 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>>Hmmm...this implies 1. Kumaarilla thought that the Buddhist teachings
>> >>were false and 2. the Veda or some supernatural force behind "the
>> >>truth of its teachings" was capable of saving the life of Kumaarilla
>>->>but also blinded him in one eye.
>
>>But if point 1 was true, why would Kumaarilla, an orthodox Mimaamsakaa
>>and the champion of brahminism declare in his Shlokavaartikam that
>>1. the teachings of the Buddha are derived from the Upanishads and
>*He* may have thought that but did the Buddhists? If they denied the
>authority of the Vedas (and all evidence suggests they did) then they >are
>nastikas and worth of condemnation.
>And please don't use the word "Brahminism" it's a woefully inadequate
>label for Sanatana Dharma.
>>2. the Buddhist texts are to be considered as authoritative.
>
>I'm sorry but I have great difficulty in believing that. Can you give >a
>quote? If you are referring to the discussion of the validity of >Agamas,
>I think you have it backwards. Even though they are old, the >Bauddhagamas
>are not authoritative because they are not based on the >Vedas.
Buddhist texts being declared as authoritative is quite consistent, and does
not prove they are absolutely true. Even in Shruti, there are many
authoritative statements which are very much valid "upto a point" such as in
Ch.U. I.8 "... This sAma is established on heaven, one should not take it
beyond heaven... ". But such statements had not been removed from Shruti
even after they had been proven false by a higher truth Ch.U.I.9 "Space is
the ultimate goal". The basic observations of Buddhism such may be very much
valid, but they are not ultimate realities.
Also, the test of veda being a protector of some one who dropped from a
height does not necessarily involve faith. Ch.U. VI. 16.1-2 has the story of
a man being accused of a theft, who was asked to touch a hot iron. Shruti
says if he had not committed the crime the iron would not burn him and he is
delivered. Kumarila's story is no different from this. The knowledge of veda
should protect Kumarila as truth protects from being burnt by the rod of hot
iron. I can never believe Ch.U. story is real, so I may get burnt one day
:-)
>>A cross combination of the above four points would invariably lead to
>>the conclusion that the teachings of the Upanishads are false!
>
>For a Mimamsaka that would be quite an adequate conclusion. (Actually >he
>would probably say that the teachings of the Upanishads are true but
>they are about something other than Brahman.)
Can we have a definitive opinion here about mimamsakas in this case?
>Neither are you or I Advaita Vedantins except at the most basic levels >as
>we have not taken sannyasa. Until such time as we do, the practice
>of Karma and Bhakti is imperative.
If advaita is conditional to sannyasa, isn't it then a conditional Brahman?
How can Brahman be pre-conditioned by requirements such as sannyasa or
death? It should be immediately realized or it may never be realized if it
is conditional.
Best Regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 04:51:22 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
----Original Message Follows----
From: nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...>
NC: But if point 1 was true, why would Kumaarilla, an orthodox Mimaamsakaa
and the champion of brahminism declare in his Shlokavaartikam that
1. the teachings of the Buddha are derived from the Upanishads and
2. the Buddhist texts are to be considered as authoritative.
VA: Where does he say that? As far as I know, this is put in the mouth of a
Purvapakshin under Sutra 1.3.1 (Tantravarttika) but I will check once again.
NC:Also if the Veda had the power to save Kumaarilla's life or blind him,
then would it not have the power to make fire cold? Is this what
Shankaraachaarya teaches? "Even the shruti cannot make fire cold".
VA: Sruti as well as Bhagvatpada are correct. If the Sruti says that 'fire
is cold', the Sruti is not interpreted literally.
NC: Else why would Shankara
launch an extensive dialectical attack *based on reason* against other
schools of philosophy and prove their doctrines as false?
VA: Because these other schools are based on reason, not on Sruti and so if
Bhagvatpada were to have resorted to an appeal to the authority of the
Sruit, the Bauddhas would not have bought that argument.
NC:If we are to believe in supernatural events like Bhagavan saving lives
or bestowing boons - then we along with the bhakti Vedaantists have
to give up the quest for jnaana and start praying to God to liberate us.
The distinction between jnaana yoga and bhakti yoga is often misunderstood.
VA: ??? Does not the Brahmasutra say - tannishtasya moksopadesaat.
NC: Even for the bhakti Vedaantists it is only knowledge which liberates.
But
their contention is that self effort is not really necessary and devotion
(bhakti) to the Lord will result in his grace which will give rise to saving
knowledge.
VA: Not really, Within the Sri Vaishnavas, it is one of the two schools
which adheres to the notion mentioned by you.
NC: We're not Mimaamsakaas to believe that karma has an end in itself and
that
the shruti is capable of anything.
VA: Well, if you read Kumarila carefully, he does not take Karmakanda as the
supreme end.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 10:06:47
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>*He* may have thought that but did the Buddhists? If they denied the
>authority of the Vedas (and all evidence suggests they did) then they are
>nastikas and worth of condemnation.
Are we talking about whether Buddhists are to be condemned or are we
talking about the validity of their teachings?
I personally think that it is very sad that in this day of age and reason,
we still indulge in wishful thinking about subjects we've not studied in
depth - where our prejudice stems only from dogma. Contrast this with the
ancient Naiyaayikas who proudly declared that they would accept anything
proved by logic and reason. I salute Gautama and his followers for their
ideal of intellectual integrity.
>I'm sorry but I have great difficulty in believing that. Can you give a
>quote? If you are referring to the discussion of the validity of Agamas,
>I think you have it backwards.
I was quoting from memory. I don't have the text on hand at present and
request Vishal to provide the reference.
>Even though they are old, the Bauddhagamas
>are not authoritative because they are not based on the Vedas.
If merely being "based" on the Vedas is enough, then where's there the
necessity to prove anything by reason? Why does Gaudapaada take the trouble
of establishing Advaita by reason? Why does Shankara engage in extensive
metaphysical speculation to establish non-duality? Why the peerless jewel of
ahdyaasa bhaashyam which itself is the saving knowledge - if understood
correctly. Else along with Baadaraayana, they should merely say that truth
is Advaita because the shruti says so.
>For a Mimamsaka that would be quite an adequate conclusion. (Actually he
>would probably say that the teachings of the Upanishads are true but
>they are about something other than Brahman.)
But we're not mimaamsakas, are we? So let us not use arguments of
Mimaamsakaas to establish our position.
>In the case of fire not being cold, it is an obvious fact which can be
>confirmed by the testimony of our senses. How do you know that
>Kumarilas' life was not saved by his faith in the Vedas? You weren't
>there. All you know is from the Madhaviya Shankara Digvijaya. How do you
>know there was even such a person called Kumarila Bhatta? For all you
>know Madhavacharya could have made him up. You may have some plausible
>reasons for believing as you do, but a guess is no more "truth" than
>faith.
Sure. But asserting an existence of somebody is quite different from saying
that some supernatural power saved him from death. The first is everyday
experience - rather it is self established - we exist, don't we? But where
do we find anybody "saved" by a supernatural power?
>What is the test of reason in this case? What objective criteria would
>you use to determine that the life of Kumarila Bhatta (if indeed there was
>such a person) was saved by the Vedas or not?
Jaladhar I don't want to engage in vithandaa vaadham. I hope you're not
saying that the existence of a person in the past who's not only left
behind works of philosophy but also a tradition which stands by his
teachings is on the same level of reality as somebody being "saved" by
the shruti.
>Or we can search for Jnana *and* pray to God to liberate us. God as the
>Guru teaches us, God as the indwelling atman contemplates and understands.
Sure. But Advaita is explicit that the way is only by self-effort. You can
only pray and it will get you nowhere. You can only probe inwards and you
can be liberated. Ofcourse you can combine both (I myself do), but
ultimately only aatma vichaaram can liberate.
>What are Bhakti Vedantists anyway? You sem to accept the old canard that
>Advaita Vedanta is against or indifferent to Bhakti. A review of the
>thoughts of Advaitins through the centuries would suggest that isn't true.
The distinction is in the means to liberation - atma vichaaram or prayer?
While prayer is inevitably sunk in duality, atma vichaaram aspires for
non-duality. Ultimately only self-effort in the form of atma vichaaram can
deliver us from samsaara.
>The distinction between jnaana yoga and bhakti yoga is often misunderstood.
>True but I fail to see the relevance to this case. Whether not a
>particular incident in the life of a particular person occurred or not is
>vyavaharic and therefore irrelevant to atmajnana.
I was trying to stress the role of reason, since you seem to give too much
credence to supernatural occurances.
>Neither are you or I Advaita Vedantins except at the most basic levels as
>we have not taken sannyasa. Until such time as we do, the practice
>of Karma and Bhakti is imperative.
As long as you persist in external worship, in strict terms you are not an
advaitin. But when the mind is turned inwards, you cannot be any other. This
is irrespective of whether you've embraced samnyaasam or not - for the
purpose of samnyaasam itself is only to turn the mind inward, away from
external objects and try to abide in yourself.
Karma or action is inevitable for an unrealized person. Can there ever be
consciousness without an object of consciousness? So long as consciousness
is not pure/non-dual consciousness, which is the state of jivan mukthaas,
there's always karma.
But bhakti is not imperative. Yes, it is an useful tool to achieve chitta
shuddhi. But it cannot liberate. We can do without bhakti also - Ramana
himself did.
I would like to clarify that by bhakti I mean praying to an external Lord.
I've no problem with Ramana's interpretation of true bhakti as Atma
vichaaram. Ofcourse this need not be interpreted as there's no utility for
bhakti. Yes, it can be an useful tool to develop faith and chitta shuddhi.
But it cannot liberate.
>Swami Madhusudan Saraswati put his intellect to use wouldn't you say?
>Yet evidently he considered himself simple-minded enough for Bhakti too.
But does he say that bhakti in the form of external worship can lead to
liberation?
It is ironic that dvijas of today are unable to do without bhakti - while
we've spirited women who want to take up jnaana - I salute the Maitreyis of
today.
See as long as you repose faith in an external supernatural being who'll
"help and take care of you", you'll not expose yourself to the reality of
samsaara - your mind will be closed to it. The reality of samsaara will be
known only if you open your mind to it - "knowledge only increases
suffering" - it is only then that mumukshutvam will arise. In Advaita, faith
is only limited to accepting that there's a higher spiritual reality beyond
this world of suffering which can be attained by ethics, austerity and
knowledge.
-------------
>VA: Where does he say that? As far as I know, this is put in the mouth of a
>Purvapakshin under Sutra 1.3.1 (Tantravarttika) but I will check once
>again.
Vishal I'm not sure whether it was in Tantravaartikam - I read it quite a
while back. But check the chapter on shunyavaada - maybe it is in there.
>VA: Sruti as well as Bhagvatpada are correct. If the Sruti says that 'fire
>is cold', the Sruti is not interpreted literally.
The shruti is the authority only on two subjects : 1. dharma and 2. brahman.
This is so because both these are beyond the reach of the intellect. But for
all phenomenal aspects of life, reason is the only guide. I don't think the
shruti teaches anywhere that "go jump off a cliff and if your faith in me is
absolute, you'll not die".
If such was Kumaarilla attitude why did he write volumnious works based on
logic and reason - disproving the theories of rival schools. He could have
wiped out the entire naastika groups by challenging them to jump off cliffs!
>Because these other schools are based on reason, not on Sruti and so if
>Bhagvatpada were to have resorted to an appeal to the authority of the
>Sruit, the Bauddhas would not have bought that argument.
If the motive behind Alaatashaanti Praakarna is to engage in dialectic
with the Bauddhas and explain to them the truth of Advaita, then why is
Gaudapaadaacharya establishing the phenomenality of the world as well as
the truth of Advaita by reason in the preceding chapters which are
perfectly "Vedaantic"? Also the numerous praakarnaa texts of Shankara which
teach you how to discriminate between the Self and the non-self.
The Advaitic way is jnaana. Jnaana is three
fold - it is objective,
subjective and non-dual - and in that order. Objectively we've to first
study works on philosophy and understand why we need to aspire for reality
and what reality is and what it isn't (objective neti-neti). Then we've to
subjectively probe inwards and understand ourselves apart from that which is
not us (subjective neti, neti). Ultimately reality itself is knowledge -
pure-consciousness.
So there's a vital role for the intellect in Advaita. Till the stage of
mukti it is our only true guide. It is that by which we keep distinguishing
ourselves from that which is not us - till only we remain in the end.
>VA: ??? Does not the Brahmasutra say - tannishtasya moksopadesaat.
Yes even as per Shankara moksha is only thru the grace of the Lord.
But the Lord is not external - he is only your own self and is to be found
only by Atma Vichaaram.
>VA: Not really, Within the Sri Vaishnavas, it is one of the two schools
>which adheres to the notion mentioned by you.
Sure there's a difference between the Vadakalai sect of Vedaanta Deshikaa
(which is truer to Ramanuja) and the Thenkalai sect of Pillai Lokaachaarya.
But again as noted before, still all believe that ultimately only bhakti in
the form of worship to an external Lord can liberate. For them such practice
is ok because it doesn't conflict with their metaphysics of duality. But for
us Advaitins for whom reality is non-dual, external worship has no utility
beyond a certain point.
>VA: Well, if you read Kumarila carefully, he does not take Karmakanda as
>the
>supreme end.
Sure. But still the Advaitins view of karma is quite different from the
Mimaamsakas. If you take Prabhaakara, he believes the even after liberation
we've to keep following the injunctions in the shruti - and why so? Because
such actions are commanded by the shruti. For Advaitins, even the shruti is
ultimately only in the realm of ignorance - because to accept the shruti
after liberation is to accept duality.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 15:03:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Question on atharvaveda, PaippalAda saMhitA
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 02:10:24 -0000, Vishal Agarwal
<vishalagarwal at H...> wrote:
VA: Actually the edition covers only the first 15 Kandas and the last 5
still have to appear. The last five have more than 1/2 of the text but a
concordance between the S and P is available and so we can determine what
unique mantrasSuktas are still unpublished
Thanks for the correction.
AH: In his introduction the editor says that the numbers of the paippalAda
followers in Orissa is
ever dwindling. One note of interest is that he mentions that the
atharvavedins in and around Puri are referred to as "daxiNashreNI"s,
meaning the Southern class.
VA: Durgamohan had argued very forcefully that these Paippaladins had
migrated from Karnataka. However, Michael Witzel argues that the oral
tradition of Paippaladins in Orisan and Kashmir was resuscitated from a
written text procured from Gujarat. These arguments were then countered by
Dipak Bhattacharya. A reply to this has been attempted by Carlos Lopez in
his PhD thesis (June 2000) that is a critical edition plus translation of
Kandas 13-14 of the Samhita. Lopez was a student of Witzel and very
infortunately, has resorted to the most cheap, personal level attacks on
Dipak Bhattacharya in his thesis
I read the basic arguments of Lopez online at the EJVS website. One of his
claims is that local (mis)pronounciation can introduce errors in the
Vedic texts. While this is possible, it is not likely to greatly
increase the complexity of critical edition. Anyone who has a basic
knowledge of local pronounciation peculiarities also knows that
those peculiarities are not usually reflected in the written language.
For example, I have heard people from Andra, and many from Tamil Nadu,
pronounce "sha" (as in shaMkara) closer to "sa" (as in saguNa), even
while reciting the Veda. But when you look at the written text (at least
the transliterated text in English) the correct "sha" is used, not the
"sa" even though it is closer to local pronounciation style.
AH: One thing that one cannot fail to notice is the lack of accents (svaras)
in the paippalAda saMhitA. What does this mean?
VA: It only means that the Samhita has lost its accents. Some portions of
the Kashmiri text are however accented but the accentuation is very
corrupt. Apparently, as Durgamohan opines, the Paippaladins lost their
Srauta tradition and in the Grhya rites one recites the text only in
ekasruti, So the accents were lost.
But, as far as the three other Vedas are concerned, the GR^ihya rites,
those performed in the GR^ihya or smArta-agni, are also accompanied by
mantras with full svaras. For example, when you do a homa, many Vedic
mantras are chanted in the normal way, not monotonously.
Also, it is doubtful whether there is a major role for the atharva
veda in shrauta rituals. ApastaMba shrauta sUtra, for example, while
describing yajnas mentions only the three other vedas - "R^igyajuH sAmA-
tmakaH chhandobhishchitaH".
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: general question
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:04:40
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Thank you for taking time to expand the meaning for me. I hope this helps
others too.
Thanks again.
Ravi
>From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at Y...>
>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
><ADVAITA-L at b...>
>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
>Subject: Re: general question
>Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:59:16 -0700
>
>--- Ravishankar Venkatraman <sunlike at h...> wrote:
> > Ravishankar Mayavaram wrote:
> > >Coming back, my view on this subject (now) is very simple and it is
> > >based on
> > >
> > >
> > >guhaayaaM gehe vaa bahirapi vane vaa.adrishikhare
> > >jale vaa vahnau vaa vasatu vasateH kiM vada phalam.h |
> > >sadaa yasyaivaantaHkaraNamapi shaMbho tava pade
> > >sthitaM chedyogo.asau sa cha paramayogii sa cha sukhii || 12||
> > >
> > >of shivAnandalaharI.
> > >
> >
> > Ravi,
> >
> > What does this sloka mean? Could you please elaborate on this?
> >
>
>
>In brief, where you heart is, is more important than where your body
>is. The place of residence of the body is not so important.
>
>guhaayaam - in a cave
>gehe vaa - or in a house
>bahirapi - or outside
>vane vaa - or in a forest
>adri shikare - on a mountain top
>jale vaa - or in water
>vahnau vaa - or in fire
>vasatu - (let one) live
>
>vasateH - having lived (there)
>kim - what
>phalam - fruit or benefit
>vada - tell
>
>sadaa - always
>yasya - whose
>eva - (emphasis)
>antaH karaNam - inner organ (manas, chitta, buddhi and ahaN^kaara)
>api - (emphasis)
>
>shambho - O Lord shiva
>tava pade - at your feet
>sthitam chet - firmly established
>asau - that is
>yogaH - yoga (or supreme union)
>sa cha - he alone
>parama yogi - is a supreme yogi
>sa cha - he alone
>sukhii - is the true enjoyer
>
>
>The key is one has to train one's mind to flow towards God no matter
>where he is. That alone will bring true joy. We all carry a portable
>paradise within us. sahasranAma calls ambaaL as daharAkAsha ruupiNii.
>One has to turn within and contemplate on the Lord. One can sit inside
>a great temple like in chidambaram or madurai, and still get agitated
>by the beautiful women who have come there to worship the Lord. Being
>in India does not alone do any great help. One can contemplate on God
>while he is in a remote corner of Alaska or inside a cubicle in a
>office in downtown Manhattan. Things like aupAsana or samidhAdaana may
>be easier to perform in India, but tell me who does these things
>anyway?
>
>
>
>=====
>ambaaL daasan
>
>Ravi
>
>sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
>
>http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
>a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 16:01:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> Are we talking about whether Buddhists are to be condemned or are we
> talking about the validity of their teachings?
They amount to the same thing. Kumarilas' purpose in engaging the
Buddhists in debate was not "ha ha, my philosophy is better than yours"
but to correct what he thought was untrue.
>
> I personally think that it is very sad that in this day of age and reason,
> we still indulge in wishful thinking about subjects we've not studied in
> depth - where our prejudice stems only from dogma. Contrast this with the
> ancient Naiyaayikas who proudly declared that they would accept anything
> proved by logic and reason. I salute Gautama and his followers for their
> ideal of intellectual integrity.
>
Note neither God nor supernatural events would have posed any problems for
the Naiyayikas.
> >Even though they are old, the Bauddhagamas
> >are not authoritative because they are not based on the Vedas.
>
> If merely being "based" on the Vedas is enough, then where's there the
> necessity to prove anything by reason? Why does Gaudapaada take the trouble
> of establishing Advaita by reason? Why does Shankara engage in extensive
> metaphysical speculation to establish non-duality? Why the peerless jewel of
> ahdyaasa bhaashyam which itself is the saving knowledge - if understood
> correctly. Else along with Baadaraayana, they should merely say that truth
> is Advaita because the shruti says so.
>
In fact they do. Both of them are commentators on texts. If they were
just out to spread their personal opinions, why bring the upanishads into
the picture?
> But we're not mimaamsakas, are we? So let us not use arguments of
> Mimaamsakaas to establish our position.
>
Sorry weren't you talking about Kumarila Bhatt? He certainly was a
Mimamsaka.
> Sure. But asserting an existence of somebody is quite different from saying
> that some supernatural power saved him from death.
Is it? In a logical sense I mean. How so?
> The first is everyday
> experience - rather it is self established - we exist, don't we?
Yes but can we extrapolate the existence of Kumarila Bhatta from that?
> But where
> do we find anybody "saved" by a supernatural power?
>
Well according to the Madhaviya Dig Vijaya Kumarila Bhatta was saved
by his faith in the Vedas.
See the fallacy here? You accept the statement of MSDV that there was
such a person called Kumarila Bhatta but not the statement of the same
work that his life was saved by the Vedas. If it is telling the truth
about one thing, why not the other? If it is lying about one thing, why
assume it is not lying about the other.
> Jaladhar I don't want to engage in vithandaa vaadham. I hope you're not
> saying that the existence of a person in the past who's not only left
> behind works of philosophy but also a tradition which stands by his
> teachings is on the same level of reality as somebody being "saved" by
> the shruti.
>
I hope I'm not engaging in Vitanda. I would really like to know what your
criteria for "reality" are. As presented so far they seem to be just as
much "dogmatic assertions" (albeit with a vaguer dogma) as anything else.
> >True but I fail to see the relevance to this case. Whether not a
> >particular incident in the life of a particular person occurred or not is
> >vyavaharic and therefore irrelevant to atmajnana.
>
> I was trying to stress the role of reason, since you seem to give too much
> credence to supernatural occurances.
>
Science aims to be as minimalistic as possible so what cannot be
determined scientifically doesn't exist as far as it is concerned.
Hinduism is rationalistic but not scientific. I don't see why it has to
be similarly minimal. I don't see that aspect of my religion which
depends on reason being impacted in any way by supernatural occurrences or
their lack. And it is a fact that previous generations did believe in
supernatural occurrences. Not acknowledging this could hamper ones
ability to understand their thoughts.
> >Neither are you or I Advaita Vedantins except at the most basic levels as
> >we have not taken sannyasa. Until such time as we do, the practice
> >of Karma and Bhakti is imperative.
>
> As long as you persist in external worship, in strict terms you are not an
> advaitin.
As long as you persist in external *anything*, external car, external house,
external job, external family, as well as external worship you are not an
Advaitin. Give up all of these and you have earned the right to the name.
> But when the mind is turned inwards, you cannot be any other. This
> is irrespective of whether you've embraced samnyaasam or not - for the
> purpose of samnyaasam itself is only to turn the mind inward, away from
> external objects and try to abide in yourself.
>
When you are at your job earning your paycheck, is your mind focused
inwardly? As we have discussed here many times before, sannyasa is not
necessarily the end of the affair, but it is definitely a vital first
step. Real Vedantic sadhana starts only after sannyasa.
> Karma or action is inevitable for an unrealized person. Can there ever be
> consciousness without an object of consciousness? So long as consciousness
> is not pure/non-dual consciousness, which is the state of jivan mukthaas,
> there's always karma.
>
> But bhakti is not imperative. Yes, it is an useful tool to achieve chitta
> shuddhi. But it cannot liberate. We can do without bhakti also - Ramana
> himself did.
>
> I would like to clarify that by bhakti I mean praying to an external Lord.
> I've no problem with Ramana's interpretation of true bhakti as Atma
> vichaaram. Ofcourse this need not be interpreted as there's no utility for
> bhakti. Yes, it can be an useful tool to develop faith and chitta shuddhi.
> But it cannot liberate.
>
If we are not liberated ourselves isn't it a bit presumptious to assume we
know what we can do without? All the Advaita acharyas (who are liberated)
have endorsed Bhakti in both senses.
> >Swami Madhusudan Saraswati put his intellect to use wouldn't you say?
> >Yet evidently he considered himself simple-minded enough for Bhakti too.
>
> But does he say that bhakti in the form of external worship can lead to
> liberation?
>
For an Advaitin what is external and internal? To Swami Madhusudan
Saraswati Bhagawan dancing in the forests of Vrindavan was still within
his own self.
> It is ironic that dvijas of today are unable to do without bhakti - while
> we've spirited women who want to take up jnaana - I salute the Maitreyis of
> today.
???
>
> See as long as you repose faith in an external supernatural being who'll
> "help and take care of you", you'll not expose yourself to the reality of
> samsaara - your mind will be closed to it. The reality of samsaara will be
> known only if you open your mind to it - "knowledge only increases
> suffering" - it is only then that mumukshutvam will arise.
The same can be said of an ordinary mortal Guru too. If you expect such a
person to "help and take care of you" you won't get very far either.
Obviously there has to be two-way communication, the Guru has to teach and
the shishya has to listen and be willing to learn. Same with Bhakti, the
devotee doesn't just sit passively and wait for things to happen. He has
to be a receptacle of divine grace and that requires discipline and
preperation on his part.
> In Advaita, faith
> is only limited to accepting that there's a higher spiritual reality beyond
> this world of suffering which can be attained by ethics, austerity and
> knowledge.
>
To get back to the original topic, how does some statement about an event
in the life of Kumarila Bhatta, impede the attainment of ethics,
austerity, or knowledge?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 16:03:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Bhadraiah Mallampalli wrote:
> Buddhist texts being declared as authoritative is quite consistent, and does
> not prove they are absolutely true.
Can we learn something from the Buddhist shastras? Yes. In the same way
as we can learn something from a map of the New York subway. Are they
pramana for Dharma or Moksha? The Advaita acharyas say no.
> Can we have a definitive opinion here about mimamsakas in this case?
>
I will cover some of the different theories of Mimamsakas and Vedantins in
my articles on the relationship between Karma and Jnana, the next one of
which I'll post soon.
> If advaita is conditional to sannyasa, isn't it then a conditional Brahman?
> How can Brahman be pre-conditioned by requirements such as sannyasa or
> death? It should be immediately realized or it may never be realized if it
> is conditional.
>
When saying anything about Advaita Vedanta, it is important to know which
viewpoint you're saying it. From the paramarthic viewpoint, Brahman is
always there. So it cannot be lost and it cannot be achieved. From the
vyavaharic viewpoint the knowledge of Brahman is blocked by Samsara(Maya).
Advaita Vedanta operates in this realm and provides the means of
transcending Maya. The first step (by no means the last) is sannyasa.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 21:31:08
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Can we learn something from the Buddhist shastras? Yes. In the same >way
>as we can learn something from a map of the New York subway. Are >they
>pramana for Dharma or Moksha? The Advaita acharyas say no.
Are you sure?
Gaudapaada says : There are some (shunyavaadins) who uphold non-dualism and
reject both the extreme views of being and not-being, of production and
destruction and thus emphatically proclaim the doctrine of no-origination.
We APPROVE says Gaudapaada, of the doctrine of no-origination proclaimed by
them.
I can actually quote numerous verses from Gaudapaada's Kaarikas which echo
the exact sentiment of some verses of Nagarjuna's Kaarikaas. Some of them
are even exact quotes from Nagarjuna.
Shankara himself notes that Gaudapaada accepts the arguments of the
Vijnaanavaadin Bauddhas regarding the unreality of the world :
vijnaanavaadino bauddhasya vachanam baahyaarthavaadipakshapratisedhaparam
aachaaryena anumoditam.
The greatest of the Advaita dialecticians Sri Harsha in his
Khandanakhandakhaadhya too warmly embraces the dialectic of Nagarjuna :
1. "As far as the unreality of the world is concerned the view of the
Advaitin is exactly the same as that of the Madhyamika"
-maadhyamikaadivaagvyavahaaraanam svaroopaapalaapo na shakyate.
2. "The criticisms of the intellectual categories given by both Madhyamika
and Advaita are perfectly valid against all views of all systems" - yadi
shunyavaadaanirvachaniyapakshayor aashrayanam tadaa taavad amusaam
nirbaadhaiva saarvapathinataa.
Citsukha the commentator on the Khandana too notes the similarities between
the samvritti of the Madhyamikas and the vyavahaara of the Advaitins and
himself takes up the Madhyamika cause by defending the concept of samvritti
against the attacks of the Miimaamsakas.
Vimukthaatmaa too has the grace to admit that if the shunya of the
Madhyamikas is not nothing, then their position is the same as that of
Advaita.
So where's the validity to your claim, Jaladhar? Have you read the
Madhyamika Shastram and understood its message? Have you read Gaudapaada's
Kaarikas and understood ajaativaada? Have you compared Nagarjuna's teachings
with Gaudapaada - when Gaudapaada himself declares that they are alike? Have
you read Sri Harsha or Citshuka and absorbed the implication of their
dialectic? Again have you compared it with Nagarjuna's teachings? If you've
not studied and understood the related texts you should not raise such
objections.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:18:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> >Can we learn something from the Buddhist shastras? Yes. In the same >way
> >as we can learn something from a map of the New York subway. Are >they
> >pramana for Dharma or Moksha? The Advaita acharyas say no.
>
> Are you sure?
>
Need you ask? :-) Supposed Buddhist influences on Advaita Vedanta are
something we've gone over countless times and we don't really need to
bring up that particular flamefest again. However let's for the sake of
argument say there are some similarities. This doesn't classify it as
pramana anymore than a whale should be classified as a fish just because
it superficially looks like one. According to Kumarila Bhatta (whose
views on this subject Advaita Vedanta accepts in toto) hat makes the Vedas
pramana? Because they are apaurusheya. Other shastras are pramana only
to the extent that they are based on the Vedas. If by coincidence other
people come up with similiar sounding things, all well and good but it
doesn't make them a pramana.
> So where's the validity to your claim, Jaladhar?
Tell you what, look through Karikas, Khandana, Ishtasiddhi, etc. Count
how many references you find to Buddhist works (as authorities). Do the
same for Vedic works. Which number is greater?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:55:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
This thread seems to have started as a response to the following.
>>In fact I have read Jain debators once conspired and pushed
>> bhaskara bhatta (?? pls. correct) from atop a building with an
>intention to
>> kill him when latter was found in jain disguise trying to learn
>jainism to
>> debate against jains later. The story goes that bhaskara loses eye
>sight
>> but survives the fall.
However, in our archives, I can't find who wrote this and when...
Jaldhar, Nanda, can you give the details of the original message?
By the way, the story is about Kumarila. The reason he is said to
have lost an eye in the fall is that he prayed, "if the Vedas are
pramANa, may I not be hurt by this." The use of the conditional
"if" indicated a doubt, so his life was spared, but he lost an eye.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:38:13 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Thanks for the responses. A few points may help:
The hot iron test may be a crude version of lie detector test. Likewise
jumping off cliff may be another extreme test we can not give too much
importance to. The implication may be that one who knows prajna may be
skilled enough to escape unhurt. A friend of mine fell from 2nd floor first
on toes, then on knees, then elbows and did a somersault to prevent head
touching the ground and escaped unhurt, but it is a rare feat.
We can not say Shruti is in ignorance or duality because that is again a way
of trivializing ignorance. There is enough Shruti out there to help one to
reach the stage where one can say "I am viSNu". If you still need more you
can scrible it yourself. That is the reason why Acharyas always take Shruti
as pramANa if there is a Shruti concerning any matter.
As for mimamsakas, I will wait for a more detailed answer. My first
impression is, they may be more interested in material benefits than
mumukSatva or they may not even care about upaniSats. But why do advaitists
hand them over all mss of Shrutis (especialy the so-called karma kANDas) on
a platter? Isn't it more like what pandit Nehru said "Not even grass grows
there" when India lost 100,000 sq miles of land to China? May be they don't
know how to read advaita in karmakANDa.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 20:10:17 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Re: bhakti.
Shraddha is the first that is needed, on any path, let it be bhakti mArga or
yoga mArga or jnAna marga or karma marga.
One little boy prahlAda who walked on bhakti mArga said confidently that he
can show viSNu anywhere. I believe advaitists can do the same. Why can't
they prove advaita in karmakANDa when the upaniSats are an
oversimplification of karmakANDa in the first place?
For an alternate opinion: (Sri kRSNa karNAmRtam of LilaShuka:)
varamimamupadeSamAdriyadhvam
nigamavaneSu nitAnta cArakhinnAH
vicinuta bhuvaneSu vallavInAm
upaniSadardhamulUkhale nibaddham
Oh, scholars, let me give you an advise. Why are you forever searching in
the forests of nigamas? Go look in the houses of milkmaids, the essense of
upaniSats is lying there bound to the grinding stone.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 20:39:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Vidyasankar Sundaresan wrote:
> This thread seems to have started as a response to the following.
>
> >>In fact I have read Jain debators once conspired and pushed
> >> bhaskara bhatta (?? pls. correct) from atop a building with an
> >intention to
> >> kill him when latter was found in jain disguise trying to learn
> >jainism to
> >> debate against jains later. The story goes that bhaskara loses eye
> >sight
> >> but survives the fall.
>
> However, in our archives, I can't find who wrote this and when...
> Jaldhar, Nanda, can you give the details of the original message?
It was sent to advaita-l-owner at y... I forwarded it to
advaita-l with Nandachandrans' permission.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 22:00:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:18:04 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at B...>
wrote:
> This doesn't classify it as
>pramana anymore than a whale should be classified as a fish just because
>it superficially looks like one.
In the bhAgavata, there is an event in Krishna's infant life that may
be used to describe the situation. Actually, this is not peculiar to
Krishna alone but all infants. When infants are in the crawling stage,
their vision is naturally restricted to the legs or the garments that
cover the legs of adults around them. Sometimes they end up crawling up
to the legs of someone other than the mother, perhaps a stranger,
thinking that they are going to the mother. But when they reach the
person and look up at that person's face, they realize that it is not
the mother! And then they move away from the person. This is
undoubtedly amusing for us adults but it does illustrate a point. When
we are infants in the spiritual path, our vision is restricted to a lot
of superficial things and many different schools of philosophy appear
to be the "right" one. Many pairs of legs appear the same. But when we
look up and see what the end-result or the sum and substance of a
particular school is, we realize it is not for us. Hopefully, we will
reach the right pair of legs (of the mother) or else She will have to
pick us up!
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 16:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Vidya thanks for your post. Here are some of my thoughts. Please
correct and criticize.
1) Contemplating on any subject is indeed an action. nididhyAsana on
mahAvakya is an action which involves time and effort. It does remove
the avidya and that is the fruit of that action. I do understand that
AtmajnAna can not be a *direct* result of an action. It is not
something external to be gained and definitely not something to be
learnt. But it is inherent and natural. It is automatically revealed
when avidyA is removed, like a gold ball covered in a cow dung is
revealed when one washes away the cow dung.
2) bhakti is a different kind of nididhyAsana, like shivAnandalahari
defines: it constant contemplation of God, or like vivekachuuDamaniH
says contemplation of the Self. And it does result in removal avidya.
Hence, bhakti also ends in the same state (Atma sAxatkAra) which
contemplation of mahAvakya-s do.
3) mantra-s like hrIm, when meditated upon (japa) with concentration,
reveals HER, trishati and its bhAShya affirms it. That is bestows the
knowledge of the supreme being. It is an action with a definite result.
That knowledge of HER leads to constant contemplation of HER, and it is
bhakti. Hence it will result in removal of avidya. Contrary to the
possible and highly probable bogus feeling that "I am realized" by a
verbal contemplation of a mahavAkya like I am brahman, intuitive
knowledge that arises out meditating on verbally meaningless bijaxara-s
like "hrIm" or "aim" which is a mantra, is a safer way with a definite
result.
4) Under what conditions does a verbal understanding of statements like
"ahaM brahmAsmi" dislodge avidyA?
Ravi
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 00:35:08
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
Ravi - sorry to jump in this discussion. Just want to bring to your
attention the exact discussion in the current and past two issues on the
Notes on Brahmasuutra-s.
>Vidya thanks for your post. Here are some of my thoughts. Please
>correct and criticize.
>
>1) Contemplating on any subject is indeed an action. nididhyAsana on
>mahAvakya is an action which involves time and effort. It does remove
>the avidya and that is the fruit of that action. I do understand that
>AtmajnAna can not be a *direct* result of an action. It is not
>something external to be gained and definitely not something to be
>learnt. But it is inherent and natural. It is automatically revealed
>when avidyA is removed, like a gold ball covered in a cow dung is
>revealed when one washes away the cow dung.
In the next posts as well as the last post two notes of Brahmasuutra-
shankara refutes the vRitiikaara arguments which are essentially based on
the comments you have made in 1. His arguments if you look back the last
but one notes is essentially that nidhidhyaasana is like upasana and
involves karma which is required after Brahma j~naanam. Please read
Shankara arugments refuting the above puurvapaksha. The next post is getting
some what delayed but will be soon available to the list. That contain three
others arguments against the puurvapaksha.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
Hari Om
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 20:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Russia - Rishi Varsha
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
This appeared in the "Letters to the Editor" of The Hindu and was forwarded by
my friend to me:
Begin
...
It appears that a few years ago a Russian orientalist by
name Prof. Ribakov from Moscow went to Kanchi to have the
darshan and receive the blessings of the late Kanchi
Paramacharya. The Paramacharya asked the Russian professor:
``Does not the northernmost part of Russia have more
Sanskrit content in the language?'' The professor was
stunned. This scholar, who came to ask questions, shed
tears of joy at the very sight of the Paramacharya and was
dumbfounded at the depth of his scholarship. The
Paramacharya further explained to the Russian that Russia
was called `Rishi Varsha' in ancient Indian geography,
because it was the land where our Rishis like sage
Yagnavalkya had their conference on the Vedas. This could
further be corroborated by the fact that some women in the
northernmost point of Russia have names like Lopamudrova,
which is stunningly close to Lopamudra, wife of sage
Agastya.
It may be recalled that during the Sankalpa (a solemn vow
to perform an observance) at the time of Pooja, we
frequently use the term Jambu Dweepa. This term actually
means the entire region covering Asia and Europe, as is
evidenced from descriptions in Puranic geography. Even
today I understand that in the USSR while writing the
postal address, the name of the country is written first
and then followed by such specifications as the city, town,
area, street number, etc., in that sequence. This is an
ancient Hindu tradition which we follow even today during
our daily Sankalpa in Pujas.
End.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 05:43:41
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Dear Jaladhar,
>In the same vein, a more accurate way to say "not only is it in you it is
>everywhere. There is no you only it."
This is a good question that needs to be understood - can knowing the
truth of an object result in the liberation of the subject?
The first question is who knows? It cannot be your true self - for it
is already liberated and has no need of such knowledge. If it is your
false self then how'll its ignorance be cleared up on account of seeing
the truth of an external object? Will observing the goodness or evil of
somebody make you good or evil? How can knowing the truth of an
object make you know the truth about yourself? Even for Patanjali
the Self sees itself in chitta shuddhi which is like a mirror and
that's how liberation occurs. In your case since you seek the truth in
external objects, even *if* you are able to know the truth of the object
your phenoemenal self which is a product of ignorance will only see
itself - ignorance - in the purity of the object. This will give rise
to even more suffering in samsaara!
Also if knowledge arises in you because of knowing the truth about
something else, then it will be caused - and all that's caused has
an end - so it too will be transient and temporary.
We're not mere philosophers trying to "know" the truth of the world - we
want to liberate ourselves from samsaara. So ultimate question in all
spiritual endeavor is how that will benefit you - infact a few years ago on
this very list it was from you that I learnt this. Actually your view that
saving knowledge can be had by knowing the truth of an external object has
the distinction of being unique in all Indian philosophy - for even the
bhakti Vedantists pray only so that Ishvara will make the knowledge of their
own self arise.
Your stance also contradicts the fundamental principles of Advaita
itself : brahman satyam jagat mithyam jivo brahmaiva naaparah : Brahman
is the only reality, the world is false and the individual soul is
non-different from Brahman. Advaita is not Ishvaravaada or jagatvaada
to believe in external worship or that you can know the truth of the
world. It is first maayavaada and then Atmavaada. Mayaavaada means all
objective "knowledge"is only relative. That's why the world is maya -
because it cannot proved as either real, or unreal, or both, or neither.
So according to mayavaada you cannot "know the truth of" anything
external to you.
The only non-relational knowledge is the knowledge of one's own self,
which is self-established and hence that's the way to saving knowledge
- Atmavaada. And that's the fundamental concept of Advaita - the essence
of your own self, which is Atman is none other than Brahman - infact
that's what Advaita itself is - that *your* self is non-dual with Brahman.
That's the reason the achaaryas of our "sadguru parampara" one after another
teach you how to know your own self. Does Ashparasha Yoga teach external
worship? Is the main thrust of Vivekachoodaamani or Atma Bodha to teach how
to worship Bhagavan? Let's not even whisper of action where Sureshvara is
concerned. What is the main teaching of Panchadasi or Jeevanmukti Viveka or
Drg Drshya Viveka? It is only to know your own
self.
>1. Nothing I've said is "Jaldhar's opinion" only the views our sadguru
>parampara has held forever. I don't go for pulling notions out of thin
>air just to suit my fancy. If you should find an opinion of mine is not
>authentic I'll gladly retract it.
But against all evidence you do seem to be pulling notions out of thin
air and your "sadguru parampara" seems to be restricted only to partial
views of Madhusudhana Saraswati. In contrast my sadguru parampara consists
of the top triumvitrate of Advaita : Gaudapaada, Shankara and Sureshvara who
are all anti-action and believe only that "inward search" can result in
liberation. The great Gauda's view about external worship which implicitly
accepts difference, is succintly put thus : vaisharadyam tu vai naasti bhede
vicharataam sadaa.
The adorable Ramana Maharishi who taught his disciples to investigate
"Who am I" says : "Self enquiry is the infallible means, the only
direct one, to realize the unconditioned absolute being that you really
are ... the attempt to destroy the ego or mind through saadhanas other
than self-enquiry is like the thief turning policeman to catch the
thief that is himself. Self-enquiry alone can reveal the truth that
neither the ego nor the mind really exists and enable one to realize
the pure, undifferentiated being of the Self".
If you're really serious about this and not arguing just for the sake
of argument, best thing for you to do is provide quotes from the
philosophical works of Shankara or Gaudapaada or Sureshvara to the effect
that "external worship" will result in liberation. Also you've to provide a
logical explanation of how it can be so.
And even with Madhusudhana he doesn't seem to believe that bhakti can
result in : siddham jivato pi viduso shariiratvam - looks like if you
practice bhakti you'll go to brahmaloka and then ...
And where's brahmaloka - in the sky somewhere? As Shankara himself says
there can be only either samsaara or nirvaana. If brahmaloka is not
nirvaana then it too is only in the realm of ignorance. Since you're not
liberated you too are obviously in the realm of ignorance. Fine couple
you'll make :-)
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Lance Nelson <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 05:35:27 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: lnelson at s...
Subject: Re: Madhusudana on bhakti
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Lance Nelson <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...> wrote:
> Thankyou for your most informative post. You described an 11 stage
> process of Bhakti. What are the 11 steps? Does Swami M.S. give a
> shastraic rationale for this?
I've taken some time to prepare summary my notes on this topic. I'll be
revising these, but this is what I've got now. See below.
> Also will your translation of the Bhaktirasayana include the Sanskrit
> text? A pet peeve of mine is translations that don't include the original
> text. It makes it very difficult for people who know Sanskrit to check
> the accuracy of the translation.
Hmmm. This is a good idea. I'm considering it. It will depend upon my time
and also, to a great extent, on the publisher.
Lance
-------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES ON MADNUSUDANA'S BHAKTI-BHUMIKAS
The eleven stages of bhakti are enumerated at BhaktirasAyana (BhR) 1.34-36, as
follows:
prathamam mahatAm sevA tad-dayA-pAtratA tataH |
zraddhA 'tha teSAM dharmeSu tato hari-guNa-zrutiH || 34 ||
tato raty-aGkurotpattiH svarUpAdhigatiH tataH |
prema-vRddhiH parAnande tasyAtha spuraNaM tataH || 35 ||
bhagavad-dharma-niSThA 'tas svasmiNs tad-guNa-zAlitA |
premNo 'tha paramA kASThety uditA bhakti-bhUmikA || 36 ||
He gives no sastraic justification for this scheme. Rupagosvami lists nine
stages of the development of prema at BhaktirasAmRtasindhu 1.4.15-16. They are
different from M's stages. They seem to be M's own arrangement. In her book
on M, Prof. Sanjukta Dasgupta suggests that he is drawing these notions from
the BhP. I would tend to agree. It is interesting to note, however, that M
gives a seven-stage scheme for the attainment of liberation, apparently based
on the YogavAsiSTha, in his GAD on BhG 3.18.
Madhusudana's commentary on these three verses (34-36) of the BhR covers
forty-four pages in the text. Remarks from his own hand occupy a total of only
about two pages of this bulk; the rest is made up of some 190 verses from the
Bhagavata Purana (BhP) which the author quotes to explain, through illustrative
reference to the legends of great devotees, the various stages of devotion.
In what follows, I give a summary of the stages along with most of M's
comments, living out all the BhP citations. Text references are to the edition
of the BhR edited by Janardana Sastri Pandeya [JSP] (Motilal Banarsidass,
c1960). The material in quotes represents my translations of M's TIkA.
I. Service of the Great (mahatAm sevA). "Service of the great," he says, "is
two-fold: service of the devotess of the Lord or service of the Lord Himself"
(sAkSAd-bhagavat-sevA, JSP, p. 97).
M comments:"Without either close association with the Lord Himself or with
those [saints] who are in close contact with Him, whichever is possible,
devotion to the Lord will not arise. Here is the distinction: for those who
have close association with the Lord Himself, there is no requirement for any
further contact [with saints], because their goal is already achieved, but for
those who are enjoying the company of saints, there is the further requirement
of direct contact with the Lord, as this is the goal" (JSP, p. 101).
II. Being a Fit Object of Their Compassion (tad-dayA pAtratA). "The
compassion of great," comments, "directed toward oneself, arises because of
one's virtues such as having a pure and tractable disposition" (JSP, p. 102).
The virtues are important for, "If the disciple does not have such qualities,
association with the great, even if attained, is useless (nirarthaka)" (JSP, p.
104).
III. Faith in Their Disciplines (zraddhA teSAM dharmeSu). This level is
described by M as follows: "For one who is possessed of the qualities just
described and is engaged in the service of the great, faith in their
disciplines arises in the form of a particular inclination, namely, 'By the
performance of such disciplines I too may become one whose purpose in life is
fulfilled'" (JSP, p. 108).
IV. Hearing of the Glories of Hari (hariguNa-zruti). "This phrase," says, "is
meant to suggest all nine of the disciplines of the Lord's devotees" (JSP, p.
115). These nine are enumerated at BhP 7.5.23-24, which he quotes. "The
performance of such disciplines of the Lord's devotees according to one's
capacity is the fourth stage. These four stages are means (sAdhana) only"
(JSP, p. 124).
V. The Arising of the Sprout of Love (raty-aMkurotpatti). "This love (rati)
will be explained as the permanent emotion of the sentiment of devotion. It is
a special permanent impression of the form of the Lord that has entered into
the melted mind, the 'sprout' of the 'seed' which consists in the performance
of the disciplines of the Lord's devotees" (JSP, p. 124). "The idea is that
after one has faith in the experience of the sentiment of devotion, love
(rati), the permanent emotion, will arise. Then that will develop into the
sentiment of devotion, all in proper sequence" (JSP, p. 125). "This, the fifth
stage, represents the real essence (svarUpa) of devotion. The other six levels
become the fruit of this through a particular process of development" (JSP, p.
126).
VI. Realization of the Essential Nature (svarUpAdhigati). This stage is
especially interesting since M indicates clearly that it is the same as
knowledge of Brahman, the highest goal of Advaita. He describes it as "the
direct realization of the essential nature (svarUpa) of the inner Self
(pratyag-Atman) as distinct from both the gross and subtle bodies"
(pratyag-Atma-svarUpasya sthUla-sUkSma-deha-dvayAtiriktatvena sAkSAtkAraS
SaSThI bhUmikA, JSP, p. 126).
Any doubts regarding the equivalence of this state to Vedantic knowledge of
Brahman are removed by M's assertion that it includes the realization of the
truth of the "great saying" of the UpaniSad, "Thou art That" (CU 6.9.4): "When,
in this way, that which is designated by the word 'thou' is realized in its
purity, there arises knowledge of its non-difference from what is designated by
the word 'That'" (evaM zuddhe tvam-pada-lakSye 'vagate tat-pada-lakSyeNa
sahAbheda-jJAnaM bhavati, JSP, p. 128). M declares that such "knowledge of
reality" (tattva-jJAna) generates intense non-attachment and suggests that this
non-attachment prepares the ground for the next stage (etAdRza-tattva-jJAne
sati, vairAgya-dArDhyAD bhagavati premNo vRddhi bhavati, JSP, p. 129).
"Without it," he says, "love (rati) will not reach its full development due to
the distractions of the body and senses" (anyathA dehendriyAdi-vikSepeNa jAyAtA
api rater anirvAhAt, JSP, p. 126-127).
VII. The Increase of Love for the Supreme Bliss (paramAnande prema-vRddhiH).
Madhusumamdana states that this stage represents the end of the practice of the
means (sAdhana) and that "the four remaining stages are accomplished without
effort" (JSP, p. 131-132).
VIII. The Direct Manifestation of God (tasya sphuraNam). "The eighth stage is
the immediate realization (sAkSAtkAra), caused by the super-abundance of love
(premAtizaya), of the Blessed Lord who is the object of that love
(premAspadI-bhUta)" (JSP, p. 132).
IX. Spontaneous Absorption in the Disciplines of the Lord's Devotees
(bhagavad-dharma-niSThA). After quoting many verses giving examples from the
BhP, M concludes: "The absorption in the disciplines of the Lord's devotees
that requires effort is a means (sAdhana), but this absorption, which is
accomplished spontaneously (svatas-siddham), is an end in itself (phala-bhUtA)"
(JSP, p. 136).
X. Possession of His Glorious Qualities in Oneself (svasmiMs tad-guNa-zAlitA).
M's exposition of the tenth and eleventh stages is disappointingly brief,
covering a total of only 21 lines of text. He begins his discussion of the
former by quoting two verses from the BhP (3.25.37-38) which indicate that the
devotee attains supernatural powers, divine radiance, and other spiritual
gifts, even though he has no desire for these things. These are explained in a
brief comment as a "manifestation [in the devotee] of qualities that are
imperishable and similar to the Lord's"
(avinazvara-bhagavat-tulya-guNa-vibhAva, JSP, p. 137).
XI. The Supreme Limit of Love (premnaH paramA kaSTA). M's explanation of this
stage is short: "It is characterized by the inability to endure separation
(viraha) to the extent of giving up
one's very life"
(prANa-parityAgAvadhi-virahAsahiSNutA-rUpA, JSP, p. 137). This comment is
supported by four passages from the BhP illustrating the anguish experienced by
the bhaktas when separated from Krishna. Here, the paradigms are the gopis and
the queen's of Dvaraka: BhP 10.19.16, BhP 10.31.15, BhP 1.11.9, BhP 10.29.9-11.
At this point, M admits that he is only hinting at the nature of preman, and he
promises to explain it in greater detail in the second chapter (diG-mAtram
ihodAhRtam | antarollAse punar etat saprapaJcam udAhariSyate prema, JSP, p.
139).
In BhR 2, M at first identifies the gopi's love for Krishna as the highest
sentiment (paramo rasaH). But he then goes on to identify the zuddha-bhakti
("pure devotion") of sages like Sanaka as an even superior rasa (eti rasatAm
adhikAm).
Please forgive any typos.
LN
=====
Lance Nelson
Associate Professor
Theology and Religious Studies
University of San Diego
San Diego, California USA 92110
PLEASE RESPOND TO: lnelson at s...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:12:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Russia - Rishi Varsha
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Namaste Sri S.V. Subramanian:
Please note that the incident that you referenced in your posting was
appeared in special article withe the title: "A Uniue Saint." The 108th
Jayanthi of Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati was on May 19th and this
special article written by A.S. Raman appeared on The Hindu on May 18th.
The entire article was posted in the advaitin list by the Hindu and is
available at: http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m9346.html
regards,
Ram Chandran
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:41:04 -0400
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 16:33:13 -0700, Ravisankar S. Mayavaram
<miinalochanii at Y...> wrote:
>
>2) bhakti is a different kind of nididhyAsana, like shivAnandalahari
>defines: it constant contemplation of God, ...
Ravi,
The definition of bhakti in shivAnandalaharI is indeed beautiful - this
definition was the main reason I was attracted towards learning it.
ankolaM nijabIjaM santatirasyakAntopalaM sUchikA
sAdhvI naijavibhuM latAkshitirUhaM sindursaridavallabhaM |
prApnotih yathA tathA pashupate pAdAravindadvayaM
chetovrittirUpetya tiShThati sadA sA bhaktirityuchyate ||
rough translation:
Like the seeds of the ankola tree (that have fallen during the day and move
back towards the mother plant in the night), like the (devotion of a)
chaste woman towards her husband, like the (embrace of the) creeper towards
the tree and like the flow of rivers towards the ocean, the constant flow
of thought towards the lotus feet of Shambhu (Pashupati) is termed as
bhakti.
Please correct any errors or omissions.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 11:10:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Namaste Sri Nanda:
I was following the discussions on this thread and thanks for articulating
your insights and wisdom forcefully with lots of patience. These discussions
were educative to understand the different philosophical thoughts on the
ultimate reality. We all know that one-size of shoe doesn't fit all foots
and same is true with respect philsophical framework. Though the frameworks
of Buddhism and Advaita are different but the realized "ultimate reality"
has to be necessarily the same. There is no disagreement between all of us
that there is only one ultimate reality.
Here is my understanding of "Nirvana" focusing on the question: Whether
"Nirvana" represents the ultimate reality? Any meaningful answer to this
question should be derived from the advaitic framework. In advaita, Jiva
(self) may be viewed as the fully dressed Brahman (SELF)with the clothes
made of body, mind and intellect. SELF-realization requires discarding
the clothes made by body, mind and intellect from the self. In other words
from advaitic point of view, Nirvana represents the liberation from the
world of prison walled by the body, mind and intellect.
It should be also pointed out that the agreement, "Nirvana equals to
SELF-realization" does not imply that Adavaita is equivalent to Buddhism. I
believe that advaita philosophy stresses the positve aspects of human life
where as the Buddhism points out the negative side of human life. For
example, according to Buddhism, desire is an evil and needs to be
eradicated. But in advaita, we can desire anything as long as we agree not
to get agitated if it is not fulfilled. It is possible to bring many
aspects of advaita and Buddhism to show that they are different. But I do
believe that the "ultimate reality" that we envision is the whether follow
Advaita or Buddhism.
I am fully aware on the pitfalls of intellectually conceptualizing
the ultimate reality. This is just a beginners first step and ultimately
one has to cross all steps of intellectualism to experience the reality.
Thanks for the opportunity,
regards,
Ram Chandran
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 08:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
This verse was discussed in detail in the past. Please look for it in
the arhives. Not just this verse, entire shivaanandalaharii is a GREAT
treatise on bhakti.
--- Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 16:33:13 -0700, Ravisankar S. Mayavaram
> <miinalochanii at Y...> wrote:
>
> >
> >2) bhakti is a different kind of nididhyAsana, like shivAnandalahari
> >defines: it constant contemplation of God, ...
>
> Ravi,
>
> The definition of bhakti in shivAnandalaharI is indeed beautiful -
> this
> definition was the main reason I was attracted towards learning it.
>
> ankolaM nijabIjaM santatirasyakAntopalaM sUchikA
> sAdhvI naijavibhuM latAkshitirUhaM sindursaridavallabhaM |
> prApnotih yathA tathA pashupate pAdAravindadvayaM
> chetovrittirUpetya tiShThati sadA sA bhaktirityuchyate ||
>
> rough translation:
>
> Like the seeds of the ankola tree (that have fallen during the day
> and move
> back towards the mother plant in the night), like the (devotion of a)
> chaste woman towards her husband, like the (embrace of the) creeper
> towards
> the tree and like the flow of rivers towards the ocean, the constant
> flow
> of thought towards the lotus feet of Shambhu (Pashupati) is termed as
> bhakti.
>
>
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 12:03:08 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> This is a good question that needs to be understood - can knowing the
> truth of an object result in the liberation of the subject?
>
> The first question is who knows? It cannot be your true self - for it
> is already liberated and has no need of such knowledge. If it is your
> false self then how'll its ignorance be cleared up on account of seeing
> the truth of an external object?
It is your false self that has to know because as you say your true self
already knows. The false self can transcend ignorance because the truth
that it learns is *there are no external objects*. What it preceived as
external is really nothing other than itself.
> Will observing the goodness or evil of
> somebody make you good or evil? How can knowing the truth of an
> object make you know the truth about yourself?
Again, because the object is not in reality different from yourself.
abhedha (non-difference) is a synonym for advaita (non-duality.)
Your "self" is as much an object and as much maya as anything else. Why
should it have a priviledged position over any other piece of maya? This
why so much stress is placed on disciplines to lessen ahamkara to combat
this idea of supremacy of self.
> Also if knowledge arises in you because of knowing the truth about
> something else, then it will be caused - and all that's caused has
> an end - so it too will be transient and temporary.
>
But if the knowledge is "there is no something else" that doesn't apply.
> We're not mere philosophers trying to "know" the truth of the world - we
> want to liberate ourselves from samsaara.
???? For us that amounts to the same thing.
> So ultimate question in all
> spiritual endeavor is how that will benefit you - infact a few years ago on
> this very list it was from you that I learnt this.
And I still stand by this. Looking back at all the great acharyas of
Advaita Vedanta, they have all endorsed Bhakti. My personal experience
and what I've observed in others is that Bhakti is a tremendous benefit
for spiritual progress in the Advaita Vedanta sense.
> Actually your view that
> saving knowledge can be had by knowing the truth of an external object has
> the distinction of being unique in all Indian philosophy
What can I say? Advaita Vedanta is unique amongst all the various darshanas.
And again let me point out that Bhakti does not imply "external object"
> Your stance also contradicts the fundamental principles of Advaita
> itself : brahman satyam jagat mithyam jivo brahmaiva naaparah : Brahman
> is the only reality, the world is false and the individual soul is
> non-different from Brahman. Advaita is not Ishvaravaada or jagatvaada
> to believe in external worship or that you can know the truth of the
> world. It is first maayavaada and then Atmavaada. Mayaavaada means all
> objective "knowledge"is only relative. That's why the world is maya -
> because it cannot proved as either real, or unreal, or both, or neither.
> So according to mayavaada you cannot "know the truth of" anything
> external to you.
>
The world is mithya. What does that mean? It is "false" in the sense
that it is misunderstood. And this comes from misapprehension of it's
nature and false conclusions based upon that. For instance let us say a
person measures their height as 6 feet. Then he measures himself
metrically as 1.8 metres. Is it right for him to conclude "Oh my God I've
shrunk!" No, because you can't logically compare two different
measurement systems. In the same way, the common man "measures" the world
in a certain way. He thinks there is "me" and external objects. On
achieving mukti, his measurement system changes. All is one. For a
jivanmukta the world doesn't suddenly disappear in a puff of smoke. He
can still pick up things and talk to people. The difference is he now
abides in the unshakeable conviction that these are not "external objects"
but only his own self.
> The only non-relational knowledge is the knowledge of one's own self,
> which is self-established and hence that's the way to saving knowledge
> - Atmavaada. And that's the fundamental concept of Advaita - the essence
> of your own self, which is Atman is none other than Brahman - infact
> that's what Advaita itself is - that *your* self is non-dual with Brahman.
Don't you see? there is no "your" or "my" in Brahman. *Everything* is
non-dual with Brahman. A sadhaka cannot privilege his own self. Again to
combat this notion is why we have disciplines such as ahimsa and vairagya.
> That's the reason the achaaryas of our "sadguru parampara" one after another
> teach you how to know your own self. Does Ashparasha Yoga teach external
> worship? Is the main thrust of Vivekachoodaamani or Atma Bodha to teach how
> to worship Bhagavan? Let's not even whisper of action where Sureshvara is
> concerned. What is the main teaching of Panchadasi or Jeevanmukti Viveka or
> Drg Drshya Viveka? It is only to know your own
> self.
>
As I've already pointed out, this idea of "external worship" is bogus, a
red herring. The bhakta does not see Bhagawan as an external entity.
And incidently even Gaudapadacharya uses the words Prabhu (e.g. III.13)
and Bhagavan (e.g. IV. 82) to describe Brahman.
> But against all evidence you do seem to be pulling notions out of thin
> air and your "sadguru parampara" seems to be restricted only to partial
> views of Madhusudhana Saraswati. In contrast my sadguru parampara consists
> of the top triumvitrate of Advaita : Gaudapaada, Shankara and Sureshvara who
> are all anti-action and believe only that "inward search" can result in
> liberation.
Once more with feeling: Bhakti does not equal action and inward search
does not equal liberation.
> The great Gauda's view about external worship which implicitly
> accepts difference, is succintly put thus : vaisharadyam tu vai naasti bhede
> vicharataam sadaa.
>
IV.94. "There is no perfection for those who meander eternally in difference"
Note nothing is mentioned about external worship only bheda. And the
warning could just as readily apply to those who believe in "inward' and
"outward"
> The adorable Ramana Maharishi who taught his disciples to investigate
> "Who am I" says : "Self enquiry is the infallible means, the only
> direct one, to realize the unconditioned absolute being that you really
> are ... the attempt to destroy the ego or mind through saadhanas other
> than self-enquiry is like the thief turning policeman to catch the
> thief that is himself. Self-enquiry alone can reveal the truth that
> neither the ego nor the mind really exists and enable one to realize
> the pure, undifferentiated being of the Self".
>
Ramana is not part of your triumvirate. But anyway, self-inquiry. What
does that mean in practice? It has to be the anubhava or experience
of Brahman (or the Self if you want to call it that.) Bhakti also
provides this.
> If you're really serious about this and not arguing just for the sake
> of argument,
Certainly not!
> best thing for you to do is provide quotes from the
> philosophical works of Shankara or Gaudapaada or Sureshvara
And I suppose your definition of "philosophical works" is "works not
including Bhakti" right? Shankaracharya as is well known wrote many
stotras to various Deities. Sureshwaracharya uses Shiva as a synonym for
Brahman in the Manasollasa which is a commentary on the Dakshinamurtistotra of
Shankaracharya. A work on Shrividya is attributed to Gaudapadacharya.
Even if you don't believe the attribution is genuine, the fact that some
Advaitin even attempted it should tell you something.
Furthermore Shankaracharya set up Shrichakra in many places including his
mathas and established the worship of Bhagawan Chandramoulishwara which
his spiritual descendents still carry out today.
> to the effect
> that "external worship" will result in liberation. Also you've to provide a
> logical explanation of how it can be so.
>
"external worship" is a bogus issue. The logical reason is that even if
the murti is phyically apart from his body, the bhakta still sees it as
only his own self.
> And even with Madhusudhana he doesn't seem to believe that bhakti can
> result in : siddham jivato pi viduso shariiratvam
Read Prof. Nelsons post.
I submit to you that because you are relying on translations you've missed
some nuances in the Sanskrit and together
with your lack of familiarity
with Advaita tradition you have received a garbled version of Advaita
Vedanta teachings and are therefore grasping the wrong end of the stick.
There's nothing wrong with that per se. God knows I've made mistakes
before. But to persist in it, is not very good for either your
intellectual or spiritual development.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 09:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: pa~nchaaN^ga
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
I recently got a pa~nchaaN^ga published from North America, and
specially for EST from
www.indianet.com/ganesh
It is prepared by the astrologer of kA~nchi maTha and specially keeping
in mind the Astika-s living in USA. They have also corrections for
other cities in USA. Unlike the ones printed in India, this runs from
Jan to Dec. Cost of the panchaanga is only $2.
Just FYI.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: pa~nchaaN^ga
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Thank you Sri Ravi for informing people about this. This has been in existence
of a quite a few years now. I think it is by one Sri LVS Mani of Kanchi Matt.
I would like to add a few things that potential users should be aware of:
1. As per strict astrological principles, the kAla nirNaya should be based on
local time and not IST (Indian Standard Time). So this panchangam is a genuine
effort in that direction.
2. The panchangam also includes a small legend about various kAla nirNaya
methodologies and terms.
3. This panchangam could cause confusion. Most of the Indian households in
USA are not very astorology-literate. They rely heavily on their elders in
India. Housewives especially are particular that they follow the day and
timings as per either their mothers or in-laws. They do not "give much" to
these calendars. It is potentially possible that the festivals may not fall on
the same day as in India. For eg., Divali. Families find it really odd to
celebrate festivals on days that are different than what the "rest of the
world" does. They just fall in line with the mass. HOUSEWIVES, are very
particular about following elders in India. Convincing them is a problem -:)
4. Nakshatra based timings are more or else compatible with IST-based timings.
But tithi-based timings are a problem. For men, the crucial decision is the
timing of srArdham. There is a very high possibility that it could be
different in both, literally 2 different days (most often by 1 day). One
should be prepared to make this change. Otherwise for simpler minds it becomes
a major cause of worry and unrest - "whether I am doing on the right day or
not" haunts them and they feel bad if someone says they went wrong.
I remember I went to the temple for Yajur upAkarma one day late because of this
difference. Bridgewater (NJ) temple was doing on day D, whereas Flushing
temple (NY) which publishes this panchAngam did it on D-1. A woman had brought
her husband to get him to wear upanayanam and perform upAkarma rites (husband
was not interested, the wife convinced him) and found she was late. She felt
so bad.
5. For South Indians who believe in rAhu kAlam again the timings are not the
same. Again the new calendar does follow the rules of rAhu kAlam
determination. But when the rules are strictly followed the timings are
different. rAhu kAlam is decided based on the sunrise and sunset and then the
time inbetween is divided into equal part of 7 or so and the first part knocked
off .....(I can look it up if someone wants) something like that. In South
India where the sunrise and sunset time do not vary by more than 0.5hrs in
range between winter and summer the timings are more or else predictable like
Monday 7:30 - 9:00, Sunday 4:30 - 6:00 etc. You will find that the rAhu kAlam
timings are quite different in the calendar. Again it requires shift in
timing.
All said and done, it is a good accomplishment and useful. But households
should be ready to think about the points I have raised before jumping into
this. Earlier, a few years ago, the temple used to be inundated with phone
calls asking clarification about the timings. They started telling point blank
after sometime "This is what we do in this temple".
None of the above should take away any credit from the panchAngam. I am only
trying to highlight issues surrounding it. Sri Jaladhar Vyas once said that
his father is an astorlogy exponent. May be he can provide some conclusive
suggestion. Sri Anand Hudli has also written some postings on kAla nirNaya.
Maybe he too can help.
Regards.
S. V. Subrahmanian.
Sri Ravishankar Mayavaram wrote:
I recently got a pa~nchaaN^ga published from North America, and
specially for EST from
www.indianet.com/ganesh
It is prepared by the astrologer of kA~nchi maTha and specially keeping
in mind the Astika-s living in USA. They have also corrections for
other cities in USA. Unlike the ones printed in India, this runs from
Jan to Dec. Cost of the panchaanga is only $2.
Just FYI.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 14:27:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Russia - Rishi Varsha
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Ram Chandran wrote:
>Namaste Sri S.V. Subramanian:
>
>Please note that the incident that you referenced in your posting was
>appeared in special article withe the title: "A Uniue Saint." The 108th
>Jayanthi of Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati was on May 19th and this
>special article written by A.S. Raman appeared on The Hindu on May 18th.
>The entire article was posted in the advaitin list by the Hindu and is
>available at: http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m9346.html
Dear Sri Ram Chandran,
Please see
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2001/05/18/stories/13180903.htm
- Article by A.S. Raman, published on May 18, 2001.
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/10/11/stories/05111305.htm
- Letter by B.M.N. Murthy, appeared on October 11, 2000.
Both have the same material, in slightly different words. The quote
forwarded by S.V.Subramanian is obviously from the latter.
Best wishes,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 15:35:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Russia - Rishi Varsha
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Namaste Sri Vidyasankar:
I am glad to see the reference to the other source on the same topic. The
reference that I have provided is an article paying tribute to
Paramacharya and it has more details about His unique personality. I
have no reason to doubt Sri Subramanian's statement regarding the Letters to
the Editor.
regards,
Ram Chandran
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 16:36:44 -0400
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Ravisankar S. Mayavaram <miinalochanii at Y...> wrote:
>1) Contemplating on any subject is indeed an action. nididhyAsana on
There is again a long history of different views about this. In fact,
Mayeda's introduction to his translation of Upadesasahasri says that
Sankara sacrifices logical consistency, in favour of a pedagogical
approach, with respect to meditation. Note that Sankara himself does
describe the parisaMkhyAna meditation in some detail in the third
prose chapter of Upadesasahasri, and recommends both yoga practice
and parisaMkhyA in his commentary on bRhadAraNyaka 4. 4. 2
(svAtantryArtham yogadharmAnusevanaM parisaMkhyAbhyAsaSca ... kartavyaH).
Various analogies are given as to how even if this practice is seen as
an action, it does not result in fruits, e.g. the soap-nut that clears
dirt from water and itself gets removed in the process.
The key issue is whether one should view removal of avidyA as a result
of any action, whether we call it bhakti or dhyAna or yoga. Giving up
the notion "I am an agent, the doer of action" is not itself an action
that generates vAsanas that in turn generate further activity. This is
the central position taken in Advaita on this issue.
Regarding mantra-japa, one can get great insight by comparing approaches
taken by the Yoga school. tasya vAcakaH praNavaH, taj japas tadartha
bhAvanam - yogasUtras 1. 27-28.
Sankara's comments on Gita 8. 10-13 are very much related to these sUtras
and the bhAshya on them.
praNavasya japaH, praNavAbhidheyasya ISvarasya bhAvanA - yogabhAshya.
Compare
brahmaNo vAcaka-rUpeNa ... brahmaNo 'bhidhAna-bhUtam oMkAraM vyAharan, ...
tadartha-bhUtaM (mAM) ISvaraM (anusmaran) anucintayan - gItAbhAshya 8.13.
The words in parentheses are from the Gita itself, the rest are Sankara's
explanations. Notice how close they are to the yoga text on japa. It is
Sankara who introduces the terms vAcakarUpa, abhidhAnabhUta and ISvara
in this context.
Clearly, there is a place in Advaita thinking, for all these approaches,
each being appropriate according to adhikAra-bheda, as explained in the
Gitabhashya itself, in the passage connecting verses 8.13 and 8.14.
>4) Under what conditions does a verbal understanding of statements like
>"ahaM brahmAsmi" dislodge avidyA?
It is not mere "verbal" understanding that is involved. When conditions
are ripe for jnAna, cultivated through the sAdhana-catushTaya, involving
the SamAdi-shaTsampatti, viveka, vairAgya and mumukshutva, then one knows
the full import of the vAkya.
In this context, see again bRhadAraNyaka bhAshya at 4. 4. 21 (vijnAya
prajnAM kurvIta), where Sankara says, "prajnA-kAraNa sAdhanAni ... kuryAd
ity arthaH ... Atmaikatva-pratipAdakAs svalpAS SabdA anujnAyante omity
evaM dhyAyata AtmAnam anyA vAco vimuncatha iti". The quotation "omity ...
vimuncatha" here is from muNDaka upanishad 2.2.5-6, which is also quoted
in brahmasUtrabhAshya 2.3.39.
In fact, a clear understanding of brahmasUta commentary from 2.3.33
to 2.3.42 is necessary for this topic of action, agent and knowledge.
This can get to be a very long discussion, so let me stop here and
perhaps resume at a later time.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 14:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
--- ShrI Vidyasankar Sundaresan wrote:
> To round this off by going back to the tradition, note
> that
> the practice of the Dasanami Sannyasins in India is not
> to
> do japa of the mahAvAkyas, but to meditate on the akAra,
> ukAra and makAra (auM), as described in the mANDUkya up.
> and in the prakaraNa text called pancIkaraNa.
Thank you very much for your wonderful reply. I learned a
lot from your post. May I request clarfication on a related
matter?
Although I am aware that the Sri Vidya tradition
occupies a honored place in the advaita tradition, I am
completely ignorant of it. Based on what I know, Sri vidya
tradition is intimately connected with dhyAna ( the chakra
itself being a meditative aid ) and has been recommended
highly by bhagavatpAda.
Is this so? If so, I kindly request information on dhyAna
in the Sri Vidya tradition.
Thank you,
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 22:25:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: V. Jayaraman
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
namaste
My name is V Jayaraman. (Stands for Vaidyanatha Deekshithar Jayaraman). I
stay at Dubai, United Arab Emirates with my family. I have learnt the most
common vedic prayers from Krishna Yajur Veda. We also participate in
regular vedantic discourses given at India and also organize quite a few
here in Dubai. We are disciples of Kanchi mattam and conduct elaborate
pooja on periyaval tiru nakshatiram day every month.
Pranams
Jayaram
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 17:58:38
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>It is your false self that has to know because as you say your true self
>already knows. The false self can transcend ignorance because the truth
>that it learns is *there are no external objects*. What it preceived as
>external is really nothing other than itself.
There're some problems here. There's the true Self which is non-dual
with brahman. The false self is a product of ignorance. It has no reality in
itself and Shankara clearly says that liberation is only the removal of
ignorance. You neither *go into* liberation or does liberation *come to*
you. You already are liberated and all you need to do is get rid of the
ignorance - the false self.
You say : "The false self can transcend ignorance because the truth
that it learns is *there are no external objects*. What it preceived as
external is really nothing other than itself".
The false self is ignorance. It is due to it that objects are perceived
as *different* from yourself. So where's there sense in saying that the
false self realizes that there are no external objects? If it perceives
external objects as nothing other than itself it only means - it which
is ignorance perceives external objects which too are a product of
ignorance as no different from itself. Sure, but where's there liberation
here?
See - ultimately to *know* the external - is only ignorance. That's the
reason it is repeatedly said that the Self cannot be known as an object.
The Self is only you - self-established knowledge - to be known as the
subject, here and now.
>Will observing the goodness or evil of
>somebody make you good or evil? How can knowing the truth of an
>object make you know the truth about yourself?
>Again, because the object is not in reality different from yourself.
>abhedha (non-difference) is a synonym for advaita (non-duality.)
But who knows that? If your true self has to know it, then obviously
it cannot be perfect - for it is then short of that knowledge. For
reasons given above, it cannot be the false self which knows this either. So
let us reflect more on what abheda or ananya means.
>Your "self" is as much an object and as much maya as anything else. Why
>should it have a priviledged position over any other piece of maya? This
>why so much stress is placed on disciplines to lessen ahamkara to combat
>this idea of supremacy of self.
Because it is your liberation which is at stake here. So it is your self
which needs the attention.
>Also if knowledge arises in you because of knowing the truth about
>something else, then it will be caused - and all that's caused has
>an end - so it too will be transient and temporary.
>
>But if the knowledge is "there is no something else" that doesn't apply.
As long as there's the thought "there is no something else" - it is
only vritti - duality and ignorance. "There's no something else" is
not a thought or knowledge - it is rather lack of any knowledge of
difference. And this feeling of non-difference is not conceptual to
be "known" as an object. It is an integral experience where when you
know your own self, the self of the world too becomes known - "knowing
which everything else is known".
>And again let me point out that Bhakti does not imply "external object"
You can have grand ideas about it - but all action necessarily implies
duality.
>The difference is he now
>abides in the unshakeable conviction that these are not "external objects"
>but only his own self.
You've to first explain how such a knowledge will arise with an *external*
search. As noted earlier : 1. according to maayaavaada you cannot *know*
external objects. 2. even if you know, it is not your true self which knows
as it doesn't need any such knowledge. So if it is your false self which
knows that things external to it are none other than itself - then it can
only mean ignorance knows ignorance. So all this only leads to absurdity.
>The only non-relational knowledge is the knowledge of one's own self,
>which is self-established and hence that's the way to saving knowledge
>- Atmavaada. And that's the fundamental concept of Advaita - the essence
>of your own self, which is Atman is none other than Brahman - infact
>that's what Advaita itself is - that *your* self is non-dual with Brahman.
>Don't you see? there is no "your" or "my" in Brahman. *Everything* is
>non-dual with Brahman.
But you're not *in* Brahman, are you? You are an individual who's striving
for liberation. Do not mix vyavahaara and paramaartha.
>A sadhaka cannot privilege his own self. Again to
>combat this notion is why we have disciplines such as ahimsa and vairagya.
But whose liberation are we talking about here? Are you trying to liberate
the world? Even if you *know* the truth of the world, then the world will be
liberated and you'll still be standing in ignorance. Personal salvation is
at stake here. The world is maya because of your avidhya. So it is your
avidhya which needs to be removed.
Don't tell me that the world is not different from you - that's only so
in the ultimate sense - if you are a jnaani. For the jiva it is different -
else why would there even be an advaita Vedanta as a path to liberation? Can
the knowledge of "non-difference" arise in you from studying the world?
Maayaavaada is the reason it cannot.
>As I've already pointed out, this idea of "external worship" is bogus, a
>red herring. The bhakta does not see Bhagawan as an external entity.
The realization of unity between the world and yourself is not a product of
mere conceptual thinking or understanding. Then it will only be as
unreal as normal experience which differentiates between yourself and
the world. Then you can imagine anything - there's no world or no you or
the world is in you or under you or above you etc
Advaita teaches an integral spiritual experience where you know yourself
as non-different from the world.
You can have a conception in your mind that Bhagavan is not external -
but everytime you act you're only proving otherwise. As long as the
mind is not turned inward, all acts are external. Even the turning
inward of the mind is also action - but it leads to inaction and
non-dualism.
>And incidently even Gaudapadacharya uses the words Prabhu (e.g. III.13)
>and Bhagavan (e.g. IV. 82) to describe Brahman.
But he doesn't mix vyavahaara and paramartha indiscriminately.
>Once more with feeling: Bhakti does not equal action and inward search
>does not equal liberation.
Unless you sit still everything is action only. There's no great complexity
here - any movement of your body, senses and mind is action only. Even
inward search is action. But it is an effort towards in-action which leads
to abiding in yourself and non-dualism. You have to explain how bhakti can
achieve this. I also notice that your definition of bhakti has progressively
undergone radical change from the day we first started this discussion.
First it was merely praying to bhagavan - now I've no idea what you're
talking about. In the next post, in precise terms please clearly explain
your conception of bhakti.
Also, let us first reconcile jnaana and bhakti with the fundamental
psychology and metaphysics of Advaita. Then we can turn to what the
teachers of Advaita say. Else it will only be your interpretation against
mine.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 07:26:35
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>But in advaita, we can desire anything as long as we agree not
>to get agitated if it is not fulfilled.
When Shankara says, "don't get seduced by looking at the navel of a
woman", do you think he says, "yes, navel gazing is ok, as long as
you don't get agitated by it"? :-)
See only if you are a jnaani will you not get agitated by the
fulfilment or non-fulfilment of desires. For the rest of us, we've
to turn our mind away - that's why they take up samnyaasam. And Buddha's
view of the world as suffering is not his invention - there're numerous
similar passages in the Upanishads themselves. And all ethical schools
of Indian philosophy too hold the same view - else why liberation from
samsaara at all?
>I am fully aware on the pitfalls of intellectually conceptualizing
>the ultimate reality. This is just a beginners first step and ultimately
>one has to cross all steps of intellectualism to experience the reality.
When it is said that Self is beyond the intellect, what it means is
it is only you yourself and thus it cannot be known as an object. This
doesn't give a free for all license to condemn all intellectual effort.
Because by nature your mind flows outward - so you're integrally bound
to the objects that you experience. You can close your mind to them
mechanically which is very hard or you can use your intelligence and
understand the relationship between yourself and the object and when you
know its non-substantiality - the hold that the object has on you will
naturally cease.
Also as the Roman philosopher Senaca is supposed to have said : "no wind
is favorable if the port one is heading to is not known". To intellectually
know what one is aspiring to is very vital - because though reality may be
beyond the intellect still you're not reality - you're only an aspring jiva
for whom the intellect is a very useful tool. If you do not use your
intellect well, your attention and effort will either be directed in a wrong
direction or will not be concentrated in the right direction - and so will
not yield the desired result.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 09:20:46
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Dear Jaladhar,
>IV.94. "There is no perfection for those who meander eternally in
>difference"
>Note nothing is mentioned about external worship only bheda. And the
>warning could just as readily apply to those who believe in "inward' and
>"outward"
To be other than yourself - all activity of the mind, body and the senses
necessarily imply difference. Yes, even turning the mind inward is sunk
in duality - but unlike the other modes of saadhana, it leads to
abiding in yourself and non-dualism.
>Ramana is not part of your triumvirate.
He is not, because for you I've to use authors who teach from the shruti.
Because for you the shruti has "absolute" value in vyavahaara - you
should first understand why vyavahaara is vyavahaara - because it is only
relative and not absolute. Ramana was conversant neither in shruti nor
sanskrit before his liberation. Liberated he automatically understood the
substance of the former and the latter just came to him naturally!
>But anyway, self-inquiry. What
>does that mean in practice? It has to be the anubhava or experience
>of Brahman (or the Self if you want to call it that.) Bhakti also
>provides this.
You just have to explain how it can. As I've explained all along -
*all action* necessarily is sunk in duality. Unless you define bhakti
as abiding in your own self - as Ramana himself does - bhakti cannot
result in the non-dual experience. See I'm not contesting the spiritual
efficacy of bhakti. But only that it cannot directly effect the non-dual
liberation.
Actually if you look at the bhakti specialists - the bhakti Vedaantists
- who've developed even more sophisticated means of bhakti than Advaita
- they all necessarily believe in a God who's distinct from their own
Atman. Unlike the Advaita conception of Atman as "space in a jar which
is non-different from the space outside", for the bhakti Vedaantists
Atman is either a part or an attribute or an expression of God. That's
fine but it is not non-dualism (Advaita).
>And I suppose your definition of "philosophical works" is "works not
>including Bhakti" right? Shankaracharya as is well known wrote many
>stotras to various Deities. Sureshwaracharya uses Shiva as a synonym for
>Brahman in the Manasollasa which is a commentary on the Dakshinamurtistotra
>of
>Shankaracharya. A work on Shrividya is attributed to Gaudapadacharya.
>Even if you don't believe the attribution is genuine, the fact that some
>Advaitin even attempted it should tell you something.
See if Shankara or Sureshvara had taught karma-jnaana-samuccayavaada as
Mandana Mishra did, then we will not have any problem with integrating
karma and bhakti in our philosophy. Then we can interpret that singing
Bhajagovindam or Saudaryalahari can by itself effect liberation.
But the demand of logic has necessiated our great aacharyas to reject
action as ignorance - for all action only takes you away from yourself.
If you're the non-dual Atman then you've to reject action to be yourself.
So they have clearly taught in their philosophical works that action of
any kind by itself cannot effect liberation. So after this if they still
teach bhakti in their hymns we can either conclude that they're
contradicting themselves or that even as, "the merciful Veda teaches
bhakti, karma and jnaana to people depending on their level of intellect",
so did our great acaaryas do so. I've great respect for the intellect of our
aachaaryas - so I stand by the second conclusion.
And in my house only the women sing Bhajagovindam and Saundaryalahari.
>Furthermore Shankaracharya set up Shrichakra in many places including his
>mathas and established the worship of Bhagawan Chandramoulishwara which
>his spiritual descendents still carry out today.
...
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 23:09:49 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>>Can we learn something from the Buddhist shastras? Yes. In the same
>> >>way as we can learn something from a map of the New York subway. Are
>> >>they pramana for Dharma or Moksha? The Advaita acharyas say no.
>
>Are you sure?
>
We have to accept the 'basic observations' of Buddhism such as pain,
suffering and sorrow etc, because they are corect to some extent. If we
reject the raw data there will be no common benchmark based on which we
compare any two systems.
Shruti explains pain and suffering as transformations of speech. Remember
the path of most pain argument. This can be observed practically. The aham
or ego goes from one failure to another, holding on to one form of speech or
the next. But in this busy life of going from one failure to the next it
does not realize the eternal bliss (Anandam) that is the real driver. So the
conclusion of Buddhism is wrong.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 04:42:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>> However, in our archives, I can't find who wrote this and when...
>> Jaldhar, Nanda, can you give the details of the original message?
>
>It was sent to advaita-l-owner at y... I forwarded it to
>advaita-l with Nandachandrans' permission.
Yes, but I was wondering what was the original discussion to which
Nanda was responding. I can't seem to remember.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 06:47:46 -0400
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Nanda Chandran
>
>If merely being "based" on the Vedas is enough, then where's there the
>necessity to prove anything by reason? Why does Gaudapaada take the trouble
>of establishing Advaita by reason? Why does Shankara engage in extensive
>metaphysical speculation to establish non-duality? Why the peerless jewel of
>ahdyaasa bhaashyam which itself is the saving knowledge - if understood
>correctly. Else along with Baadaraayana, they should merely say that truth
>is Advaita because the shruti says so.
Nanda - one has to be careful. As Vishal mentioned clearly, the logic
which is based on laukika anumaana is negated using laukika anumaana
only. The arguments of the naastika-s that is those daarshhanika-s
who do not accept Veda pramaaNa have to be dismissed only on the
basis of laukika anumaana only. aloukika anumaana is based on
shhabda pramaaNa and the arguments of the other aastika-s
daarshhanika-s are dismissed first using shaastriiya anumaana and
second loukika anumaana as well, if applicable. Thus necessity of
reason or loukika anumaana comes since the naastika darshhana- s do
not subscribe to Veda pramaaNa to dismiss them on that basis.
Badaraayana and Shankara in Bhaashhya use both depending on who is
the puurvapakshii - a nostik or aastik?
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 12:53:05
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Badaraayana and Shankara in Bhaashhya use both depending on who is
>the puurvapakshii - a nostik or aastik?
But it doesn't stop there does it? If logic is only used to refute other
logical arguments, then why do we have multiple schools of Vedaanta, which
all claim to only be the interpreters of the Upanishads. The same goes for
Astika schools too since they too claim that they're only interpreting the
Upanishads. Why should we accept Advaita and not Dvaita or Vishistadvaita?
It is not as if there's only one clear single message in the Upanishads. We
need reason to interpret the message of the Upanishads too. If not, what's
the point in Baadaraayana or Gaudapaada or Shankara writing on Vedaanta - if
what you say is true they should only engage in dialectic against other
schools and put a note at the end of their works saying, "for our view on
reality refer to the Upanishads"!
If they are all only saying the same thing then what's the point in the
expositions of Vedaanta by Shankara and his followers - because Yaagnavalkya
or Baadaraayana had already done it before them. So the effort doesn't stop
in any single exposition of Vedaanta - each follower tries to improve on the
thought of his predecessor - rethinking and clarifying complex issues and
finding solutions for questions raised by rivals. Sometimes such questions
even leads to the birth of a brand new interpretation - that's how Dvaita
and Visishtadvaita have come about. So there's ever a central role for the
intellect in the study of Vedaanta.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:10:06 -0400
Subject: Re: pratyaksha
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Nanda Chandran worte:
>
>The following is only my opinion and I don't hold it as absolute. It is only
>a relative view. If anybody can express something more relevant, you can
>discard this view.
>
>See we can divide the mental apparatus as the mind, ego and intellect - but
>this is only theory strictly for the purpose of intellectual understanding.
>Modern science shows us that it is the brain which performs all these
>functions. So I would simplfy the whole issue down to two categories : 1.
>knowledge which involves thought construction and 2. knowledge which doesn't
>involve thought construction.
Nanda - as I understand.
Knowledge of - that is an objective knowledge involves thought
construction. That is the mediate knowledge involving pramaaNa or
means of knowledge and mind is involved since it is thought process.
This is the knowledge of what is known - that includes what is seen -
all cognitions and what is recognized or recognitions from memory.
All involves thought process. Since locus of the object out there is
a thought in the mind. Without that cognition of the thought in the
mind the cognition of the object outside cannot takes place - It is
not purusha tantra in the sense hearing, seeing smelling tasting etc
takes place immediately when the sense and the mind behind the senses
are in operating condition. Since are operated by the prakR^iti
itself or as natural process one can say as long as the life force is
enlivening all these as in the waking state of living being.
Can the knowledge takes place without the mind - I do not think so
for objective knowledge.
If subject itself is the object of knowledge then the instruments of
knowledge or knowledge itself looses its meaning - since it swataH
siddham or exiting entity and there is really no new knowledge - it
is only self-knowledge as one can say. Self-realization is slightly
different where in there is current understanding that one is not one
self and realization is that one is oneself by discarding that what
one is not. This has to happen through the mind only the notions
that one is not oneself is in the mind - Hence the need that buddhi
has to be free or pure - free from all the wrong notions for this
realization of what one truly is. One cannot say mind is not
required for this - hence emphasis on the inquiry of the nature of
oneself that involves vichaara or mental pursuits yet the truth is
not objective knowledge but realization of oneself by oneself through
inquiry of oneself.
Pleasure and pain are states of mind. A mind free from longing even
momentary is the mind which is free from agitations and is pleased
mind - that pleased state of mind could have been arrived by
fulfilling the desires or by self-contentment. In contrast the
paining mind is an agitated mind, mind that is disturbed from its
equilibrium, a mind which is wanting or demanding etc. udaramantaram
kurute athatasya bhayam bhavati says shruti - any duality causes the
fear since one is always afraid of the second - Like even Arjuna
afraid of seeing Vishvaruupa which is different from him.
Thus pain and pleasures are mental states.
Bliss or happiness is slightly different from pleasure - in the sense
that there is absence of complete duality as reality. 'I am the
totality and all are in me and I am in all of them' eliminates the
apparent duality as reality and that is realization of one own self
according to advaita vedanta. This is immediate knowledge since it
is swataH siddham or already accomplished fact and does not involve
knowledge that is really unknown.
Intuition is a natural process by which all new knowledge takes
place- that includes even scientific knowledge. This is again not
purusha tantram - or by will of an individual. When the mind devoid
of any disturbing agitations is meditating on the object of knowledge
- be it a chemistry or self - then the knowledge dawns on him. A
scientist may say that he discovered the truth or made a break
through - but a sage will say that truth is revealed to him and it is
a revelation. For that one has to contemplate or inquire with
proper instruments - a mind in meditation is the mind that develops
intuition or in Sanskrit j~naana kshakshu or wisdom eye or third eye
of dakshaNamuurthy opening of which all ignorance gets burned to
ashes.
As Vidya has pointed out some aachaarya-s classify mind as one of the
instruments of knowledge like the fine senses. Bhagavaan
Madhvaachaarya talks about saakshii j~naanam in the sense all
knowledge gets validity of truth - prama - when saaskha knows it.
and It is sakshi that knows the space and time too not the senses and
mind accrorind to him. He may be off base in that but that is what
he defines.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>
>In the first the brain is involved. In the latter it isn't. The knowledge
>of the second category is purely intuitional. But I'm not saying that it
>is the knowledge of the Self etc Just that such knowledge - like knowledge
>of one's own existence, love, happiness, instinctive dislike or fear -
>doesn't involve thought construction. It is immediate and intuitive.
>
>Ofcourse there're other kinds of happiness/fear which involve thought
>construction. Like if we imagine something pleasant happening to us, we
>feel happy. After watching a horror movie, your mind works overtime and
>you're scared of dark corners - there's fear. Fear can also arise due to us
>imagining ourselves in some unfortunate situation.
>
>Again repeated experiences of something can also can give rise to immediate
>knowledge. Like if we know something for sure, then due to practice the mind
>works like lightning and knowledge arises. Like the happiness we feel on
>coming home after a long time or seeing a friend after a long time.
>
>But how do we account for happiness which arises, say, when you listen to
>some good music that you've not heard before. Or if you go to some place
>or get into a situation where you instinctively feel uncomfortable. Or the
>love/affection between people - between mother and children, lovers etc. The
>mother doesn't evaluate/validate the reasons for which she should love her
>offspring. The rush of love and affection for her children is natural and
>spontaneous.
>
>Ofcourse you can distinguish between them as feeling and thought. But again
>both involve knowledge, don't they? For all acts of consciousness are
>ultimately knowledge. To be conscious of something is to know it. If you ask
>a mother whether she loves her children, she doesn't think about it, does
>she? She instinctively knows so. Maybe the affection between lovers -
>especially in Hollywood movies where the question, "do you really love
>him/her?" :-) - is even more relevant.
>
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:45:04 -0400
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
>>Badaraayana and Shankara in Bhaashhya use both depending on who is
>>the puurvapakshii - a nostik or aastik?
>
>But it doesn't stop there does it? If logic is only used to refute other
>logical arguments, then why do we have multiple schools of Vedaanta, which
>all claim to only be the interpreters of the Upanishads. The same goes for
>Astika schools too since they too claim that they're only interpreting the
>Upanishads. Why should we accept Advaita and not Dvaita or Vishistadvaita?
Nanda - I discussed this aspect in the II chapter of anumaana
pramaana of my notes on Brahmasuutra.
The date for discussion comes from Veda- shruti pramaaNa. In any
anumaana pramaaNa including shaastiiya anumaana data are not
questioned. The conclusions or theories based on the data can be
questioned. Adviata, dwaita and vishhTaadvaita are the theories or
conclusions or interpretations based on the data which are based on
shaastra. All the these theories explain in self-consistent manner
the apparent contradictions in the data. That is the role of
theories. You can develop your own if you do not like any one of
them.
Advaita stands out in one way which is unique. It rests on the
absolute fact which is self-existence. Even the shaastra can be
negated but one cannot negate oneself. That is beyond any pramaaNa
including shaastra pramaaNa.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:54:45 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
Namaste to all,
The adhikaaritva for the jnana marga, or the freedom through self-knowledge
is prescribed as the 4 fold sadhana-chatushTaya as is well known to all. The
first and the foremost being viveka - nitya-anitya vastu viveka. The second
being vairagya - renunciation, which can be in 2 stages - renunciation of
the fruits of action, i.e nishkaama karma, and then renunciation of action
itself. The 3rd of the 4 being shamaadi shadka sampatti, or the 6 fold inner
wealth. They are shama, dama, uparati, titixa, shraddha and samadaana. The
last being mumukshutva. When all this is attained, it is said that the
sadhaka approaches a guru humbly, and asks him for knowledge. When the guru
accepts him and imparts knowledge, then begins sravaNa, manana and
nidhidhyAsana.
In my opinion, this order laid down by our sages prepares the sadhaka
gradually and each one easily leads to the other. Although, it can be argued
that no one really possesses all these before they approach a guru,
theoretically this is supposed to be the case. As we see, sraddha is a very
important attainment for jnAna. We just returned from a retreat at the Arsha
Vidya Gurukula, where Sri ViditAtmananda Saraswati describes sraddha as
implicit trust, faith in the scriptures and in the Guru, which comes to the
sadhaka at the appropriate time. Some among us question why devotion is
required for jnAna, why is there a need to trust a God or a Guru when jnAna
is all about realizing the parabrahman in oneself. These questions will not
arise if the sadhaka is ripe enough for this sraddha. It is not a matter of
forcing ourselves to trust and imbibe this faith, it arises with the
cultivation of the prior pre-requisites. The Guru having trodden the path
before, and having realized his self will be an invaluable instrument in
helping the sadhaka arrive at the truth, which is really the attainment of
the already attained! Even chapter 18 of Bhagavad Geetha talks of this
supreme devotion that is absolutely necessary for the light of jnAna to
dawn.
Just my 2c here.
regards,
Savithri
>Re: bhakti.
>
>Shraddha is the first that is needed, on any path, let it be bhakti mArga
>or
>yoga mArga or jnAna marga or karma marga.
>
>One little boy prahlAda who walked on bhakti mArga said confidently that he
>can show viSNu anywhere. I believe advaitists can do the same. Why can't
>they prove advaita in karmakANDa when the upaniSats are an
>oversimplification of karmakANDa in the first place?
>
>For an alternate opinion: (Sri kRSNa karNAmRtam of LilaShuka:)
>
>varamimamupadeSamAdriyadhvam
>nigamavaneSu nitAnta cArakhinnAH
>vicinuta bhuvaneSu vallavInAm
>upaniSadardhamulUkhale nibaddham
>
>Oh, scholars, let me give you an advise. Why are you forever searching in
>the forests of nigamas? Go look in the houses of milkmaids, the essense of
>upaniSats is lying there bound to the grinding stone.
>
>Best regards
>Bhadraiah
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 10:06:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1220458907==_ma============"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
--============_-1220458907==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> >. As we see, sraddha is a very
>important attainment for jnAna. We just returned from a retreat at the Arsha
>Vidya Gurukula, where Sri ViditAtmananda Saraswati describes sraddha as
>implicit trust, faith in the scriptures and in the Guru, which comes to the
>sadhaka at the appropriate time.
>
>Just my 2c here.
>
>regards,
>Savithri
>
Savitriji -Just a clarification - The description of shraddha you
mentioned is actually by Shankara. In his VivekachuuDamani for
example
Shankara defines shhraddha or faith as
shaastrasya guru vaakyasya satya buddhyavadhaaraNam|
saa shraddha kathitaa sadbhiH yayaa vastuupalabhyate||
The Wise say that faith is an understanding that the words of the
teacher and that of scriptures are true indeed (essentially shabda
pramaaNa) based on which one attains or realizes the truth.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
--============_-1220458907==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: Philosophical debates and
hoaxes</title></head><body>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>>. As we see, sraddha is a
very</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>important attainment for jnAna. We just
returned from a retreat at the Arsha<br>
Vidya Gurukula, where Sri ViditAtmananda Saraswati describes sraddha
as<br>
implicit trust, faith in the scriptures and in the Guru, which comes
to the</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>sadhaka at the appropriate
time.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br>
Just my 2c here.<br>
<br>
regards,</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Savithri<br>
</blockquote>
<div>Savitriji -Just a clarification - The description of
shraddha you mentioned is actually by Shankara. In his
VivekachuuDamani for example</div>
<div> Shankara defines shhraddha or faith as</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><x-tab>
</x-tab>shaastrasya guru vaakyasya satya buddhyavadhaaraNam|</div>
<div
> <span
></span> saa shraddha kathitaa sadbhiH yayaa
vastuupalabhyate||</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><font face="Times" color="#000000"> The Wise say that faith
is an understanding that the words of the teacher and that of
scriptures are true indeed (essentially shabda pramaaNa) based on
which one attains or realizes the truth.</font></div>
<div><font face="Times" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Times" color="#000000">Hari Om!</font></div>
<div><font face="Times" color="#000000">Sadananda</font></div>
<div>-- <br>
K. Sadananda<br>
Code 6323<br>
Naval Research Laboratory<br>
Washington D.C. 20375<br>
Voice
>From "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 14:16:47 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
>From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at A...>
>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
><ADVAITA-L at b...>
>To: ADVAITA-L at L...
>Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
>Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 10:06:27 -0400
>
>> >. As we see, sraddha is a very
>>important attainment for jnAna. We just returned from a retreat at the
>>Arsha
>>Vidya Gurukula, where Sri ViditAtmananda Saraswati describes sraddha as
>>implicit trust, faith in the scriptures and in the Guru, which comes to
>>the
>>sadhaka at the appropriate time.
>>
>>Just my 2c here.
>>
>>regards,
>>Savithri
>>
>Savitriji -Just a clarification - The description of shraddha you
>mentioned is actually by Shankara. In his VivekachuuDamani for
>example
> Shankara defines shhraddha or faith as
>
> shaastrasya guru vaakyasya satya buddhyavadhaaraNam|
> saa shraddha kathitaa sadbhiH yayaa vastuupalabhyate||
>
> The Wise say that faith is an understanding that the words of the
>teacher and that of scriptures are true indeed (essentially shabda
>pramaaNa) based on which one attains or realizes the truth.
>
>
Hari Om Sadanandaji,
Thats very good!! I just quoted exactly the way I heard from him a few days
ago, hence I thought I should mention his name.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Savithri
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:25:26 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes (fwd)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: vpcnk at H...
To: advaita-l-owner at yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 10:12:14 -0000
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
I think it was your post about the absurdity of Shankara prompting his
disciple to give Vyaasa a thrashing to win an argument which started
this - ofcourse needless to say that the idea of Kumaarilla
challenging Buddhists to a "jump off the cliff to prove the truth of
your teachings", is only as ridiculous.
--- In advaita-l at y..., Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
wrote:
> >> However, in our archives, I can't find who wrote this and when...
> >> Jaldhar, Nanda, can you give the details of the original message?
> >
> >It was sent to advaita-l-owner at y... I forwarded it to
> >advaita-l with Nandachandrans' permission.
>
> Yes, but I was wondering what was the original discussion to which
> Nanda was responding. I can't seem to remember.
>
> Vidyasankar
>
>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Aitareya Upanishad
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:02:15 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Aranyakas 2-3 of the Ai. Aranyaka constitute the Upanishad portion of the
text but normally only Aranyaka 3.4-6 are available with commentary in
printed editions (notable exception being the commentary of Sri Madhvacharya
along Dvaita lines).
I read in some Univ. library catalog, a reference to a printed edition
containing a commentary attributed to Sri Shankaracharya on complete
Aryanyakas 2-3 but cannot find it now. Do list members know of the
bibliographic info on this edition?
Thanks
Vishal
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Bhartrmitra, the Mimamsaka
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:51:31 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Vishal Agarwal" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I have created a webpage on the Mimamsaka BHARTRMITRA at
http://www.voi.org/vishal_agarwal/bhartrmitra.html
Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
Sincerely,
Vishal
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:01:45
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>They amount to the same thing. Kumarilas' purpose in engaging the
>Buddhists in debate was not "ha ha, my philosophy is better than yours"
>but to correct what he thought was untrue.
Ah! I'm glad that you're giving atleast some validity to reason here.
>Note neither God nor supernatural events would have posed any problems for
>the Naiyayikas.
Yes, but even for that they were willing to provide logical arguments.
>In fact they do. Both of them are commentators on texts. If they were
>just out to spread their personal opinions, why bring the upanishads into
>the picture?
You've missed the point. I'm not denying that they're interpreters of the
shruti. But they also try to reconcile the teachings of the shruti with
reason. Else what makes the Advaitic interpretation superior over other
schools of Vedaanta? Why should you believe in Advaita and not Dvaita?
>Sure. But asserting an existence of somebody is quite different from saying
>that some supernatural power saved him from death.
>>Is it? In a logical sense I mean. How so?
In Indian philosophy it is a rule that for a meaningful debate the opponents
should agree on some common pramaana - means of knowledge. Since you seem to
possess some supernatural faculty to comprehend as to how a text can save
the life of a person and also blind him - which faculty I unfortunately do
not possess, I don't think there's any point in discussing this issue any
further.
>Well according to the Madhaviya Dig Vijaya Kumarila Bhatta was saved
>by his faith in the Vedas.
>See the fallacy here? You accept the statement of MSDV that there was
>such a person called Kumarila Bhatta but not the statement of the same
>work that his life was saved by the Vedas. If it is telling the truth
>about one thing, why not the other? If it is lying about one thing, why
>assume it is not lying about the other.
But Kumaarilla himself has also left behind his own works. There's also a
tradition which swears by him. There're also numerous other works which
refer to him.
Actually what you're saying is exactly the thing that Shankara meant to
discourage when he said "even the shruti cannot make fire cold". We cannot
interpret everything literally. For simple minded people who lack the
education and the intellect, spiritual leaders colour truth in religious
hues - the Maadhaviya Shakara dig vijayam where Shankara performs "miracles"
is a case in point. It is for the discerning to understand the underlying
message.
>As long as you persist in external *anything*, external car, external
>house,
>external job, external family, as well as external worship you are not an
>Advaitin. Give up all of these and you have earned the right to the name.
>When you are at your job earning your paycheck, is your mind focused
>inwardly? As we have discussed here many times before, sannyasa is not
>necessarily the end of the affair, but it is definitely a vital first
>step. Real Vedantic sadhana starts only after sannyasa.
Do you think every person who takes up samnyaasam has his mind turned
inward 24 hours of the day? Also the turning inward of the mind has no end
in itself - after a stage your identity has shifted and from there all
you've to do is abstain from sin and just be yourself.
Each person's spiritual development is his own and it is not possible for
others to understand it. When I say something about the mind turning inwards
it is my own experience and I cannot prove it to you - nor do I care to.
Even if I tried, it will be very difficult for you to understand it - for it
is a subjective experience and cannot be understood in the objective way.
Every person has to know it by himself. As for me, to merely be myself is a
daily struggle par excellence. Oh! I forget that expressions of mysticism
raises catcalls on this list - irony indeed when that is the advaitic way.
Sign of the times, I guess.
Anyway if you want an authority I can quote Ramana's exact words to show why
you can still be part of the normal world and still have your mind turned
inwards.
>If we are not liberated ourselves isn't it a bit presumptious to assume we
>know what we can do without? All the Advaita acharyas (who are liberated)
>have endorsed Bhakti in both senses.
But we're not taking about my preferences, are we? We're talking about
Advaita's stand on external worship. Please give me references for your
claim that Advaita aachaaryas have endorsed that worshipping an external
object by itself can lead to mukti.
I can give you my reference straight away - Maandukya Kaarikaas -
Advaita Praakarna chapter verse 16. Devotion is only for those of
dull intellect. And I think all of us know Shankara's and
Sureshvara's view of any kind of karma - "the opposition of knowledge
and action stands firm like a mountain". Again : "Those who talk of
combining knowledge with action have perhaps not read the
Brhadaaranyaka nor are they aware of the glaring contradiction
repeatedly pointed out by the shruti and smriti". "Knowledge and
action are like light and darkness. Action is only for those who're
still in ignorance".
>For an Advaitin what is external and internal? To Swami Madhusudan
>Saraswati Bhagawan dancing in the forests of Vrindavan was still within
>his own self.
But that's only after liberation. But prior to liberation as the Purusha
Shuktam says : the Purusha resides in the heart of one's own being and to
know it there is the only way to liberation.
>To get back to the original topic, how does some statement about an event
>in the life of Kumarila Bhatta, impede the attainment of ethics,
>austerity, or knowledge?
My answer was in the original post itself.
"See as long as you repose faith in an external supernatural being who'll
"help and take care of you", you'll not expose yourself to the reality of
samsaara - your mind will be closed to it. The reality of samsaara will be
known only if you open your mind to it - "knowledge only increases
suffering" - it is only then that mumukshutvam will arise."
No mumukshutvam - no nirvaana.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 16:05:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Aitareya Upanishad
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 18:02:15 -0000, Vishal Agarwal
<vishalagarwal at H...> wrote:
>Aranyakas 2-3 of the Ai. Aranyaka constitute the Upanishad portion of the
>text but normally only Aranyaka 3.4-6 are available with commentary in
>printed editions (notable exception being the commentary of Sri
Madhvacharya
>along Dvaita lines).
>
>I read in some Univ. library catalog, a reference to a printed edition
>containing a commentary attributed to Sri Shankaracharya on complete
>Aryanyakas 2-3 but cannot find it now. Do list members know of the
>bibliographic info on this edition?
I am not sure if Shankara wrote such a commenatary on the AraNyakas.
However, the AraNyaka commentary of sAyaNa is available. See for
example, call no. *OKL 95-941 at the New York Public Library.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrasekaran Venkatraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 16:24:48 -0400
Subject: Reposting: Original: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Chandrasekaran Venkatraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear members,
This thread was started by my following post which I posted on yahoo
groups, but somehow had not appeared in this advaita-l listserver for
some reason. I saw mail from Sri Vidyasankar wondering who posted the
original... So I am reposting this for reference of members who check
only advaita-l listserv... Thanks.. Pls. bear with me if this reposting
is redundant... I mentioned bhaskara bhatta instead of kumarilla bhatta
wrongly which was corrected by members..
---------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted on : 6/1/01
Dear members,
Sorry for touching this distasteful subject... But would like
to clarify...
Sri Vidyashankar's recent article on "Shankaravijaya" mentioned about
wrong anecdotes of Shankara using aggression to subdue his philosophical
adversaries. As Vidyashankar pointed out, these have to be hoax. But it
seems there is a widely held belief that disciples of Shankara used physical
aggression to drive away jains and bhuddhists from their caves in Kerala
and other places as per the behest of their teacher. Have people come across
these...? In fact I have read Jain debators once conspired and pushed
bhaskara bhatta (?? pls. correct) from atop a building with an intention to
kill him when latter was found in jain disguise trying to learn jainism to
debate against jains later. The story goes that bhaskara loses eye sight
but survives the fall. Are these also hoax? One can't easily believe that
philosophers would do such things..., be it a jain or an advaitin or any.
But we also have such ones as yaadhava prakaasha (bhedaabhedin) trying to
kill
his student, Ramanuja by drowning, which is held as true by almost everyone
aware of these personalities. It's still disgusting to note many atrocities
done by Kings to followers of minority religions esp. in South India (TN).
May be I am extrapolating and mixing up too many things.. but I am not
comparing one with the other in terms of their individual anecdotal
authenticity.
There is always an agitation in our minds when we recollect such
anecdotes not knowing how to reconcile and abide. In the end it is a
Truth that Religion/Philosophy is much bigger than the individual and
even bigger is Supreme.
Regards,
-chandra.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 20:22:45
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
> >Can we learn something from the Buddhist shastras? Yes. In the same
> >way
> >as we can learn something from a map of the New York subway. Are >they
> >pramana for Dharma or Moksha? The Advaita acharyas say no.
>
>Are you sure?
>
>Need you ask? :-) Supposed Buddhist influences on Advaita Vedanta are
>something we've gone over countless times and we don't really need to
>bring up that particular flamefest again.
What? Even after I've provided all the references? And it is a flamefest
only if you think so. I've no racour in this endeavour - I'm just pointing
out the facts.
>However let's for the sake of argument say there are some similarities.
We cannot take it for "argument". If you've not studied ajaativaada of
Gaudapaada, the Khandana of Sriharsha and the Madhyamaka Shaastram of
Nagaarjuna you're hardly in any position to even talk about this matter.
>This doesn't classify it as pramana anymore than a whale should be
>classified as a fish just because it superficially looks like one.
I've already quoted from the Kaarikas and the Khandana. Does Gaudapaada
or Sri Harsha think there're only superficial similarities between
Madhyamika Buddhism and Advaita Vedaanta? When Sri Harsha says that "the
Madhyamika view of the phenomenal world is exactly the same as Advaita's" -
does that indicate superficiality? I think you should check up the
definition of "superficiality" in a dictionary.
>According to Kumarila Bhatta (whose views on this subject Advaita Vedanta
>accepts in toto) that makes the Vedas pramana? Because they are
>apaurusheya. Other shastras are pramana only
>to the extent that they are based on the Vedas. If by coincidence other
>people come up with similiar sounding things, all well and good but it
>doesn't make them a pramana.
This view is itself flawed. For Kumaarilla as well as the other
Mimaamsakas the Vedas have absolute validity. So Karma is an integral
part of their world view - that's the reason the Kumaarilla advocates
karma-jnaana-samuccayavaada - action cum knowledge as to way to
liberation. Mandana too toes the same line - it is towards this view
of action cum knowledge, that Shankara's criticism which I've quoted in my
previous post, "for those who think karma and jnaana ... have perhaps not
read the Brhadaaranyaka", is directed against. Action and knowledge are
opposed to each other like darkness and light and those who advocate this
view are sunk in ignorance.
Also unlike Purva Miimaamsaa, in Advaita even the Vedas do not have absolute
validity. They're only para vidhya - lower knowledge - and in the realm of
ignorance. They can only point us to the truth - but beyond that it is our
self effort which really matters. So let's not hear any more about the
acceptance of Kumaarilla's views by Advaita in "toto".
>Tell you what, look through Karikas, Khandana, Ishtasiddhi, etc. Count
>how many references you find to Buddhist works (as authorities). Do the
>same for Vedic works. Which number is greater?
Have I anywhere said that Advaita is not inspired by the Upanishads or
other Vedic works? Ofcourse it is an aastika school which is derived
from the shruti. But you cannot deny that there's a strong Bauddha
influence too.
But I'll ask you a question in return - show me one pre-Gaudapaada
work where two central doctrines of Advaita are explained clearly -
1. Ajaativaada and 2. Maya.
Not mere passing remarks or vague references - but a full blown clear
exposition of these doctrines based on reason, even as Gaudapaada has
done.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
Subject: Re: Aitareya Upanishad
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 15:54:00 -0600 (MDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Shrisha Rao <shrao at n...>
Anand Hudli wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 18:02:15 -0000, Vishal Agarwal
> <vishalagarwal at H...> wrote:
>
> >Aranyakas 2-3 of the Ai. Aranyaka constitute the Upanishad portion of the
> >text but normally only Aranyaka 3.4-6 are available with commentary in
> >printed editions (notable exception being the commentary of Sri
> Madhvacharya
> >along Dvaita lines).
> >
> >I read in some Univ. library catalog, a reference to a printed edition
> >containing a commentary attributed to Sri Shankaracharya on complete
> >Aryanyakas 2-3 but cannot find it now. Do list members know of the
> >bibliographic info on this edition?
>
> I am not sure if Shankara wrote such a commenatary on the AraNyakas.
B.N.K. Sharma, writing in `The History of the Dvaita School' (3d ed.,
2000, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi, available at amazon.com), says
only that unavailable portions of Shankara's comm. on the Upanishad
are referenced by Sayana; I am not aware of any publication. It is
not clear exactly where Sayana refers to the unavailable portions, but
one presumes it must be in dealing with the same text.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> However, the AraNyaka commentary of sAyaNa is available. See for
> example, call no. *OKL 95-941 at the New York Public Library.
>
> Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From vaidya_sundaram at i...
Subject: New member introduction: Lance Nelson
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 17:35:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 007C1A4D86256A61_="
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: vaidya_sundaram at i...
--=_alternative 007C1A4D86256A61_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 06/04/01 04:58 PM -----
Lance Nelson <ln108 at y...>
06/01/01 02:15 AM
Re: Welcome and Request for more inf
Hello,
I am an associate professor in the Department of Thelogy and Religious
Studies
at the University of San Diego (Calif., USA). I have published a number
of
articles on Advaita. I am currently completing a translation of
Madhusudana
Sarasvati's BhaktirasAyana, which so far as I know is the only independent
treatise on bhakti by one of the great classical preceptors of Advaita.
Those
wishing to know more are welcome to check my CV at:
http://www.sandiego.edu/~lnelson/cv.html
Best wishes to all,
Lance Nelson
=====
Lance Nelson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Theology and Religious Studies
University of San Diego
San Diego, California USA 92110
PLEASE RESPOND TO: lnelson at s...
--=_alternative 007C1A4D86256A61_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<br><font size=1 color=#800080 face="sans-serif">----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 06/04/01 04:58 PM -----</font>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Lance Nelson <ln108 at y...></b></font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">06/01/01 02:15 AM</font>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: Welcome and Request for more inf</font></table>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Hello,<br>
<br>
I am an associate professor in the Department of Thelogy and Religious Studies<br>
at the University of San Diego (Calif., USA). I have published a number of<br>
articles on Advaita. I am currently completing a translation of Madhusudana<br>
Sarasvati's BhaktirasAyana, which so far as I know is the only independent<br>
treatise on bhakti by one of the great classical preceptors of Advaita. Those<br>
wishing to know more are welcome to check my CV at:<br>
<br>
http://www.sandiego.edu/~lnelson/cv.html<br>
<br>
Best wishes to all,<br>
<br>
Lance Nelson<br>
<br>
=====<br>
Lance Nelson, Ph.D.<br>
Associate Professor<br>
Theology and Religious Studies<br>
University of San Diego<br>
San Diego, California USA 92110<br>
PLEASE RESPOND TO: lnelson at s...</font>
--=_alternative
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 20:19:52 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Just a side show, and a few sAmidhenis (kindling sticks) for the flamefest
:-)
>ajaativaada
Ch.U. II. 18.1-2 revati sAma: "goats (aja) are HimkAra, sheep (avayaH) are
prastAva, cows (gAva) uthgItha, horses (asvaH) pratihAra, man (puruSa) is
nidhana."
aja means goat, but it also means 'unborn'. The mimamsakas of Buddha's time
only thought of goats. (revati might take a different meaning when other
words are explained likewise as something other than animals.)
>mAya
This item was never needed because there was nothing that could not be
deconstructed and explained in terms of ritual. A counter question: is the
any mention of avidya or ajnAna in veda or upaniSats?
Bonus question: Is there a world view where there is an abheda
(non-difference) between karma and jnana? (add bhakti etc)
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 22:31:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 15:24:41 -0400, nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>
>"See as long as you repose faith in an external supernatural being who'll
>"help and take care of you", you'll not expose yourself to the reality of
>samsaara - your mind will be closed to it. The reality of samsaara will be
>known only if you open your mind to it - "knowledge only increases
>suffering" - it is only then that mumukshutvam will arise."
>
>No mumukshutvam - no nirvaana.
Namaste.
Why do you think so ? Why do you think that the external being you think of
is incapable of guiding you once he knows your faults i.e. you are praying
to an external being? How can we classify Reality as being *not* external?
Do we imply its internality then? I know the answer to this question but it
is odd to consider that the reality is not out there at all when in fact it
is everywhere. In fact, Sri Ramakrishna Paramahansa tells of his extreme
devotion to Ma Kali which would not let him enter the nirguna avastha. He
says that Kali Herself appeared in his meditation, gave him an axe and
asked him to chop Her into two! The same Being who was being externalized
in fact showed the way to surmount It.
The Guru is in the same position - that is why our Acharyas never tire of
impressing Guru Bhakti in us. If the Guru says its day, its day, if He says
its night, its night. Faith in an Brahmanishtha Guru is much more valuable,
and of relevance to Sadhana, than reason or any amount of intellection.
Don't mean to make this any more of a monologue, but while we are on the
subject of reason, what makes you consider reason to be any indicator of
truthfulness in as much as it(reason) itself is purely subjective and can
never grasp the Supreme.
Have we not come across writings by our sages that are rhetorical in
nature? In a discussion on varna some time back, a Brahma Sutra was brought
into picture where the Rishi addresses a king as "fie on your wealth
Shudra". We cannot infer that the king was Shudra. Could it not, similarly,
be a rhetorican statement by Gaudapadacharya when he says "devotion is for
those of inferior intellect"? Rather than make this an absolutist
statement, do we not need to interpreat in its proper context e.g. warning
to those sannyasis who would not let go of objects of meditation (of course
I cannot do so as I have not read the Karika)?
Granted that Atma vichara alone will bring Atma jnana but who is to say
that bhakti will not lead to atma vichara, even if its bhakti to an
external Being, as it did in the case of Sri Ramakrishna?
On my computer at work, I have a picture of people, poor villagers, who
visited this year's Kumbh Mela at Prayag. The women and men alike have
spread their forecloths, as if asking for bhiksha, from the passing caravan
of sages and saints. I always tell myself that these people are way ahead
than I am because they have shraddha in our traditions, traditions which to
a great part have been reinforced by supernatural occurrences. They have
never heard of the karikas or the khandankhandakhadya, but they have, in
greater measure than most people I know, something that is probably the
most important ingredient - shraddha.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 23:42:18 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Nanda Chandran,
>I can give you my reference straight away - Maandukya Kaarikaas -
>Advaita Praakarna chapter verse 16. Devotion is only for those of
>dull intellect. And I think all of us know Shankara's and
>Sureshvara's view of any kind of karma - "the opposition of knowledge
>and action stands firm like a mountain". Again : "Those who talk of
>combining knowledge with action have perhaps not read the
>Brhadaaranyaka nor are they aware of the glaring contradiction
>repeatedly pointed out by the shruti and smriti". "Knowledge and
>action are like light and darkness. Action is only for those who're
>still in ignorance".
Could you please give me the reference in Br.U.?
Also kindly check this. The same Br.U. says at 3.2.13..
"13. 'Yagnavalkya,' he (ArtabhAga) said,'when the speech of this dead person
enters into the fire', breath into the air, the eye into the sun, the mind
into the moon, the hearing into space, into the earth the body, into the
ether the self, into the shrubs the hairs of the body, into the trees the
hairs of the head, when the blood and the seed are deposited in the water,
where is then that person?'
Yagnavalkya said: 'Take my hand, my friend. We two alone shall know of this;
let this question of ours not be (discussed) in public.' Then these two went
out and argued, and what they said was karman (work), what they praised was
karman, viz. that a man becomes good by good work, and bad by bad work.
After that Garatkarava Artabhaga held his peace."
Did they talk about the dead man's knowledge or wisdom?
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 23:53:43 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
My quotes are usually from Max Muller's translations at following URL.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/upan/index.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/index.htm
This serves as a quick reference on the web. I suggest checking back with
originals later to avoid errors.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 05:38:59
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Dear Bhadraiah,
>Could you please give me the reference in Br.U.?
The quote wasn't mine - it was Shankara's. I would think that he
was referring to the Yaagnavalkya and Maitreyi dialogue.
>Also kindly check this. The same Br.U. says at 3.2.13..
>"13. 'Yagnavalkya,' he (ArtabhAga) said,'when the speech of this dead
>person
>enters into the fire', breath into the air, the eye into the sun, the mind
>into the moon, the hearing into space, into the earth the body, into the
>ether the self, into the shrubs the hairs of the body, into the trees the
>hairs of the head, when the blood and the seed are deposited in the water,
>where is then that person?'
>Yagnavalkya said: 'Take my hand, my friend. We two alone shall know of
>this;
>let this question of ours not be (discussed) in public.' Then these two
>went
>out and argued, and what they said was karman (work), what they praised was
>karman, viz. that a man becomes good by good work, and bad by bad work.
>After that Garatkarava Artabhaga held his peace."
>Did they talk about the dead man's knowledge or wisdom?
The Atman ever is. Even if you die, it still is. As Yaagnavalkya says in his
dialogue with Maitreyi, it is a mass of knowledge with neither inside nor
out. It is the essence of your self. But you as you are in normal life are
not the Atman. You're a compounded entity of the body/brain/Atman and also
all that you've experienced in the world. With Atma Vichaara if you
transcend all these that you've identified with and rest in your true
essence, then you're liberated. So though in a sense action is required, in
the ultimate sense it is not. The Atman ever is - you neither go into it or
become it - it is only you always.
It is impersonal - unmoved by either good or bad actions. Ofcourse if you do
bad actions then there'll be that much effect in your mind - agitation,
tension etc - which will keep you away from the Atman - from yourself. If
you perform good actions which lead to calmness and senerity of mind, then
you can be yourself. Even all this is only a way of saying it and is not
absolutely true. If the Atman "becomes pure" because of your good actions
and "becomes impure" because of your bad actions - then it will be caused
and thus be transient and impermenent like the rest of the world. As said
before the Atman ever is in its own pristine purity irrespective of whether
you resort to good or evil.
Gaudapaada's and Shankara's view is exactly that of Nagarjuna when he says
that "the wise one does not act"! I've already outlined the fundamental
structure of the human being above - if you use your intellect, you should
be able to figure it out as to why action and knowledge are opposed to each
other like light and darkness. Anyway in my forthcoming site on Indian
philosophy I've explained all this in much more detail.
Ashish, this reply is also directed at your questions. Bhakti helps in
developing chitta shuddi - but it is not imperative and it by itself cannot
lead to liberation.
Friends, I'm actually terribly busy at work (!!!) and also very exhausted.
So pardon me if I'm not able to reply to all your posts - I just don't have
the time. Infact I'll make just one more post as to why I created such a
ruckus about all this and then you'll not hear anymore from me on this
subject.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:33:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> >They amount to the same thing. Kumarilas' purpose in engaging the
> >Buddhists in debate was not "ha ha, my philosophy is better than yours"
> >but to correct what he thought was untrue.
>
> Ah! I'm glad that you're giving atleast some validity to reason here.
>
You're raising a straw man here. That reason is important was never in
dispute. The question is can it independently tell us anything about
Brahman? It cannot.
> >Note neither God nor supernatural events would have posed any problems for
> >the Naiyayikas.
>
> Yes, but even for that they were willing to provide logical arguments.
>
Up to a point. For them too, Veda is pramana.
> >In fact they do. Both of them are commentators on texts. If they were
> >just out to spread their personal opinions, why bring the upanishads into
> >the picture?
>
> You've missed the point. I'm not denying that they're interpreters of the
> shruti. But they also try to reconcile the teachings of the shruti with
> reason. Else what makes the Advaitic interpretation superior over other
> schools of Vedaanta? Why should you believe in Advaita and not Dvaita?
>
Note by the time you've begun deciding between varieties of Vedanta you've
already placed your faith in the validity of the Vedas. Of course there
is nothing wrong with logical analysis (Mimamsa) of the Vedas, that's what
Vedanta is. But it is the Vedic texts which set the parameters for what
can be reasoned about.
> In Indian philosophy it is a rule that for a meaningful debate the opponents
> should agree on some common pramaana - means of knowledge. Since you seem to
> possess some supernatural faculty to comprehend as to how a text can save
> the life of a person and also blind him - which faculty I unfortunately do
> not possess, I don't think there's any point in discussing this issue any
> further.
>
No supernatural faculty is needed. We have the testimony of Madhavacharya
a liberated soul and author of works like Panchadashi and
Jivanmuktiviveka. If we trust him in regard to those works why not the
Digvijaya?
> But Kumaarilla himself has also left behind his own works. There's also a
> tradition which swears by him. There're also numerous other works which
> refer to him.
>
No there are certain works which have the name Kumarila Bhatta attached to
them but we cannot locate him or even reliably say what century he was in.
Of course I do believe there was a person called Kumarila Bhatta but the
point is that belief is based on tradition not reason.
> Actually what you're saying is exactly the thing that Shankara meant to
> discourage when he said "even the shruti cannot make fire cold". We cannot
> interpret everything literally. For simple minded people who lack the
> education and the intellect, spiritual leaders colour truth in religious
> hues - the Maadhaviya Shakara dig vijayam where Shankara performs "miracles"
> is a case in point. It is for the discerning to understand the underlying
> message.
>
> >As long as you persist in external *anything*, external car, external
> >house,
> >external job, external family, as well as external worship you are not an
> >Advaitin. Give up all of these and you have earned the right to the name.
>
> >When you are at your job earning your paycheck, is your mind focused
> >inwardly? As we have discussed here many times before, sannyasa is not
> >necessarily the end of the affair, but it is definitely a vital first
> >step. Real Vedantic sadhana starts only after sannyasa.
>
> Do you think every person who takes up samnyaasam has his mind turned
> inward 24 hours of the day?
I think on the whole they spend more time with their minds turned inward
than worldly people. Whenever you talk about a large group of people you
necessarily have to generalize. I suppose it is possible that somewhere
there is a samsari who is more inward than a sannyasi. Just as it is
within the realms of possibility that a helicoptor could drop a million
dollars on me in the next five minutes. The two are about as likely.
> Also the turning inward of the mind has no end
> in itself - after a stage your identity has shifted and from there all
> you've to do is abstain from sin and just be yourself.
>
You yourself said it Karma and Jnana are utterly different. Polar
opposites. Karma is not just religious rituals. When you pay the
electricity bill that's karma. When you take your kids to the zoo that's
karma. All of that has to be given up. If not, then all this turning
inward is at worst self-indulgence and at best upasana. Again you pointed
out that for a jnani upasana falls short and is to be pitied.
> Each person's spiritual development is his own and it is not possible for
> others to understand it. When I say something about the mind turning inwards
> it is my own experience and I cannot prove it to you - nor do I care to.
> Even if I tried, it will be very difficult for you to understand it - for it
> is a subjective experience and cannot be understood in the objective way.
> Every person has to know it by himself. As for me, to merely be myself is a
> daily struggle par excellence.
Yes that seems to be the way most of these debates end up. "Oh everything
is subjective so I'll just continue doing as I please anyway." The whole
reason we have a Vedanta shastra is that there has to be something more
than personal opinions. Vedanta attempts to be objective. We owe a
tremendous debt of gratitude to the generations of Vedantic thinkers who
have provided the conceptual framework that makes spiritual development
even possible. A true sadhaka should have the humility to submit his
personal feelings to rigorous Vedantic analysis.
> Oh! I forget that expressions of mysticism
> raises catcalls on this list - irony indeed when that is the advaitic way.
> Sign of the times, I guess.
>
You started this thread talking about reason. Now you're shifting to
mysticism? Reason is objective, it is the very opposite of mysticism.
It is precisely because Advaita Vedanta is based on reason that we are
able to discern most of this supposed mysticism for what it is, wishful
thinking. But true mysticism? That has an honored place in our
philosophy. If it is not discussed much on the list it is only because
the medium is not well-suited for such things. But devotion to God and
faith in the power of the Vedas are discussed and they are plenty
mystical.
> Anyway if you want an authority I can quote Ramana's exact words to show why
> you can still be part of the normal world and still have your mind turned
> inwards.
>
And he lived up a mountain because?
> But we're not taking about my preferences, are we? We're talking about
> Advaita's stand on external worship. Please give me references for your
> claim that Advaita aachaaryas have endorsed that worshipping an external
> object by itself can lead to mukti.
>
> I can give you my reference straight away - Maandukya Kaarikaas -
> Advaita Praakarna chapter verse 16. Devotion is only for those of
> dull intellect.
I've addressed this in another post in this thred. Upasana leads to
saguna Brahman. Although Gaudapadacharya doesn't mention it explicitly
later Advaitins believed this could lead to kramamukti.
>
> But that's only after liberation. But prior to liberation as the Purusha
> Shuktam says : the Purusha resides in the heart of one's own being and to
> know it there is the only way to liberation.
>
It doesn't (at least not in the Shuklayajurvedi version which I know)
Upasana on the Purush residing in the heart is just one of many upasana
mentioned in the Upanishads and there is nothing unique about it.
> >To get back to the original topic, how does some statement about an event
> >in the life of Kumarila Bhatta, impede the attainment of ethics,
> >austerity, or knowledge?
>
> My answer was in the original post itself.
>
> "See as long as you repose faith in an external supernatural being who'll
> "help and take care of you", you'll not expose yourself to the reality of
> samsaara - your mind will be closed to it. The reality of samsaara will be
> known only if you open your mind to it - "knowledge only increases
> suffering" - it is only then that mumukshutvam will arise."
>
> No mumukshutvam - no nirvaana.
Given that samsara isn't real I don't see why knowing the "reality of
samsara" helps any. A person who never
knew samsara (like Shukadevaji)
seems to me to be better of than one who has to be taught that. And note
"help" in "help and take care of you" God is also the Guru. Some effort
will be needed on the Bhaktas side but that isn't incompatible with
Bhakti.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:34:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> Gaudapaada says : There are some (shunyavaadins) who uphold non-dualism and
> reject both the extreme views of being and not-being, of production and
> destruction and thus emphatically proclaim the doctrine of no-origination.
> We APPROVE says Gaudapaada, of the doctrine of no-origination proclaimed by
> them.
>
If you are refering to IV.5 (which btw you translated very loosely.) then
he is not talking about Shunyavadins at all. The context begins from IV.3
which describes "vAdinaH" (debaters -- not a complimentary term) one
party of which believes in creation from previously existing things while
another believes in creation from non-existence. They are sarcastically
called "dhirah" (wise thinkers) Now neither of these theories were held by
the Buddhists and indeed Shankaracharya says in his bhashya that the two
parties are Samkhya/Yoga and Nyaya/Vaisheshika respectively. IV.4 refutes
both these views and then goes on to say that they are really advaitins.
How so? By their endless quarrels about creation they inadvertantly prove
the Advaitin point by showing the futility of creation theories. Again
you're missing the sarcasm here. IV.5 sums it up. We don't need to
quarrel with these people they are proving the point for us. We approve
of the conclusion even if it was reached by backwards means. Our own
philosphy is beyond dispute.
> I can actually quote numerous verses from Gaudapaada's Kaarikas which echo
> the exact sentiment of some verses of Nagarjuna's Kaarikaas. Some of them
> are even exact quotes from Nagarjuna.
>
Or alternatively Nagarjuna got them from some astika source. Given that
he was a learned Brahmana in his purvashrama that's not implausible.
> Shankara himself notes that Gaudapaada accepts the arguments of the
> Vijnaanavaadin Bauddhas regarding the unreality of the world :
> vijnaanavaadino bauddhasya vachanam baahyaarthavaadipakshapratisedhaparam
> aachaaryena anumoditam.
>
I was not able to find this in the Karikas (no index) can you give me the
exact reference please?
> The greatest of the Advaita dialecticians Sri Harsha in his
> Khandanakhandakhaadhya too warmly embraces the dialectic of Nagarjuna :
>
> 1. "As far as the unreality of the world is concerned the view of the
> Advaitin is exactly the same as that of the Madhyamika"
> -maadhyamikaadivaagvyavahaaraanam svaroopaapalaapo na shakyate.
>
Again the lack of an index embarrasses me. Could it be in the section
called saugatabrahmavAdinorbhedaH "the difference between the Saugatas
(Buddhists) and Brahmavadins(Vedantins)"?
References for the other texts you mentioned will also be greatly
appreciated.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:35:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> What? Even after I've provided all the references?
Yes. But rather than take my word for it I invite list members to look
back in the archives and form their own opinions.
> And it is a flamefest
> only if you think so. I've no racour in this endeavour - I'm just pointing
> out the facts.
>
Again whether or not it was a flamefest should be decided for oneself by
looking at the archives.
> >However let's for the sake of argument say there are some similarities.
>
> We cannot take it for "argument". If you've not studied ajaativaada of
> Gaudapaada, the Khandana of Sriharsha and the Madhyamaka Shaastram of
> Nagaarjuna you're hardly in any position to even talk about this matter.
>
If someone says up is down, one hardly needs a degree in physics to refute
it. But yes, I have studied the authors you mentioned and more. That's
precisely why I find your thesis so difficult to believe.
> I've already quoted from the Kaarikas and the Khandana. Does Gaudapaada
> or Sri Harsha think there're only superficial similarities between
> Madhyamika Buddhism and Advaita Vedaanta? When Sri Harsha says that "the
> Madhyamika view of the phenomenal world is exactly the same as Advaita's" -
> does that indicate superficiality? I think you should check up the
> definition of "superficiality" in a dictionary.
>
Let's see now: You quoted Mandukya Karikas III.1
upAsanAshrito dharmo jAte brahmANi vartate |
prAgutpatterajaM sarvaM tenAsau krpaNah smrtah || 1 ||
First thing to notice is the word used here is upasana. Now true later on
Shankaracharya gives devotion to Hiranyagarbha (Brahma) as an example of
upasana but the term means any kind of meditation not just bhakti. Those
who have followed the path of upasana become one with saguna Brahmana (not
just chitta shuddhi). They are to be pitied because they are so close yet
so far. Thus in the next few shlokas Gaudapadacharya sets out to close
the gap. In III.16 Gaudapadacharya explains that there are three paths
for people of lower, middle, and higher ability, karma, upasana, and jnana
respectively. That isn't a Buddhist view by any stretch of the
imagination.
> This view is itself flawed. For Kumaarilla as well as the other
> Mimaamsakas the Vedas have absolute validity. So Karma is an integral
> part of their world view - that's the reason the Kumaarilla advocates
> karma-jnaana-samuccayavaada - action cum knowledge as to way to
> liberation. Mandana too toes the same line - it is towards this view
> of action cum knowledge, that Shankara's criticism which I've quoted in my
> previous post, "for those who think karma and jnaana ... have perhaps not
> read the Brhadaaranyaka", is directed against. Action and knowledge are
> opposed to each other like darkness and light and those who advocate this
> view are sunk in ignorance.
>
You are making the classic mistake of confusing vyavahara and paramartha.
At the vyavaharic level Advaitins also believe the Vedas have absolute
validity. Why else do you think they follow the lead of Purva Mimamsa? At
the paramarthic level, *no* pramana has validity.
> Also unlike Purva Miimaamsaa, in Advaita even the Vedas do not have absolute
> validity. They're only para vidhya - lower knowledge - and in the realm of
> ignorance. They can only point us to the truth - but beyond that it is our
> self effort which really matters. So let's not hear any more about the
> acceptance of Kumaarilla's views by Advaita in "toto".
>
No pramana including reason can do more than point us towards the truth.
So reason and the Vedas from this point of view are in exactly the same
boat.
> Have I anywhere said that Advaita is not inspired by the Upanishads or
> other Vedic works? Ofcourse it is an aastika school which is derived
> from the shruti. But you cannot deny that there's a strong Bauddha
> influence too.
>
The fact that Advaita Vedanta prefers Jnana over Karma doesn't prove any
Buddhist influence. The same is true of Samkhya, Pashupatas, Jains etc.
> But I'll ask you a question in return - show me one pre-Gaudapaada
> work where two central doctrines of Advaita are explained clearly -
> 1. Ajaativaada and 2. Maya.
>
> Not mere passing remarks or vague references - but a full blown clear
> exposition of these doctrines based on reason, even as Gaudapaada has
> done.
The evidence is too meagre to make pronouncements about that era but let
me point out that Gaudapadacharya makes frequent references to tradition (see
IV.88 or 96 for example) and spefically to Vedanta (II. 12) Thus it is
reasonable to assume that Gaudapada had predecessors. And as the only
clear reference to the Buddha is in IV.99 which calls his philosophy a
near-miss it is reasonable to assume those predecessors weren't Buddhists.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 10:39:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: New member introduction: Lance Nelson
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Vaidya Sundaram wrote:
> I am currently completing
> a translation of Madhusudana Sarasvati's BhaktirasAyana, which so far
> as I know is the only independent treatise on bhakti by one of the
> great classical preceptors of Advaita.
Given the recent discussions on the list would you like to comment on
Swami Madhusudanajis thoughts on Bhakti and its' relationship to Jnana?
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 11:08:53 -0400
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 02:01:56 -0400, nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>
>Ashish, this reply is also directed at your questions. Bhakti helps in
>developing chitta shuddi - but it is not imperative and it by itself cannot
>lead to liberation.
>
Nanda,
My objection was only directed at your words that implied that bhakti has
no place of value in Advaita and that Atma Vichara alone leads to Jnana. A
purified intellect by means of bhakti to Guru or God is equally fit for
Jnana, without necessarily Self-affirming statements like "I am all this".
Sri Ramakrishana's is a case in point.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:17:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Reposting: Original: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Chandrasekaran Venkatraman <vchandra at A...> wrote:
>some reason. I saw mail from Sri Vidyasankar wondering who posted the
>original... So I am reposting this for reference of members who check
>only advaita-l listserv...
Thanks, this clarifies my doubt.
> Sri Vidyashankar's recent article on "Shankaravijaya" mentioned about
>wrong anecdotes of Shankara using aggression to subdue his philosophical
>adversaries. As Vidyashankar pointed out, these have to be hoax. But it
>seems there is a widely held belief that disciples of Shankara used
These kinds of legends float around. In the Himalayan foothills, there
is a widespread tradition that Sankara and his disciples fought with the
Buddhists, using both zastra (arms) and zAstra (scripture). Whether this
is true or whether it originates entirely for reasons of poetic metaphor
and alliteration is up to debate.
One fertile source of legends casting Advaitins, and particularly Sankara,
in a negative light is the Madhva tradition. There are legends that he
was an avatAra of a demon and that he was born as an illegitimate child.
And where the Advaita tradition says Sankara and Mandana Misra debated,
leading to the defeat of the latter, the Madhvas say that Mandana Misra
was actually Sankara's teacher, and that Sankara committed the ultimate
sin of adultery with his guru's wife. Obviously, the easiest way to cast
doubt and suspicion on a monk is to accuse him of breaking his vows. As
Phyllis Granoff, the editor of the Journal of Indian Philosophy, points
out somewhere, this is clearly an "anti-hagiography" of Sankara. What is
one to do? This trend has a six century-old history. One can't go about
changing the old texts, to make them say what we would like to see. One
can only respond to some things and simply ignore the rest.
Anantanandagiri's Sankaravijaya says that Sankara and his disciples were
physically violent towards a Carvaka, Jainas, Buddhists, Saugatas, some
devotees of Varaha, and even to Vyasa. A verbal debate ends in physical
violence, inflicted unilaterally on one party by the other. This is quite
different from a legend that says that both parties in a debate challenged
each other to jump off a cliff, to see who survives. It is up to those
interested in such things, to figure out which of these stories are to
be taken literally, how much is merely poetic exaggeration, and how much
is said out of mere envy, jealousy or pique.
Best wishes,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Sankara's life period
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 18:37:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Vidya and other members,
I have some naive questions... Please shed some light
and clarify by sharing your ideas...
Indian History is strewn with eminent personalities both from
political and cultural circles. Most of them have been dated
without much doubt.. Even Buddha's and Mahavira's periods have
been dated without disputes (or I think)... The Alwars and
Nayanmars (tamil saints) have also been dated without much
doubt, if not all atleast the most important of them have been.
We are also aware of each and every dynasty that rose and declined
over atleast a millenium till now viz., maurya, gupta, harsha,
pallava, to name a few... we know their periods beyond doubt.
While this is the case, why is the life period of the most eminent
of all Indian religious personalities, Sankara, so much debated
even by the very orgs. that represent his dharsana? Even if one
says there is lot of other issues (related to originality of mutt etc.,)
that has given rise to this forced ambiguity (per se), why is no
other school of scholars able to nail this down? Are we so much
starved of data to prove one way or the other, once and for all?
I apologise if this question is annoying.. This is a sincere question
as I am totally an illiterate in this area.
Wasn't Sankara patronised or associated with any King whose period
can be determined..? Like, Pallava dynasty flourished around 7th/8th
century AD in South. Mahendravarma Pallava was Jain (I think) for most
of the time and later got converted by 'appar peruman' (a Nayanmar)
into saivism... Could he or his descendents have had contacts with
Sankara or his followers?
One reason for meagre data could be that Sankara lived a short life
and might have never been at one place and was always on the move.
Here lies my main doubt... When Sankara's period couldn't be proved
beyond doubt, how come everyone agrees that Sankara indeed lived a short
life and that too everyone agrees that Sankara merged in Supreme
at the age of 32. (though I know there are many versions of how
Sankara merged in Supreme). How was it possible for the scholars
to prove this?
I understand that 'precept is more important than the preceptor
himself', but I felt it's still good to get these clarified. Even in
our own puranas, we see instances where history of personalities
and past events have been given importance. In Vishnu puranam
Sage Maitreya repeatedly puts many questions related to these topics
to Sage Parasara and the latter doesn't reject those questions as
frivolous.
Thanks in advance,
chandrasekaran.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 04:56:14
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
The world changes. You change. Still saints teach there's a changeless
reality in you underlying all the change. Not only is it *in you*, they
also teach that it is only you yourself. If you yourself are the
changeless reality, why are you not so in normal life? Our body changes
- it grows old, it becomes strong/weak etc The mind also changes - there's
no end to the working of the mind - it keeps churning out thoughts one after
another - change. So who're we apart from the body and mind? How do we
intuit the changeless reality within?
Almost without exception all siddhas teach you to "be still"; Tamil
Siddhas teach you "chumma iru" - keep quiet. The Bible teaches "Be still
and know you're God!". Dakshinaamurti teaches silence. Because it is
fundamentally action/change - both physical and mental - which keeps you
from being yourself. Becoming keeps you from being aware of your own
Being. But why do we change? Because that's the way nature has made you -
you're a psycho/physical entity who by the nature of the physical
and psychical faculties always have to be in action/change. The body
and mind have to keep on working without stop till they grow tired
and then drop down to sleep.
If you sit quietly - when there's no action either mental or physical -
it is only natural that you'll be by yourself - after a period of time
when the agitation of the body and mind has died down, your true self
will shine through. But the problem is that nobody can
sit quitely in a place for more than a few minutes, without their mind
asking for "justification" for such an action, without the body craving
to move/act. Within minutes you'll be up and running - being will become
becoming.
So when sages script a way of life for people with the ultimate purpose
of aspiring for nirvaana - they know that they
cannot only talk about the changeless - they've to cater towards the
changing too. Yes, even the samnyaasin cannot be in a changeless state
- with a mind turned inwards - for more than few hours a day. So what
do we do with the rest of the day? The monkey mind if left to itself
will feed on all things which are not conducive to you being yourself.
So to keep you occupied with things that does not take away whatever
spiritual benefit you've accumulated, the sages teach various kind of
beneficial karma - if you must act atleast do things which are beneficial
to you being yourself - like concentration in meditation, chanting
mantras, rituals, bhakti etc But the utility of these actions is not
positive but non-negative - they keep you away from evil. But they
themselves cannot lead to liberation - no action can - for liberation is
only being yourself - and action which necessarily implies the action of the
body and mind will take you away from yourself.
Beyond this I've no wish to engage in the debate, which only keeps
my mind churning and agitated - it keeps me from being myself. The
conflict here is not between me and Jaladhar or between Buddhism and
Vedanta (here Vedanta is what Jaladhar interprets it to be; for me
there's no difference between Buddhism and Vedanta) - it is between
karma and jnaana. I am telling you to be quiet, but you want to act.
I'm telling you to be - but you want to become. Karma forever will try
to obstruct jnaana in everyway possible. Action and becoming will
keep you away from what you truly are. That's nature. According to
praarabdha karma are all lives lived - what will be will be. What will
not be will never be.
Peace be with you all.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 01:40:22 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Nanda Chandran
I am not in hurry for an answer, and you can take your time to reply.
Why are we talking of nirvana here? Isn't it a Buddhist word meant for
achieving non-existence? Nirvana surely needs a lot of mind stilling and one
has to forever keep doing the vanishing trick on the objects that pop up
every few micro seconds. Ever played that game in amusement park where you
keep hitting the frogs that keep popping up?
It may be a surprise to you, but the logic re: action is actually the
otherway round.
I don't remember when and where, but I believe I read Adi Sankara's argument
as follows:
"There is no means for jnana from the absolute view point; but from the
relative (dualistic) view point there is means for jnana, because we are in
dualistic world." He gives examples of a teacher etc as means of obtaining
jnana, but in reality there is no such means. When the duality of
teacher/taught goes away who is teacher and who is taught? But as long as
you see duality you need a teacher, a person or book.
Same thing goes with every other item. Substitute the word "teacher" with
any word of your choice such as 'action".
Action is absent in highest reality because there is simply no place to move
or act, as existence is a material that has no properties; but in relative
dualistic world there is surely action.
What is the purpose of this action?
The purpose of this action that you see in dualistic world is precisely to
get rid of the duality. So if you let the action really happen, the
dualistic world would simply disappear. But we dont let it happen.
A fish in the water can play or sleep standing steady.
But put it out of water, it tosses up and down. Why? because it wants to get
back to its earlier state of existence (in water).
In Existence, we were still, and there was no action.
Once we were out of that existence (apparently), we are like that fish out
of water. So we keep tossing and turning up and down desperately hoping that
one moment we will get back into that existence.
So it is proved that the purpose of the action that is driving us from
within is 'actually' to liberate us.
But we are precisely afraid of that which is taking us to existence. So we
keep running away from it. That is the reason we do not stay still. So we
act. But the fear of the inner action has already distorted the actual
content of that action, and by the time we translate that inner action into
words and deeds that we understand, it is no longer what was originally
intended by the creator/destroyer. It is something else.
So all we have to do is to gear up with that inner drive of the
creator/destroyer.
But hey, even a maniac or a psychopath can claim to have some inner drive!
How to distinguish what is divine and what is mundane?
It is the action or inner drive that agrees with dharma (it always does but
we misunderstand), which we need to gear up to. If you miss one gear, not to
worry, there is always that next thought cycle.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 02:06:10 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear Nanda Chandran
There are clearly two types of action:
(1). The inner action prompted by the creator of duality (prajna), who now
wants to destroy the duality.
(2). The action that we perceive after all the mis-translations.
To identify (1) is not so easy, it needs the skill of Shruti etc. This
discrimination is important.
Otherwise if you condemn every action you are only eliminating all the
available means for liberation, and actually freezing the status quo of
duality. It is like taking a strong anti-biotic which also kills useful
strains.
Action (2) is bad, prohibited or at least avoidable. Action (2) will surely
continue the duality or even complicate it to such an extent it will be
nearly impossible to get out of it.
Action (1) is good, and it is the injunction. It is the yajna (the
bombshell!) Now the purpose of this yajna is actually to get rid of duality.
Not to continue the duality or milk its advantages as the pUrva mimamsakas
say.
All corrections and arguments are welcome.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Lance Nelson <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 02:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: lnelson at s...
Subject: Re: New member introduction: Lance Nelson
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Lance Nelson <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...> wrote:
> Given the recent discussions on the list would you like to comment on
> Swami Madhusudanajis thoughts on Bhakti and its' relationship to Jnana?
In response to Jaldhar's request, I include here notes of a talk I gave at the
U. of Pune on M's conception of bhakti. It is essentially a summary of an
article I recently publsihed:
"Bhakti Preempted: Madhusudana Sarasvati on Devotion for the Advaitin
Renouncer." Journal of Vaisnava Studies 6 (Winter 1998): 53-74.
These notes contain what I believe are the main distinctive points in M's
thinking on bhakti.
I would be interested in the comments of the members of the list, among whom
there are surely some more qualified than I to write about such things.
Warm regards,
Lance
See also:
Gupta, Sanjukta. 1966. Studies in the Philosophy of Madhusudana Sarasvati.
Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar. Prof. Gupta includes a very good chapter
on M's conceptions of bhakti.
Madhusudana Sarasvati. Siddantabindu. Trans. by P. M. Modi. Allahabad, 1985.
This volume has also a discussion of M's ideas on bhakti, as well as an
interesting collection of "subhASitas" by M.
------------------------------------------------
NOTES ON BHAKTI IN MADHUSUANDA'S BHAKTIRASAYANA AND GUDHARTHADIPIKA
Bhakti in the BhaktirasAyana (BhR)
1. Bhakti-yoga is an independent spiritual path, equal to or greater than
jJAna, and not just a preliminary to Vedantic knowledge (BhR 1.1, + TIkA [Note:
the first chapter of the BhR has M's own TIkA; the second and third, alas, do
not]).
2. Bhakti is itself, for those who follow it, the parama-puruSArtha (1.1 + T).
3. Bhakti itself is defined as the reflection of the form of BhagavAn in the
melted mind of the devotee (druta-citta-pratibimbita-bhagavad-AkAratA). M sets
up what is in effect a parallel between the bhakti-vRtti and the
akhaDAkAra-citta-vRtti that leads to Vedantic knowledge. The bhakti-vRtti,
which is savikalpika, occurs in the mind “melted” (druta) by the practice of
sAdhana-bhakti. The path of jJAna is for the mind that is not melted
(adruta-cittasya, BhR 1.1 +T).
4. The path of bhakti includes, as one of its higher but not its final stages,
realization of the Atman, the goal of traditional Advaita.
a) The 6th of the 11 bhakti-bhUmikAs involves pratyag-Atma-svarUpasya . .
. sAkSAtkAraH , “the direct realization of the essential nature of the inner
Self.”
b) This realization is equivalent to knowledge of the identity of Atman
and Brahman as revealed in the mahAvAkya tat tvam asi.
c) It creates the intense non-attachment to body, etc., necessary for the
more complete manifestation of bhakti in stages 7-11 yet to come ( T on BhR
1.35).
d) This means, in effect, that the higher levels of devotion are only
experienced by jIvanmuktas, those who are “liberated in life,” or–in other
words–that jIvanmukti is an essential prerequisite for the full development of
bhakti.
5. While the bhakti exemplified by the gopIs of Vraj attains the premno paramA
kASThA, “the supreme limit of love” (1.36) it is not the highest type of
bhakti. That experience is reserved for renouncer devotees, of whom the mythic
paradigm is Sanaka, sanakAdi, whose experience is greater (adhika, 2.73).
Interestingly, it is these latter, not the gopIs, with whom MadhusUdana (as a
saMnyAsI?) identifies himself (2.46).
Bhakti in the bhagavadgItAgUDhArthadIpikA (GAD)
1. M asserts that the primariy message of the BhG is bhagavad-eka-zaraNatA: “It
is not renunciation that is enjoyed here [as ZaMkara asserts]. Rather, the
state of having the Lord as one’s sole refuge is prescribed generally for the
student, the householder, the retiree, and the renouncer (GAD 18.66).
2. The idea of the BhR that bhakti is an independent path to salvation, and is
itself the parama-puruSArtha, is dropped, to be replaced by the standard
doctrine of Advaita that liberation comes through knowledge of Brahman,
mediated through the VedAnta-vAkyas and–importantly–preceded by saMnyAsa.
3. Non-renouncers may obtain liberation [1] owing to the fructification of
renunciation performed in a previous life, [2] by the Lord’s grace, after
death, in brahma-loka, or [3] through taking saMnyAsa and attaining knowledge
in a subsequent birth (GAD 18.63).
4. Bhakti, on the other hand, may be enjoyed by those (presumably saMnyAsins)
who are liberated-in-life. The jJAnins are also the foremost of prema-bhaktas
(GAD Intro, vs. 37-39). Their experience is richly described:
Those saintly ones who have Me as their sole refuge see “Me alone,” the Blessed
Lord VAsudeva, the complete essence of Infinite Beauty, the abode of all
refinements, the glory of whose two lotus feet is greater than the beauty of a
fresh lotus, GopAla, who delights in uninterrupted playing on the flute, whose
heart is attached to sporting in VRndAvana, . . . Because their minds are
immersed in the great ocean of bliss which is ecstatic love of Me (mat-prema),
they are not overcome by all the fluctuations of mAyA . . . (GAD 7.14).
Conclusion
1. The GAD’s presentation of bhakti, while impressive, lacks the unqualified
support of bhakti spirituality found in the earlier text, the BhR. We discover
here a style of bhakti designed to be compatible with, and included within,
jJAna-yoga, the path of Advaitic knowledge. The bhakti of the GAD is, to say
the least, of less interest for those who are not renouncers, whether by
inclination or lack of qualification (adhikAra).
2. Yet, despite his change of position in the GAD, M in that work refers his
readers to the BhR. So he hasn’t repudiated his earlier work.
3. In view of his tradition and training, as well as the orthodox nature of his
major writings, I am inclined to believe that the teachings of the GAD, and not
the BhR, are closer to M’s own personal experience as a jJAnin-devotee and more
indicative of his final outlook.
=======================
=====
Lance Nelson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Theology and Religious Studies
University of San Diego
San Diego, California USA 92110
PLEASE RESPOND TO: lnelson at s...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:59:48 -0400
Subject: Re: New member introduction: Lance Nelson
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 02:00:52 -0700, Lance Nelson <ln108 at Y...> wrote:
>Bhakti in the bhagavadgItAgUDhArthadIpikA (GAD)
>
>
>2. The idea of the BhR that bhakti is an independent path to salvation, and
is
>itself the parama-puruSArtha, is dropped, to be replaced by the standard
>doctrine of Advaita that liberation comes through knowledge of Brahman,
>mediated through the VedAnta-vAkyas and-importantly-preceded by saMnyAsa.
>
I disagree with this. Although MadhusUdana's teachings in the gItA
commentary are in agreement with the supremacy of jnAna, he does
say that bhakti, even when not accompanied by proper study of VedAnta,
leads to liberation, in the 12th chapter. Those who practice intense
bhakti will reach the Brahmaloka. MadhusUdana, then, explicitly says
that the great truths of the upanishhads, such as "tattvamasi"
automatically become revealed with no effort in the Brahmaloka.
What MadhusUdana has done here is to reconcile the krama-mukti theory
of Shankara, which says that those who resort to the upAsana of the
saguNa Brahman achieve krama-mukti, with bhakti towards God as it is
understood in bhakti-yoga. He also, at the same time, reconciles
the advaita doctrine that only jnAna attained through upaniShad
statements can ultimately yield mukti, with bhakti because he points
out that those who practice the bhakti as described in the 12th chapter
of the gItA and reach Brahmaloka will automatically, with no effort
on their part, realize the upanishad truths and attain mukti.
According to MadhusUdana, the final statement on bhakti-yoga is
18.66, commenting on which he says:
nahyatra karmatyAgo vidhIyate .api tu vidyamAne karmaNi tatra-anAdareNa
bhagavadekasharaNatAmAtraM brahmachArigR^ihasthavAnaprasthabhixUNAM
sAdhAraNena vidhIyate |
Abandonment of karmas is not being recommended here. Rather (what is)
recommended commonly to people in all Ashramas - brahmachAris, gR^ihasthas,
vAnaprasthas, and sannyAsins - is the performance of actions with an
indifference (to their fruits) and with the sole sense of surrendering
to God.
The surrender to God is of three kinds according to MadhusUdana:
tasyaivAhaM mamaivAsau sa evAhamiti tridhA |
bhagavachchharaNatvaM syAtsAdhanAbhyAsapAkataH |
After the ripening of sAdhana, surrender to God (BhagavachchharaNatva)
is of three kinds. 1) Surrender with a sense of "I am His", 2)
with a sense of "He is mine", and 3) "I am He" (sa evAhaM or sohaM).
MadhusUdana says he has described all these in another work of
his, the BhaktirasAyana. The last realization, "I am He" is the
culmination of bhakti according to advaita.
He says that this verse 18.66 is the concluding statement on
bhakti yoga, just as the verse 18.46 with the words
"svakarmaNaa tamabhyarchya siddhi.n vindati maanavaH" is the
concluding statement on karma yoga, and the verse 18.55 with
the words "tato maaM tattvato GYaatvaa vishate tadana.ntaram.h"
is the concluding statement on GYAna-yoga. These three verses,
18.46, 18.66, and 18.55 are then the key statments in the concluding
chapter of the gItA.
Anand
>
>
>4. Bhakti, on the other hand, may be enjoyed by those (presumably
saMnyAsins)
>who are liberated-in-life. The jJAnins are also the foremost of
prema-bhaktas
>(GAD Intro, vs. 37-39).
Actaully, he makes room for others too because he defines three kinds
to bhakti - karmamishrA, mixed with karma, shuddhA, unmixed with
karma or jnAna, and jnAna-mishrA, mixed with jnAna.
>Conclusion
>
>1. The GAD?s presentation of bhakti, while impressive, lacks the
unqualified
>support of bhakti spirituality found in the earlier text, the BhR. We
discover
>here a style of bhakti designed to be compatible with, and included within,
>jJAna-yoga, the path of Advaitic knowledge. The bhakti of the GAD is, to
say
>the least, of less interest for those who are not renouncers, whether by
>inclination or lack of qualification (adhikAra).
Here is where different levels of bhakti would become relevant. Karma-
mishra-bhakti or one where one thinks of God and devotee as separate
would be a lower kind of bhakti and hence not ruled out for those
who are not renouncers.
>
>
>3. In view of his tradition and training, as well as the orthodox nature of
his
>major writings, I am inclined to believe that the teachings of the GAD, and
not
>the BhR, are closer to M?s own personal experience as a jJAnin-devotee and
more
>indicative of his final outlook.
Tradition has it that he was more inclined towards the emotional kind
of bhakti as practiced by the gauDIya-vaiShNavas in his early life.
As he grew older and after studying advaita, he must have changed
over to the views as he expresses them in the gItA commentary.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Lance Nelson <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 10:17:07 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: lnelson at s...
Subject: Changed Topic: Madhusudana on bhakti
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Lance Nelson <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Formerly: New member intro: Lance Nelson
--- Anand Hudli <anandhudli at H...> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 02:00:52 -0700, Lance Nelson <ln108 at Y...> wrote:
>
> >Bhakti in the bhagavadgItAgUDhArthadIpikA (GAD)
>
> >2. The idea of the BhR that bhakti is an independent path to salvation, and
> is
> >itself the parama-puruSArtha, is dropped, to be replaced by the standard
> >doctrine of Advaita that liberation comes through knowledge of Brahman,
> >mediated through the VedAnta-vAkyas and-importantly-preceded by saMnyAsa.
> >
> I disagree with this. Although MadhusUdana's teachings in the gItA
> commentary are in agreement with the supremacy of jnAna, he does
> say that bhakti, even when not accompanied by proper study of VedAnta,
> leads to liberation, in the 12th chapter. Those who practice intense
> bhakti will reach the Brahmaloka. MadhusUdana, then, explicitly says
> that the great truths of the upanishhads, such as "tattvamasi"
> automatically become revealed with no effort in the Brahmaloka.
> What MadhusUdana has done here is to reconcile the krama-mukti theory
> of Shankara, which says that those who resort to the upAsana of the
> saguNa Brahman achieve krama-mukti, with bhakti towards God as it is
> understood in bhakti-yoga. He also, at the same time, reconciles
> the advaita doctrine that only jnAna attained through upaniShad
> statements can ultimately yield mukti...
I'm not sure we do disagree, in fact. This is just the point I made. The
bhakta has to wait until after death, perhaps the end of the yuga, in
brahmaloka, and then still go through the final "bottleneck", if you will, of
the mahAvSkyas, until he/she gets final goal, mukti, which is mediated by
jJAna. There is no mention in the GAD, so far as I know, of bhakti as an
indeptendent path or as paramapurSArtha. Moksa comes through the orthodox
Vedantic process of zravaNa, etc., which is indespensible, even for the bhakta.
If we are to take M's comments on the last few verse of chapter 18 as more
authoritative, let me quote my Journal of Vaisnava studies article (of which my
earlier posting was just a summary, and to which I'd refer anyone interested),
in which I wrote:
"That the hearing of the great sayings of the Upanis
ads is essential even for
bhaktas is reaffirmed in a particularly perplexing passage at Gudharthadipika
18.65. Madhusu¦dana begins by quoting Bhagavata Pura¦n
a 7.5.23-24, the
classical source of the nine-fold “disciplines of the Lord’s devotees”
(bhagavata-dharmas), the efficacy of which is much stressed in the
Bhaktirasayana. Then, having referred his readers back to that earlier text for
a more detailed explanation of those practices, he writes:
'Thus, constantly having your mind absorbed in Me because of the arising of
attachment to Me through the practice of the disciplines of the Lord’s
devotees, you will come to Me, the Blessed Lord Va¦sudeva, i.e., you will
attain Me by the realization of Me (mad-bodha) produced by the Upanis
adic
sentences.' [Sorry, I don't have the Sanskrit text at hand.]
"Apart from the continuation here of the close identification of bhagavat (“the
Blessed Lord”) and Brahman found in the Bhaktirasayana, these remarks are
completely contrary to the spirit of the author’s earlier work."
In the BhR M says, as I indicated in my earlier posting, that bhakti is an
independent path and itself the paramapuruSArtha, and--in standard VaiSNava
bhakti style--produces mokSa, without the necessity of mahAvAkyas, etc., as a
kind of incidental by-product. Mukti is not mentioned anywhere as the highest
goal.
>From this point of view, the BhR is a tad "unorthodox," it seems to me. It
appears that it was one of his earlier works, though he refers in it to the
VedAntakalpalatikA and also, as you say, refers back to it in the GAD, which is
rather a later work.
For those interested, an earlier version of the JVS article was published in
the Vedanta Kesari:
"The Samnyasi and the Bhakta: Madhusudana Sarasvati's Reappraisal of the
Bhagavad Gita." Vedanta Kesari (Madras) 76 (March, April, May 1989): 93-96,
134-139, 172-180.
Has Swami Gambhiranandaji's excellent translation of the GAD been mentioned on
this list? See:
Madhusudana Sarasvati. Bhagavad-Gita with the Annotation Gudharthadipika.
Trans. by Swami Gambhirananda. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1998.
I do not recommend at all the earlier translation by S. K. Gupta. It in many
places is more of a paraphrase.
Lance
=====
Lance Nelson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Theology and Religious Studies
University of San Diego
San Diego, California USA 92110
PLEASE RESPOND TO: lnelson at s...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 16:29:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 20:19:52 -0400, Bhadraiah Mallampalli
<vaidix at H...> wrote:
>>mAya
>
>This item was never needed because there was nothing that could not be
>deconstructed and explained in terms of ritual. A counter question: is the
>any mention of avidya or ajnAna in veda or upaniSats?
Sure, there are occurrences of "mAyA", "mAyinaM", "mAyinAM", etc. in
what is believed by even the skeptics of today (who do not believe
Vedas to be eternal) to be very ancient- the R^igVeda saMhitA.
As a rudimentary experiment, I recommend those interested to open the
electronic text version of the R^igVeda saMhitA at:
ftp://vedavid.org/pub/IBM_texts/RV_ITRANS_NoAccent_NoCompress/rvibm.1.txt
and do a search for "mAyA". You will be surprised to see how many "hits"
you get. You may also find occurrences in other maNDalas of the Veda
at the same site.
So much for the theory that advaitins borrowed the term "mAyA" from
the Buddhists!
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 18:30:10 -0400
Subject: Sankaravijaya texts - III
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>From
Message-Id: <.>
Jun 6, 2001 - Post made by Vidyasankar Sundaresan, from Pasadena, USA,
to the Advaita-L mailing list. Archives hosted at Advaita Vedanta
Anusandhana Kendra (www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html)
.______________________.
| Part III of a series |
=========================================================================
Sankara's birthplace -
--------------------
The general oral tradition says that Sankara was born in the village of
Kaladi in Kerala. This is also found in the texts written by Madhava,
Cidvilasa, Brahmananda Saraswati, Rajacudamani Dikshita, Sadananda,
Nilakantha Dikshita and others. Anantanandagiri's Sankaravijaya, in its
1971 edition [1], also gives Kaladi as the place name. However, the 19th
century editions of this text from Calcutta [2, 3], give the birthplace as
Cidambaram in Tamil Nadu. The Cidambaram version also mentions that Sankara
was born to a Brahmana lady, three years after her husband left home to
become a monk. This is referred to in an old encyclopedia, where the author
has relied on the old editions. [4]
Veezhinathan, the editor of the 1971 version from Univ. of Madras, informs
us that two sets of manuscripts of this text may be classified, one set
giving the Cidambaram legend and another giving the Kaladi legend. He gives
the Kaladi version in the text, citing Acyutaraya in support, and puts the
Cidambaram story into footnotes. His reasoning is that the Kaladi version
is authentic, while manuscripts that give Cidambaram are not.
However, there is a reference in the same text, which compares the infant
Sankara with Cidambaresa, which would be appropriate for the Cidambaram
version, but not for the Kaladi version. T.M.P. Mahadevan gives us a very
roundabout "explanation", according to which Kaladi is near Trichur, the
original name of which is Tirusivapperur, which has the name Perur in it,
and that there is a town called Perur in Coimbatore, which has a Nataraja
temple, and is called Adi-Cidambaram. Whatever the merits of this may be,
this supposed explanation still has to refer to Cidambaram in a twice-
removed fashion.
Cidambaram continues to remain central in Anantanandagiri's text, because
it places Sankara's guru, Govinda, at Cidambaram. Mahadevan's introduction
tells us that according to Kanchi matha sources, even Gaudapada was from
Cidambaram. Earlier, in his work on Gaudapapda, Mahadevan had explicitly
refused to view the matha sources as reliable ones [5], but his
introduction to Anantanandagiri's text, he raises no such doubts. In any
case, all this indicates that manuscripts that refer to Cidambaram are the
authentic ones, while those that give Kaladi are probably not authentic. It
follows that the Cidambaram version given in this text comes with all its
unsavory details, casting doubt over the legitimacy of Sankara's birth.
So much for all the ado raised by Mr. Sivabgs about Sankara's birthplace.
Again, to reiterate, I confess to much perplexity when I see that this text
is quoted so often and with such force, by those who derive their authority
from Sankara's name.
Mahavakyas - Four or more?
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian has already pointed out that Panchikarana and
Sukarahasya Upanishad explicitly give four sentences, which are
traditionally known as the four Mahavakyas for initiation into Sannyasa.
T.M.P. Mahadevan's introduction to Anantanandagiri's Sankaravijaya says
that Panchikarana lists only three such sentences, and implies many more.
This is again extremely perplexing, as all editions of Panchikarana give
"tat tvam asi, brahmAham asmi, prajnAnam AnandaM brahma, ayam AtmA brahma
ityAdi vAkyebhyaH [SrutibhyaH]." There are clearly four sentences here, all
of them being versions of the standard four. Yes, the word ityAdi is used,
but then, no Advaitin has denied the existence of other Upanishadic
sentences that teach Advaita. Mahadevan's statement simply makes no sense.
There is one place in the main text of this Sankaravijaya itself, where the
Mahavakyas are mentioned. Veezhinathan makes the text read, "tat tvam asi,
ahaM brahma asmi, ayam AtmA brahma, prajnAnaM brahma, (neha nAnAsti
kiMcana) iti." He has inserted neha nAnAsti kiMcana in parentheses here,
and proceeds to explain himself in a long footnote. Surprisingly, the
footnote has not a single word about this sentence, but enters into a long
digression about how oM tat sat should be a Mahavakya. However, it is not
surprising that he does this, because G. C. Pande's book on Sankara's life
[6] reports that according to Kanchi Matha texts, oM tat sat is the
Mahavakya of that matha.
Veezhinathan also raises the strawman argument that ahaM brahmAsmi, from
the Sukla Yajurveda Upanishad cannot be a Mahavakya for monks of the
Krishna Yajurveda. This is bogus. If this is so, Sankara should be
criticized for commenting on Upanishads of all four Vedas, instead of
sticking to the Veda of his ancestors. Nobody has claimed that the
Mahavakyas should be so rigidly divided according to Veda affiliation, but
everybody has come to associate the four Mahavakyas with the four Mathas
traditionally said to have been established by Sankara, probably based on
nothing more than the fact that each is a set of four.
Be that as it may, it is clear that Veezhinathan has tampered with the
text, and wilfully, in his addition of neha nAnAsti kiMcana within
parentheses. The very next sentence in Anantanandagiri's text uses the term
mahAvAkya-catushTaya in the context of upadeSa, and proceeds to refer to
the "rahasyaveda", where Siva gives upadeSa to Suka, using the mahAvAkya-
catushTaya. This is obviously a reference to the Sukarahasya Upanishad, and
as already pointed out, that text explicitly says, "atha mahAvAkyAni
catvAri" and lists the standard four.
So much for Veezhinathan's claim to having produced a "critical edition" of
Anantanandagiri's text.
It should be obvious that the goal has been to reject the number four, by
hook or by crook. I am sorry to sound harsh, but those who claim to
represent tradition cannot also toss it aside and trample upon it in this
fashion.
This will be the concluding part of this series. Some posts in this series
have sparked a few responses, but there is no point in lengthening this
beyond a certain point. For further small details and analysis, I point
interested readers to my forthcoming article in the International Journal
of Hindu Studies. I will notify list members when it is published.
_________________________________________________________________________
Notes -
-----
1. N. Veezhinathan. ed. Anantanandagiripranitam Srisankaravijayam. 1971.
Madras: University of Madras; [with a foreword by T. M. P. Mahadevan].
2. Jayanarayana Tarkapancanana and Nabadweep Goswami, eds. Sankaravijaya.
1868. Calcutta: Asiatic Society (Bibliotheca Indica No. 46, 137 and 138).
3. Jibananda Vidyasagara Bhattacharya. ed. Sankaravijaya. 1881. Calcutta:
Sarasudhanidhi Press.
4. V. S. Ghate. Sankaracarya. In, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,
XI: 185-186. 1924. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
5. T. M. P. Mahadevan. Gaudapada: A Study in Early Vedanta. 1960. Madras:
University of Madras.
6. G. C. Pande. Life and Thought of Sankaracharya. 1994. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.
=========================================================================
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:05:07 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Anand Hudli-hi,
Thanks for the reference re: mAya in RgVeda. I will create a new thread for
it.
"Buddhistic influence"
It is clear that Bhagvan Buddha was an innovator but set up his own shop
opposing Vedas for political reasons. Aren't we champions of copy rights? We
must give due credit to Buddha for his innovations.
Buddha's initiatives may have prompted Vedic scholars to dig back into vedas
as we do it today whenever a new scientific or philosophic wave takes over
the world. It may be no different than that.
As the vedic culture had already peaked out a few milennia before Buddha and
the original meaning of the scriptures was lost, there were no further
prajApati legends being created, and almost all new literature was poetic
(kAlidAsa etc). This only goes to prove intellectual honesty of scholars in
that they did not use any word without knowing its meaning, just because it
is the "in thing" to do.
By the time of gauDapAdAcharya advaita in vedas was well known. I read only
one post Sankara work advaita makarandam of lakSmIdhara and it is
consistent.
Buddhistic influence is a dirty word, but I see so such thing in AchAryas or
later works.
Even any use of Buddhistic jargon is no proof of influence. It is like the
way we use English words like mind, however inadequate they are.
It is only when the approach itself becomes corrupt or inconsistent, the
accusation of Buddhistic influence is valid.
But the real influence of Buddhism is on the people. A good number of Indian
philosophers of 20th century who respect vedas taught things like emptyness.
Akasha is fine with me, but not emptyness. This makes the whole approach
inconsistent and difficult to classify where it belongs.
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: mAya in Rgveda
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:21:56 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Anand Hudli-ji,
(Sorry it was a typo, and I wrote "hi" which is also a valid address.)
Thanks for the reference re: mAya in RgVeda. I still haven't looked into
them but here is preview of how I like to approach the matter.
1. All the references to mAya in Rgveda must be looked into and studied.
2. Very often I hear advaitists become apologic about the use of mAya
concept by Sankara. If non-duality can explain everything what is the need
for mAya? Now with Rgvedic reference, I see no reason for apology with
scriptural evidence. Yes, mAya exists (relative to us).
3. mAya may be just another tool to explain advaita like snake and rope.
4. I am tending to conclude to that mAya may be something created by higher
deities to continue its own pre-eminence. For instance your boss may keep
some things confidential, and that may appear as mAya to you. We have
absolutely no right to know about it or question it, nor do we have any
competence to understand even if revealed to us. upaniSats are very clear
about hierarchical order gods depending on context. These vedic gods create
their own food, do guard it and deny it to beings ruled by them to continue
their own pre-eminence.
Br.U. 1.4.10: "Therefore it is not pleasant to the Devas that men should
know this."
If this is mAya we have absolutely no right to question mAya. But mAya
doesn't exist from the highest view point.
4. Now a question arises who created mAya for indra who is only one level
lower than Existence! Did Brahman create it? No. Other gods like viSNu may
have created it to deal with indra. Or the very birth of indra may have
created it.
More ideas please!
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: mAya in Rgveda
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 20:30:08 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Sri Anand Hudli-ji,
Repeat posting: I will take care to recheck for typos in future.
Thanks for the reference re: mAya in RgVeda. I still haven't looked into
them but here is a preview of how I like to approach the matter.
1. All the references to mAya in Rgveda must be looked into and studied.
2. Very often I hear advaitists become apologetic about the use of mAya
concept by Sankara. If non-duality can explain everything what is the need
for mAya? Now with Rgvedic reference, I see no reason for apology. Yes, mAya
exists (relative to us)!
3. mAya may be just another tool to explain advaita like snake and rope.
4. I am tending to conclude to that mAya may be something created by higher
deities to continue their own pre-eminence. For instance your boss may keep
some things confidential, and that may appear as mAya to you. We have
absolutely no right to know about it or question it, nor do we have any
competence to understand even if it is revealed to us. upaniSats are very
clear about hierarchical order of gods depending on context. These vedic
gods create their own food, they do guard it and deny it to beings ruled by
them to continue their own pre-eminence.
Br.U. 1.4.10: "Therefore it is not pleasant to the Devas that men should
know this."
But this mAya doesn't exist from the highest view point.
4. Now a question arises who created mAya for indra who is only one level
lower than Existence! Did Brahman create it? No. Other gods like viSNu may
have created it to deal with indra. Or the very birth of indra may have
created it.
More ideas please!
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: mAya in Rgveda
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 21:01:08 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Bhadraiah Mallampalli" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
>Buddhistic influence is a dirty word, but I see "no" such thing in
> >AchAryas or later works.
No such thing!
Best regards
Bhadraiah
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 22:11:31 -0400
Subject: Re: mAya in Rgveda
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 20:21:56 -0400, Bhadraiah Mallampalli
<vaidix at H...> wrote:
>1. All the references to mAya in Rgveda must be looked into and studied.
>
I agree. A systematic study requires us to look into commentaries on
the R^ig veda by sAyaNa, skandasvAmI, venkaTa-mAdhava, and others.
>From this study, especially sAyaNa who is recognized as the foremost
among such commentators, perhaps a clear picture of the origins of
the mAyA theory will emerge.
>2. Very often I hear advaitists become apologic about the use of mAya
>concept by Sankara. If non-duality can explain everything what is the need
>for mAya? Now with Rgvedic reference, I see no reason for apology with
>scriptural evidence. Yes, mAya exists (relative to us).
>
True. The negative connotations of mAyAvAda and prachchhanna-bauddha-mata
have been propagated viciously by many schools who could not find any
breach in the impregnable fortress of advaita built on strong
foundations by GauDapAda and Shankara, with rock-solid walls by
the likes of shrIharSha and MadhusUdana, and finally a strong roof and
banner by those jIvanmuktas in the recent past who have served as
beacons or living proof of the doctrines of advaita. Also, Western
and modern Indian scholars have their own fish to fry, and with the rise
in popularity of Buddhism in the West, they feel that somehow advaita
must be a rehash of shUnyavAda or mAdhyamika theories to fit the
upaniShads. One of the allegations is that the upaniShads themselves
were "composed" after Buddha. But this is clearly refuted by the fact
that the Vedas as a whole, saMhitAs, brAhmaNas, and upaniShads, are
remarkably consistent and self-contained and it is foolish to argue
that one part of the Vedas which is consistent with others is
prebuddhist (the R^igveda saMhitA for example) while another
part (the upaniShads) are post-buddhist.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Irony of possessiveness!
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 19:55:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Dear members,
Amidst all the controversies (about the superficial details) that
have been flying in this list, I would like to share an ironical
situation I was in about a few years back.
I belong to kaanchi mutt, but never have been very spiritually
associated with the mutt in any sense except that I am a follower
of advaita and adore Sri Chandrasekarendra Saraswati, as much as
I adore Sri Chandrasekara Bharathi of Sringeri mutt.
My friend and colleague belongs to Sringeri mutt. Abt a few years back,
I recollect, we were discussing about Sankara's period... I went by what
I have read in history, having no valuable acquaintance with any other
sources, and asserted that Sankara's period is 8th century AD.. but my
friend asserted that it's well before birth of christ. We being good
friends settled down saying 'how does it matter' and remained calm in
the end. If you noticed, here we belonged to two difft. mutts
but were asserting the other's belief as the valid one unknowingly.
What an irony?! This irony was brought out by our ignorance about
our respective traditional beliefs, I agree. But there is also a
remote chance that if we had known our respective beliefs and were
staunch about it, we would have asserted differently.. So much to
our ego and its possessions!
The possessiveness in us lots of times paints the Truth, but it
seems so innocent most of the times when it does this! But the
solace is that Truth being much much bigger than the individuals
who are defending it and those who are offending it (either knowingly
or unknowingly), it prevails ever untainted amidst our constant
endeavours to know it as it is. So human efforts should be to share
ideas and *discover* the Truth. Truth doesn't need any Guards.
I think these are some lessons brought out by Sankaravijaya series
posted by Vidya. But still we haven't discovered the Truth as it is
in this case since there are still disputes. But the Truth is prevailing
intangibly regardless of the mortals going after it... I feel this
is pretty much same as human endeavours in defining the one God in
many ways... In whatever way each human defines God, God will exist
as what He is regardless of the mortals after Him. God is Truth.
Sorry, if this sounds like rambling...
Just wanted to share these thoughts.. I would be glad if this
is valuable in the present context.
Regards,
chandra.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 23:38:21 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> The world changes. You change. Still saints teach there's a changeless
> reality in you underlying all the change.
I'm being a little nit-picky here but I'd just like to point out that the
changeless reality is not just in you but everywhere. The problem is only
secondarily that you don't recognize the changeless reality but mainly
that you you do recognize a you (and me and them...) The point I'm trying
to elucidate is that Advaita Vedanta is not only pointed inwards but
outwards too. A mystical approach can also mean being like Purusha who
"covers all this and ten fingers beyond."
> Not only is it *in you*, they
> also teach that it is only you yourself.
In the same vein, a more accurate way to say "not only is it in you it is
everywhere. There is no you only it."
[...]
> If you sit quietly - when there's no action either mental or physical -
> it is only natural that you'll be by yourself - after a period of time
> when the agitation of the body and mind has died down, your true self
> will shine through. But the problem is that nobody can
> sit quitely in a place for more than a few minutes, without their mind
> asking for "justification" for such an action, without the body craving
> to move/act. Within minutes you'll be up and running - being will become
> becoming.
>
> So when sages script a way of life for people with the ultimate purpose
> of aspiring for nirvaana - they know that they
> cannot only talk about the changeless - they've to cater towards the
> changing too. Yes, even the samnyaasin cannot be in a changeless state
> - with a mind turned inwards - for more than few hours a day. So what
> do we do with the rest of the day? The monkey mind if left to itself
> will feed on all things which are not conducive to you being yourself.
In Samkhya/Yoga this stillness of the mind (chitta vrtti nirodhah) is
Samadhi the ultimate goal. You have revealed why Advaita Vedanta rejects
this view. Samadhi is an unnatural state. The mind is naturally
inconstant and that's why force must be used to still it. This is ok for
Samkhya/Yoga because it is dualistic and they readily admit the soul
(purush) is not part of nature (prakrti.) But jnana as described in
Advaita Vedanta is much more than stillness of the mind. Brahman is not
apart from prakriti made up of three gunas. It contains it and transcends
it. Even all the movement in the universe is nothing compared to the
infinity of Brahman. The knowledge of Brahman is unshakeable and
effortless.
[...]
> The
> conflict here is not between me and Jaladhar or between Buddhism and
> Vedanta (here Vedanta is what Jaladhar interprets it to be; for me
> there's no difference between Buddhism and Vedanta)
1. Nothing I've said is "Jaldhar's opinion" only the views our sadguru
parampara has held forever. I don't go for pulling notions out of thin
air just to suit my fancy. If you should find an opinion of mine is not
authentic I'll gladly retract it.
2. The idea that there could have been a Buddhist influence o Advaita
Vedanta I don't agree with but atleast it's plausible. That "there's
no difference between Buddhism and Vedanta" is an idea more fantastic than
any exploit of Kumarila Bhatta.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 23:47:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Madhusudana on bhakti
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Thankyou for your most informative post. You described an 11 stage
process of Bhakti. What are the 11 steps? Does Swami M.S. give a
shastraic rationale for this?
Also will your translation of the Bhaktirasayana include the Sanskrit
text? A pet peeve of mine is translations that don't include the original
text. It makes it very difficult for people who know Sanskrit to check
the accuracy of the translation.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 00:00:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Sankara's life period
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Chandrashekaran Venkataraman wrote:
> While this is the case, why is the life period of the most eminent
> of all Indian religious personalities, Sankara, so much debated
> even by the very orgs. that represent his dharsana? Even if one
> says there is lot of other issues (related to originality of mutt etc.,)
> that has given rise to this forced ambiguity (per se), why is no
> other school of scholars able to nail this down? Are we so much
> starved of data to prove one way or the other, once and for all?
> I apologise if this question is annoying.. This is a sincere question
> as I am totally an illiterate in this area.
>
You're right there just isn't enough data. Indians (particulary
Sannyasis like Shankaracharya) never cared much for dates. The estimates
of the times of Buddha and Mahavira are in part based on the calendar
systems based upon their lives. But their is no "Shankara Samvata" so
that can't help. And even if there was it might not be accurate. (It is
widely suspected that the Christian calendar is off by four years because
the calendermakers--the first of whom lived about a couple of hundred
years after Jesus--miscalculated his date of birth.)
Other information about Buddhist authors we get from the date when
translations were made by the Chinese (and later the Tibetans.) The
Chinese were as meticulous with dates as the Indians were not. Why? I
don't know but there you have it. As the translations were not made
instantly even this leaves a margin of error.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 05:53:30
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Buddhistic influence is a dirty word, but I see so such thing in AchAryas
>or
>later works.
See even Ramana Maharishi only expeienced the Reality. But he "learnt"
Advaita only by listening to various texts on the subject. When he heard
them he was able to reconcile those teacings with his own spiritual
experience.
So what I'm saying here is not that maya or ajaativaada is not a Vedic
concept - but that before Nagarjuna nobody was able to *explain it
logically*. Ramana himself admits that after even his experience he did not
know about any unifying substratum underlying all the diversity in the
world. He just knew his own Self and knew that it was not the body or mind
and beyond birth and death. That's how much he knew. And only after
listening to various expositions of Advaita was he able to logically work
out the implications of his experience.
So yes, the Vedic sages did know of maya and ajaativaada. Gaudapaada himself
says so - that those versed in the Vedas know the world to be unborn. But
only that they were not able to logically explain how. It is Nagarjuna's
genius which shows how it is so. The whole of Madhyamaka Shaastram is
nothing but an exposition of ajaativaada and maya.
But could he have borrowed this from other sources? As he was a brahmin
before his conversion to Buddhism it is very possible that he did borrow the
concept. But as noted before - he didn't borrow the logical exposition. From
what we can make out both ajaativaada and maya were buried in Vedic
teachings and nobody really understood it. It was he who picked it out.
Indian philosophy in those days was a highly competitive environment with
all philosophers of all schools well versed in the teachings of other
schools. If a logical exposition was already present - then when Nagarjuna
came out with his teachings, the Buddhists themselves would have condemned
it as a Vedic concept (as they condemned Vijnaanavaada of resembling the
Atman doctrine too much) and other schools too would have noted it. But no
such thing happened. Before Gaudapaada, maya and ajaativaada were recognized
Bauddha concepts. But in contrast look at how Bhaskara reacts when Advaita
surfaced : maahaayaanika
bauddhagaathitam maayaavaadam (Bhaskara's Bhasya on the Brahma Sutras). He
was quick to note that Maya was a Buddhist concept, because it was they who
had logically explained it and made it their own teaching.
Also note that Shankara himself recognizes only Gaudapaada of being the one
who brought out the truth of the Upanishads - because it was only he who
recognized that ajaativaada and maya were actually Vedic concepts though it
was being taught by the Buddhists - and he reconciled it with the Vedanta.
Even this "Vedic" or "Bauddha" concept is only foolishness. Ajaativaada
and maya is in phenomenal terms the product of reason/jnaana - you analyze
ideas about the world and they are not ultimately meaningful and hence the
world can neither be desribed as real, nor unreal, nor both, nor neither -
maya. The idea is that what the Buddhas experience, they're proving it by
logic.
And Bhadraiah, please read more about Buddhism before coming to unwarranted
conclusions about what it taught or didn't teach.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:03:21 -0400
Subject: Re: mahAvAkyAs
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 10:42:18 -0700, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian
<balasr at Y...> wrote:
>Thanks Ravi, for the pointer. I went through the other
>mails of Mr BGS in the ambaa list. It's interesting
>when someone joins the list claiming that he can
>supply the details of original research on BhaTTar and
>then the only contribution seems to be a monlogue on
>why Kudali and not Sringeri was the maTHa established
>by sha.nkara. One is certainly justified in wondering
>what the motives here are.
Rama, it seems that you have not searched the list properly.
In my intro. I had informed them about my collections on
Bhattar.Please read my posts in the ambaa list about bhattar.
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: FW: JIVA & BRAMHAN - a Lecture from Dr. SMS CHari this sunday eve ning
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:49:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <owner-advaita-l at L...>
-----Original Message-----
From: Krishna Kalale [mailto:kkalale1 at s...]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 11:43 AM
To: lecture-announce at yahoogroups.com; bhakti-list at yahoogroups.com;
malolan_net at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lecture-announce] JIVA & BRAMHAN - a Lecture from Dr. SMS
CHari this sunday evening
Lecture Annoucement : PLEASE FORWARD TO OTHER GROUPS IF YOU ARE A MEMBER
Lecture from Dr. SMS Chari
Subject : Jiva and Bramhan in the Upanisads and Bhagavadgita
Duration ; Lecture 1 hr - Q& A 40 minutes.
Date : June 10th, Sunday : 6pm Pacific 9pm EST
Note : Dr. SMS Chari is the author or several books on Vedanta.
Cost : $8
To get dial in number and codes send email to pavitra at w...
<mailto:pavitra at w...> ( Srinath Chakravarthy)
Note : this is an important lecture on the aspects of how the Bhagavadgita
and Upanisads explain the nature of Jiva and Bramhan. This will be a
comparitive analysis based on several Vedantic Acharyas. This lecture
throws some light on the subject matter of the new book which Dr. Chari is
writing currently. It is a treat to discuss these details with Dr. Chari
and interested people can take advantage of this lecture which will be
followed by Q&A.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lecture-announce-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Visit http://ramanuja.org/svss/lectures.html for latest info
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 12:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at H...>
wrote:
> Veezhinathan also raises the strawman argument that
> ahaM brahmAsmi, from
> the Sukla Yajurveda Upanishad cannot be a Mahavakya
> for monks of the
> Krishna Yajurveda. This is bogus. If this is so,
> Sankara should be
> criticized for commenting on Upanishads of all four
> Vedas, instead of
> sticking to the Veda of his ancestors. Nobody has
> claimed that the
> Mahavakyas should be so rigidly divided according to
> Veda affiliation, but
> everybody has come to associate the four Mahavakyas
> with the four Mathas
> traditionally said to have been established by
> Sankara, probably based on
> nothing more than the fact that each is a set of
> four.
This is a very important point made by Vidyasankar.
The association must have been based on the fact that
each is a set of four only. There seems to be a
misconception, sometimes within the tradition itself,
that the mahAvAkya upadesha at the start of sannyAsa
is like some gAyatrI mantra upadesha or something like
that.
The important thing is to realize that unity is taught
in all 4 vedas. That is the idea behind *4*
mahAvAkya-s. Surely no one would think there are no
other passages teaching unity? The idea of meditation
on mahAvAkya-s is also explicitly rejected by
Sureshvara in his naishhkarmya siddhi. He asks "if the
sentence tattvamasi cannot dispel ignorance once, how
can it dispel ignorance by repeated meditation on it?"
Plus, various mahAvAkya-s get repeated in different
upanishhads. For example, the kaivalya upanishhad
which has been quoted by sha.nkara has the statement
"tattvamasi tvameva tat.h". Also the aghamarshhaNa
sUktam in the kR^ishNa yahureveda declares:
yo.ahamasmi brahmAhamasmi | ahamasmi brahmAhamasmi. So
one should not fall into the error of rigid
demarkations and understand why shruti comes up with
the number 4.
Rama
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 12:17:20 -0400
Subject: Re: Madhusudana on bhakti
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 23:47:14 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at B...>
wrote:
>Thankyou for your most informative post. You described an 11 stage
>process of Bhakti. What are the 11 steps? Does Swami M.S. give a
>shastraic rationale for this?
>
I believe I have also read of only 7 bhumikas - that at the 7th, Brahman is
fully known.
>Also will your translation of the Bhaktirasayana include the Sanskrit
>text? A pet peeve of mine is translations that don't include the original
>text. It makes it very difficult for people who know Sanskrit to check
>the accuracy of the translation.
In addition to what Jaldhar has said, could you also post a history of
Bhaktirasayana e.g. when it was written etc. AFAIK, GUdArthadIpikA was
written by Swami Madhusudan Saraswati in order to be accepted by his
Advaita guru in Kashi, who wanted proof of his eligibility. Maybe some list
member knows why his Guru put this condition on Swami Madhusudan.
thanks
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:23:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
--- ShrI Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
> The idea of meditation
> on mahAvAkya-s is also explicitly rejected by
> Sureshvara in his naishhkarmya siddhi. He asks "if the
> sentence tattvamasi cannot dispel ignorance once, how
> can it dispel ignorance by repeated meditation on it?"
Thank you for this information. I was under the impression
that vAkya upadesham was specifically meant for meditation.
Namely, shravanam, manannam and nidhidhyasanam were meant
especially for the mahAvAkya-s. What is the role of the
mahAvAkya-s then? Does it just teach the tattva? If we are
not supposed to meditate on them then what should we
meditate on? I kindly request clarification on this.
Thanks,
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 18:19:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Vivek Anand Ganesan wrote:
>Thank you for this information. I was under the impression
>that vAkya upadesham was specifically meant for meditation.
>Namely, shravanam, manannam and nidhidhyasanam were meant
>especially for the mahAvAkya-s. What is the role of the
>mahAvAkya-s then? Does it just teach the tattva? If we are
>not supposed to meditate on them then what should we
>meditate on? I kindly request clarification on this.
If meditation is to be seen as japa, the way people recite a
mantra, without understanding any deeper meaning behind it,
then no, the mahAvAkyas are not meant to be meditated upon in
this fashion. Indeed, there are numerous stories about how a
mantra for japa need not have conventional or even a hidden
meaning, but a meditation on it will still yield fruits. A
mantra can often be a purely meaningless syllable. Inasmuch
as this is a mental activity, which gives a result, japa is
akin to karma. However, it is a matter of definition, that
AtmajnAna is not the result of any action whatsoever.
Sankara and Suresvara make the point, numerous times, that
the Sruti has a revelatory role (jnApaka or bodhaka), so
the vedAnta-vAkyas are to be understood and internalized.
The process of doing this, in reality, IS meditation. The
dictionary meaning of the verbal root, to meditate, is -
to contemplate, to reflect upon, to focus one's thoughts on,
to ponder over. In this sense, when a scientist is thinking
intensely about his research problem, he is meditating; when
a judge is pondering over evidence in a court trial, he is
meditating; when a university professor is planning his
lecture, he is meditating; when a student is focussed on
his assignments, he is meditating; when a musician is
immersed in his music, he is meditating. (As an aside, this
is what makes me impatient with those who claim that there
is no spirituality in Western music. To me, the spirituality
is in the person, not in the thing.) However, these are not
the same as repeating a mantra some x times.
Sravana, manana and nididhyAsana are indeed meant for the
mahAvAkyas, but the object here is to know the knowledge
revealed by the vAkyas. If we realize that the word manana
implies the operation of memory, and that nididhyAsana is
analogous to the word dhyAna, then yes, there is meditation
involved. But we have to be very clear about what we mean
by the word meditation here. Memory implies a recollection
of that which is already known. Similarly, dhyAna implies
a focussing of attention on that which is already known.
It therefore follows that what makes the thing known is
primarily SravaNa. That is why mahAvAkya upadeSa is given
much importance in the tradition.
Note that Sankara gives a very high place to what is called
dhyAna-yoga, in his commentary on the Gita, as he labels
dhyAnayoga as an integral part of the right vision that is
AtmajnAna (samyag-darSanasya antaranga - Gitabhashya 5. 27).
Any action is only an external/peripheral portion of this
dhyAnayoga (samyagdarSanasya antarangasya dhyAnayogasya
bahirangaM karma iti - Gitabhashya chapter 6, introductory
passage).
When Suresvara says - "If one teaching of tattvamasi does
not reveal the Atman, then how will mere repeating of the
sentence reveal it?" - he is raising an objection to an
old Vedantic view called prasaMkhyAna vAda. When we dig
into the texts, we see that this is part of a very old
dispute in the history of Vedanta. The prasaMkhyAna vAdin
says that meditation on the vAkyas is to be done till the
Atman is experienced (prasaMkhyAnam ataH kAryaM yAvad
AtmAnubhUyate - verse chapter 18 in Upadesasahasri).
There is a small book by Jonathan Bader, titled Meditation
in Sankara's Vedanta, published by Aditya Prakashan, Delhi.
There are a few points on which I would disagree with the
author, but I definitely recommend it as a ready reference
work. Also see the discussion by Mayeda in his introduction
to the translation of Upadesasahasri, and my paper in the
Adyar Library Bulletin, 1998, on prasaMkhyAna vAda, and
Sankara's teaching of parisaMkhyAna meditation. Among the
contemporary teachers of Advaita in the US, I would draw
attention to what Swami Dayananda Saraswati of the Arsha
Vidya Gurukulam says about this topic.
To round this off by going back to the tradition, note that
the practice of the Dasanami Sannyasins in India is not to
do japa of the mahAvAkyas, but to meditate on the akAra,
ukAra and makAra (auM), as described in the mANDUkya up.
and in the prakaraNa text called pancIkaraNa.
This praNavadhyAna is either on the brahman with attributes
or on the higher brahman. This follows mANDUkya kArikAs
(praNavo hy aparaM brahma, praNavaS caiva paras smRtaH).
However, note that the auMkAra is not called a mahAvAkya.
Technically, it is an akshara, i.e. a syllable, not a vAkya.
(aum ity etad aksharam idaM sarvam... - mANDukya up.)
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 08:27:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Namaste Nandaji:
Though your logic appears compelling, I am sorry to say that I disagree.
Here is my understanding of Shankara's statement: "don't get seduced by
looking at the navel of a woman." Shankara by this statement warns the lower
ends of human tendencies and ask us to assume the higher levels. When we
were children, we get amused by the toys and if we go to a toy store, we
want to buy and play with the toys. As children, our mind gets agitated
because of our attachment to things that we like and enjoy. But as adults,
when we go to the toy store, the same toys that we used to play do not have
any impact on us and we are no more agitated. We do become ‘instant
jnanis!" Whether you agree or disagree, we have high potential to be a jnani
and avoid getting mind agitation when seeing objects that bring sensual
pleasures. According to Vedanta, we are truly jnanis but our ignorance and
false attachment propels desires and we suffer due to their consequences.
We do take up samnyaasam slowly and steadily, some can do it faster and
others may indulge in worldly things for a longer time. Please understand
that the Vedantic view of human liberation is much more appealing than the
views expressed in Buddhism. Vedanta doesn't deny that pain is inevitable
but it stresses that suffering is avoidable through detachment. You may
have a different point of view and may be more convinced with point of view
of Buddhism and I fully respect it but I certainly don't agree.
Coming back to intellectual conceptualization, let me restate my
understanding. Vedanta distinguishes between "para" and "apara" vidya.
Apara vidya includes learning and mastering of all scriptures including the
Vedas. The Upanishads (also in Vivekachoodamani) states that apara vidya is
not sufficient for God-realization and it is para vidya that can lead us to
Self-realization. The famous quotation of the Upanishads, "the more we
know, the more we don't know" signifies why the path of intellectual
education will never help us realize the Brahman. Please understand that
faith is integral part of Advaita Vedanta and "God" is the gate keeper who
opens the door for us when the reach the gate to liberation. All the road
maps, guides and vehicles that travel can take us may at the most can take
us to the Gate. But with only God's grace, the gate will open for human
liberation. If you are convinced that without God's grace and with only
intellectually, you can be liberated, I respect your view but I disagree.
Your statements regarding ‘object,' and ‘subject' are intellectually quite
appealing but it can take us no where as for as I can see. According to
Vedanta, we should prepare discard all notions including the notion of
Advaita Philosophy to get the liberation. Once again, God's grace alone will
guarantee our liberation and this statement is the statement of faith which
is quite essential in understanding Shankara's Advaita Philosophy. The
reading of books and Shastras are only to help us to cultivate ‘faith.' St
Augustine is quite correct when he said: "faith is to believe what we don't
see; its reward is to see what we believe."
warmest regards,
Ram Chandran
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:27:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> There're some problems here. There's the true Self which is non-dual
> with brahman. The false self is a product of ignorance. It has no reality in
> itself and Shankara clearly says that liberation is only the removal of
> ignorance. You neither *go into* liberation or does liberation *come to*
> you. You already are liberated and all you need to do is get rid of the
> ignorance - the false self.
>
No there is only one self. Whether it is perceived as true or false
depends on the perceiver. It is there, in the perception, that the value
true or false resides. Removal of ignorance means a change in perspective
not the creation or destruction of anything. Perhaps a picture might
help.
Before Moksha:
+---+
| A | B
+---+
After Moksha:
+-------+
| A B |
+-------+
A and B represent two putative "objects". The box, the boundaries of "self".
What changes after the dawn of jnana is only the notion of where the
boundaries of self are. (Or to be more accurate the notion that there are
no boundaries to the self.)
> You say : "The false self can transcend ignorance because the truth
> that it learns is *there are no external objects*. What it preceived as
> external is really nothing other than itself".
>
> The false self is ignorance. It is due to it that objects are perceived
> as *different* from yourself. So where's there sense in saying that the
> false self realizes that there are no external objects? If it perceives
> external objects as nothing other than itself it only means - it which
> is ignorance perceives external objects which too are a product of
> ignorance as no different from itself. Sure, but where's there liberation
> here?
>
Ok time for a another picture.
Samsara Moksha
false self true self
ignorance jnana
| |
+----->----->----->----->----->----->+
| |
A B
All that is happening between point A and point B is a change of
perspective, the nature of the perceiver is exactly the same. The self is
only "false" insofar as it considers things to be external. This
feeling of externality grows less and less until it disappears. Then the
self is true.
> See - ultimately to *know* the external - is only ignorance. That's the
> reason it is repeatedly said that the Self cannot be known as an object.
> The Self is only you - self-established knowledge - to be known as the
> subject, here and now.
>
The object is not to know the external or internal but to know non-difference.
> But who knows that? If your true self has to know it, then obviously
> it cannot be perfect - for it is then short of that knowledge.
> For
> reasons given above, it cannot be the false self which knows this either. So
> let us reflect more on what abheda or ananya means.
>
That argument could be made against any kind of Vedantic sadhana. At
first the equivalance has to be taken as a matter of faith or ideology.
As the level of discipline and experience becomes higher the
sense of equivalence becomes stronger and stronger until it is
unshakeable. This is mukti.
> Because it is your liberation which is at stake here. So it is your self
> which needs the attention.
>
This may be so at the very beginning but ashe learns more, the sadhaka
realizes this is a false premise.
> As long as there's the thought "there is no something else" - it is
> only vritti - duality and ignorance. "There's no something else" is
> not a thought or knowledge - it is rather lack of any knowledge of
> difference. And this feeling of non-difference is not conceptual to
> be "known" as an object. It is an integral experience where when you
> know your own self, the self of the world too becomes known - "knowing
> which everything else is known".
>
> >And again let me point out that Bhakti does not imply "external object"
>
> You can have grand ideas about it - but all action necessarily implies
> duality.
>
But Bhakti does not imply action!
> >The difference is he now
> >abides in the unshakeable conviction that these are not "external objects"
> >but only his own self.
>
> You've to first explain how such a knowledge will arise with an *external*
> search.
The same way it can arise from reading the words of the Vedas (an external
object) or hearing a Guru (an external object) or reading a book (an
external object.)
> As noted earlier : 1. according to maayaavaada you cannot *know*
> external objects.
The distinction betwen external or internal is purely a matter of
perspective. The goal of any kind of Vedantic sadhana is to wean the
sadhaka away from the idea of external objects.
> 2. even if you know, it is not your true self which knows
> as it doesn't need any such knowledge. So if it is your false self which
> knows that things external to it are none other than itself - then it can
> only mean ignorance knows ignorance. So all this only leads to absurdity.
>
Then according to you all Vedantic sadhana is absurd. Every sadhaka
starts off mired in ignorance. If the ignorant cannot know, then
knowledge is impossible. Yes ignorance knows ignorance. Ignorance uses
ignorance to negate ignorance.
> >Don't you see? there is no "your" or "my" in Brahman. *Everything* is
> >non-dual with Brahman.
>
> But you're not *in* Brahman, are you? You are an individual who's striving
> for liberation. Do not mix vyavahaara and paramaartha.
>
Then why did you say "*your*self is Brahman". That is also mixing up
vyavahara and paramartha no? In order to give the sadhaka a goal to aim
for the end result of that sadhana (this applies to any sadhana) is
described in detail. At first the sadhaka only pays lip service to such
words. As he progresses they become more solid for him.
If the statement "yourself is Brahman" is possible and meaningful than the
statement "everything is Brahman" is also possible and meaningful. If
one is a mixup of perspectives, both are.
> But whose liberation are we talking about here? Are you trying to liberate
> the world? Even if you *know* the truth of the world, then the world will be
> liberated and you'll still be standing in ignorance. Personal salvation is
> at stake here. The world is maya because of your avidhya. So it is your
> avidhya which needs to be removed.
>
Perhaps "personal salvation" is the initial motive to make a person
interested in Vedanta but again the aim of the sadhana is to disabuse him
of the notion that there is "person", "world", even eventually
"liberation" Avidya will not lessen while he believes in such things.
> Don't tell me that the world is not different from you - that's only so
> in the ultimate sense - if you are a jnaani. For the jiva it is different -
> else why would there even be an advaita Vedanta as a path to liberation? Can
> the knowledge of "non-difference" arise in you from studying the world?
> Maayaavaada is the reason it cannot.
>
Actually even in the world there is some sense of non-difference. Take
for example a soldier dressing the same way, following the same orders
etc. as the rest of the army. Or perhaps more apropos for our discussion,
a mothers love for her child. When the child is hurt, she feels the pain
as much. The problem with these small outbreaks of non-difference is they
are transient. Vedanta is a system for making non-difference stick. If
even the common man can have some inkling of non-difference, then surely
the Vedantic sadhaka can even before he is a jnani.
> The realization of unity between the world and yourself is not a product of
> mere conceptual thinking or understanding. Then it will only be as
> unreal as normal experience which differentiates between yourself and
> the world. Then you can imagine anything - there's no world or no you or
> the world is in you or under you or above you etc
>
Again the same can be said of any form of sadhana. They all start off as
concept. Their worth is measured by where they end up.
> Advaita teaches an integral spiritual experience where you know yourself
> as non-different from the world.
>
> You can have a conception in your mind that Bhagavan is not external -
> but everytime you act you're only proving otherwise. As long as the
> mind is not turned inward, all acts are external. Even the turning
> inward of the mind is also action - but it leads to inaction and
> non-dualism.
>
A basic misunderstanding in this discussion revolves the meaning of
Karma.
Action is an adequate English translation but not a perfect one. Some
kinds of actions do not fall under the purview of karma. Things like
eating, sleeping, breathing for instance are purely instinctual. (this by
the way is the defence against those who think Jivanmukti is impossible
because they say it is impossible to give up action entirely.) What is
karma then? It is action performed with intention. During a religious
ritual we make the saMkalpa (intention) "ahaM amuka karma karishye" and in
secular actions too we have some intention in mind. It is intention which
is to be avoided by the sadhaka because it presupposes duality.
Interestingly in III.32 Gaudapadacharya uses the words na saMkalpayate to
describe what happens to the mind after realization. "It does not
intend." Not it does not think. A jivanmukta can also talk to people,
move objects, or trip over things. The difference is he no longer has
thoughts like "I will do this to achieve that." This is what is meant by
transcending karma.
> >And incidently even Gaudapadacharya uses the words Prabhu (e.g. III.13)
> >and Bhagavan (e.g. IV. 82) to describe Brahman.
>
> But he doesn't mix vyavahaara and paramartha indiscriminately.
>
No he doesn't. Tell me, why do you think he used those particular words?
> Unless you sit still everything is action only. There's no great complexity
> here - any movement of your body, senses and mind is action only.
It may be action but it isn't karma in the sense a Vedantin cares about.
> Even inward search is action. But it is an effort towards in-action
> which leads to abiding in yourself and non-dualism. You have to
> explain how bhakti can achieve this. I also notice that your
> definition of bhakti has progressively undergone radical change from
> the day we first started this discussion. First it was merely praying
> to bhagavan - now I've no idea what you're talking about. In the next
> post, in precise terms please clearly explain your conception of
> bhakti.
>
Bhakti in a nutshell is intense love of God. It certainly includes prayer
but perhaps the key behavior is the Bhakta's attention is constantly
focused on God. It is purely selfless (i.e. lacking intention which as I
mentioned is the hallmark of karma.) When the bhakta realizes that God is
not other than his own self it is jnana nothing else.
> Also, let us first reconcile jnaana and bhakti with the fundamental
> psychology and metaphysics of Advaita. Then we can turn to what the
> teachers of Advaita say. Else it will only be your interpretation against
> mine.
So first you're going to a priori assume a "psychology and metaphysics of
Advaita" and then turn to the people who actually created that psychology
and metaphysics? That seems to be approaching the problem backwards to
me.
And I must say I'm getting rather annoyed with this "well that's just your
opinion" attitude people have. Advaita Vedanta is a living force today.
It is plainly obvious that its' exponents have no problem with Bhakti.
I've shown that their historical predecessors haven't had such a problem
either. You on the contrary have mostly offered up unsupported assertions
and where you have given quotes more often than not you've misinterpreted
them. There is such a thing as objectivity. I for one try and maintain
an objective outlook as much as possible. I only wish more people would
do the same.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 17:04:58
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Namaste Nandaji:
>
>Though your logic appears compelling, I am sorry to say that I disagree.
>
>Here is my understanding of Shankara's statement: "don't get seduced by
>looking at the navel of a woman." Shankara by this statement warns the
>lower
>ends of human tendencies and ask us to assume the higher levels. When we
>were children, we get amused by the toys and if we go to a toy store, we
>want to buy and play with the toys. As children, our mind gets agitated
>because of our attachment to things that we like and enjoy. But as adults,
>when we go to the toy store, the same toys that we used to play do not have
>any impact on us and we are no more agitated.
But we have other "toys" to interest us, don't we? Irrespective of age, I
would think that there'll always be some desire for something external to
you. Ofcourse I'm only young and have not lived long enough as you - and
therefore I can only say this from my perspective. If you see Indian
philosophers I think most of them were pretty young too - Shankara was
definitely young. So was Gautama Siddhartha and Nagarjuna. So in their works
when they write about philosophy they can only express what an young man
feels. When the philosophical consciousness increases not only does your
awareness of reality increase, your awareness of samsaara also increases on
the side - so the lure of the external world is even more heightened. That's
the reason Shankara warns people not to succumb to sensual desires but
persevere in their spiritual effort.
>Whether you agree or disagree, we have high potential to be a jnani
>and avoid getting mind agitation when seeing objects that bring sensual
>pleasures. According to Vedanta, we are truly jnanis but our ignorance and
>false attachment propels desires and we suffer due to their consequences.
>We do take up samnyaasam slowly and steadily, some can do it faster and
>others may indulge in worldly things for a longer time. Please understand
>that the Vedantic view of human liberation is much more appealing than the
>views expressed in Buddhism.
Ram, all this is terribly subjective. Bhartrhari thinks that if you delay
too much your mind and body will not have the necessary strength for the
effort that's required to liberate oneself. I think it is in the vairaagya
shaatakam he says : "there're only two things that're of interest to a man -
the breasts of a woman and the forest". So I guess even he was pretty
troubled by his desires. But ultimately he did renounce. Likewise if
Shankara had no such thoughts would he have talked about being attracted by
the navel of a woman?
The greatest problem in such matters is you'll not know what suffering is
unless you take samnyaasam. If you live your normal life doing what you do
daily and getting what you want, how will you know what suffering is? I'll
suggest something to you : take three things which are really dear to you -
which give you a lot of happiness and pleasure - it can be anything - food,
entertainment, people who're dear to you etc - abstain from them for a
month. See the amount of heartburn and restlesness it will cause. After
experiencing this think about people who renounce everything for life.
I tried this out practically a couple of years back. I quit my job in the US
and came back home to Madras and didn't take up a job for six months -
though I ate normal food and slept in a bed, I avoided all forms of
entertainment and pleasure and read only spiritual books - it was sheer hell
and in the end I was only depressed. But I think it was an eye opener for
me. For prior to that I was fantasising about taking up samnyaasam etc and
after my experiment I knew how immature I was spiritually - I lacked the
physical, mental and moral discipline. Most people experience happiness and
pleasure only because of things external to them - it can be both material
and subtle like thoughts. We exist every moment in the anticipaton of
experiencing something which will make us happy or give us pleasure - that's
what sustains our lives amidst all the disappointments - it can be anything
- food, love of dear ones, a new car or dress, career goals etc. Take these
external things away and watch how much misery will arise - without all
these to feed you with happiness/pleasure life will become meaningless in
the phenomenal sense. You've no idea how much attached you're to things
unless you give them up. Try experimenting - it'll show you how much you
presume.
The problem is even more compounded when you mind is filled with wrong
notions. Intially when I used to practice meditatation, Yagnavalkyaa's :
"when you're all there is", used to really depress me. Think about your ego
which has no identity apart from all the objects it experiences - thinking
that the end is only itself being the only thing in the world!
Ram, I'm not going to go beyond this. You take up samnyaasam - then you tell
me whether samsaara is suffering or not.
>Vedanta doesn't deny that pain is inevitable
>but it stresses that suffering is avoidable through detachment. You may
>have a different point of view and may be more convinced with point of view
>of Buddhism and I fully respect it but I certainly don't agree.
>
>Coming back to intellectual conceptualization, let me restate my
>understanding. Vedanta distinguishes between "para" and "apara" vidya.
>Apara vidya includes learning and mastering of all scriptures including the
>Vedas. The Upanishads (also in Vivekachoodamani) states that apara vidya
>is
>not sufficient for God-realization and it is para vidya that can lead us to
>Self-realization. The famous quotation of the Upanishads, "the more we
>know, the more we don't know" signifies why the path of intellectual
>education will never help us realize the Brahman. Please understand that
>faith is integral part of Advaita Vedanta and "God" is the gate keeper who
>opens the door for us when the reach the gate to liberation. All the road
>maps, guides and vehicles that travel can take us may at the most can take
>us to the Gate. But with only God's grace, the gate will open for human
>liberation. If you are convinced that without God's grace and with only
>intellectually, you can be liberated, I respect your view but I disagree.
>
>Your statements regarding ‘object,' and ‘subject' are intellectually quite
>appealing but it can take us no where as for as I can see. According to
>Vedanta, we should prepare discard all notions including the notion of
>Advaita Philosophy to get the liberation. Once again, God's grace alone
>will
>guarantee our liberation and this statement is the statement of faith which
>is quite essential in understanding Shankara's Advaita Philosophy. The
>reading of books and Shastras are only to help us to cultivate ‘faith.' St
>Augustine is quite correct when he said: "faith is to believe what we don't
>see; its reward is to see what we believe."
>
>warmest regards,
>
>Ram Chandran
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of ADVAITA-L Digest - 10 Jun 2001 to 11 Jun 2001 (#2001-145)
>****************************************************************
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 13:10:42 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> To be other than yourself - all activity of the mind, body and the senses
> necessarily imply difference.
I disagree. Actions of the body such as breathing, sleeping etc. are
purely instinctual. A hospital patient in a coma has little brain
function. He doesn't cognize difference at all. But he still breaths,
sweats, etc. In the same way the mind will constantly be active. This is
no more noteworthy than the kidneys producing urine. Rather than engage
in a futile quest to stop the mind from doing what it's supposed to do,
Advaita Vedanta aims to remove its objects of attention after which mental
turmoil is irrelevant.
> Yes, even turning the mind inward is sunk
> in duality - but unlike the other modes of saadhana, it leads to
> abiding in yourself and non-dualism.
>
Why should turning the mind inward be privileged in this way? Other forms
of sadhana also lead to non-dualism.
> >Ramana is not part of your triumvirate.
>
> He is not, because for you I've to use authors who teach from the shruti.
> Because for you the shruti has "absolute" value in vyavahaara - you
> should first understand why vyavahaara is vyavahaara - because it is only
> relative and not absolute.
Right now vyavahara is all we have. If you argue from paramartha you're
putting the cart before the horse. The most you can do is give a vision
of paramartha as the final goal of sadhana but it can't be the main
substance of your arguments. Shruti may be illusionary in the end but
right now it is the only pramana for knowing Brahman.
> Ramana was conversant neither in shruti nor
> sanskrit before his liberation. Liberated he automatically understood the
> substance of the former and the latter just came to him naturally!
>
Perhaps. There have been posts on this list suggesting this isn't true.
> You just have to explain how it can. As I've explained all along -
> *all action* necessarily is sunk in duality.
But you've also admitted to the possibility of duality leading to
non-duality.
> Unless you define bhakti
> as abiding in your own self - as Ramana himself does - bhakti cannot
> result in the non-dual experience. See I'm not contesting the spiritual
> efficacy of bhakti. But only that it cannot directly effect the non-dual
> liberation.
>
> Actually if you look at the bhakti specialists - the bhakti Vedaantists
> - who've developed even more sophisticated means of bhakti than Advaita
> - they all necessarily believe in a God who's distinct from their own
> Atman. Unlike the Advaita conception of Atman as "space in a jar which
> is non-different from the space outside", for the bhakti Vedaantists
> Atman is either a part or an attribute or an expression of God. That's
> fine but it is not non-dualism (Advaita).
>
Then why bring it up? Advaita Vedanta has it's own views on Bhakti and
doesn't need the help of "specialists".
> See if Shankara or Sureshvara had taught karma-jnaana-samuccayavaada as
> Mandana Mishra did, then we will not have any problem with integrating
> karma and bhakti in our philosophy. Then we can interpret that singing
> Bhajagovindam or Saudaryalahari can by itself effect liberation.
>
Again your raising a strawman. Singing a stotra cannot effect liberation
anymore than chanting the mahavakyas can. But just as knowledge of the
meaning of the mahavakyas does effect liberation, so does the intense love
and feeling of non-difference with God caused by Bhakti.
> But the demand of logic has necessiated our great aacharyas to reject
> action as ignorance - for all action only takes you away from yourself.
> If you're the non-dual Atman then you've to reject action to be yourself.
> So they have clearly taught in their philosophical works that action of
> any kind by itself cannot effect liberation. So after this if they still
> teach bhakti in their hymns we can either conclude that they're
> contradicting themselves or that even as, "the merciful Veda teaches
> bhakti, karma and jnaana to people depending on their level of intellect",
> so did our great acaaryas do so. I've great respect for the intellect of our
> aachaaryas - so I stand by the second conclusion.
>
Or we can make a third conclusion that action is something other than you
think it is and Bhakti isn't action. May I again point out that
Shankaracharya established the puja to Shri Chandramouleshwara and his
descendents still do it today. Even on the days when they have no
visitors.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 15:07:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara's life period
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Sorry for a late reply.
Note - I prefer to use the abbreviations CE (Common Era) and BCE
(Before Common Era), instead of AD and BC.
Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <VCHANDRA at A...> wrote:
>Indian History is strewn with eminent personalities both from
>political and cultural circles. Most of them have been dated
>without much doubt.. Even Buddha's and Mahavira's periods have
>been dated without disputes (or I think)... The Alwars and
Dated without dispute only for those who accept the inferences of
historical research. There are those who would claim that Buddha
must have lived in the 18th or 19th century BCE. One motivation
(for some people, not all) for such a date is the desire to date
Sankara to the 5th c. BCE, instead of the 7th-8th c. CE.
A related question is that of the Maurya dynasty. Those who would
date Buddha to the 18th c. BCE would also like to put the Mauryas
at such an early date. Apparently, the Candragupta of whom there
is some evidence in the 3rd century BCE belonged to the Gupta
dynasty, not the Maurya one. Needless to say, these assertions
do not take a lot of evidence into account. And they make a lot
of unnecessary assumptions, e.g. assigning an average of 25 years
for every king named in a dynasty. These assumptions do not take
into account possibilities like what we have seen even in the very
recent past - a king "ruled" for only one weekend in Nepal.
So, the "dated without much doubt" holds for those who have taken
the pains to compare a lot of historical sources, from India, Sri
Lanka, China, Greece etc. For others, they prefer to live in a
state of doubt, for various reasons of their own.
Regarding Sankara's date, life history etc. -
There is a tradition that he lived a short life of 32 years. Why
there is a near unanimity about this tradition is a mystery, when
there are disputes about so many other biographical issues. It is
unknown whether Sankara was patronized by any king or dynasty. If
he was, records are unavailable. Even from a period where records
are indeed available, people claim impossible things. E.g. we all
know the dates of the Vijayanagara dynasties, of the various Nayaks
and the Marathas after them, as far as south Indian history is
concerned. This doesn't stop people from claiming a 15th century
CE date for someone who must have undeniably lived in the 18th c.
That is why, when they also give dates down to a fine degree of
precision, from 509 BCE to 2001 CE, I question them.
The very notion of a factual biography as a written account is of
a Western origin, and even there, it is quite recent. The earliest
biographies from Europe date from the 15th century CE or so. We have
to realize that an important religious figure attracts all kinds of
legends around him. What we have about Sankara is not a plain
biography, but what is called a hagiography. This term is primarily
used in a Christian context, but can be extended to the texts that
intend to describe the life of any religious figure in the world,
from Buddha and Jina to Christ and Mohammed. Asking for historically
attested facts in such things is often a wild goose chase.
Sankaracharya has been a title for a long time now. When people say,
Sankaracharya said this or that, they probably have in mind not the
Adi Sankaracharya, but one of the later title-holders. This leads to
variant traditions, and to some confusion.
And then, there is the question of religious belief. I may be in a
minority nowadays, but I don't think that something like Sankara's
possible date should be a matter of "belief". pratyaksha is ruled
out for things from a distant past. What we can know from anumAna,
arthApatti and anupalabdhi should be good enough, so long as we are
honest enough to acknowledge that false assumptions can lead to false
conclusions. Where these false assumptions come from is a different
question. I do not subscribe to the view, "my family belongs to this
matha, therefore I must believe the date that its mathadhipati claims
for Sankaracharya." I would rather go to the mathadhipati and try to
discuss the issue with him.
Tying religious belief to historical facticity is foreign to us. For
example, what sort of historically factual proof can one offer in
support of the statement that Krishna is an avatAra of Vishnu? Going
a step further, does the religious value of such a statement stand
in need of supporting historical evidence? On the other hand, there
are things that are quite mundane, and do not call for belief in a
religious sense.
Finally, we have to look at what needs proof, and what constitutes
proof. A particular detail on which there is unanimity does not
need external proof. Nobody has disputed that Sankara did not live
for long. There are no mathas around that claim that he lived for
say, 80 years or 100 years. So, there is no need to prove to any
scholar that Sankara lived a very short life. Only in instances
where there is some internal dispute does one need other sources
of proof. In these cases, the burden of proof rests on those who
make the claims that are disputed.
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 15:43:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Rajagopal Balasubramanian
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Hi,
My name is Rajagopal Balasubramanian. I am a Software
Engineer working with Ericsson at Rockville, Maryland.
I am very much interested in learning about the
advaita philosophy.
Regards,
Rajagopal
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:16:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
>> Actually if you look at the bhakti specialists - the bhakti Vedaantists
>> - who've developed even more sophisticated means of bhakti than Advaita
>> - they all necessarily believe in a God who's distinct from their own
>> Atman. Unlike the Advaita conception of Atman as "space in a jar which
>> is non-different from the space outside", for the bhakti Vedaantists
>> Atman is either a part or an attribute or an expression of God. That's
>> fine but it is not non-dualism (Advaita).
>>
>
>Then why bring it up? Advaita Vedanta has it's own views on Bhakti and
>doesn't need the help of "specialists".
>
...
>Or we can make a third conclusion that action is something other than you
>think it is and Bhakti isn't action. May I again point out that
>Shankaracharya established the puja to Shri Chandramouleshwara and his
>descendents still do it today. Even on the days when they have no
>visitors.
Bhakti, like karma and jnAna, can be classified into different
types. Karmas can be classified as nitya, naimittika, kAmya, and
niShiddha. We are told to avoid kAmya (karma with a desire for a
result), and niShiddha (prohibited or sinful) karmas. Again,
jnAna can be aparA vidyA or parA vidyA. We are told to seek
parA vidyA. Similarly, bhakti can be of different types. The common
ground among all types of bhakti is that it is
premarUpA, essentially love. But one can be engaged in love with
different motivations. For example, the typical love of a young man
for a young woman is motivated by the pleasure of engaging in
romantic/erotic actions, a pleasure that is mistaken for a higher
kind of bliss. Many people love God as long as He seems to hold
the promise of material benefits. Once there is a calamity and
if they feel that God didn't do anything to help them, they stop
loving God, losing all "faith." This kind of love with a motive
is akin to karma done with a desire for a particular result. As such,
it is to be avoided. But when love for God is without a motive and
unconditional, it becomes qualified to be called "bhakti-yoga." It
becomes a great purifier and becomes conducive to the dawn of jnAna,
as karma-yoga does. In karma-yoga, one is asked to perform actions
with no attachment to the results. In bhakti-yoga, one is asked to
love God with no expectation of anything from Him and without any
conditions attached.
The advantage of such bhakti over karma is that even a sannyAsin is not
forbidden to practice it. Why? Because, first of all, such bhakti does
not have to involve actions. One can use the mind to contemplate on God.
Here there is, no doubt, mental activity. But mental activity is subtler
than physical activity and there is less chance of being caught up
in duality through mental activity. Second, such mental activity can
"seamlessly" make a transition from bhakti to jnAna. Note that a
"seamless" transition from karma to jnAna is not possible because the
two are by definition dead opposed to each other, "ativirodhataH" as
MadhusUdana says. He further says, bhagavadbhaktinishhThaa tu madhyame
parikiirtitaa, practice of devotion to God (bhakti) is explained as
intervening (between the two - karma and jnAna).
Further he says that bhakti is three-fold:
ubhayAnugatA sA hi sarvavighnopanodinI |
karmamishrA cha shuddhA cha jnAnamishrA cha sA tridhA ||
That bhakti is compatible with both jnAna and karma and it removes
all obstacles (to spiritual progress). It (bhakti) is of three
types - bhakti mixed with karma, pure (shuddhA) bhakti, and
bhakti mixed with jnAna.
This "seamless" transition from bhakti to jnAna is possible because
of the following condition. When God has entered the mind of the devotee
and has pervaded it to such an extent, the devotee sees God in himself,
outside, and everywhere. At that point, he/she starts to knock down the
last barriers of duality, the separation between God and devotee. Once
the barrier of duality is destroyed, God and devotee merge just as
described by the shivAnandalaharI verse, as a river runs towards the
ocean, merges with it, and the two become indistinguishable. This is
the state where one could declare "so .ahaM, so .ahaM", (I am He).
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 07:40:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ram Chandran <rchandran at c...>
Namaste Nandaji:
I totally agree that we are talking about the subjective science of religion
and everything that we write or say is likely to be subjective. This is
again a relative statement and some talks and writings are likely more
subjective than on others. My contention is that Shankara's advaita
philosophy is relatively more objective and open to discussion than other
vedantic and other religous philosophies.
Let me conclude my part of these discussions with a note of thanks to you
for your openess and well articulated conversation with patience. I also
want to commend you for your keen interest in advaita and related
philosophies at your young age. Both Joy and suffereings are mind projected
illusions and when we realize our true being, we will certainly attain total
peace!
warmest regards,
Ram Chandran
> --- In advaita-l at y..., "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>
> Ram, all this is terribly subjective. Bhartrhari thinks that if you
> delay
> too much your mind and body will not have the necessary strength for
> the
> effort that's required to liberate oneself.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 14:20:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>I tried this out practically a couple of years back. I quit my job in the
US
>and came back home to Madras and didn't take up a job for six months -
>though I ate normal food and slept in a bed, I avoided all forms of
>entertainment and pleasure and read only spiritual books - it was sheer
hell
>and in the end I was only depressed. But I think it was an eye opener for
Nanda, this falls under the category of "don't try this at home by
yourself." It is not for nothing that the traditional advice has always
been to seek a personal Guru first. Just thinking logically about Advaita
and trying out a discipline without the close supervision of a master is
apt to cause problems. There is no advantage in ending up in a trizanku-
like state, which is neither here nor there. If we are serious, we first
need to get prepared, mentally and physically, through other means,
including karma-yoga and bhakti-yoga and upadeza.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 12:43:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "S. V. Subrahmanian" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
START EARLY. DRIVE SLOWLY. REACH SAFELY.
>From
Message-Id: <.>
nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>I tried this out practically a couple of years back. I quit my job in the
US
>and came back home to Madras and didn't take up a job for six months -
>though I ate normal food and slept in a bed, I avoided all forms of
>entertainment and pleasure and read only spiritual books - it was sheer
hell
>and in the end I was only depressed. But I think it was an eye opener for
Nanda, this falls under the category of "don't try this at home by
yourself." It is not for nothing that the traditional advice has always
been to seek a personal Guru first. Just thinking logically about Advaita
and trying out a discipline without the close supervision of a master is
apt to cause problems. There is no advantage in ending up in a trizanku-
like state, which is neither here nor there. If we are serious, we first
need to get prepared, mentally and physically, through other means,
including karma-yoga and bhakti-yoga and upadeza.
Vidyasankar
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 20:04:46
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Nanda, this falls under the category of "don't try this at home by
>yourself." It is not for nothing that the traditional advice has always
>been to seek a personal Guru first. Just thinking logically about >Advaita
>and trying out a discipline without the close supervision of a >master is
>apt to cause problems. There is no advantage in ending up in >a trizanku -
>like state, which is neither here nor there. If we are >serious, we first
>need to get prepared, mentally and physically, >through other means,
>including karma-yoga and bhakti-yoga and upadeza.
Vidya, really grateful for the advice for I know that you've only my best
interests at heart.
But as I said my "experiment" was two years back. Irrespective of whatever
path you take Truth will not let you down if you correctly and sincerely
aspire for it. If you falter, it will guide you like a mother. But again
Truth is nothing but you yourself in your essence. Tat tvam asi - aham
brahmaasmi - ayam aatma brahma. Also logic is only logic if you're unable to
reconcile it with your life - but if you're able to reconcile it with your
ife, it is the truth.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 20:07:16
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>START EARLY. DRIVE SLOWLY. REACH SAFELY.
Good advice - but only if you know where you are going.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 21:58:05
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<P>Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part I</FONT><FONT face=Arial> </P></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<P>I am posting this message in 3 parts. </P>
<P>While I was in India fifteen years ago, I had keen interest in the topics – the age of Sankara and the Sankara Vijayams. I did extensive study on these topics then, and I came to the conclusion that there are so many contradicting events in history, that we cannot decide an objective date for Sankara, and the number of mathas established by Sankara. Both the dates 509 B.C. and 788 A.D. seem to be valid, unless we totally deny the authority of the other sources. I would not be able to show my references here, as I do not have my compilations with me now. However, I wanted to send this note now as this was being discussed a couple of weeks ago. I could get more information in a few months time for interested readers, when I visit India. May be people like Vidyasankar can help find the relevant quotes, as he seems to have access to the material. I have tried my best not to distort any information, and if you feel that I have some details wrong, please let me know and we can !
verify later.</P>
<P>I want to stay away from the politics of this matter, as I consider myself as a honest seeker, and someone who respects the lineage of Sankara, and all the monks following Sankara’s tradition. I intend to avoid any negative innuendoes or direct reference to any of the Sankara institutions for the purposes of defaming them, and I hope I am successful.</P>
<P>To start with, I want to discuss the sources about Sankara’s life. The majority of information about Sankara comes from the Sankara Vijayams. Siva Rahasya and Markandeya Samhita add more details. We also have the traditional Guru Parampara Stotras (with different names) from the four Amnaya mathas like Puri, Dwaraka, Sringeri and Jyosirmath, and the Kanchi matha. We have information in the Mathamnaya stotras of the Amnaya mathas. There are a lot of other Mathas throughout India following the Dasanami tradition, and some of them can shed information on this topic, based on their Parampara traditions.</P>
<P>We will see some of the differences and also see why we cannot solve them. Firstly, we can take the case of Sankara Vijayams. Anantanandagiri Sankara Vijayam (ASV) has been under a lot of fire here. Vidyasankar questions its authenticity, and the motives behind Dr. Veezhinathan’s work and so on. Though there could be some valid points in the arguments, I want to ask how good is any other Sankara Vijayam?</P>
<P>ASV has 2 distinct versions about his place of birth, the one mentioning Kaladi and the one mentioning Chidambaram. Which one of them is correct? Vidyasankar chooses the one that mentions Chidambaram to be more acceptable. </P>
<P>If you look at how these documents (not only ASV but other Sankara Vijayams as well) have been rewritten several times, we can understand the reason for these kinds of textual differences. How were they copied from the "Original" source text? There are many possibilities here. One of them was exactly copied from the source verbatim and the other was copied from the source to the extent the source was available, and some more subjective text was added for completing the document. This iterative process of reproducing the original manuscript gives room to more and more changes in the later versions. </P>
<P>H.H. Wilson used ASV for his study of the ancient religions and cults, and accepted it to be a safe reference to know about the lifetime of Adi Sankara. He did not believe that Adi Sankara could do so many miracles as depicted and called the author a liar. What do Asthikas like us think here? Do we think that Sankara cannot do miracles?</P>
<P>ASV mentions that Sri Sankara had many disciples other than the usual four. It mentions about a disciple Suddhanantanandendragiri, whom some people identify with Totakacharya and Anandagiri. Here comes the confusion about Anandagiri and Anantanandagiri. If you refute this argument, then Anandagiri Sankara Vijayam is different from Anantanandagiri Sankara Vijayam. There could be more than one Anandagiri in history.</P>
<P>...Continued in <FONT face=Arial size=2> Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part II</FONT><FONT face=Arial></P></FONT></FONT></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions Part II
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 22:03:08
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV>
<DIV>Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part II (continued from Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part I) </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Madhaiviya Sankara Vijayam (MSV) has been very popular since 19th century, as it was the first one to be printed. It has two commentaries – ‘Advaita Rajya Lakshmi’ written by Achyutaraya Modak and ‘Dindima Vyakyanam’ by Dhanapathi Suri. </DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Madhava mentions, in the beginning few slokas, that he has compiled his book from various sources available on Sankara’s life. Though some people accept Anandagiri as a mentioned source, they may not accept ‘Vyasachala Sankara Vijayam’ as another source. Madhava holds Vyasachala in a very high esteem in the beginning verses and praises him as a great poet. Vyasachala Mahadeva is of a much later date (16th century). This contradicts that the author of Madhaviyam was the great Vidyaranya swami who lived couple of centuries before him.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>If we assume that the author was not a 14th century person, the other sources (of a later period) for Madhaviyam (not mentioned by the author but identified later) are ‘Sankarabyudham’ by Raja Chudamani Dikshitar, Pathanjali Vijayam by Rama Badra Dikshitar and Bhagavatpada Saptati by Jagannadha. We can see some of the slokas from these books are in ‘Madhaviya Sankara Vijayam’ without any change. It may be argued that books like ‘Shankarabyudhayam’ and ‘Bhagavadpada Saptati’ used Madhaviya Sankara Vijayam as their source and not vice versa. But Madhava admits that he has compiled from other books. ‘Bhagavadpada Saptati’ has 70 slokas and ‘Madhaviya Sankara Vijayam’ has roughly 2000 slokas. It has the 70 slokas from ‘Bhagavadpada Saptati’ without any change. Is it possible for someone ‘to copy and paste’ from one book and call it another book?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>The author of ‘Advaita Rajya Lakshmi’ in his commentary on MSV, when talking about the last days of Sankara adds some slokas from Siva Rahasyam, and mentions that this information is available in ‘Anandagiri’s Sankara Vijayam’ also. The slokas say that Adi Sankara attained siddhi in Kanchi. Madhaviyam says that Sankara lived in Kanchi, but attained Siddhi in the Himalayas. The point we have to note here is that MSV’s commentator gives credibility to Sankara’s siddhi in Kanchi, while the main text maintains that it happened in the Himalayas. Where is the MSV text used by Achyuta Raya Modak to make his commentary? Is it different from the one we have today? If it was the same, did someone tamper with the commentary?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>The question of whether Adi Sankara established only four mathas or five or even more is equally confusing. We have accounts of only four Mathas, listed in the popular Mathamnaya stotras (like Mathetivrttam accepted by Sringeri). These stotras are attributed to Sankara himself. Each of these four mathas has its own version of Mathamnaya stotra, and there are contrasting details in them. How can we attribute all the differences to the same author, Sankara? Sureswara is claimed to be the head in several places, Dwaraka and Sringeri. The system of associating a Mahavakya, Sampradaya, ksetra and tirtha to a mutt, has come from the Mathamnaya stotra. The concept of Sankara having establishing four mutts came from this too. The Mathamnaya stotras do not deny anywhere that Sankara established more than four mutts.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Some feel that Sri Sankara established the Sumeru and the Paduka mathas in Varanasi, and the Namboodhiri mathas in the Malabar as well, based on some other sources. Many of these mutts have disappeared over the period of time. All the Mathas have had rough times and good times as well. After Vidyaranya swami established the Vijayanagar Empire, Sringeri Matha has had special royal patronage, and its popularity grew manifold. The other Mathas had a modest existence.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>The Amnaya mathas have not sorted out their differences. The first major difference is Dwaraka and Puri maintaining Sankara lived between 509 – 477 B.C. and Sringeri maintaining that Sankara in 8th century A.D. (earlier in 1st century B.C.). The second major difference is the role of Sureshwara as the first Acharya of these Mathas. Mathetivrttam claims that the first Acharya of Sringeri was Prithvidhara (some identify him as Hastamalaka), while Sringeri Matha maintains that their first Acharya was Sureshwara.
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>...continued in Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part III) </DIV></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions Part III
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 22:05:30
Content-Type: text/html
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
<html><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<P>Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part III (continued from Sankara Vijayam Contradictions – Part II)</P>
<P>The Mathamnaya is the primary basis for claiming that Sankara established only four mathas. These texts do not take into account other Mathas established by Sankara. Siva Rahasyam clearly says that Sankara established 5 mathas, the fifth one in Kanchi. It adds that Sankara ascended the sarvajnapITha</FONT><FONT size=2> </FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>in Kanchi, and attained siddhi there. We know what MSV, ASV and other texts say about this in this forum in various posts.</P>
<P>We have to find out whether Sri Sankara was the author of Mathamnaya stotras and if so, why there are so many differences among them? They should be of a later date then, but written by whom? By one author, or many? Which one of them is correct? Were they written with the intention of glorifying one Matha over the other, because of some verses with preferential treatment in classifying the Mathas. </P>
<P>There are many questions unanswered and they will remain unanswered. I do not think the erudite people in this forum have an answer for all these. We have to fit in all the pieces of the puzzle properly and give solid reasons for the ones that do not fit well. People have done this to some extent, but still it is enigmatic. It is not with such thoroughness that the argument is totally acceptable. I feel that everybody has been loyal to his/ her emotions, family affiliations and personal preferences. I do not think that this is a prolific topic to engage in, for advancing our knowledge on Sri Sankara and his philosophy.</P>
<P>The politics of staunch devotees has induced them to find references in these texts substantiating their arguments and disputing other claims for nearly a century. We have to come out of the influence caused by our affiliations, to even truly consider another opposing view for review. There is so much of a critical evaluation of ASV and not an evaluation of MSV. In my opinion, all these texts should be used as a guidance to know the life, times and activities of Sankara, and not used to refute any claim about anything. We are trying to build the life history of great personality who condemned duality, from various contradicting sources propagating schism. How can we achieve this? </P>
<P>Attributing the date of Sri Sankara to 788 A.D as opposed to 509 B.C has the same problem. While we may refer to the GOI accepting this date and some internal evidences in Sankara’s works, there are a good amount of pointers that Sankara was born in 509 B.C. Many of the names in Sankara’s works do not seem to be famous personalities in history. However, we have seen era that Dharmakirti seems to be a famous personality whose date seems to be certain.</P>
<P>The Age of Sankara by T. S. Narayana Sastri gives the differing dates that could be attributed to Sri Sankara, and how the year 509 B.C seems to be more appropriate. It may be interesting to note how some of the texts condemning Advaita are useful to determine the date of Sankara as well. The Jains follow Yudhistara Era, which is like the Hindu Yudhistira Era with an offset in the beginning. They mention that Sankara, an avatar of Siva, when he was 15 years old met Kumarila Bhatta. They also mention that Sankara died when he was 32 years old. This text mentions the year Sankara met Kumarila Bhatta, and using that date, we can derive the date of Sankara to 509 B.C. However, some of other arguments and assumptions for 509 B.C. could be questioned.</P>
<P>God bless,</P>
<P>Ravi</P></FONT></DIV><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 20:16:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Venkatesh Gopal
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
namaskaram:
My interest in Advaita-Vedanta stems from my upbringing. Living in Madras
for 30 years, I had made numerous trips to Kanchipuram to listen to and get
the blessings of HH of Kanchi. More over, living in the US, and more
recently as a parent, I feel it is my duty to propagate the heritage and
philosophies of Hinduism to the next generation. I am an avid reader and
would like to use your listserve to keep in touch with the Vedanta's of
periyavaal.
Professionally, I do biomedical research and am a scientist here at
Nashville, TN.
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 05:33:40
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>To be other than yourself - all activity of the mind, body and the senses
>necessarily imply difference.
>I disagree. Actions of the body such as breathing, sleeping etc. are
>purely instinctual. A hospital patient in a coma has little brain
>function. He doesn't cognize difference at all. But he still breaths,
>sweats, etc. In the same way the mind will constantly be active. This is
>no more noteworthy than the kidneys producing urine. Rather than engage
>in a futile quest to stop the mind from doing what it's supposed to do,
>Advaita Vedanta aims to remove its objects of attention after which mental
>turmoil is irrelevant.
Good, now you're thinking. What I didn't explicitly say is "all willful
action" is only activity. Even for sleeping, you don't generally just
fall down wherever you are and go to sleep do you. When you feel tired,
you think "I feel tired and sleepy" and consciously head towards your
bedroom, lie in your bed and then fall asleep. Even in sleeping some
people who've trouble sleeping - use their will to fall asleep. So it is
this conscious action that I'm talking about. For consciousness in
action implies the working of the mind - that's where the ignorance part
comes in - for ignorance is a mental aspect of our being.
>Why should turning the mind inward be privileged in this way? Other forms
>of sadhana also lead to non-dualism.
Jaladhar, is reality conscious or unconscious? Doesn't Shankara explicitly
define shruti to be consciousness. You're a conscious being. But are you
directly aware of consciousness external to you - like the consciousness of
other people? You can hear what people say and infer that they too have
consciousness/thoughts - but you cannot directly be conscious of their
consciousness. Likewise how can any saadhana which is directed externally
result in the grasping of consciousness? You are a conscious being - your
essence is pure consciousness - to be grasped here and now.
>Right now vyavahara is all we have. If you argue from paramartha you're
>putting the cart before the horse. The most you can do is give a vision
>of paramartha as the final goal of sadhana but it can't be the main
>substance of your arguments. Shruti may be illusionary in the end but
>right now it is the only pramana for knowing Brahman.
It is common practice to raise an iron curtain between paramaartha and
vyavahaara and then try to project paramaartha as an abstrace which is
beyond the reach of vyavahaara. If that's so how'll you ever reach
paramaartha? What's that which seperates the two - avidhya or ignorance.
So analyze and understand and raise your level of consciousness to
transcend the difference. Please try to understand how the concept of
vyavahaara itself came to be defined so.
>Perhaps. There have been posts on this list suggesting this isn't true.
Jaladhar this is getting pretty typical of you. "Our sadguru parampara
has said this" or "there have been posts ..." - please produce the evidence.
Even with regards "sadguru parampara" evidence, I didn't notice you
producing any - Lance Nelson and Anand produced some verses from
Madhusudhana Saraswati's works. But even this seems to be only a minority
view in Advaita. I'd be really interested in seeing you produce similar
evidence from Gaudapaada or Shankara or Sureshvara. Please do.
>But you've also admitted to the possibility of duality leading to
>non-duality.
Consciousness working on itself can produce pure-consciousness. I don't
see how consciousness working on the unconscious can produce any
kind of consciousness - even if it does, I don't see how it can produce
non-dual consciousness. And you're offering no explanation either.
>Or we can make a third conclusion that action is something other than you
>think it is and Bhakti isn't action.
Only till date you've not explained how it is so. You say intense love for
God. Here, is God external or internal to you? If God is not your own self
and is also not external then he can only be a mental concept - still it is
only a vritti - action/ignorance.
You say you cannot see any difference between you and God. I'm saying I
don't see how that is possible unless you keep quiet/abide in your own self
- for all action - mental/physical/emotional - implies duality/difference.
And I've been repeating these questions in the last three posts without
any clarifications from you!!!
And regarding you other post with pictograms :-), please wait for a couple
of days - I'm busy at the moment, but definitely will write a reply.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 03:50:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
A very carefully thought-out set of posts by Ravishankar. I will try to
respond briefly and carefully.
>To start with, I want to discuss the sources about Sankara’s life. The
>majority of information about Sankara comes from the Sankara Vijayams.
>Siva Rahasya and Markandeya Samhita add more details. We also have the
Markandeya Samhita is a text that no one has really seen. It is said to
be from the Brahmanda Purana, but I haven't found any such section in
any edition of that Purana. I haven't seen the verses attributed to the
Markandeya Samhita in any other portion of the Brahmanda Purana either.
There is a Pancaratra text called Markandeya Samhita, published by TTD
in 1984. I think this is different from the other text that is said to
have details about Sankara's life. And obviously, Markandeya Purana is
a different text as well.
>We will see some of the differences and also see why we cannot solve them.
>Firstly, we can take the case of Sankara Vijayams. Anantanandagiri Sankara
>Vijayam (ASV) has been under a lot of fire here. Vidyasankar questions its
>authenticity, and the motives behind Dr. Veezhinathan’s work and so on.
>Though there could be some valid points in the arguments, I want to ask
>how good is any other Sankara Vijayam?
Depends on what one is looking for in a Sankara Vijayam. Sw. Tapasyananda
of the Ramakrishna Math, for example, finds great lyrical beauty in the
Madhaviya. Others think its usage of multiple poetic meters is proof for
its being a composite text.
>ASV has 2 distinct versions about his place of birth, the one mentioning
>Kaladi and the one mentioning Chidambaram. Which one of them is correct?
>Vidyasankar chooses the one that mentions Chidambaram to be more
>acceptable.
Not "acceptable", but more probable to be the original version of that
text. The point you make about copying and rewriting is apt here.
I have explicitly given the reasons why I think that the original version
of this text must have given only the Cidambaram version. Unless these
are disproved, it follows that the Kaladi version OF THIS TEXT has been
manipulated at a later time.
>If you look at how these documents (not only ASV but other Sankara
>Vijayams as well) have been rewritten several times, we can understand the
>reason for these kinds of textual differences. How were they copied from
>the "Original" source text? There are many possibilities here. One of them
The question is, was there any such "original" source text?
>H.H. Wilson used ASV for his study of the ancient religions and cults, and
>accepted it to be a safe reference to know about the lifetime of Adi
>Sankara. He did not believe that Adi Sankara could do so many miracles as
>depicted and called the author a liar. What do Asthikas like us think
>here? Do we think that Sankara cannot do miracles?
The full quotation from Wilson is as follows,
"Some of the marvels it records of Sankara, which the author professes
to have seen, may be thought to affect its credibility, if not its
authenticity, and either Anandagiri must be an unblushing liar, or the
book is not his own; it is, however, of little consequence, as EVEN IF
THE WORK BE NOT THAT OF ANANDAGIRI HIMSELF, it bears internal and
indisputable evidence of being the composition of a period, not far
removed from that at which HE MAY BE supposed to have flourished."
In some books, this sentence is misleadingly edited to read as follows,
"The work is sufficiently historical since it bears internal and
indisputable evidence of being the composition of a period not far
removed from that at which he (Sankara) may be supposed to have
flourished."
I request readers to compare the two statements carefully. In Wilson's
original statement, the "he" is a reference to Anandagiri, not to Sankara.
Wilson never said the words, "The work is sufficiently historical since".
When we take into account the evidence that the author was not Anandagiri,
but Anantanandagiri, it is clear that Wilson was quite mistaken about both
the name and the date of the author. His opinion, "not far removed from
that at which ..." is invalid, because Anantanandagiri quotes from a 14th
century text, which came at least 6 centuries after Sankara (19 centuries
after Sankara, if one believes the 5th century BCE date). As such, Wilson
can be safely set aside, and he cannot and should not be cited as one who
recommended the text as a safe guide to anything. A claim that Wilson had
endorsed this text has to accept Wilson's entire statement, in totality.
I prefer to ignore Wilson's entire statement, in totality, for very solid
reasons.
The question is not whether Sankara could or could not have performed
miracles. The question is, what are the intentions of the text, when it
tells us that Sankara won disputes by physically thrashing two Kapalikas
(chapter 23), a Carvaka (chapter 25), a Saugata (chapter 26), a Jaina and
his disciples (chapter 27), a Bauddha (chapter 28), a Vaishnava (chapter
37) and Vyasa himself.
I wonder if anybody has read the Manimanjari and compared it with this.
>ASV mentions that Sri Sankara had many disciples other than the usual
>four. It mentions about a disciple Suddhanantanandendragiri, whom some
>people identify with Totakacharya and Anandagiri. Here comes the confusion
>about Anandagiri and Anantanandagiri. If you refute this argument, then
>Anandagiri Sankara Vijayam is different from Anantanandagiri Sankara
>Vijayam. There could be more than one Anandagiri in history.
1. Totakacharya and Anandagiri cannot and should not be identified with
each other.
2. Anandagiri and Anantanandagiri cannot and should not be identified
with each other.
3. Totakacharya and Anantanandagiri cannot and should not be identified
with each other.
4. Whether there were more than one Anandagiri-s in history is immaterial.
There was only one author of Tikas on Sankara's commentaries, and that
Anandagiri was a disciple of Suddhananda, as attested by all sources,
including the salutation Slokas in those very Tikas. And this Anandagiri
is not the same as Anantanandagiri.
5. If the Anandagiri who is said to have written a Sankaravijaya is said
to be different from the author of the Tikas, then we will be going
contrary to all the secondary evidence we have about the matter. In the
absence of any manuscripts of Anandagiri's Sankaravijaya, we can't make
any primary conclusions about the identity of the author.
6. Whether the Suddhanantanandendragiri and other novel names listed in
the text of Anantanandagiri were historical people is unverifiable.
If Anantanandagiri himself is the same as Suddhanantanandendragiri,
then we have a problem. How could a post-14th century person have been
a direct disciple of Sankaracharya? So, why does Anantanandagiri claim
to be one?
7. If the answer to the above is that the text may have been modified in
later times, by persons unknown, then welcome to my conclusions about
the text, and keep in mind A. C. Burnell's comment about it too.
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 05:17:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions Part II
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>Madhaiviya Sankara Vijayam (MSV) has been very popular since 19th century,
>as it was the first one to be printed. It has two commentaries – ‘Advaita
>Rajya Lakshmi’ written by Achyutaraya Modak and ‘Dindima Vyakyanam’ by
>Dhanapathi Suri.
It is the other way round. Anantanandagiri's Sankaravijaya was printed
in 1868, in the Bibliotheca Indica series of the Asiatic Society in
Calcutta, and again in 1881, from the Sarasudhanidhi Press in Calcutta.
Both editions gave the author's name (mistakenly) as Anandagiri. All the
chapter colophons give the name only as Anantanandagiri, so the wrong
attribution was probably editorial oversight. Burnell's catalogue of the
Tanjavur Saraswati Mahal Library, prepared in 1880, mentions an edition
from Madras also, which seems to have been available to R Krishnaswamy
Aiyar (Jnanananda Bharati) and KR Venkataraman.
Madhaviya was printed first, in its entirety, I believe in 1891, at the
Pune Anandasrama Press, as part of the Anandasrama Sanskrit Series. An
earlier edition (1864) from Bombay contained only a small extract from
that text. In the 19th century, Madhaviya was already very popular. Only
a widely read text attracts a commentary. It takes some time for a text
to circulate around and to become popular. It would have taken more time
in those days, when printing and xerox copies were not available. People
do not write commentaries on obscure texts, or on very recent texts. The
Advaitarajyalakshmi commentary was written in the year 1824. Dindima was
written even earlier, having been completed in the year 1798. And earlier
to that, Sadananda wrote a text called Sankaravijayasara, in 1783. He has
relied on the Madhaviya, according to Dhanapati Suri's evidence. These
dates are from the verbal chronograms found in the texts themselves. This
Sadananda was, by the way, the father-in-law of Dhanapati Suri. Acyutaraya
Modak later became a Sannyasi, taking the name Gopalendra Sarasvati.
Dhanapati Suri was a disciple of a Sannyasi called Balagopala Tirtha.
So, already in the 18th century, the Madhaviya was quite popular within
the Dasanami Sannyasi community and their disciples. It was printed only
a century later, when printing on paper became widespread in India.
If a text became popular within the tradition, only because it got printed
first, then the Anantanandaigiriya, printed in the prestigious series of
the Asiatic Society, with British government funding, should have become
even more popular than the Madhaviya. But we see that it is not so.
>Madhava mentions, in the beginning few slokas, that he has compiled his
>book from various sources available on Sankara’s life. Though some people
>accept Anandagiri as a mentioned source, they may not accept ‘Vyasachala
>Sankara Vijayam’ as another source. Madhava holds Vyasachala in a very
>high esteem in the beginning verses and praises him as a great poet.
Madhava mentions only that he is giving the essence (sAra) of the old
(prAcIna) Sankarajaya. Nowhere does he say that he has various textual
sources. He does report variant traditions, but there is no indication
that each tradition came from a different text. He could have been only
writing down different oral traditions.
Madhaviya verse 1. 17 refers to the name Vyasacala. Both the commentators
tells us that this is an epithet of Madhava himself. Neither commentator
seems to even know about a DIFFERENT text called Vyasacala Sankaravijayam.
>Vyasachala Mahadeva is of a much later date (16th century). This
>contradicts that the author of Madhaviyam was the great Vidyaranya swami
>who lived couple of centuries before him.
Madhava salutes Vidyatirtha in the first verse. This is the same verse
that says that he is following the prAcIna text. If this verse is cited in
support of the assertion that Madhava has referred to older sources, then
the same verse should be given credibility when it salutes Vidyatirtha.
Secondly, from what sources do we know that Vyasachala was also called
Mahadeva, and how do we know a date of 16th century for him? In the 1954
edition of a text attributed to Vyasachala, published from GOML, Madras,
Vyasachala has been identified with Mahadevendra Saraswati, relying on
the authority of one Atreya Krishna Sastri. How did this Sastri make this
identification? It is a mystery, because no Mahadevendra Saraswati has
been identified as Vyasachala in the Gururatnamalika or in Sushama.
Atreya Krishna Sastri also traces the origin of the name to a hill named
after Vyasa, but gives no specific geographical references. Which hill
is this?
>If we assume that the author was not a 14th century person, the other
>sources (of a later period) for Madhaviyam (not mentioned by the author
>but identified later) are ‘Sankarabyudham’ by Raja Chudamani Dikshitar,
>Pathanjali Vijayam by Rama Badra Dikshitar and Bhagavatpada Saptati by
>Jagannadha. We can see some of the slokas from these books are in
How have these works been identified as sources for the Madhaviya, by
whom, and for what reasons? Read Sw. Tapasyananda's introduction in his
translation of the Madhaviya. I have nothing much to add to it now, but
see also my forthcoming article, which I mentioned earlier on this list.
And, you have left out the Bhagavatpada Saptati of Umamaheswara Sastri.
See the Tamil book by Polakam Rama Sastri.
>‘Madhaviya Sankara Vijayam’ has roughly 2000 slokas. It has the 70 slokas
>from ‘Bhagavadpada Saptati’ without any change. Is it possible for someone
>‘to copy and paste’ from one book and call it another book?
Why not? See Polakam Rama Sastri's small book containing some 30+ verses
on the Gita, published as his own "nUtana" composition. More than 25 of
these are verbatim copies of verses from gUDhArthadIpikA of Madhusudana
Saraswati and SrIdharIyam of Sridharaswamin. Copy and paste happens all
the time. That is why modern word processing software has shortcuts for
these things!!
Seriously speaking, if it can be concluded that Madhaviya has copied and
pasted from one or more books, why cannot it be concluded that another
book (or books) has (have) copied and pasted from Madhaviya? Of course,
if one is already highly biased about the Madhaviya to begin with, the
direction of this copy and paste job seems obvious, but if one takes an
impartial look, it is not at all settled as to which text(s) is/are
older and which younger.
>The author of ‘Advaita Rajya Lakshmi’ in his commentary on MSV, when
>talking about the last days of Sankara adds some slokas from Siva
>Rahasyam, and mentions that this information is available in ‘Anandagiri’s
>Sankara Vijayam’ also. The slokas say that Adi Sankara attained siddhi in
>Kanchi. Madhaviyam says that Sankara lived in Kanchi, but attained Siddhi
>in the Himalayas. The point we have to note here is that MSV’s commentator
>gives credibility to Sankara’s siddhi in Kanchi, while the main text
>maintains that it happened in the Himalayas. Where is the MSV text used by
>Achyuta Raya Modak to make his commentary? Is it different from the one we
>have today? If it was the same, did someone tamper with the commentary?
Questions are easily answered. There are variant traditions about these
things. Acyutaraya Modak has simply noted the version given in Madhaviya,
and has drawn attention to another version. "Where is the MSV text used
by Achyuta Raya Modak?" is an unreasonable question, because Achyuta Raya
Modak does not tell us that the Kanchi version is in the MSV text that he
used. What he does tell us is that the MSV text names the Himalayas, but
that another text gives the Kanchi version. He names this text as
Anandagiri's Sankaravijaya, but significantly enough, his quotation there
is found only in the Sivarahasya. We have no manuscripts of Anandagiri's
Sankaravijaya to compare this point. Maybe Acyutaraya made an inadvertant
mistake in giving the name of his source. But this quotation is not in
Anantanandagiri's text, which is further proof that Anantanandagiri's text
should not be identified with the Pracina or the Brhat text of Anandagiri.
TMP Mahadevan and N Veezhinathan are definitely wrong to have done so.
As far as Madhaviya and commentary are concerned, neither book has changed
in contents. The text referred by Acyutaraya is the same as the one that
has been published. Complete manuscripts of Madhaviya are available all
over India, and these tally quite well with one another, even according
to
WR Antarkar, who otherwise has nothing positive to say about this work.
The commentary was written in 1824, and printed soon, in the year 1891,
using an original manuscript. Nobody has tampered with this commentary
either.
Madhaviya does not say that Sankara lived in Kanchi. It just says that he
visited Kanchi. It also says that he visited Ujjain, Kashmira, Kambhoja,
and many other lands. There are many different versions of Sankara's last
days. Govindanatha's Sankaracaryacarita says Sankara attained siddhi in
Trichur, at the same temple where his parents prayed to Siva, before he
was born. Swami Rama (of the Himalayan Institute in the US) says that
Sankara's last days were near Kolhapur in Maharashtra. There is a matha
near Kolhapur, called Karavirpitha, associated with a famous Mahalakshmi
temple there. The commentary on the Sringeri Matha's Guruvamsakavya gives
a tradition that Sankara's last days were at a Dattatreya cave near Mahur
in Maharashtra. Cidvilasa's text says that Sankara spent his last days
near Badrinath in Himalayas. The Dwaraka Matha tradition says it was near
Kedarnath. The previous Dwaraka Acharya renovated an old structure behind
the Kedarnath temple that is locally reputed to be Sankara's adhishThAnam.
As I said, there are various traditions. yatra yatra Sankara-bhaktAH tatra
tatra santy adhishThAnAni.
I won't get into the issue of number of mathas established by Sankara,
as this has been dealt with numerous times in the past. Some are older
than the others, some are more prestigious than the others, some have
more learned pundits than the others, some have better administrators
than the others. The heads of some mathas become famous as tapasvis,
the heads of others become famous as social leaders and politicians,
and the heads of yet others become famous or notorious, as the case may
be, for talking about religious conversion and about the practice of sati.
It is all part of life. The origins and history do not matter ultimately.
Whenever and wherever there are good advaita gurus, mathas are born.
They go out of existence, for one reason or the other. Whichever matha
has a succession of accomplished gurus, and takes care to maintain that
standards are not compromised, gains a continued standing that becomes
permanent over time. And really, that is what one should bother about.
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 06:12:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions Part III
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>There is so much of a critical evaluation of ASV and not an evaluation of
>MSV. In my opinion, all these texts should be used as a guidance to know
>the life, times and activities of Sankara, and not used to refute any
Actually, there has been a lot of adverse evaluation of MSV. I don't have
to evaluate MSV at all. Others have done it long ago. Indeed, the saga of
criticizing and name-calling, with respect to these texts, began with TS
Narayana Sastri's unnecessary statements about MSV (The Age of Sankara,
Madras, 1916). According to him (page 153 ff), the 1891 Anandasrama text
of MSV was printed hastily, with alterations in favour of the Sringeri
Matha, just to score a point over Kanchi Matha. TS Narayana Sastri even
claimed that the person who compiled the text and called it MSV was alive
in the early 20th century. However, when we take the dates of the two
commentaries into account (1798 and 1824, see previous response), all of
this falls apart. The person who wrote MSV could not have possibly been
alive in the 1900s, and the text could not have possibly been tampered
with in 1891, a century after a detailed commentary was written on it, in
1798. Sw. Tapasyananda's introduction to his translation of MSV describes
Narayana Sastri's statements as "scurrilous" and as "bazaar gossip". I am
afraid I have to agree with Sw. Tapasyananda here. WR Antarkar (article
in the Journal of the University of Bombay, 1972) concedes that Narayana
Sastri's statements "have not been proved, and indeed even been disproved
by evidence to the contrary". However, he soon contradicts himself and
allows that the text "may have been altered" in the late 19th century. I
have discussed this elsewhere, and leave it to interested readers to dig
into it themselves.
The Kanchi Paramacharya, in his book, Adi Sankara: His Life and Times
(translated by TMP Mahadevan, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bombay 1980), says
that the author of MSV has himself written a commentary to it (pg. 1-5).
The only known commentaries are by Dhanapati Suri and Achyutarya Modak,
so this statement completely mystifies me. I hope this is only a mistake.
TMP Mahadevan and N Veezhinathan feel it necessary to take potshots at
MSV, in their introduction and preface to Anantanandagiri's SV. They
quote, of all things, Monier-Williams's dictionary, which says that MSV
is fanciful, and they misquote Wilson (see previous response) to claim
that Anantanandagiri's text is a safe guide. That is how things have been.
Well, if MSV is fanciful because of its stories of miracles, but the other
text is a safe guide in spite of its stories of miracles, and in spite of
its stories casting Sankara and his disciples in a negative light, I don't
know what to say. I have criticized Anantanandagiri's text only because
I feel the multitude of problems in this text should not go unnoticed and
uncommented. I will be willing to listen, if somebody takes me up point
by point, and shows me that I am wrong about all this.
vAde vAde jAyate jnAnam.
>Attributing the date of Sri Sankara to 788 A.D as opposed to 509 B.C has
>the same problem. While we may refer to the GOI accepting this date and
>some internal evidences in Sankara’s works, there are a good amount of
>pointers that Sankara was born in 509 B.C. Many of the names in Sankara’s
>works do not seem to be famous personalities in history. However, we have
>seen era that Dharmakirti seems to be a famous personality whose date
>seems to be certain.
By that very piece of evidence, 509 BCE is not good. If Sankara is 509
BCE, then Dharmakirti should have been even earlier, and Buddha much much
earlier still. On the other hand, if there is any certain date that can
be reasonably given to Dharmakirti, it is in the 5th-6th century CE (or
AD, for the sake of clarity). Sankara should have lived after that time.
This is the reason why Sringeri matha has accepted the 7th-8th c. dates.
To reiterate what I wrote years ago, check Sw. Tapasyananda's translation
of MSV, where he gives the text of a letter written to him from Sringeri.
The matha secretary simply sticks to their tradition, and leaves the job
of date interpretation to historians. But where historians have done a
fairly good job, there is no reason not to accept their conclusions,
always keeping in mind that further refinements in dates might come, if
and when more historical evidence comes to light.
>Jains follow Yudhistara Era, which is like the Hindu Yudhistira Era with
>an offset in the beginning. They mention that Sankara, an avatar of Siva,
Is this from the so-called Jina Vijaya? This text also seems to be quite
unavailable. While on the topic, I wish Indian scholars did more careful
referencing of sources. Usually, only name of book and name of author is
given. No information about publisher name, publication year and place is
revealed. It is extremely hard for anybody to follow up, when researching
these things. Any member of this list, who has written scientific reports
or papers in the humanities, would appreciate this peeve of mine.
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: ADVAITA-L Digest - 11 Jun 2001 to 12 Jun 2001 (#2001-146)
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:58:04
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Doesn't Shankara explicitly define shruti to be consciousness.
Oops - what I meant to say was : Doesn't Shankara and the shruti explicitly
define Reality to be consciousness?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 06:40:25 -0400
Subject: Re: ADVAITA-L Digest - 11 Jun 2001 to 12 Jun 2001 (#2001-146)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
>>Doesn't Shankara explicitly define shruti to be consciousness.
>
>Oops - what I meant to say was : Doesn't Shankara and the shruti explicitly
>define Reality to be consciousness?
Yes Nanda - "praj~naanam brahma' is one of the declaration considered
as mahaavaakya. Consciousness is Brahman, Brahman being the reality.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 10:15:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions Part III
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 06:12:32 -0400, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<vsundaresan at H...> wrote:
>
>By that very piece of evidence, 509 BCE is not good. If Sankara is 509
>BCE, then Dharmakirti should have been even earlier, and Buddha much much
>earlier still. On the other hand, if there is any certain date that can
>be reasonably given to Dharmakirti, it is in the 5th-6th century CE (or
>AD, for the sake of clarity). Sankara should have lived after that time.
>This is the reason why Sringeri matha has accepted the 7th-8th c. dates.
>
>To reiterate what I wrote years ago, check Sw. Tapasyananda's translation
>of MSV, where he gives the text of a letter written to him from Sringeri.
>The matha secretary simply sticks to their tradition, and leaves the job
>of date interpretation to historians. But where historians have done a
>fairly good job, there is no reason not to accept their conclusions,
>always keeping in mind that further refinements in dates might come, if
>and when more historical evidence comes to light.
>
Swami Tapasyananda has also talked about there being the possibility that
Adi Shankara, the commentator of the Upanishads might have been different
from the 8th century Shankara, who he calls Abhinava Shankara, and that it
might have been Abhinava Shankara who engaged in debates, ( I am quoting
this from memory so I might have things a little mixed up here) unless, of
course, we find evidence within the commentaries where Shankara quotes
Dharmakirti. Also, if I remember correctly, there is some reference in Sw.
Tapasyananda's introduction to Nagarjuna and the possibility that the dates
of the two i.e. (Abhinava) Shankara and Nagarjuna could not have been far
apart. Any thoughts?
thanks
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 07:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
In the course of a discussion Jaldhar got this reply:
> Good, now you're thinking.
Am I the only one who finds such statements offensive
and demeaning?
I salute Jaldhar for maintaining his calm and patience
during the course of this discussion.
I think it's time to reactivate my kill file :-).
Rama
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 15:56:32
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Swami Tapasyananda has also talked about there being the possibility that
>Adi Shankara, the commentator of the Upanishads might have been different
>from the 8th century Shankara, who he calls Abhinava Shankara, and that it
>might have been Abhinava Shankara who engaged in debates,
Quite unlikely. Dialectic is an essential element of Shankara's philosophy
and that's what gives rise to ajaativaada and maayaavaada. That's the base
on which Advaita psychology and metaphysics itself is developed. And his
works on the Upanishads, Gita and the Brahma Sutras are filled with it -
either in explicit or implicit reference to the views of other schools.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 10:02:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...> wrote:
> --- ShrI Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
> > The idea of meditation
> > on mahAvAkya-s is also explicitly rejected by
> > Sureshvara in his naishhkarmya siddhi. He asks "if
> the
> > sentence tattvamasi cannot dispel ignorance once,
> how
> > can it dispel ignorance by repeated meditation on
> it?"
>
> Thank you for this information. I was under the
> impression
> that vAkya upadesham was specifically meant for
> meditation.
> Namely, shravanam, manannam and nidhidhyasanam were
> meant
> especially for the mahAvAkya-s. What is the role of
> the
> mahAvAkya-s then? Does it just teach the tattva? If
> we are
> not supposed to meditate on them then what should we
> meditate on? I kindly request clarification on this.
Apologies for the long mail.
Much of what I write below is paraphrasing of
sha.nkara's genuine works. I have not given any
references or quotations due to lack of time. If
anyone
needs exact references please let me know and I'll try
to e-mail them.
First, understanding how perception works is
essential.
Perception involves a perceiver and the perceived.
Thus, duality is a presupposition to perception. Hence
at this level, the perceiver and the perceived are
*not* the same. This level is the so called vyavahAra.
How perception works: the antaHkaraNa flows through
the
sense organs and assumes the shape of the object
presented to it. This is called perception.
Meditation presupposes a meditator, an object to be
mediatated upon and a technique of meditation. For
e.g., I (meditator) could meditate on Lord Narayana
(object of meditation) as per the instructions of the
vishhNu purANa. Duality is again presupposed and hence
meditation conforms to the rules of vyavahAra. However
meditation can be performed correctly or incorrectly
and depends on the will of the individual person. If
the right technique is followed, the intense
concentration causes the antaHkaraNa to assume the
shape of the deity. This causes the vision of the
deity.
There is, of course, a difference between perceiving
an
object, say a pen, and a deity. The former can be
easily observed by looking at the pen, whereas for the
latter, intense concentration, and quite possibly
repetition of the meditative act, mantra japa etc, may
be required. However, the relevant texts in shruti and
smR^iti give detailed instructions on how various
types
of meditation are to be carried out and their results.
It is up to the meditator to implement the techniques
and the results vary depending on how well the
meditator implements the instructions.
shravaNa et al are also in vyavahAra. After all, if
the
knowledge of brahman was already present, why would
there be shravaNa? But, shravaNa, et al are quite
different from meditation (I'll call it upAsana from
now on)although at first glance it might not appear to
be so. shravaNa is hearing the truth from a qualified
guru. Clearly, this is different from mantropadesha
and
what the disciple does with the mantra. Why? The truth
is what IS and quite independent of the will of the
person who hears about it. There is nothing he can
"do"
after shravaNa. As a matter of fact there is nothing
to
be done since the vAkyas merely contain facts. Note
again that upAsana can be performed correctly or
incorrectly depending on the will of the observer.
However, the will of the observer cannot affect the
*fact* conveyed by the statements. Also, unlike in the
upAsana, the antaHkaraNa cannot assume the shape of
Atman by repetition of what has been heard, since the
latter is beyond mind and words.
Note that for the highest class of aspirant, shravaNa
alone is enough. For others manana is of great use.
This is because the mind is used to demanding logic
and
consistency. Indeed, for the lower class manana may be
a must. manana is reasoning based on the words of the
qualified guru. This reasoning is different from
inferences drawn by other schools, be they the
sA.nkhyA, nyAya-vaisheshhika, Buddhism, etc. These
latter schools dissociate the Atman and build a
philosophical system based on a combination of
observation, inference and speculation.
Of course, each system has its own epistemology also,
but they also derive an ontology without considering
of
Atman. E.g., the sAnkhya has its prakR^iti, the
vaisheshhika-s have their categories, buddhists have
their pratItya-samutpAda and so on. In advaita the
Atman is never removed from the picture. *Only*
reasonings which involve Atman are acceptable. This is
called shrutyAnuga tarka. The other schools develop
great systems which can be accepted logical from one
point of view, but since they dissociate Atman and
develop part of their system, they are to be
discarded.
The reasonings of these systems quite are useless or
sushhka tarka. The arguments of such suystems are
refuted by pointing their mutual contradictions, as by
bhagavAn gauDapAda.
As the physicist/philosopher Erwin Schrodinger remarks
in his "Nature and the Greeks", dissociating the self
from the picture is done either deliberately or
otherwise and this greatly simplifies the world
picture. He also remarks that it leads to
contradictions of all sorts on deeper examination.
Advaita does not commit this mistake and IMO, the only
system which does not commit this mistake.
To reiterate, the upanishhad-s do not approve of
reasoning with Atman dissociated from the picture. Now
the reasonings given in the upanishhad-s can be
classified into two broad types: more ontic and more
epsitemic. Purely ontic and purely epistemic
reasonings
cannot be found for the simple reason that Atman is
never dissociated from the picture. Neither can the
"outer world" be dissociated from the picture, since
they have the same Atman for their essence!
ekameva-advitIyam, sAxi, chetA kevalaH etc.
Examples of more ontic reasonings: chhAndogya
instruction to shvetaketu by uddalaka. Descriptions
where first brahman creates the world and enters as
the
jIva and so on.
Examples of more epsitemic reasonings: examination of
the five sheaths in the taittirIya, examination of
waking dream and deep sleep in the bR^ihadAraNyaka and
so on.
Wilhelm Halbfass in his "On being and what there is: A
history of classical vaisheshhika and Indian ontology"
characterizes sha.nkara's "theory of salvation" as a
"soterio-ontology". In reality the whole of sha.nkaras
(and the upanishhad-s) thoughts should be
characterized
as epistemo-soterio-ontology.
A hint on how to avoid confusion:
I have found that translating the Sanskrit words may
hinder understanding. For example shravaNa is not
merely hearing someone say tattvamasi or anything like
that. shravaNa is hearing *after* the required
sAdhana,
hearing with great faith and concentration. Similarly
nididhyAsana translated as "profound meditation" is
certainly misleading. But that's the limitation of
translations.
Comments/corrections are most welcome.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:05:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: New member introduction: Shankar Krishnamurthy
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Namaskar
I am a software engineer working in the US and I am interested in the
advaita vedanta philosophy. To enrich my spiritual quest,I have browsed your
site but I still have some queries. I am particularly interested in the
non-distinction of Jiva and Brahman and the worldly difference that is
apparent.
rgds
shankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:07:32 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, nanda chandran wrote:
> Good, now you're thinking. What I didn't explicitly say is "all willful
> action" is only activity. Even for sleeping, you don't generally just
> fall down wherever you are and go to sleep do you. When you feel tired,
> you think "I feel tired and sleepy" and consciously head towards your
> bedroom, lie in your bed and then fall asleep. Even in sleeping some
> people who've trouble sleeping - use their will to fall asleep. So it is
> this conscious action that I'm talking about.
It is true that you can control instincts somewhat. If you have some
deadline you can will yourself to not sleep for a while or a Yogi can slow
down his breathing to some extent. But can you will yourself not to sleep
or breathe at all? You can't. Instinct operates seperately from
consciousness. (Like a coma patient who has almost zero brain function
but still breathes etc.)
The relevance to our current discussion is that Bhakti is pure love. It
is emotional not intellectual. It is also free of intention.
> For consciousness in
> action implies the working of the mind - that's where the ignorance part
> comes in - for ignorance is a mental aspect of our being.
>
And the goal is to let go of ignorance. This is where some form of
sadhana is necessary for ignorance is very hard to let go of. The Bhakta
is obsessed with God. Nothing else is of any relevance especially the
paltry demands of the world.
> Jaladhar, is reality conscious or unconscious? Doesn't Shankara explicitly
> define shruti to be consciousness.
Yes reality is consciousness (and truth and bliss.)
> You're a conscious being. But are you
> directly aware of consciousness external to you - like the consciousness of
> other people? You can hear what people say and infer that they too have
> consciousness/thoughts - but you cannot directly be conscious of their
> consciousness.
If I can perceive and infer that consciousness then that's good enough. I
just have to check my perception and inference to make sure they are
pramana and not invalid. Based on your posts I have enough data to
reasonably believe you are conscious despite never having met you.
> Likewise how can any saadhana which is directed externally
> result in the grasping of consciousness?
Which sadhana is not at the beginning directed externally? If you read
the shastras that book is an external object. If you listen to a Guru
that person is also an external object. Atma vichar is also in your
words, "mired in duality" at the beginning. The difference between
sadhana and some mundane task is not where it begins but where it ends up.
>You are a conscious being - your
> essence is pure consciousness - to be grasped here and now.
>
But the essence of everything is pure consciousness. You are saying if I
understand the true nature of my individual self I will grasp that
essence. Fine, but won't I do the same if I understand the true essence
of my cell phone? Or a tree? Or...
Is inward easier? Maybe, maybe not. Excessive emphasis on oneself can
lead to problems with ahamkara (confusion of self with Self.) Bhakti may
not have that problem but it might have other problems. All forms of
sadhana have their own strengths and weaknesses.
> It is common practice to raise an iron curtain between paramaartha and
> vyavahaara and then try to project paramaartha as an abstrace which is
> beyond the reach of vyavahaara. If that's so how'll you ever reach
> paramaartha? What's that which seperates the two - avidhya or ignorance.
> So analyze and understand and raise your level of consciousness to
> transcend the difference. Please try to understand how the concept of
> vyavahaara itself came to be defined so.
>
Take a look at my picture in a previous post to see how I understand this
concept. The iron curtain turns out to be made from smoke.
> >Perhaps. There have been posts on this list suggesting this isn't true.
>
> Jaladhar this is getting pretty typical of you. "Our sadguru parampara
> has said this" or "there have been posts ..." - please produce the evidence.
> Even with regards "sadguru parampara" evidence, I didn't notice you
> producing any - Lance Nelson and Anand produced some verses from
> Madhusudhana Saraswati's works. But even this seems to be only a minority
> view in Advaita. I'd be really interested in seeing you produce similar
> evidence from Gaudapaada or Shankara or Sureshvara. Please do.
>
Go to the archives and see the posts entitled "Life of Ramana Maharshi" by
S.V. Subrahmaniam from about three to four months back. Venkataraman
Iyer had a typical childhood for that time which means he probably picked
up a great deal of religious lore without formally studying it. I find it
curious that that you found it hard to accept the incident in Kumarila
Bhattas life but you readily believe that Ramana spontaneously learned
Sanskrit!
As for the views of the Advaita parampara I've already mentioned a lot of
evidence based on that. To recap, I've already mentioned that
Gaudapadacharya readily uses words such as Prabhu and Bhagawan to describe
Brahman. That Shankaracharya wrote lots of stotras and established
Shrichakras and Shri Chandramouleshwar puja. That Sureshwaracharya use
words such as Shiva in Manasollasa. And the parampara doesn't stop
there. Chitsukhacharya who wrote Tattvapradipa also wrote a commentary on
the Bhagavata Purana. Swami Madhusudan Saraswati you already know about.
Appaya Dikshita also wrote stotras along with logical works. This is just
a few examples. The full number of Advaitins who have also been involved
with Bhakti is innumerable. And the parampara conntinues today. You
could go to Shringeri or Kanchi right now and ask about the relation of
Bhakti and Advaita.
You can't just pull ideas out of a hat and cobble them together to
understand Advaita Vedanta. It has a historical context some aspects of
which are hazy but much which is crystal clear. This is just as much
evidence as books especially if you haven't even read the original books,
just translations.
> Consciousness working on itself can produce pure-consciousness. I don't
> see how consciousness working on the unconscious can produce any
> kind of consciousness - even if it does, I don't see how it can produce
> non-dual consciousness. And you're offering no explanation either.
>
If you accept the idea that the ground of every thing is pure
consciousness, than it shouldn't be too much stretch to realize that
consciousness can work on anything. The key is to identify that anything
with ones self. In Bhakti, the intense love of God eventually leads to
the loss of all ego and a feeling of oneness with Him.
> Only till date you've not explained how it is so. You say intense love for
> God. Here, is God external or internal to you? If God is not your own self
> and is also not external then he can only be a mental concept - still it is
> only a vritti - action/ignorance.
>
He is external at first and internal at the end. Just like the objects of
any form of sadhana.
> You say you cannot see any difference between you and God. I'm saying I
> don't see how that is possible unless you keep quiet/abide in your own self
> - for all action - mental/physical/emotional - implies duality/difference.
>
Bhakti in it's purest form is love bordering on obsession. (And
sometimes not at all quiet I might add.) A Bhakta cannot (and does not
want to) do anything except think of God.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:09:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
> I salute Jaldhar for maintaining his calm and patience
> during the course of this discussion.
>
Now I've heard everything! :-)
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 16:08:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions Part III
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...> wrote:
>Swami Tapasyananda has also talked about there being the possibility that
>Adi Shankara, the commentator of the Upanishads might have been different
>from the 8th century Shankara, who he calls Abhinava Shankara, and that it
>might have been Abhinava Shankara who engaged in debates, ( I am quoting
>this from memory so I might have things a little mixed up here)
Yes, Sw. Tapasyananda does mention this theory, but it cannot be so.
And I don't think he really endorses it very much.
Sankara wrote Upadesasahasri. This text has a verse which is identified
as a reference to Dharmakirti's text, pramANalakshaNa. This identification
has been done by no less a person than Suresvara, the direct disciple of
Sankara. It follows that Sankara must have lived in the 7th or 8th cent.
CE. So, this theory that Adi Sankara may have lived in 509 BCE and an
Abhinava Sankara lived in the 8th century CE is only a cause for quite
unnecesary confusion.
We have to ask, "where is the evidence that there was somebody called
Abhinava Sankara who lived in the 8th century?" We have to ask, "if so,
did this Abhinava Sankara compose all the commentaries on Gita, Sutras
and Upanishads?" Then, we have to ask, "then what did Adi Sankara do,
so many centuries ago?" Finally, we have to ask, "who is the Sankara we
are interested in, when we talk of the Advaita tradition, and when did
he live?"
There have been thousands of people named Sankara, and some of them may
have been called Acharyas. There may or may not have been somebody named
Sankara, who may or may not have been an Acharya, and who may or may not
have lived in the 5th century BCE. But we can neither prove nor disprove
such ifs and buts. The question is this - are we interested in some
hypothetical person who may or may not have lived 2500 years ago, or are
we interested in the Advaita teacher who rejuvenated the Upanishadic
tradition by writing commentaries on a number of texts? And what do we
gain by substituting an imaginary Abhinava Sankara, who is claimed to
have lived in the 8th century, for THE Sankara? There is no need to think
that all great people like Sankara had to have lived before Christ. We
have seen a number of great people even in the recent past. Our tradition
is not enhanced by dating Sankara to a period before Christ. Nor is our
tradition diminished if Sankara's date is said to have been after Christ.
On a light note, check http://www.sadhanaashram.org - there is a Westerner
who calls himself Shankaracharya, and advertises himself as being available
to give Shaktipat initiation. Who knows, if he gains followers, a hundred
years from now, there will be a myth that Shankaracharya was in America!
It would be true and yet not true. :-) loko bhinnaruciH.
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:04:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : prakaraNa grantha series - Foreword
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Hari AUM!
Salutations to Lord Ganesha, remover of obstacles!
Many, many salutations to Godess ShAradA,
Godess of knowledge, bestower of wisdom and our Merciful
Mother who always heeds her devotee's call!
O Mother! Please shed thy grace on us!
Prostrations to ShrI Shankara bhagavatpAda, who was blessed
with HER vision and out of compassion for the suffering
souls, has blessed us with his spiritual works!
May his works and their divine wisdom guide us to HER!
============================================================
Hello all :
I wish to introduce a new series of posts in advaita-l
on ShrI Shankara bhagavatpAda's spiritual literature called
prakaraNa grantham. As the name indicates, the Great
Teacher
wrote these works as an introductory study of Advaita
Vedanta. These works contain not only the basic teachings
of Advaita but also cover the ethical and moral
pre-requisites to study advaita vedanta.
The purpose to start this series is two-fold. I wish to
improve my understanding of the fundamentals of advaita
vedanta. What better way to do it than to study and discuss
the introductory texts of advaita in advaita-l? The other
reason is that, I have seen basic questions about advaita
being posed repeatedly on this list. I feel that a sincere
study of the prakaraNa granthas would answer most if not
all
such questions. Considering that our membership has soared
in recent months and quite a few of our new members have
expressed their desire to learn the basics, this venture,
I hope, would be an useful one.
I wish to declare up front that I am a sanskrit novice
and that this is my maiden venture in transliteration of
sanskrit literature. Please bear with me.
I request the knowledgeable list members to correct my
mistakes. As always, your comments are most welcome.
Notes on Posts
---------------
1. The subject of all posts would be pre-fixed with PGS,
indicating the prakaraNa grantha series, followed by the
name of the text and the shloka number.
2. I intend to go at a slow pace to facilitate ample
discussion.
3. All the posts should be searcheable by indicating the
PGS in the subject line. To facilitate this, please
reply
with PGS as part of the subject.
4. Due to my limited knowledge of sanskrit, the posts would
have minimal sanskrik ( or more English ). Again, I
kindly request the knowledgeable list members to fill in
the blanks.
Thanks,
-Vivek.
bhava Shankara deshikame SharaNam!
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:43:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 01
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Hari AUM!
We shall start our journey with the prakaraNa grantha
called
Atma Bodha. As the name indicates, this text deals with
teachings of the Self. I have taken this up first because
it is a brief but a brilliant treatise on the subject of
the
Self. I have based my explanations on the translations
of Swami Chinmayananda-ji and the Vedanta press of the
Ramakrishna mission. However, the translation has been
re-worded by me. Hopefully, this would not violate any
copyrights.
Atma Bodha Verse 01 :
tapObhih kshiNapApAnAm SAntAnAm vItarAgiNAm |
mumukshuNAm ApekshyOyam AtmabOdhO vidhIyate ||
Translation:
For those who have cleansed their sins by austerities,
for those who are calm ( or attained calmness ),
for those who are not bound to cravings of the body,
and
for those who seek liberation, to such worthy people,
I (ShrI Shankara) compose this teaching on the Self.
Explanation:
This verse is the introductory verse which identifies
the purpose and the intended audience. The Great Teacher
has laid down certain basic qualifications ( discussed
in other works ) and he mentions a simplified version of
the
same here.
The advaita tradition maintains that only certain
people
are qualified to take up the study of advaita vedanta. The
reason being that the path of advaita is like walking a
tightrope across a ravine. One who is not competent to do
so would most certainly injure himself/herself. It is out
of compassion and regard for such souls that such
conditions
exist.
What are these qualifications? In other texts, ShrI
Shankara has elaborated upon this and presented the four
basic qualifications. Here, he has offered a simpler
scheme,
as follows,
1. Those who have cleansed their minds by spiritual
practices such as tapas, japa etc.
2. Those who have attained a degree of mental calmness
( required to contemplate and meditate )
3. Those who have at the very least realized that the
cravings of the body are ephemeral.
4. Those who posess a desire for liberation ( moksha ).
This is very important!
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 01
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 01:50:42
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
>From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
>Hari AUM!
>
>We shall start our journey with the prakaraNa grantha
>called
>Atma Bodha. As the name indicates, this text deals with
>teachings of the Self.
Beautiful - all my best wishes in this task.
Hari Om!
sadananda
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "A.R. Ramachandran" <ramachandran at g...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 07:33:13 +0200 (MEST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: ADVAITA-L Digest - 12 Jun 2001 to 13 Jun 2001 (#2001-147)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "A.R. Ramachandran" <ramachandran at g...>
I was reading with great interest Mr.Vidyasankar Sunderesan's responses to
Sankara Vijaya Contradictions. He made a brief reference to "Mani Manjari"
Is this the same "Mani Manjari" written by Sri Narayana Panditacharya?
Kind Regards, AR
--
Today, I dont want to live for,
I want to live.
Hugh Prather
Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From satish arigela <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: satish arigela <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
>Howevermeditation can be performed correctly or
>incorrectly
>and depends on the will of the individual person. If
>the right technique is followed, the intense
>concentration causes the antaHkaraNa to assume the
>shape of the deity. This causes the vision of
>thedeity.
while it is true that a sadhaka sees the saguna
brahman in whatever form he imagines(and worships),
the vision of the deity(saakShaatkaara) can happen
only if there is
Ishvara anugraha.It is not like the sadhaka does
certain
number of japa or certain amount of meditation to make
the deity manifest before the sadhaka.
i remember reading HH Shri Chandrasekhara Bharati's
saying that ,karma is inert and and hence cannot give
fruit by itself.It is Ishvara who does.
corrections welcome.
regards
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 01
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
> Beautiful - all my best wishes in this task.
>
> Hari Om!
> sadananda
Thank you very much. Please guide me and correct me
as appropriate.
Thanks,
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 02
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Hari AUM!
Atma Bodha Verse 02 :
bOdhO'nya sAdhanebhyOhi sAkshan mOkshaikasAdhanam |
pAkasya vahnivat jnAnam vinA mOkshO na sidhyati ||
Translation:
This teaching(bodham), when compared to other means
(sAdhana-s), is the single, direct means to
liberation(mOksha).
Just as fire is the direct cause of cooking(burning),
without jnAna, mOksha cannot be attained.
Explantation:
In Verse 01, ShrI bhagavatpAda had enunciated the
qualifications required for studying advaita. Here, he
explains the purpose of this text. It is a common practice
to explain the purpose(prayojanam) of a venture. In this
verse, ShrI shankara states that the purpose of this
bodha(teaching) is to explain the One sure means to
mOksha.
He further states one of the cardinal principles of
advaita vedanta - jnAna and jnAna alone liberates. There
are
many schools of vedanta and some of them teach that bhakti
can bring about liberation. Other schools of Indian thought
maintain that rituals(karma) or other means can bring about
liberation. But, ShrI Shankara and his followers, with the
firm support of Shruti(revelation i.e. vedas), maintain
that
only Self-Realization(jnAna) can bring about liberation.
Why is this so?
Because, the advaitic view states that we are liberated
already. In fact, there is no bondage. The only bondage is
our ignorance(avidya). When this ignorance is shed, we are
our true selves. How should this ignorance be dispelled?
By the light of jnAna(Self-Realization).
ShrI Shankara states this in the latter half of this
verse. Just as fire is the direct cause of cooking i.e
without fire there won't be any burning(cooking), just an
assorted collection of vegetables, grains etc.; similarly,
jnAna is the direct cause for liberation. In fact, without
jnAna, mOksha is not possible.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 01
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
--- Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at y...> wrote:
> Atma Bodha Verse 01 :
>
> tapObhih kshiNapApAnAm SAntAnAm vItarAgiNAm |
> mumukshuNAm ApekshyOyam AtmabOdhO vidhIyate ||
>
> Translation:
> For those who have cleansed their sins by austerities,
> for those who are calm ( or attained calmness ),
> for those who are not bound to cravings of the body,
> and
> for those who seek liberation, to such worthy people,
> I (ShrI Shankara) compose this teaching on the Self.
>
> Explanation:
> This verse is the introductory verse which identifies
> the purpose and the intended audience. The Great Teacher
> has laid down certain basic qualifications ( discussed
> in other works ) and he mentions a simplified version of
> the
> same here.
>
Does this imply that people without such qualifications should not
study the work?
Often, these days, many may not meet the qualifications set forth for
adhikAri laxaNam. And since all this information is available via
printed medium almost everybody interested has access to all. Should
one then based on one's own judgement stop reading these works. If one
goes via the channel of a guru then things are different.
This is my view on this. One need not stop, but has to keep in my mind
that the text itself is intended for those who meet the qualifications
set forth. That is, if one does not understand, or experience, or
obtain the benefits mentioned in the text it is due to the lack of
adhikAri laxaNam. Besides these text themselves by repeated study and
contemplation, help one one to attain those qualifications.
To give an example, in yoga sUtra-s some say you can proceed further
only if you satisfy the yama-s and niyama-s, however, who but advanced
yogins can satisfy these conditions? It is a such a nonlinear path,
some advancement in subsequent steps really aids one to meet the basis
steps like yama and niyama better.
Even further, in yoga sutra is says, "vitarka bhaadhane pratipaxa
bhaavanam". Say if a person is overcome by lust by looking at a
beautiful woman, patanjali asks me think the contrary to stop it. How?
By merely repeating that I am not overcome by lust, will it contradict
it. No. Then what is the thoght which contradicts it? There are few
which can contradict and stop and the best comes from the adhyaasa
bhaashya (probably one who is overcome by lust will not have adhikAri
laxanam for an advanced text like adhyAsa bhaashhya). The strong idea
that contradicts here is the understanding that one is not the body or
the mind. Only if one thinks he is man he is bound to get attracted to
a woman. That errors arises from dehAtma buddhi. One has to probably
contemplate and understand that one is not the body, and not even the
mind. If one contemplates on that aatma anaatma adhyAsa, then one can
successfully contradict the lustful thoughts. Thus the way of practice
for the suutra comes from a very advanced text.
In summary, when reading from a printed text, one need not stop based
on the the adhikAri laxaNam mentioned. But one should always bear that
in mind and strive for that.
Corrections are welcome.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sri Meenakshi Mahima series
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
If you know Tamil language and if you are a bhakta (especially towards
jaganmAta) then please read
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ambaa-l/message/1999
In addition if your are interested in Carnatic music (this is not
required though) you will enjoy it more. It is a lecture on kRti-s by
shrii muttusvaami diixitar (sanskrit) and shrii shyaama shaastri
(telugu) on shrii miinaaxii ambaa in Tamil, running approximately 450
minutes.
Ravi
www.ambaa.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 01
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:21:51
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
Ravi - there are two ways to look at the adhikaaratvam.
Those who have the qualifications will gain the knowledge of aatma
immediately, aparoksha j~naanam since no medium (pramaaNa) is required for
what is swataH siddam.
Those who do not have it - the study of the scriptures becomes a means of
purification process and when they gain the required purification then this
knowledge will come to the resque. -
The example given in the BSB notes with reference to suutra I is that it is
like replacing a burned-out bulb. If the connection is live, as soon as the
new bulb is connected it will glow. But if the line is not live, the
connecting the bulb is not a waste. Even though bulb does not burn
immediately after it is fixed, one can now go back and turn on the switch
after it is connected. If it is a dimmer switch, one has to slowly turn it
until the bulb glows. Same way shravana is not a waste even if all the
qualifications are not there. But when the qualifcations are acquired then
the previously acquired knowledge shines forth.
Hence the study of the scriptures are recommended along with yoga which is
meant for purification.
Shankara is also indirectly implying that if one has not gained the
knowledge of aatma after studying the text, it is not the fault of the text
but lack of proper adhikaaratvam for the subject.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at Y...>
>Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri
>Does this imply that people without such qualifications should not
>study the work?
>
>.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 02:47:02 -0400
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at h...>
>>the right technique is followed, the intense
>>concentration causes the antaHkaraNa to assume the
>>shape of the deity. This causes the vision of
>>thedeity.
>
> while it is true that a sadhaka sees the saguna
>brahman in whatever form he imagines(and worships),
>the vision of the deity(saakShaatkaara) can happen
>only if there is
> Ishvara anugraha.
There is no inherent contradiction between these two perspectives.
The antaHkaraNa is also inert. Even in normal daily perception, the
antaHkaraNa is said to take the form of the object being perceived.
This can't happen if there were no object to be perceived. In other
words, to say that the antaHkaraNa takes the form of the deity is
not to deny the independent existence of the deity. What causes the
devatA-sAkshAtkAra is the same thing, whether we call it ISvara-
anugraha or credit the intense practice of the sAdhaka. That is why,
sometimes it is said that ISvara lets Himself be bound by the bhakta.
>From the point of view of progressive steps, see gItA and bhAshya,
verse 6.3. Arurukshor muner yogaM karma kAraNam ucyate, yogArUDhasya
tasyaiva zamaH kAraNam ucyate - here yoga is dhyAnayoga, according
to Sankaracharya, and is part of the renunciation of karma. Here,
karma has to be viewed in the specific sense of ritual action. The
practice of dhyAna-yoga may be called an action, but it truly comes
only when the saMkalpa, the intentionality, is given up.
Whether it is karma-phala or yoga-phala, ultimately the source of
it can only be traced to ISvara. However, karma-phala is given in
accordance with the karma. The path of yoga is not easy, and again
we gItA references about what happens to the yogabhrashTa.
Vidyasankar
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:05:00 -0400
Subject: Notes on BSB I-i-1-4J
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1219519393==_ma============"
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
--============_-1219519393==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry for the delay in posting this notes - we are streamlining the
editing processes and hopefully these processes become smooth. My
sincere thanks to Geetha who took up the major responsibility in the
editing process, and to Sunder and Dennis as usual for their efforts.
-Any mistakes obviously are mine. Hari Om! Sadananda
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------------------------
Notes on BSB I-i-1-4J
sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h |
asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h ||
I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who
is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all
the way up to my own teacher.
vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM
aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .|
shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM
sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h ||
Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the
three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source of
purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree Chinmayaananda, to
his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate.
---------------------------------------------------
samanvaya adhyaaya - I
spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya paada- i
samanvaya adhikaraNam.h .-1
suutra: tat tu samanvayaat.h .-4J
We are discussing Shankara's response to the vR^ittikaara's arguments
that upaasanaa is required after acquiring brahma-j~naanam. In the
last post we have presented the first argument of Shankara and in
this we present the other three arguments. As we noted in the
previous notes, these arguments have relevance also in relation to
vishishhTa-advaita as well as dvaita approaches to moksha.
2. For the second argument, Shankara gives a second definition of
moksha from a different angle.
brahma bhaavaH hi mokshaH | -
This definition is given since every philosopher agrees that moksha
or liberation is nitya or eternal. From the scriptures, from adviatic
point, we come to know that there is only one nitya vastu that is
Brahman (dwaitins and vishishhTa-advaitins do not accept this, but do
accept that moksha is nitya - =96 yat gatvaa na nivartante tat dhaama
paramaM mama =96) Gita | (15:6)
Therefore from adviata point moksha and Brahman have to be one and
the same. Hence moksha praaptiH is equal to brahma praaptiH.
Brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati =96 knower of Brahman becomes Brahman. The
question of 'Can moksha be upaasana phalam?' translates now to ' Can
Brahman be upaasana phalam?'. brahma bhaavaH upaasanena labhyate vaa
na vaa ?-
Shankara says any karma or upaasanaa can produce only four types of
results or phalam: 1. aaptiH, meaning reaching -Thus by doing an
action we can reach a place. 2. utpattiH, meaning production - Just
as a farmer producing the produce. 3. vikaaraH, meaning modification
or conversion - Converting a bangle into a chain. 4. san.skaaraH,
meaning purification - Purification of water for drinking.
The question is - 'Can Brahman come under any one of the four types
for it to be a phalam?'.
(a) Reaching Brahman is out of question, brahmanaH sarvagatatvaat
(Brahman is all pervading) - If Brahman is all pervading and moksha
is attaining Brahman - and what should one do for that -some say that
one has to die first (since this body is impure) then, through '
shuklagati uttaraayaNa maargah' jiiva has to travel and go to some
loka and thereafter merge into that Bhagavan =96 - which Bhagavan?, the
sarvavyaapakaH bhagavaan, the one who is everywhere! Hence all
pervasiveness of Brahman and travel are contradiction - tasmaat
brahma aapyam na bhavati or therefore Brahman or moksha is not of the
type involving going somewhere or reaching somewhere, vaikunTa or
kailaasa, etc.
(b) There is no question of utpatti or to be a product of an action
for Brahman because brahmanaH nitya siddhatvaat - ever present.
(people ask; Sir, when can we attain Brahman or make statements we
cannot attain moksha in this life, but may be in the next life - it
is like asking when is the snake going to become a rope? - it is all
the time a rope even when one is thinking it is a snake.) - Hence
'when?' cannot be the question since Brahman is ever present.
(c) Can Brahman be the result of a modification or vikaara? Brahman
cannot be an end product of any process because brahmanaH
avikaaryatvaat =96Brahman cannot be neither cause for modification or
effect of modification since Brahman is eternal. 'avyaktaH ayam
achintyaH ayam avikaaryaH ayam uchyate =96 The shruti says that
Brahman is unmanifested, unthinkable, does not undergo any
modification.
(d) . Brahman cannot be the result of purification process.
Shankara says brahmanaH nityashuddhatvaat, 'apraaNaH hi amanaH
shubhraH' (This mantra was provided before). He is ever pure. Hence
He cannot be the product of purification process. The sa.nskaara or
purification process is subdivided into two types - i) doshha
apanayana-ruupa sa.nskaaraH - refinement by the removal of impurity
and ii) guNa adhaana-ruupa sa.nskaaraH- addition of various virtues.
In the case of Brahman, doshha apanayana na bhavati -
nitya-shuddhatvaat- since He is eternally pure, there is no question
of purification process. Also guNa adhaanam api na bhavati,
nirguNatvaat , since he is guNaatiitaH. (guNa is a concept of
intellect and he is beyond any guNa-s since he is beyond any
intellectual comprehension). Also being infiniteness, nothing can be
added and nothing can be subtracted. Hence Brahman cannot be
sa.nskaaryaH also. Therefore, Brahman is chaturvidha karma phala
vilakshaNaH - different from all the four types of karma phalam.
Moksha is also different from all the types of karma phalam. Hence
moksha cannot be upaasanaa phalam.
The next argument is called abhyupedya vaadaH -an assumption -
assuming that puurvapakshi is right and showing that such an
assumption leads to contradiction thereby invalidating the
puurvapaksha. We assume first that the argument of puurvapakshi that
'moksha is upaasana phalam' is right. Then what will be the nature
of moksha? If it is a result of upaasanam, then it will certainly
have a beginning - since result is accomplished by following a
saadhana and not before. It is not there before and it comes after
the upaasana is completed. It is called praak abhaavaH - not
existent before the upaasana took place. But, whatever has a
beginning will certainly have an end. jaatasya hi dhruvaH mR^ityuH
dhruvam janma mR^itasya cha | (Gita 2-27) - Hence the upaasana
phalaruupa mokshaH will be anitya mokshaH or is impermanent moksha.
Gaudapada says beautifully in his kaarikaa
anaadeH antavatva.n cha sa.nsaarasya na setsyati |
anantataa cha aadimataH mokshasya na bhavishhyati || 4:30
Eternity is not possible for moksha which has a beginning if it is
the result of upaasanaa, therefore moksha becomes anitya.
Fortunately all the philosophers have agreed that moksha is eternal.
The very purpose of moksha is to go beyond mortality. In Chandogya
Up., it is said that whatever is acquired here in this loka is
impermanent and whatever is acquired as a result of puNya phala in
the other loka-s is also impermanent -
tat yathaa iha karma chitaH lokaH kshiiyate, evam eva amutra
puNyachitaH lokaH kshiiyate | -Hence the conclusion is nitya mokshaH
upaasana phalam bhavitum na arhati, upaasana phalasya anityatvaat -
Eternal moksha cannot be the result of upaasana phalam since upaasana
phalam is impermanent. In fact the very word phalam - Shankara says
-phalgutayaa liiyate iti phalam - that which becomes rotten and gets
destroyed in time is called phalam.
This completes the second argument.
3. For the third argument Shankara says upaasanaa cannot be or
is
not the theme of Vedanta. upaasanaa vedaantasya taatparyam bhavitum
na arhati. Why? This is because miimaa.nsaa or samanvaya shows that
the theme of Vedanta is not upaasanaa. This has been proved using
upakramaadi shhaD-li~Ngaani or six-fold factors beginning with
upakramaa. (These six factors were discussed in relation to this
suutra in the earlier posts). By using these six factors it is
established that Vedanta talks about acquiring a moksha which is here
and now. Vedanta does not talk about accomplishing something new in
future - that is which is not available now and here. In Vedanta the
mahavaakyam in the same 6th chapter of Chandogya. Up., that was
analyzed above, says- tat tvam asi - 'that thou art' - by using asi
the present tense Vedanta clearly shows moksha is in the present. If
it is not here and now, it cannot be anywhere at any time. Either
one is nitya muktaH or nitya baddhaH. That which is not here and now
and comes in future can never be moksha that involves freedom from
all limitations, since it is not eternal and ever existent as it is
not here and now hence that kind of moksha is itself is limited. That
which is limited cannot be a freedom from limitation.
In addition in BR^ihadaaranyaka. Up., there is a discussion of karma
and upaasanaa phalam. putreNa ayam lokaH jayyaH, karmaNaa
pitR^ilokaH, vidyayaa deva lokaH (1:5:16). It is said through the
putra, father can gain the birth of human later, through karma one
can gain swarga or heaven and through vidya or upaasanaa one can gain
deva lokaH or brahmalokaH. Having enumerated karma phalam and
upaasanaa phalam, BR^ihadaaranyaka. Up., (3:5:1) glorified a
sa.nnyaasii and says -
putraishhaNaayaaH cha vittaishhaNaayaaH cha lokaishhaNaayaaH cha
vyutthaaya atha bhikshaacharya.n charanti | 3:5:1
saH eshha na iti na iti aatmaa agR^ihyaH na hi gR^ihyate ashiiryaH na
hi shiiryate asa~NgaH na hi sajyate asitaH na vyathate na rishhyati |
3:9:26
I do not want putra phalam, I do not want karma phalam, I do not want
even upaasanaa phalam, all I want is moksha - by rejecting, neti neti
- not this - not this - he goes after that which cannot be
objectified, that which is without a body, therefore eternal, that is
free from all attachments, eternally free.
Thus, shruti says by rejecting all that which can be obtained by
karma and upaasanaa phalam, he goes after moksha. Thus here it
indirectly indicates that moksha will not come under karma or
upaasanaa phalam. Hence how can one bring karma and upaasana in
Vedanta. Hence upaasana is not the taatparyam of Vedanta. In the
previous argument it was established that samanvayaat (in terms of
the six-factors) upaasanaa is not the central theme of the Vedanta.
In this argument it is established that mokshasya upaasanaaphala
vilakshaNatvaat, upaasanaa is not the taatparyam or the central theme
of Vedanta.
Next Shankara gives a technical reason - The entire Veda is divided
into two portions - karma kaaNDa (upaasana is included) and
j~naanakaaNDa (Vedanta). The first part is analyzed by Jaimini in his
puurva-miimaa.nsaa suutraaNi which begins =93atha ataH dharma
jij~naasaa=94. Vedanta is analyzed by Vyasa in this brahmasuutra which
begins with =93atha ataH brahma jij~naasaa=94. Now Shankara raises a
question - whether all karma and upaasanaa should be analyzed in Veda
puurva or Veda anta? It should be analyzed only in the puurva
kaaNDa. Because karma or upaasanaa produces dharma or puNyam and
hence everything connected with Dharma should be analyzed in the
puurvakaaNDa. If Vedanta deals with moksha and if moksha is upaasanaa
phalam, and if Vedanta also deals with upaasanaa, there is no reason
to separate it from puurvakaanDa and it should be covered under
puurva-miimaa.nsaa under dharma jij~naasaa. Hence Shankara says
Vedanta would not have become a separate part of the Veda. It would
have come under karma kaanDa itself and would have come under
jaiminii suutra-s. Vyasacharya chose to write a separate suutra for
the Uttara-miimaa.nsaa only because it does not come under karma or
upaasanaa. Only because Vedanta has nothing to do with Dharma
(karma)- It is dealing with aatmaa which is
anyatra dharmaat, anyatra adharmaat, anyatra asmaat kR^itaa akR^itaat
anyatra bhuutaat cha bhavyaat cha yat tat pashyati tat vida ||
(KaTha. Up. 1-2-14)
-It does not deal with dharma or adharma, karma or akarma, and past
and future - that is to be known.
yadaa pashyaH pashyate rukmavarNam
kartaaram iishaM purushaM brahmayonim
tadaa vidvaan puNyapaape vidhuuya
niranjanaH paramam saamyam upaiti || (MuNDaka. Up. 3-1-3)
Vedanta deals with vidvaan who renounces both puNyam and paapam -
which are karma upaasanaa phalam. In the Gita Krishna says - sarva
dharmaan parityajya maam ekam sharaNam vraja - Give up all the karma
and upaasana which comes under dharma. (actually no achaarya advises
one to give up karma - what is advised is to give the kartR^itva
bhaava or notion of the doership - His will, will be done). Therefore
moksha is dharma vilakshaNatvaat. Upaasana is not the taatparyam of
Vedanta. That completes the third argument. The first argument was
moksha cannot be upaasanaa phalam. The second argument was if moksha
is upaasanaa phalam it becomes anityam or impermanent. The third
argument was upaasanaa cannot be the central theme of Vedanta.
This completes the third argument. Now the fourth argument.
4. Shankara says, brahma upaasanaa itself is not possible. The
question of brahma as the upaasana phalam will arise until one
settles the issue whether one can even do Brahma upaasanaa at all
before settling the issue of Brahman can be obtained as upaasana
phalam. Upanishad clearly says 'tat twam asi' - you are yourself
Brahman. Which means Brahman is not an object at all for upaasana. It
is the upaasaka swaruupam - the very nature of upaasaka, one who does
upaasana. How can the upaasaka Brahman become upaasya Brahman -
kartR^i karma virodhaat ? Subject can never be an object, object can
never be the subject. Therefore nobody can meditate on Brahman.
Therefore Brahman cannot be an object of upaasana - hence the very
basis of the argument of the puurvapakshi has no validity. It is
illogical to talk about Brahma-upaasanaa. The Kena Upanishad clearly
says:
yat vaachaa nabhyuditam yena vaak abhyudyate |
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upasate || [1:5]
The student asked for Brahman and the teacher very clearly says
whatever you do upaasana upon is not Brahman.
yat manasaa na manute yena aahuH manaH matam.h .|
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate || [1:6]
yat chakshushhaa na pashyati yena chakshuu.nshhi pashyati |
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate || [1:7]
yat shrotreNa na shR^iNoti yena shrotram idam shrutam.h |
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate || [1:8]
yat praaNena na praaNiti yena praaNaH praNiiyate |
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate || [1:9]
Thus it repeats that statement five times indicating the importance
of the statement. It says the object of upaasanaa or meditation
cannot be Brahman - it is anaatma. The meditator is Brahman. When
one cannot even do any upaasanaa on Brahman, where is the question of
Brahma upaasanam producing moksha.
Thus the fourth argument is Brahma upaasanam is not possible because
brahmanaH avishhayatvaat (Brahman is not an object - it is seeing the
truth as the truth - like seeing rope as a rope and it is not
acquiring, reaching or producing - aatmani atmanaa atmaanam pastyet -
realization of ones own self by oneself in oneself.).
This completes the four arguments of Shankara that Brahma upaasanaa
is not possible and is not required for moksha. Only knowledge is
the solution to the problem since the problem is caused by adhyaasa
or an error in the vision - To understand the nature of adhyaasa one
should go back and study again the adhyaasa bhaashhyam of Shankara
(Ch. III in this 'Notes on Brahmasuutra').
We will try to complete the discussion on Suutra 4 soon.
********
Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/files/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/
for personal study.
***Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected.***
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
--============_-1219519393==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type=3D"text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Notes on BSB I-i-1-4J</title></head><body>
<div><font color=3D"#000000">Sorry for the delay in posting this notes -
we are streamlining the editing processes and hopefully these
processes become smooth. My sincere thanks to Geetha who took up
the major responsibility in the editing process, and to Sunder and
Dennis as usual for their efforts. -Any mistakes obviously are mine.
Hari Om! Sadananda</font></div>
<div><font size=3D"-2"
color=3D"#000000"
>--------------------------------------------------------------------<span
></span>-----------------------------------------</font></div>
<div><font size=3D"-2" color=3D"#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font size=3D"-2" color=3D"#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times"
color=3D"#000000"
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> Notes on BSB
I-i-1-4J</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
</font><font color=3D"#000000">sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n
sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h |<br>
asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h ||<br>
<br>
I prostrate to the lineage of teachers
starting from Lord Shiva who is
ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all the
way up to my own teacher.<br>
<br>
vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM<br>
aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .|<br>
shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM<br>
sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h ||<br>
<br>
Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the
three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source
of purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree
Chinmayaananda, to his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate.<br>
---------------------------------------------------<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
>
samanvaya adhyaaya - I<br>
<span
></span> spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya
paada- i</font></div>
<div><font
color=3D"#000000"
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> samanvaya
adhikaraNam.h .-1</font></div>
<div><font
color=3D"#000000"
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> suutra: tat tu
samanvayaat.h .-4J</font></div>
<div><font color=3D"#000000"><br>
<font face=3D"Times">We are discussing Shankara's response to the
vR^ittikaara's arguments that upaasanaa is required after acquiring
brahma-j~naanam. In the last post we have presented the first argument
of Shankara and in this we present the other three arguments. As we
noted in the previous notes, these arguments have relevance also in
relation to vishishhTa-advaita as well as dvaita approaches to
moksha.<br>
<br>
2. For the second argument, Shankara gives a second definition of
moksha from a different angle.<br>
brahma bhaavaH hi mokshaH |
-</font></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
This definition is given since every philosopher agrees that moksha or
liberation is nitya or eternal. From the scriptures, from adviatic
point, we come to know that there is only one nitya vastu that is
Brahman (dwaitins and vishishhTa-advaitins do not accept this, but do
accept that moksha is nitya - =96 yat gatvaa na nivartante tat
dhaama paramaM mama =96) Gita | (15:6)<br>
<br>
Therefore from adviata point moksha and Brahman have to be one and the
same. Hence moksha praaptiH is equal to brahma praaptiH.
Brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati =96 knower of Brahman becomes Brahman.
The question of 'Can moksha be upaasana phalam?' translates now to
' Can Brahman be upaasana phalam?'. brahma bhaavaH upaasanena
labhyate vaa na vaa ?-<br>
<br>
Shankara says any karma or upaasanaa can produce only four types of
results or phalam: 1. aaptiH, meaning reaching -Thus by
doing an action we can reach a place. 2. utpattiH, meaning
production - Just as a farmer producing the produce. 3. vikaaraH,
meaning modification or conversion - Converting a bangle into a
chain. 4. san.skaaraH, meaning purification - Purification of
water for drinking.<br>
<br>
The question is - 'Can Brahman come under any one of the four
types for it to be a phalam?'. <br>
(a) Reaching Brahman is out of question, brahmanaH sarvagatatvaat
(Brahman is all pervading) - If Brahman is all pervading and moksha
is attaining Brahman - and what should one do for that -some say that
one has to die first (since this body is impure) then, through '
shuklagati uttaraayaNa maargah' jiiva has to travel and go to
some loka and thereafter merge into that Bhagavan =96 - which
Bhagavan?, the sarvavyaapakaH bhagavaan, the one who is everywhere!
Hence all pervasiveness of Brahman and travel are contradiction -
tasmaat brahma aapyam na bhavati or therefore Brahman or moksha is not
of the type involving going somewhere or reaching somewhere, vaikunTa
or kailaasa, etc.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"> </font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">(b)</font><font face=3D"Arial"
color=3D"#000000"> </font><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"> Ther=
e
is no question of utpatti or to be a product of an action for Brahman
because brahmanaH nitya siddhatvaat - ever present. (people ask;
Sir, when can we attain Brahman or make statements we cannot attain
moksha in this life, but may be in the next life - it is like asking
when is the snake going to become a rope? - it is all the time a rope
even when one is thinking it is a snake.) - Hence 'when?'
cannot be the question since Brahman is ever present.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"> </font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">(c)</font><font face=3D"Arial"
color=3D"#000000"> </font><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"> Can
Brahman be the result of a modification or vikaara? Brahman
cannot be an end product of any process because brahmanaH
avikaaryatvaat =96Brahman cannot be neither cause for
modification or effect of modification since Brahman is eternal.
'avyaktaH ayam achintyaH ayam avikaaryaH ayam uchyate =96
The shruti says that Brahman is unmanifested, unthinkable, does not
undergo any modification.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">(d) . Brahman cannot be
the result of purification process. Shankara says brahmanaH
nityashuddhatvaat, 'apraaNaH hi amanaH shubhraH' (This mantra was
provided before). He is ever pure. Hence He cannot be the
product of purification process. The sa.nskaara or purification
process is subdivided into two types - i) doshha apanayana-ruupa
sa.nskaaraH - refinement by the removal of impurity and ii) guNa
adhaana-ruupa sa.nskaaraH- addition of various virtues. In the
case of Brahman, doshha apanayana na bhavati - nitya-shuddhatvaat-
since He is eternally pure, there is no question of purification
process. Also guNa adhaanam api na bhavati, nirguNatvaat , since
he is guNaatiitaH. (guNa is a concept of intellect and he is beyond
any guNa-s since he is beyond any intellectual comprehension). Also
being infiniteness, nothing can be added and nothing can be
subtracted. Hence Brahman cannot be sa.nskaaryaH also.
Therefore, Brahman is chaturvidha karma phala vilakshaNaH - different
from all the four types of karma phalam. Moksha is also
different from all the types of karma phalam. Hence moksha
cannot be upaasanaa phalam.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
The next argument is called abhyupedya vaadaH -an assumption -
assuming that puurvapakshi is right and showing that such an
assumption leads to contradiction thereby invalidating the
puurvapaksha. We assume first that the argument of puurvapakshi that
'moksha is upaasana phalam' is right. Then what will be the
nature of moksha? If it is a result of upaasanam, then it will
certainly have a beginning - since result is accomplished by following
a saadhana and not before. It is not there before and it comes
after the upaasana is completed. It is called praak
abhaavaH - not existent before the upaasana took place. But,
whatever has a beginning will certainly have an end.
jaatasya hi dhruvaH mR^ityuH dhruvam janma mR^itasya cha | (Gita 2-27)
- Hence the upaasana phalaruupa mokshaH will be anitya mokshaH or is
impermanent moksha. Gaudapada says beautifully in his
kaarikaa<br>
<br>
anaadeH antavatva.n cha sa.nsaarasya na setsyati |<br>
anantataa cha aadimataH mokshasya na bhavishhyati ||
4:30<br>
<br>
Eternity is not possible for moksha which has a beginning if it is the
result of upaasanaa, therefore moksha becomes anitya.
Fortunately all the philosophers have agreed that moksha is eternal.
The very purpose of moksha is to go beyond mortality. In Chandogya
Up., it is said that whatever is acquired here in this loka is
impermanent and whatever is acquired as a result of puNya phala in the
other loka-s is also impermanent -</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
tat yathaa iha karma chitaH lokaH kshiiyate, evam eva amutra
puNyachitaH lokaH kshiiyate | -Hence the conclusion is nitya
mokshaH upaasana phalam bhavitum na arhati, upaasana phalasya
anityatvaat -</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">Eternal moksha cannot be the
result of upaasana phalam since upaasana phalam is impermanent. In
fact the very word phalam - Shankara says -phalgutayaa liiyate iti
phalam - that which becomes rotten and gets destroyed in time is
called phalam.</font><br>
<font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">This completes the second
argument.</font><br>
<font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">3. For the third
argument Shankara says upaasanaa cannot be or is not the theme of
Vedanta. upaasanaa vedaantasya taatparyam bhavitum na arhati.
Why? This is because miimaa.nsaa or samanvaya shows that the
theme of Vedanta is not upaasanaa. This has been proved using
upakramaadi shhaD-li~Ngaani or six-fold factors beginning with
upakramaa. (These six factors were discussed in relation to this
suutra in the earlier posts). By using these six factors it is
established that Vedanta talks about acquiring a moksha which is here
and now. Vedanta does not
talk about accomplishing something new
in future - that is which is not available now and here. In
Vedanta the mahavaakyam in the same 6th chapter of Chandogya. Up.,
that was analyzed above, says- tat tvam asi - 'that thou art'
- by using asi the present tense Vedanta clearly shows moksha is in
the present. If it is not here and now, it cannot be anywhere at
any time. Either one is nitya muktaH or nitya baddhaH. That
which is not here and now and comes in future can never be moksha that
involves freedom from all limitations, since it is not eternal and
ever existent as it is not here and now hence that kind of moksha is
itself is limited. That which is limited cannot be a freedom from
limitation.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
In addition in BR^ihadaaranyaka. Up., there is a discussion of karma
and upaasanaa phalam. putreNa ayam lokaH jayyaH, karmaNaa
pitR^ilokaH, vidyayaa deva lokaH (1:5:16). It is said through
the putra, father can gain the birth of human later, through karma one
can gain swarga or heaven and through vidya or upaasanaa one can gain
deva lokaH or brahmalokaH. Having enumerated karma phalam and
upaasanaa phalam, BR^ihadaaranyaka. Up., (3:5:1) glorified a
sa.nnyaasii and says -<br>
<br>
putraishhaNaayaaH cha vittaishhaNaayaaH cha lokaishhaNaayaaH cha<br>
vyutthaaya atha bhikshaacharya.n charanti | 3:5:1<br>
saH eshha na iti na iti aatmaa agR^ihyaH na hi gR^ihyate ashiiryaH na
hi shiiryate asa~NgaH na hi sajyate asitaH na vyathate na rishhyati |
3:9:26<br>
<br>
I do not want putra phalam, I do not want karma phalam, I do not want
even upaasanaa phalam, all I want is moksha - by rejecting, neti neti
- not this - not this - he goes after that which cannot be
objectified, that which is without a body, therefore eternal, that is
free from all attachments, eternally free.<br>
<br>
Thus, shruti says by rejecting all that which can be obtained by karma
and upaasanaa phalam, he goes after moksha. Thus here it
indirectly indicates that moksha will not come under karma or
upaasanaa phalam. Hence how can one bring karma and upaasana in
Vedanta. Hence upaasana is not the taatparyam of Vedanta. In the
previous argument it was established that samanvayaat (in terms of the
six-factors) upaasanaa is not the central theme of the Vedanta. In
this argument it is established that mokshasya upaasanaaphala
vilakshaNatvaat, upaasanaa is not the taatparyam or the central theme
of Vedanta.<br>
<br>
Next Shankara gives a technical reason - The entire Veda is divided
into two portions - karma kaaNDa (upaasana is included) and
j~naanakaaNDa (Vedanta). The first part is analyzed by Jaimini in his
puurva-miimaa.nsaa suutraaNi which begins =93atha ataH dharma
jij~naasaa=94. Vedanta is analyzed by Vyasa in this brahmasuutra which
begins with =93atha ataH brahma jij~naasaa=94. Now Shankara
raises a question - whether all karma and upaasanaa should be analyzed
in Veda puurva or Veda anta? It should be analyzed only in the
puurva kaaNDa. Because karma or upaasanaa produces dharma or
puNyam and hence everything connected with Dharma should be analyzed
in the puurvakaaNDa. If Vedanta deals with moksha and if moksha is
upaasanaa phalam, and if Vedanta also deals with upaasanaa, there is
no reason to separate it from puurvakaanDa and it should be covered
under puurva-miimaa.nsaa under dharma jij~naasaa. Hence Shankara
says Vedanta would not have become a separate part of the Veda.
It would have come under karma kaanDa itself and would have come under
jaiminii suutra-s. Vyasacharya chose to write a separate suutra for
the Uttara-miimaa.nsaa only because it does not come under karma or
upaasanaa. Only because Vedanta has nothing to do with Dharma
(karma)- It is dealing with aatmaa which is<br>
<br>
anyatra dharmaat, anyatra adharmaat, anyatra asmaat kR^itaa akR^itaat
anyatra bhuutaat cha bhavyaat cha yat tat pashyati tat vida || (KaTha.
Up. 1-2-14)<br>
-It does not deal with dharma or adharma, karma or akarma, and past
and future - that is to be known.<br>
<br>
yadaa pashyaH pashyate rukmavarNam<br>
kartaaram iishaM purushaM brahmayonim<br>
tadaa vidvaan puNyapaape vidhuuya<br>
niranjanaH paramam saamyam upaiti || (MuNDaka. Up. 3-1-3)<br>
<br>
Vedanta deals with vidvaan who renounces both puNyam and paapam -
which are karma upaasanaa phalam. In the Gita Krishna says - sarva
dharmaan parityajya maam ekam sharaNam vraja - Give up all the karma
and upaasana which comes under dharma. (actually no achaarya advises
one to give up karma - what is advised is to give the kartR^itva
bhaava or notion of the doership - His will, will be done).
Therefore moksha is dharma vilakshaNatvaat. Upaasana is not the
taatparyam of Vedanta. That completes the third argument.
The first argument was moksha cannot be upaasanaa phalam. The
second argument was if moksha is upaasanaa phalam it becomes anityam
or impermanent. The third argument was upaasanaa cannot be the
central theme of Vedanta.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">This completes the third
argument. Now the fourth argument.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
4. Shankara says, brahma upaasanaa itself is not possible. The
question of brahma as the upaasana phalam will arise until one settles
the issue whether one can even do Brahma upaasanaa at all before
settling the issue of Brahman can be obtained as upaasana phalam.
Upanishad clearly says 'tat twam asi' - you are yourself Brahman.
Which means Brahman is not an object at all for upaasana. It is the
upaasaka swaruupam - the very nature of upaasaka, one who does
upaasana. How can the upaasaka Brahman become upaasya Brahman -
kartR^i karma virodhaat ? Subject can never be an object, object
can never be the subject. Therefore nobody can meditate on Brahman.
Therefore Brahman cannot be an object of upaasana - hence the very
basis of the argument of the puurvapakshi has no validity. It is
illogical to talk about Brahma-upaasanaa. The Kena Upanishad clearly
says:<br>
<br>
yat vaachaa nabhyuditam yena vaak abhyudyate |<br>
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upasate ||
[1:5]<br>
<br>
The student asked for Brahman and the teacher very clearly says
whatever you do upaasana upon is not Brahman.<br>
<br>
yat manasaa na manute yena aahuH manaH matam.h .|<br>
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate ||
[1:6]<br>
<br>
yat chakshushhaa na pashyati yena chakshuu.nshhi pashyati |<br>
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate ||
[1:7]<br>
<br>
yat shrotreNa na shR^iNoti yena shrotram idam shrutam.h |<br>
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate ||
[1:8]<br>
<br>
yat praaNena na praaNiti yena praaNaH praNiiyate |<br>
tat eva brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate ||
[1:9]<br>
<br>
Thus it repeats that statement five times indicating the importance of
the statement. It says the object of upaasanaa or meditation cannot be
Brahman - it is anaatma. The meditator is Brahman. When one
cannot even do any upaasanaa on Brahman, where is the question of
Brahma upaasanam producing moksha.<br>
<br>
Thus the fourth argument is Brahma upaasanam is not possible because
brahmanaH avishhayatvaat (Brahman is not an object - it is seeing
the truth as the truth - like seeing rope as a rope and it is not
acquiring, reaching or producing - aatmani atmanaa atmaanam pastyet
- realization of ones own self by oneself in oneself.).</font><br>
<font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">This completes the four
arguments of Shankara that Brahma upaasanaa is not possible and is not
required for moksha. Only knowledge is the solution to the
problem since the problem is caused by adhyaasa or an error in the
vision - To understand the nature of adhyaasa one should go back and
study again the adhyaasa bhaashhyam of Shankara (Ch. III in this
'Notes on Brahmasuutra').</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000">We will try to complete the
discussion on Suutra 4 soon.</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"Times" color=3D"#000000"><br>
</font><font color=3D"#000000">********<br>
Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed
at<br>
<font
face=3D"Times"><u
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/files/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/<br
>
</u></font>for personal study.<br>
<br>
***Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright
protected.***</font><br>
<font color=3D"#000000"></font></div>
<div>-- <br>
K. Sadananda<br>
Code 6323<br>
Naval Research Laboratory<br>
Washington D.C. 20375<br>
Voice
>From Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: japa and contemplation (Re: Sankaravijaya texts - III)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <owner-advaita-l at L...>
--- satish arigela <satisharigela at Y...> wrote:
> while it is true that a sadhaka sees the saguna
> brahman in whatever form he imagines(and worships),
>
> the vision of the deity(saakShaatkaara) can happen
> only if there is
> Ishvara anugraha.It is not like the sadhaka does
> certain
> number of japa or certain amount of meditation to
> make
> the deity manifest before the sadhaka.
True. But, my explanation of the difference between
upAsana and shravaNa, manana and nididhyAsana was not
meant to lower the importance of Ishvara anugraha. On
reading it again, I realized that my post gave an
impression that upAsana is something "procedural"
while shravaNa is different. Thanks for pointing that
out. But, that was not my intention. In fact without
the anugraha of Ishvara, shravaNa, etc cannot yield
any fruit. The anugraha is an automatic result of the
sAdhana chatushhTaya.
On the other hand, Ishvara anugraha does not come in
any random way. People who deserve it get it. And
people who perform karma with faith and devotion are
the ones who deserve it. This has also been emphasized
by Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati.
Rama
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 14:10:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 03
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 03 :
avirOdhitaya karma nAvidyAm vinivartayEt |
vidyAvidyAm nihantyEva tejas timira san.ghavat ||
Translation :
Not being opposed to ignorance, action(karma) cannot
destroy ignorance.
Vidyam(Supreme Knowledge) alone can destroy ignorance, just
as light(tejas) alone can dispel dense darkness.
Explanation :
In this verse, bhagavatpAda begins to explain avidya.
In the previous verse, he had stated that jnAna alone leads
to mOksha. Continuing along the same line, herin he
explains
the purpose of mOksha. What is mOksha in advaita? Answer :
The removal of avidya that keeps us in the dark about our
true selves. Hence, jnAna = mOksha = removal of avidya.
Having said that, what is it that can remove avidya?
Can works such as "good" deeds, rituals, chanting, singing
etc. remove avidya. "Certainly not" says ShrI Shankara.
Why not? Because all works are in the realm of avidya.
Because they are in the realm of avidya, they cannot remove
avidya. So, what is it that can remove avidya?
"Vidya" he declares. Vidya herein refers to the Supreme
Knowledge of One-ness i.e. Brahma-vidya, which alone can
remove avidya. Why? Because it alone is not in the realm
of avidya and is **directly opposed** to avidya. Only
light
can dispel darkness because only luminosity is opposed to
darkness. Here, avidya is likened to dense darkness.
NOTE : ShrI Shankara is not condemning action per se.
But, he is saying that action **in the realm of avidya**
cannot dispel avidya as it is not opposed to avidya.
A Self-realized person also "acts" but does so without the
sense of duality. Also, the Shankaran tradition maintains
that until one takes up sannyasam, one has to perform the
required actions. One cannot use statements against karma
to
give up nitya karma-s. That is the sole privilege of
sannyasins and jIvanmukta-s only.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 14:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 03
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
--- Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at y...> wrote:
> |Hari AUM|
>
> Atma Bodha Verse 03 :
> avirOdhitaya karma nAvidyAm vinivartayEt |
> vidyAvidyAm nihantyEva tejas timira san.ghavat ||
>
> Translation :
> Not being opposed to ignorance, action(karma) cannot
> destroy ignorance.
> Vidyam(Supreme Knowledge) alone can destroy ignorance, just
> as light(tejas) alone can dispel dense darkness.
>
This light - darkness analogy is very nice because darkness is absence
of light and not an entity by itself. When light comes in darkness
disappears in that instant; and one can not say from where it came from
before and to where it went now. avidyA is like that.
------------
Not related, but when I see the words "dense darkness" I am reminded of
the beautiful verse from AchArya's shivaanandalahari.
eko vaarijabaandhavaH kshitinabho vyaaptaM tamomaNDalaM
bhitvaa lochanagocharo.api bhavati tvaM koTisuuryaprabhaH |
vedyaH kinna bhavasyaho ghanataraM kiidR^igbhavenmattama\-
statsarvaM vyapaniiya me pashupate saakshaat prasanno bhava || 58||
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 04
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 04 :
paricchinna ivAjnAnAt tannASe sati kevala: |
svayam prakASate hiAtmA meghApAyEamSumAniva ||
Translation :
This Self appears to be finite due to ignorance(ajnAna);
when ignorance is destroyed, the Self which is
self-luminous
is known, just as the radiance of the Sun is known after
the clouds pass away.
Explanation :
This verse is in continuation of the theme of the prior
verses; namely, the explanation of Atman, jnAna, avidya
etc.
To sum, bhagavatpAda has so far taught us that mOksha is
the
prime goal of life, mokshA can be attained by jnAna alone
and that jnAna leads to removal of avidya. But, what is
avidya?
Avidya is the primal ignorance of the jIva which thinks
of itself as finite, mortal etc. not realizing its true
Self
(Atman) which is infinite, immortal etc. How should this
avidya be removed? Not by any external agent. In verse 03,
ShrI Shankara mentioned that "karma" cannot remove avidya.
Here, he says that the Atman is self-luminous, meaning, the
Atman is already aware of its true Self. This is a key
concept.
No external agent can reveal the Self because the
Self is self-conscious and self-luminous. So, what prevents
it from knowing itself? Avidya. The ontological status of
avidya and its locus will be dealt with in other works of
greater philosophical depth. For now, it suffices to think
of avidya as that which prevents the jIva from realizing
its true Self(Atman).
Continuing with the earlier simile, in which avidya is
likened to darkness, here ShrI Shankara offers another
simile where avidya is likened to the darkness cast by the
clouds that obstruct sun light. What are these clouds?
We shall see later that these clouds are nothing but mAyA.
Once these clouds(mAya) go away, the darkness cast by them
(avidya) also vanishes and lets us bask in the radiant sun
light(brahman).
PS : I have added a couple of extra verses today because
they are on a related theme and naturally go together.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:58:37 -0400
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 04
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:22:42 -0700, Vivek Anand Ganesan
<v_ganesan at Y...> wrote:
> |Hari AUM|
>
>Atma Bodha Verse 04 :
>paricchinna ivAjnAnAt tannASe sati kevala: |
>svayam prakASate hiAtmA meghApAyEamSumAniva ||
>
>Translation :
>This Self appears to be finite due to ignorance(ajnAna);
>when ignorance is destroyed, the Self which is
>self-luminous
>is known, just as the radiance of the Sun is known after
>the clouds pass away.
>
>Explanation :
> This verse is in continuation of the theme of the prior
>verses; namely, the explanation of Atman, jnAna, avidya
>etc.
>To sum, bhagavatpAda has so far taught us that mOksha is
>the
>prime goal of life, mokshA can be attained by jnAna alone
>and that jnAna leads to removal of avidya. But, what is
>avidya?
>
> Avidya is the primal ignorance of the jIva which thinks
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>of itself as finite, mortal etc. not realizing its true
>Self
>(Atman) which is infinite, immortal etc. How should this
>avidya be removed? Not by any external agent. In verse 03,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>ShrI Shankara mentioned that "karma" cannot remove avidya.
>Here, he says that the Atman is self-luminous, meaning, the
>Atman is already aware of its true Self. This is a key
>concept.
>
> No external agent can reveal the Self because the
>Self is self-conscious and self-luminous. So, what prevents
>it from knowing itself? Avidya. [...]
We have just witnessed a discussion between Nanda and Jaladhar about what
is external and what is not. Maybe what I am writing goes tangential to the
purpose of this verse of Atmabodh, but I could not help noticing a few
things that have been the object of my thoughts lately.
It can be inferred from logic that
1) I am not the body, mind or nescience of deep sleep. If I were any of
these, I would always experience whichever one of these I am in all the
three states i.e. I do not experience any of these three states
continuously and therefore must be different from them.
2) From 1), I can deduce that I am a witness of these three states and that
I am conscious of them as well - I am Witness-Consciousness.
3) This witness-consciousness having no locus i.e. in the body or mind,
must exist somewhere (because it is a fact that it is). I am using a piece
of logical reasoning that I came across in Tarka Sangraha - Annambhatta is
stating that padArtha-s are only 7 and in defence against the opponent's
objection as to what if the 8th exists, he replies that the "*absence* of
the 8th padArtha pervades all seven (padArtha-s)" (From the very first
chapter). Similarly, using the same logic, if "I" exist without any locus,
then "I" must exist everywhere - it must be omnipresent.
4) Objects of the waking, dream or deep sleep states necessitate a witness-
consciousness that cognizes them. However, being themselves devoid of
consciousness, it must be that the objects like body, mind etc. are
pervaded by consciousness (or become capable of cognition). To cite an
example, if I see a candle lighted in front of me, it must be the all
pervading locus-less witness-consicousness that cognizes both the candle
and the mind that undergoes the modification (vritti) becoming aware of
things like shape, light, colour etc, and not the mind or the intellect
that impart this knowledge to "I".
It can be inferred, therefore, from logic that there is no such thing like
external or internal and that to even talk of such a thing is illogical, if
we are to be consistent with 1), 2), 3) or 4).
This I know to be my present nature - by what other agency (there being
none other than my witness consciousness) can I possibly know that the
objects of my consciousness are my very Self - as the Shruti says? How am I
in avidyA? I feel that this is gravitating, without really applying the
strict rules of the system, towards the duality of sAnkhya where the
consciousness of the purusha exists side by side with prakR^iti. But even
then, I don't know, apart from trusting an object of my perception like
Guru or Ishvara or Veda, that I am All This. My nature is not even enquiry -
that itself being absent in deep sleep - should I think of "enquiring"
into my Self.
How, then, can the Self be known different from this and how is this avidyA
removed and All is known as Me and Me as All ("I" am placing faith in the
words of our Gurus when I say this).
My idea is not to know anything by reasoning alone but actually to enquire
how is it to be known that my present state is one of avidyA and that
obejcts don't exist (as I pointed out that I am the eternal subject and
hence different from the objects cognized by me).
I would appreciate any clarifications and/or pointers to flaw in the logic
used.
thanks
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:36:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 05
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 05 :
ajnAnakalusham jIvam jnAnAbhyAsAdvi nirmalam |
krtvA jnAnam svayam naSyet jalam katakareNuvat ||
Translation :
Stained by ignorance(ajnAna), the jIva should purify itself
by the constant pursuit of jnAna.
Once jnAna is attained, the jIva self-destructs, just as
the kataka nut dissolves after cleansing turpid water.
Explanation :
This verse picks up from the previous verse on the
theme of avidya and the jIva. So far, we have seen how
jnAna
destroys avidya and how that this "destruction" cannot be
brought about by any external agent. But, the removal of
avidya has to be brought about by someone/something. Here,
bhagavatpAda states that it is the jIva that should do
this.
First of all, what is the jIva? The jIva cannot be an
external entity to the Atman because ShrI Shankara has
clearly stated already that no external agent can bring
about the destruction of avidya. Here, ShrI Shankara
defines
the jIva as nothing but the Atman "contaminated" by ajnAna
( ignorance or avidya ). Hence, the jIva must attempt to
remove this contamination by the constant pursuit of jnAna.
OK, fine. The jIva pursues jnAna and eventually attains
it. Then what? Then, the jIva ( along with avidya ) is
destroyed. What this means is that the jIva loses its
ignorance and realizes its true Self(Atman). So, what is
destroyed here is jIva-ness, which is the
ignorance(avidya).
This process is similar to the process of cleaning turpid
water in India. The powder of the kataka nut is mixed with
the turpid water. This powder aggregates the impurities
which sink to the bottom due to their weight, leaving clean
water on top. Having accomplished its task, the powder also
disappears( dissolves and binds with the impurities ).
Hence, the jIva brings about its own destruction only to
reveal its true Self(atman) to Itself!
NOTES on themes
---------------
We have seen a persistent theme in the verses discussed
so far. After touching upon the qualifications and utility,
ShrI Shankara dwelled upon avidya, its definition,
its removal, the method of its removal and the agent of its
removal. From the next verse onwards, we shall see other
topics addressed. In the end, there will be a summary and
a terse re-statement of the concepts presented so far.
The method employed adheres to the three fold subject
matter of advaita. Namely,
1. Brahman alone is Real
2. The world is un-Real
3. The true Self(atman) of the jIva is nothing but Brahman.
ShrI bhagavatpAda has started with 3) first. Because,
this
is the most immediate knowledge, knowledge of one's Self.
This is akin to the "bottoms-up" approach. This can also
be likened to the "inside-out" approach. After teaching
us about our true Self, he would now address the nature of
the world and finally conclude with the nature of Brahman
(Ultimate Reality). In the end, he would summarize all
three
views to state the advaitic concept, The Ultimate Reality
is noting but our True Self.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 04
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 17:18:32
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>Similarly, using the same logic, if "I" exist without any locus,
>then "I" must exist everywhere - it must be omnipresent.
I've no idea what made you come to this conclusion. Please explain.
>4) Objects of the waking, dream or deep sleep states necessitate a
> >witness-
>consciousness that cognizes them. However, being themselves devoid of
>consciousness, it must be that the objects like body, mind etc. are
>pervaded by consciousness (or become capable of cognition). To cite an
>example, if I see a candle lighted in front of me, it must be the all
>pervading locus-less witness-consicousness that cognizes both the candle
>and the mind that undergoes the modification (vritti) becoming aware of
>things like shape, light, colour etc, and not the mind or the intellect
>that impart this knowledge to "I".
>It can be inferred, therefore, from logic that there is no such thing >like
>external or internal and that to even talk of such a thing is >illogical,
>if we are to be consistent with 1), 2), 3) or 4).
If you/consciousness were omni-present, then you would not be
perceiving/knowing only what you know - you would know whatever goes on in
the world - you would know whatever other people experience too. But is that
normal experience? You only know what your senses/mind present to you.
One minor rule in philosophy - never adopt a metaphysical stance without
reconciling it with psychology. The way lies from psychology to metaphysics
and not the other way round. If you study Shankara's dialectic you'll find
that this is where he catches most rival schools - he hammers them in
psychology - like the anatta or the kshanikavaada or vijnaanavaada of the
Buddhists. Most of these theories fail to reconcile with normal
psychological experience and hence are flawed.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 18:08:04
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>No there is only one self. Whether it is perceived as true or false
>depends on the perceiver. It is there, in the perception, that the value
>true or false resides. Removal of ignorance means a change in perspective
>not the creation or destruction of anything. Perhaps a picture might
>help.
If what you say is true then the immortal has become mortal and has to
become immortal again by saadhana.
"The immortal cannot become mortal. Similarly the mortal cannot become
immortal. The mutation of one's nature will take place in no way
whatsoever" - Gaudapaadiya Kaarikaa - Alaatashanti Praakarnaa - verse 7.
Again what's "nature" : "By the word nature is to be understood that
which is permanently acquired or is intrinsic, instinctive,
non-produced or unchanging in its character" - GK - AP - verse 9.
Also : "No soul ever came under any veil. They are by nature pure as
well as illumined and free from the very beginning. Thus being endowed
with the power of knowledge, they are said to know" - GK - AP - verse 99.
So you cannot change from mortality to immortality - the suffering jiva
cannot change to the blissful Atman by removing avidhya. The Atman
is already liberated. The logic involved here is much more complex.
Your pictogram below only displays the "common sense" view. Even here
it is flawed. Because after liberation there's neither A nor B - it is
advaita - non-duality due to ananya - non-difference.
> Before Moksha:
>
> +---+
> | A | B
> +---+
>
>
> After Moksha:
>
> +-------+
> | A B |
> +-------+
>
>A and B represent two putative "objects". The box, the boundaries of
>"self".
>What changes after the dawn of jnana is only the notion of where the
>boundaries of self are. (Or to be more accurate the notion that there are
>no boundaries to the self.)
>The relevance to our current discussion is that Bhakti is pure love. It
>is emotional not intellectual. It is also free of intention.
>Bhakti in it's purest form is love bordering on obsession. (And
>sometimes not at all quiet I might add.) A Bhakta cannot (and does not
>want to) do anything except think of God.
Whether it is emotion or intention - the question is : is it karma?
The world is divided into the "you" and "not you" - subject and
object. As Shankara says they are opposed to each other like light
and darkness.
Since you're saying that bhakti is love - then it begs the question :
love for whom?
1. If it is love for yourself then we've to wonder whether it will lead
to abhimaana. But again if it is true love of yourself without any notion of
an ego then it is no different from atma vichaaram itself.
2. If it is not love for yourself then it means love for the non-you -
duality. And for you to connect to all that's not you you can only use
the faculties available to man - the mind, senses and body. Usage of
any of these faculties also involves karma - also to grasp for the
external either as a physical or a mental object involves duality.
Emotion is also only an object of the sense of feeling. When you're
sad or happy you feel it - and all that you feel or conscious of,
cannot be you - karma and duality.
3. Ofcourse there can be the third option of love for itself - there's
neither subject nor object but only love - but that's liberation itself
- but since you're a jiva who's aspiring for liberation that is not an
option for you.
Sada posted from the Brahma Sutras yesterday. Read it carefully.
You've also said that if atma vichaaram is also but karma then why
not bhakti? Because it is externally directed and according to
mayavaada such effort cannot bear fruit. Also my prescribed means
is not Atma Vichaaram itself - I'm actually asking you to keep
quiet - keep still - and when the agitation of the mind and
body has died down, let "reality/the true you" take over.
"As the movement of a firebrand appears to be straight or crooked
so is it the vibration of consciousness that appears to be the
knower and known" - GK - AP - verse 47.
"This duality, possessed of subject and object is a mere vibration
of connsiousness. And consciousness is objectless and hence it is
declared to be eternally without relations" - GK - AP - verse 72.
>You're a conscious being. But are you
>directly aware of consciousness external to you - like the consciousness of
>other people? You can hear what people say and infer that they too have
>consciousness/thoughts - but you cannot directly be conscious of their
>consciousness.
>If I can perceive and infer that consciousness then that's good enough. I
>just have to check my perception and inference to make sure they are
>pramana and not invalid. Based on your posts I have enough data to
>reasonably believe you are conscious despite never having met you.
But we're not talking about pramaanas are we? We're talking about
"brahmavid brahmaiya bhavathi" - which is beyond pramaanas. I can see
that my argument about the inability of the individual consciousness
to grasp external consciousness, is totally lost on you.
It is not so much as you yourself who's the Atman. A part of you -
a part of the "I" - your essence - is the changeless Atman. Liberation
is to find that unchangable in yourself. It can be done only by neti,
neti - atma vichaaram - initially and later by abiding in yourself. If
you have that much control over your body and mind, you can directly
take the latter path.
Jaladhar I've no wish to pursue this discussion any further because
for the last four posts I've only been repeating the same thing which
you're not able to grasp. Jnaana is not mere common sense - it is subtle
abstract reasoning - it is literally almost a physical effort by
which avidhya is known. You are obviously not ready to learn. It is not
that you lack intelligence - if it was so I wouldn't bothered to sustain
this discussion for such a long time. But you've a mental block which
is preventing your mind from opening up. Maybe another time.
Anyway thanks for helping me think about this issue. I've written a
short article on this - jnaana and karma in Advaita - which I'll
post on both this list as well as the Advaitin list.
Also know that I wasn't arguing simply to defeat you in debate - if you
can obtain release by bhakti which you seem naturally inclined towards,
no one will be more happier than me.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Notes on BSB I-i-1-4J
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 21:19:49
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
>(actually no achaarya advises one to give up karma - what is advised is >to
>give the kartR^itva bhaava or notion of the doership - His will, >will be
>done).
This has to be well understood. If you're not the doer in reality, then
where's the question of you ever relinquishing the notion of doership?
You as you are - you're not the Atman. The jiva is under the impression that
it is the doer. But the awareness part of the jiva is the changeless atman
which is only the witness and not the doer. As long as your identity doesn't
fully abide in the witness you'll always be the doer and karma is
inevitable.
Sadhana like "do everything but give up the notion of doership" or "give up
the results of one's action" is basically to kill the sense of doership. But
this sadhana has no end in itself and applicable only to the jiva - for the
Atman - the true you - is never to doer. Sadhana in all cases - whether
chanting mantras or control of the mind or bhakti or selfless service - is
only an indirect method to silence the mind/kill the ego and make you aware
of your own self. Atma Vichaara or the practice of neti, neti - is more
direct than all these.
But the teaching of silence and stillness taught by Dakshinamurti and Ramana
Maharishi - is the direct method where you can intuit your true self.
In his commentary on the Chaandogya Upanishad Shankara tells of a Vedic
teacher who kept silent when repeatedly asked by a student for an exposition
of brahma vidya, but finally said : "Verily I'm telling you, but you're not
listening! Brahman is silence"!
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 20:31:59 -0400
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 04
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Ashish Chandra <ramkisno at H...>
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 13:42:27 -0400, nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...>
wrote:
>>Similarly, using the same logic, if "I" exist without any locus,
>>then "I" must exist everywhere - it must be omnipresent.
>
>I've no idea what made you come to this conclusion. Please explain.
>
The idea is this: I take a piece of paper which I call "All There Is" for
example's sake. On that paper, I mark a point X and say that I was here
when I went to sleep. I wake up having gone through deep sleep and try to
mark where I was when I experienced deep sleep. I have no idea where to put
the mark now. Something that exists but has no locus - where would you put
it? I have already said that I used the logical approach that Annambhatta
has used. I don't really wish to quote him but anyway, for the sake of
example, how old do you think the *lack of knowledge* of this email is in
you before you actually read it? I would say infinitely old. Similar
approach would put me everywhere if I exist but without locus. I exist
everywhere as consciousness as that is my nature - no one can deny this.
>>4) Objects of the waking, dream or deep sleep states necessitate a
>> >witness-
>>consciousness that cognizes them. However, being themselves devoid of
>>consciousness, it must be that the objects like body, mind etc. are
>>pervaded by consciousness (or become capable of cognition). To cite an
>>example, if I see a candle lighted in front of me, it must be the all
>>pervading locus-less witness-consicousness that cognizes both the candle
>>and the mind that undergoes the modification (vritti) becoming aware of
>>things like shape, light, colour etc, and not the mind or the intellect
>>that impart this knowledge to "I".
>
>>It can be inferred, therefore, from logic that there is no such thing
>like
>>external or internal and that to even talk of such a thing is >illogical,
>>if we are to be consistent with 1), 2), 3) or 4).
>
>If you/consciousness were omni-present, then you would not be
>perceiving/knowing only what you know - you would know whatever goes on in
>the world - you would know whatever other people experience too. But is
that
>normal experience? You only know what your senses/mind present to you.
>
Who is this "I" that claims to know what it does - that was my point. I
have already said that I know that I am not the body, mind or intellect by
direct experience. The knowledge of what goes on in the world that exists
and does not exist is momentary - it cannot be said to truly be. This too
is from direct experience as the world, with all its objects is negated in
deep sleep of which I am a witness. The knowledge grasped by the mind,
discriminated by the intellect and presented by the senses which themselves
are not permanent - how is that of any value to me? I am not avoiding your
question but tell me, the knowledge of many minds and many intellects,
whether they be mine or others', is ultimately not real because the
receptacles of that knowledge, the respective intellects, themselves are
ephemeral, and are not my nature (being only present in two of the states
of which I am a witness). What do I care about what is not my nature? I
repeat - negating my intellect, the receptacle of the knowledge of objects,
I negate its contents (as untrue) as well. Consciousness being the cause of
all knowledge in the first place, it is not viable to admit that it is
unaware of itself (so what other people know or do not know is already
known to me as I am their cause). The intellect of which it becomes a
content of can paint it in any colour it pleases - it is irrelevant to the
cause. Fire does not care whether it is used to cook food or create light.
>One minor rule in philosophy - never adopt a metaphysical stance without
>reconciling it with psychology. The way lies from psychology to metaphysics
>and not the other way round.
[...]
>If you study Shankara's dialectic you'll find
>that this is where he catches most rival schools - he hammers them in
>psychology - like the anatta or the kshanikavaada or vijnaanavaada of the
>Buddhists. Most of these theories fail to reconcile with normal
>psychological experience and hence are flawed.
>
The kshanikvaadins, shunyavaadins etc. are defeated because of their
maintenance that knowledge is in the objects, or that knowledge, along with
the objects, is momentary. As you probably have read, there are logical
problems with these stances i.e. if everything be momentary, including the
intellect that is an object itself, then who will grasp the knowledge at
the time it becomes available - intellect itself is not there to grasp the
knowledge since it is momentary. Who is there to raify a shunya if the
knowledge and objects are all negated? This is where Shankara attacks these
doctrines AFAIK. I probably don't know the ABCD of Buddhist thought but I
fail to see how this is a psychological attack only and not metaphysical?
Shankara is only refuting these doctrines because of logical
inconsistencies vis-a-vis direct experience.
Ok. The purpose of my initial email was to know how am I in avidyA and how
am I to know that there is a thing called liberation. I may have answered
some of my own questions but I would really like someone else to comment. I
hope I have clarified my point Nanda.
ashish
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 04
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 07:06:39
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Ah Ashish, I see that you've progressed from the days you were enquiring
about Praakriti and Purusha.
>Similar approach would put me everywhere if I exist but without locus. >I
>exist everywhere as consciousness as that is my nature - no one can >deny
>this.
You know that I exist - as I'm writing this mail to you. But do you know
where I am? No. So will that lead you to conclude that I exist everywhere?
As a normal man I am bound by space and time. At any point in time I exist
in a particular geographical position. Likewise you too. Though you are able
to identify yourself as something apart from the body/mind/senses, but still
are not able to pin point yourself - that cannot mean that you exist
everywhere - for the simple reason that if you did you'll experience
everything happening everywhere - which is not normal psychological
experience.
Also though you are not able to pinpoint yourself - still you've the
experience of the fact that "you are" and "you exist". And that experience
is only limited to a particular space, right? You've the experience of
yourself only where you are at the moment and not a place 5 miles away from
you.
The fundamental problem is looking at yourself objectively (the Naiyaayikas
are prone to this error because they are logicians - but philosophy is more
than logic). But you're not the object are you - you are the subject whose
existence is self-established and self-proved.
>I have already said that I know that I am not the body, mind or >intellect
>by direct experience.
Do you really know? Can you distinguish yourself apart from thought as they
occur? You only know them when they have passed. Psychology is much more
complex.
>Consciousness being the cause of all knowledge in the first place,
Is that really true? Can consciousness function without the subject which is
conscious and the object which the subject is conscious of? It is an
interlinked chain - remove the subject or object, there can be no
consciousness either. Objects need not only be external physical objects,
they can also be internal mental objects - objects of thoughts.
You can experience this psychologically too - except for deep sleep where
you've no consciousness - is there anytime in the waking or dream state when
you do not experience an object of consciousness? You are always conscious
of something - either an external physical object or an object of thought.
Even in so called "self consciousness" - your ego becomes the object of
consciousness.
>it is not viable to admit that it is unaware of itself (so what other
> >people know or do not know is already known to me as I am their cause).
As said above - first you've to prove that consciousness can exist in itself
apart from the subject and object, before we can even think about it
cognizing itself.
Philosophy is more than logic - complement your intellectual effort with
meditation and psycho analysis (atma vichaaram).
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
Subject: Re: Notes on BSB I-i-1-4J
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 14:57:16
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda at h...>
>From: nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...>
>
>>(actually no achaarya advises one to give up karma - what is advised is
>> >to
>>give the kartR^itva bhaava or notion of the doership - His will, >will be
>>done).
>
>This has to be well understood. If you're not the doer in reality, then
>where's the question of you ever relinquishing the notion of doership?
Yes nanda from absolute point - even giving up has to be given up!
you are right if not really a doer in reality there is no question of giving
up either. That is why I used the word 'notion of doer-ship" - It is the
notion in the mind that he or I am the doer. If one has does not have that
notion what you say is right. But if one has that notion - that arises
because one has already a preconceived notion that one is the body, mind and
intellect (adhyaasa). One can giveup the notion. Giving up the notion of
doer ship is all what contains as the essence of in the Karma yoga. Yoga
itself is notional for the one who thinks he is bound and need liberation.
This bhaashya, commentaries and the teaching of achaarya-s are only to those
who have those notions. If those who do not have these notions, this is
usless. Hence these teaching and even the inquiry is only those notional
minds which have these notions of kartR^itva bhaava (underline bhaava) and
bhoktR^itva bhaava.
>
>You as you are - you're not the Atman. The jiva is under the impression
>that
>it is the doer. But the awareness part of the jiva is the changeless atman
>which is only the witness and not the doer. As long as your identity
>doesn't
>fully abide in the witness you'll always be the doer and karma is
>inevitable.
>
True to a large extent but the intensity or purification process or the
egotistical attitude varies with sadhana. There is gradation in sadhana not
in realization - that is how satvik the mind is!
>Sadhana like "do everything but give up the notion of doership" or "give up
>the results of one's action" is basically to kill the sense of doership.
I will use the word sublimating the sense of doership rather killing it!
But
>this sadhana has no end in itself and applicable only to the jiva - for the
>Atman - the true you - is never to doer.
In a way you are right - yet it is like preparing the bed and preparing
oneself to sleep. By action or will I cannot go to sleep. Yet all those
actions are condusive for me to have a sound sleep - sleep for me and sound
for others!
Sadhana in all cases -
>whether
>chanting mantras or control of the mind or bhakti or selfless service - is
>only an indirect method to silence the mind/kill the ego and make you aware
>of your own self. Atma Vichaara or the practice of neti, neti - is more
>direct than all these.
Nanda one has to be very careful as you suggeted. the directness of a given
appraoch depends on the qualification of the sadhak. If you read Geeta -
Krishan exhaults karma in karma yoga, bhakti in bhakti yoga and j~nana in
j~naana yoga. Which one is superior to other depends on to whom the
teaching is. What is so called direct path is no more applicable for the
one who can not sit calmly in one place. Mental purity is very important
for any knowledge to take place. Hence all the yoga-s are important in their
realm depending on sadhak.
>
>But the teaching of silence and stillness taught by Dakshinamurti and
>Ramana
>Maharishi - is the direct method where you can intuit your true self.
True only to those who can direct their mind in way it was taught - read
Arjuna question and Krishna's answer. chanchalm hi manas krishNa --- and
Krishna's answer to it where vairagya is emphasized as pre-requisite.
>In his commentary on the Chaandogya Upanishad Shankara tells of a Vedic
>teacher who kept silent when repeatedly asked by a student for an
>exposition
>of brahma vidya, but finally said : "Verily I'm telling you, but you're not
>listening! Brahman is silence"!
But why is that student not listening to the silence he was teaching. It is
like my attending a quantum mechancs class where even though I know all the
alphabets, I do not understand the alphabets used to teach that science!
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>================================================================================
>"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
>
>To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
>listserv at l... with
>body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
>If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>================================================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 15:50:17
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "Ravishankar Venkatraman" <owner-advaita-l at L...>
I am sorry for not replying earlier. I have problems accessing hotmail when
I travel.
Vidyasankar wrote:
>Markandeya Samhita is a text that no one has really seen. It is said to
>be from the Brahmanda Purana, but I haven't found any such section in
I have seen a few verses from Markandaya Samhita and not the entire text. As
you say, it may not available in full. The tradition of Sankara getting five
lingas from Lord Shiva is seen in Markandeya Samhita and Siva Rahasya.
Markandeya Samhita says that he got it in Kailasa, whereas Siva Rahasyam
says that he got it from Kasi Viswanatha.
Thanks,
Ravi
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 12:46:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: BGS <owner-advaita-l at L...>
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 12:14:18 -0400, Ravishankar Venkatraman
<sunlike at H...> wrote:
>I have seen a few verses from Markandaya Samhita and not the entire text.
As you say, it may not available in full. >
Markanteya samhita contains 100 khandas. Events in Sankara's life is
narrated in the 72nd khanda(7th and 8th parispandas). Markanteya Samhita
was first published in Telugu script in the Kalarathnakaram Press, Madras
in 1897. Manuscript copies of this work are found in the Oriental
Institute Library - University of Mysore(catalogue of Sanskrit
Manuscripts - S.No. 18179 )and in the Adyar Manuscripts Library (Sri
Sankara Bhagavatpadacarya - A.Kuppuswami, 1991, Pub. by S.Radhakrishnan,
Chennai).
BGS
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Notes on BSB I-i-1-4J
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 17:42:23
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Sada, I wasn't contesting your views - simply adding to them.
>Hence all the yoga-s are important in their
>realm depending on sadhak.
But still given that there's a truth which is only you and it is changeless
- so all effort involving change can only be the anti-thesis of it. Yes they
may indirectly approach the truth but cannot align with it. So the saadhana
which complements the changeless is the best way.
I agree with Gaudapaada that the teaching has to cater to people with
varying levels of intellect - but he's careful not to place them all on the
same level - there're the inferior and the superior paths. Because if we
were to conclude that all are the same, then how can people even aspire for
the better way? Saying that "everything is equally good" they'll only stick
to the way which is natural to them and will not go beyond it. Karma,
bhakti, jnaana - the focus should move progressively onwards and try to
level with the goal. Yes there are things which come natural to us - but
we're not talking about preferences for food or clothes - we're talking
about moksham where the goal is immortality - superhuman effort is needed.
So if certain ways aren't natural, efforts should be doubled to make them
natural.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 14:12:42 -0400
Subject: Emotions and advaita
Sender: owner-advaita-l at b...
From: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at h...>
Often, in the company of those who are fond of advaita, one is left
with the impression that there is no room for emotions in path of
jnAna. While emotions such as anger, fear, anxiety, and so on are
certainly a hindrance, there is one emotion that is NOT a hindrance.
Rather it is a help. And it is pure, selfless love, love without
a motive. And this is exactly what bhakti is. It is not absolutely
necessary to love a particular God but it is generally the case.
Even if one is not inclined to love a particular God, we see that
many great advaitins in the past have shown immense bhakti to
the Guru. Guru and Ishvara are, in fact, nondifferent.
As a slight digression, even modern research has shown that what
is now being called "emotional intelligence" is more important
that mere IQ in determining how intelligent a person is. Skills such
as empathy (awareness of others' feelings, needs, and concerns),
leveraging diversity, social skills, communication, working in a
team, etc. are far more valuable than what are traditionally called
cognitive skills, for example, technical skills. Technical skills
alone do not ensure one is successful in career. The so called
"soft" skills (emotional intelligence) become an important factor.
This does not mean that success in advaita can be treated like
success in career. But it may be useful to make the point that
advaita is not a purely intellectual exercise, although it does
demand a higher involvement of the intellect than other disciplines.
When intellectual strength is combined with emotional strength, which
also includes self-control and keeping harmful emotions in check apart
from selfless devotion, it is more effective.
Anand
================================================================================
"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
To unsubscribe from ADVAITA-L please send an e-mail to
listserv at l... with
body of the message containing SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L
If you need any other help please contact listmaster at a...
>From "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 17:01:36 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Main Server is down
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
Hard disk of the main server crashed and it will probably take
another week before it is up and running. Till then:
Please send your messages to
advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
and you can look at current archives at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l/messages/
Complete archives at
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita
If you any questions, please send to
advaita-l-owner at yahoogroups.com
Thank
>From "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:53:33 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Main Server Down
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
(even though I saw this on archives, I did not get a copy of it at
all, that is why I am sending this again, sorry if you got it twice)
Hard disk of the main server crashed and it will probably take
another week before it is up and running. Till then:
Please send your messages to
advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
and you can look at current archives at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l/messages/
Complete archives at
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita
If you any questions, please send to
advaita-l-owner at yahoogroups.com
Thank you.
Ravi
>From "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:58:50 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Membership out of sync
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
The list on YahooGroups is based on the member database I checked out
on May 17th (with some +s and some -s). If you are receiving this e-
mail by error, let me know, I will unsubscribe you.
Sorry for the
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 14:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 06
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 06 :
samsAra: svapnatulyOhi rAgadveshAdhi san.kula: |
svakAle satyavadbhAti prabOdhe satyasadbhavet ||
Translation :
This world(samsAra:) is like a dream, filled with
likes and dislikes.
While dreaming, the dream appears to be real; after
awakening from the dream it is known to be un-real.
Explanation :
With this verse, bhagavatpAda explains the nature of
the
world and how we relate to it. The world that we
experience
is samsAra, it is the "world" that is perceived by us in
our
waking state. This "world" is "felt" through our senses,
is conditioned by the likes and dislikes of our ego
and is cognized by our mind to yield our perception of the
world. This world is declared to be un-real!
Un-real in what sense? In the sense that it is like a
dream which only **appears** to be real but is simply an
illusion created by our mind. This is a very fundamental
issue of advaita ontology and has been fully dealt with in
the more advanced texts ( for starters, please refer to the
series of posts by ShrI Anand Hudli on advaita siddhi in
advaita-l archives ). For now, it is explained as thought
it
were an "illusion".
How do we know that we are dreaming? Can we know that
we are dreaming, while still dreaming? Of course, we
cannot.
It is only upon awakening from the dream can we say, "hey I
was dreaming". Similarly, the non-existence of the world
can
be known only upon awakening from our "dream" i.e. after
the
dawn of jnAna.
PS : Re-sending due to mail server problems.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
>From Ramiya Iyer <ramiya_iyer at y...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 22:20:16 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Advaita-L ADMIN: Membership out of sync
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Ramiya Iyer <ramiya_iyer at y...>
Ravi,
I had unsubscribed from the mail list some time back.
thanks,
Ramiya.
--- Ravi <miinalochanii at y...> wrote:
> The list on YahooGroups is based on the member
> database I checked out
> on May 17th (with some +s and some -s). If you are
> receiving this e-
> mail by error, let me know, I will unsubscribe you.
>
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
>
> Ravi
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 16:27:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 07
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 07 :
tAvatsatyam jagadbhAti shuktikA rajatam yatha |
yAvannjnAyate brahma sarvAdhiShThAnam advayam ||
Translation :
The apparent reality of the phenomenal world is like the
illusion of silver in nacre. This illusion persists until
the realization of the non-dual brahman as the ground of
all existence.
Explanation :
As in Verse 06, the theme here is to
explain the apparent reality of the phenomenal world(herein
referred to as jagam). We have already been told that this
phenomenal world is like a dream. In this verse, the world
is likened to the illusion of silver in nacre. Of course,
once we wake up from the dream ( i.e. spiritual awakening
),
this illusion is lost and we understand Reality ( Brahman )
as non-dual(advayam i.e. without a second ) and as the
ground(adiShThAnam) of all( sarvam ) existence.
Notably, this is the first time in this text that
bhagavatpAda has equated jnAnam with the realizaiton of
Brahman. So far, we have seen jnAnam equated with the
intuition of our own true Self. Now, we see that jnAnam
also
leads to us "waking up" from the dream of this manifold
world and to the realization of the Ultimate Reality.
In fact, these three realizations, namely,
Self-Realization,
Realization of the un-reality of the phenomenal world and
the Realization of the Supreme Reality are not different.
We are being led slowly to the ultimate thesis of Advaita,
Atman is Brahman.
As mentioned in the notes to the previous verse, it is
crucial that the "illusory" nature of the world is
understood correctly. In advaita texts many examples, like
the Snake-and-Rope or Silver-in-nacre are offered to
explain
it. Often, one is led to the conclusion(wrongly) that
advaita is very illusionist (mAya-vAda) etc. In this verse,
ShrI Shankara explains very clearly that the Brahman is
the substratum and the ground of all existence. This is a
very key concept in advaita and worth remembering
throughout
our study of other advaitic concepts like mAya etc.
Explanation of the silver-in-nacre analogy
------------------------------------------
In this verse, ShrI Shankara offers an analogy to the
illusionary nature of the world. He says it is like the
illusion of silver-in-nacre. Let us say you are walking
along the beach early in the morning. Ahead of you, you
spot
a shining object which you identify as a silver coin. Upon
closer inspection, you realize that the shining object you
had seen is in fact an oyster shell, whose smooth and
reflective inner surface had shone brilliantly in the sun
light.
There are three immediate facts in this analogy :
1. The perception of the silver coin is an illusion
i.e. there was no silver coin there at all.
2. There has to be an actual reflective object ( like the
shell ) for the illusion to have taken place.
Otherwise, you would not have perceived it in the first
place.
3. The "illusion" had taken place only in your mind. The
shell was never affected by it i.e. the shell did not
"change" in to the silver coin and then revert back to
being a shell. It was a shell before you saw it, it was
a shell when you mistook it for the silver coin and it
still is a shell after you have realized your error.
Now, let us relate the analogy to the world and
brahman.
1. The perception of the **manifold** world is an illusion
i.e. it is like the silver coin.
2. There is an actual existence which is True Reality i.e.
brahman. Because the illusion of the world has to have
a substratum to rest on just as a movie needs a screen
to play on.
3. This "illusion" i.e. of the perception of the world is
entirely in your mind. Brahman has been, Brahman is
and Brahman shall forever be Brahman. It has never
changed as it is beyond change. It is only up to us to
correct our error.
To introduce some more vedantic terminology, this
"illusion"
or projection of a "false" manifold world on to the non-
dual brahman is called adhyAsa or super-imposition. The
sublation of this super-imposition by the dawn of correct
knowledge(jnAna) is called apavAda. Hence, the method of
advaita is sublation of super-imposition upon the non-dual
brahman which is the ground of all existence ( adhyArOpa
apavAda ).
PS : Apologies for the verbosity. Had to state some
concepts
up front. Havind covered this ground, I shall try to
keep future posts limited.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From Chuck Hillig <chillig at j...>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 18:28:40 -0700
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
From: Chuck Hillig <chillig at j...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>
>>>>Often, in the company of those who are fond of advaita, one is left
>>>>with the impression that there is no room for emotions in path of
>>>>jnAna. While emotions such as anger, fear, anxiety, and so on are
>>>>certainly a hindrance, there is one emotion that is NOT a hindrance.
>>>>Rather it is a help. And it is pure, selfless love, love without
>>>>a motive. And this is exactly what bhakti is. It is not absolutely
>>>>necessary to love a particular God but it is generally the case.
>>>>Even if one is not inclined to love a particular God, we see that
>>>>many great advaitins in the past have shown immense bhakti to
>>>>the Guru. Guru and Ishvara are, in fact, nondifferent.
>>>>
>>>>As a slight digression, even modern research has shown that what
>>>>is now being called "emotional intelligence" is more important
>>>>that mere IQ in determining how intelligent a person is. Skills such
>>>>as empathy (awareness of others' feelings, needs, and concerns),
>>>>leveraging diversity, social skills, communication, working in a
>>>>team, etc. are far more valuable than what are traditionally called
>>>>cognitive skills, for example, technical skills. Technical skills
>>>>alone do not ensure one is successful in career. The so called
>>>>"soft" skills (emotional intelligence) become an important factor.
>>>>
>>>>This does not mean that success in advaita can be treated like
>>>>success in career. But it may be useful to make the point that
>>>>advaita is not a purely intellectual exercise, although it does
>>>>demand a higher involvement of the intellect than other disciplines.
>>>>When intellectual strength is combined with emotional strength, which
>>>>also includes self-control and keeping harmful emotions in check apart
>>>>from selfless devotion, it is more effective.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Anand
>>>
>>>Hi Anand,
>>> Well, isn't it only the illusory ego that considers these emotions
>>> (anger, fear, anxiety) to be hindrances? The
>>> Consciousness-That-You-Are experiences absolutely nothing as a
>>> so-called "hindrance." Fear, sadness, hurt, etc. are not a "problem"
>>> for the Self because, ultimately, It never ever rejects anything of
>>> Itself. These uncomfortable emotions only serve to provide bolstering
>>> for the ego because they're able to strongly reinforce the persistent
>>> illusion of separation ...thus delaying the ego's eventual annihilation
>>> in the face of the Absolute-Vastness-That-Is.
>>>
>>> So, like waves on the "ocean-of-emotion," these emotions will come
>>> and go. In fact, it's part of their nature to simply come and
>>> go; come and go; come and go.....
>
>>> Maybe the best idea is not to be free OF emotions, but, rather to
>>> be free FROM them.
>
>>> With Blessings,
>>> Chuck Hillig
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 02:28:04 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
Emotions:
guNatraya vibhAga yoga of gIta says satva, rajas, tamas are the three
guNas and nirguNa is in the background. This again, is not a static
model of diverse, unrelated feelings. As some people on this list
might already know, what bhagavAn kRSNa explained is a dynamic
process.
pramAda (mada - reckless egotism?), Alasya (laziness), nidra(the idle
sleep here, not deep sleep), bhaya (fear), Ascharya (surprise) etc
are forms of ignorance (tamas).
When one melts this ignorance, it converts into feelings (rajas). If
one does not having rajas, one can not understand the urgency of any
situation. rajas is better than tamas.
After understanding the urgency of a situation, still one can decide
correctly if one depends on rajas alone. Emotion can lead to wrong
decisions. One has to use satva guNa and decides what needs to be
done.
"After doing the work as decided by satva", one discards the fruit of
the action, which leads to nirguNa.
(It must be clear that one can not discard result of action before
the result itself was produced. There was the story of yudhiSThira or
someone who refused to wait till next day to fulfil a promise given,
as that would go against vidhAta because there is no guarantee one
lives till tomorrow.)
Emotion is the second stage in reaching advaita (and advaita is the
fourth stage).
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 02:32:30 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
Typos as usual, please delete the last post:
Emotions:
guNatraya vibhAga yoga of gIta says satva, rajas, tamas are the three
guNas and nirguNa is in the background. This again, is not a static
model of diverse, unrelated feelings. As some people on this list
might already know, what bhagavAn kRSNa explained is a dynamic
process.
pramAda (mada - reckless egotism?), Alasya (laziness), nidra(the idle
sleep here, not deep sleep), bhaya (fear), Ascharya (surprise) etc
are forms of ignorance (tamas).
When one melts this ignorance, it converts into feelings (rajas). If
one does not have rajas, one can not understand the urgency of any
situation. rajas is better than tamas.
After understanding the urgency of a situation, still one can NOT
decide correctly depending on rajas alone. Emotion can lead to wrong
decisions. One has to use satva guNa and decides what needs to be
done.
"After doing the work as decided by satva", one discards the fruit of
the action, which leads to nirguNa.
(It must be clear that one can not discard result of action before
the result itself was produced. There was the story of yudhiSThira or
someone who refused to wait till next day to fulfil a promise given,
as that would go against vidhAta because there is no guarantee one
lives till tomorrow. So one can not promose to offer the result of an
action to bhagavAn before the result is produced.)
Emotion is the second stage in reaching advaita (and advaita is the
fourth stage).
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 03:27:56 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
The type of emotion in bhakti can not be limited to love only. Any
one of the nine major rasAs, or the more complex ones like viraham
(not being able to live without) qualifies the relationship between
the bhakta and the paramAtma.
The path of going from tamas to rajas to satva to nirguNa is eternal.
There is no escape from encountering rajas in the sAdhana, even for
an advaitin. The intellectual process may find nirguNa instantly, but
when this 'liberated' intellect deals with the gross body and mind,
those organs will in turn go through the guNatraya vibhAga yoga and
enjoy or suffer the rajas (nine rasAs) etc. Liberation is not like a
surgery which can be done after administering some anaesthetic so
that one does not feel pain etc. Ofcourse there won't be any more
rajas after liberation.
>From smarur at i...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:56:35 +0700
Subject: VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: smarur at i...
There is a tamil translation of smrithi muktAphalam, known
as vaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam, compiled and translated by
Sri Venkatrama Shastry and Ramamoorthy Shastry, at the behest
of srI KAnchi ParamAchAryAl in 1985.
The details of this book are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------
Title: samkshEpa dharma sAstram
Author: Manjakudi VenkatrAma shAstry et al.
Publishers: Heritage India Educational Trust,
#6, Sanskrit College street,
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004
(Copies can be purchased form
Dr R. Krishnamurthy shAstry,
at this address)
Latest edition: Third, 1990
Pages: XXIII + 416
Price: Rs. 25/-
This book deals with the following topics in detail:
varnAshrama dharma prakaranam (d.p.), Ahnika d.p.,
Asoucha d.p., srAdhdha d.p., thithi nirnaya d.p.,
and prAyaschitha d.p.
------------------------------------------------------
Regards,
Sudhakar _________________________________________________________________________________ Aid Gujarat earthquake relief - Click the link below for IIM A CORE and other community efforts for help
http://www.iitiim.com/WebX?14@@.ee93df4
_________________________________________________________________________________ || http://www.iitiim.com - Networking of Minds
>From "ram" <ram at p...>
Subject: Re: Advaita-L ADMIN: Membership out of sync
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 10:27:30 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "ram" <ram at p...>
Hari Om.
I had unsubscribed earlier but i got a few mails today.Please do unsubscribe
me.
Thanks
Ram
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
To: <advaita-l at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 2:28 AM
Subject: Advaita-L ADMIN: Membership out of sync
> The list on YahooGroups is based on the member database I checked out
> on May 17th (with some +s and some -s). If you are receiving this e-
> mail by error, let me know, I will unsubscribe you.
>
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
>
> Ravi
>
>
>
> bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 02:26:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
--- vaidix at h... wrote:
>
> The type of emotion in bhakti can not be limited to
> love only. Any
> one of the nine major rasAs, or the more complex
> ones like viraham
> (not being able to live without) qualifies the
> relationship between
> the bhakta and the paramAtma.
>
> The path of going from tamas to rajas to satva to
> nirguNa is eternal.
Is there such a path? My understanding is that the
Trinity of the guNa is everpresent inasmuch as where
there is one guNa dominant then the other two are
present; this is very observable in our lives. It is
only when the guNa are in a state of equilibrium that
the movement ceases and there is rest in potential and
NirguNa state realised.
Having said that I welcome the movement in this topic
away from the contemporary use of the word 'emotion'
in English. Really the word means 'without motion'
and what is usually being referred to are the
passions. When we use the word 'love' we are in
similar trouble in English. We need to use words such
as 'prema' and 'lobha' if we are to penetrate this
topic... as well as lookingf at the play of the guNas
of course,
Sri Ram Jai Ram Jai Jai Ram
Kern knight
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Subject: Re: Advaita-L ADMIN: Membership out of sync
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 10:50:54
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
From: "nanda chandran" <vpcnk at H...>
Ravi, can you set my option to the digest mode?
Rgds,
Nandakumar
>From: "Ravi" <miinalochanii at y...>
>Reply-To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
>To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Advaita-L ADMIN: Membership out of sync
>Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:58:50 -0000
>
>The list on YahooGroups is based on the member database I checked out
>on May 17th (with some +s and some -s). If you are receiving this e-
>mail by error, let me know, I will unsubscribe you.
>
>
>Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
>
>Ravi
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>From <advaita-l at yahoogroups.com>
Date: 20 Jun 2001 12:36:22 -0000
From: <advaita-l at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: New file uploaded to advaita-l
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello,
This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the advaita-l
group.
File : /invitation.jpg
Uploaded by : paddy37in at y...
Description : invitation for inauguration
You can access this file at the URL
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l/files/invitation.jpg
To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files
Regards,
paddy37in at y...
>From vpcnk at H...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:22:25 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vpcnk at H...
> Well, isn't it only the illusory ego that considers these emotions
> (anger, fear, anxiety) to be hindrances? The
> Consciousness-That-You-Are experiences absolutely nothing as a
> so-called "hindrance." Fear, sadness, hurt, etc. are not a
"problem"
> for the Self because, ultimately, It never ever rejects anything
of
> Itself.
Though there's a risk of strengthening the ego, still once in a while
it is good to observe things subjectively. When you wake up from a
deep sleep - you are relaxed and peaceful. But after a few minutes you
get involved in your life and in a few hours you are back in the grind
again - the peace which you had after the deep sleep is lost.
So questions to ask are :
1. Why did you who were so peaceful after deep sleep have suddenly
become agitated or miserable or even happy.
2. Are you the happiness or the pain which you experience? It cannot
be, for if it was then a. you'd always be happy or sad and b. you
would not be feeling happiness or pain as an object.
So if you're neither pain nor happiness and if they are something
apart from you why do they affect you? Or do they really affect you at
all? Also can we really distinguish between happiness and our feeling
of this happiness? Likewise with pain. Happiness and pain are things
in themselves and apart from you - it is not logical to hold that you
- who observes them as an object - can be happy or sad.
Yet we experience happiness and pain. As long as your identity rests
in the compound of the senses/body/brain/consciousness - there's bound
to be superimposition - you'll always attribute to yourself that which
is external to you. When you withdraw into yourself you'll develop an
awareness of objective nature all these emotions - in the sense that
they do not belong to
>From vaidya_sundaram at i...
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 10:34:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: vaidya_sundaram at i...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Namaskaram.
I have been looking for a while with many book sellers for the
Vaidyanatha DIkshitIyam for several months now while having the samkshEpa
dharma sAstram right on my desk top and using it as reference for several
of my day to day activities - I have posted sections from it in the past
to the list as well. The copy I have does not state that it is a
translation of the vaidyanAtha dIkshitIyam though ...
Many sincere thanks to you for bringing up the point that this Tamil
translation is that of the vaidyanatha dIkshitIyam.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam.
Vaidya.
smarur at i...
06/19/01 11:56 PM
Please respond to advaita-l
To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
cc:
Subject: [Advaita-L] VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
There is a tamil translation of smrithi muktAphalam, known
as vaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam, compiled and translated by
Sri Venkatrama Shastry and Ramamoorthy Shastry, at the behest
of srI KAnchi ParamAchAryAl in 1985.
The details of this book are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------
Title: samkshEpa dharma sAstram
Author: Manjakudi VenkatrAma shAstry et al.
Publishers: Heritage India Educational Trust,
#6, Sanskrit College street,
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004
(Copies can be purchased form
Dr R. Krishnamurthy shAstry,
at this address)
Latest edition: Third, 1990
Pages: XXIII + 416
Price: Rs. 25/-
This book deals with the following topics in detail:
varnAshrama dharma prakaranam (d.p.), Ahnika d.p.,
Asoucha d.p., srAdhdha d.p., thithi nirnaya d.p.,
and prAyaschitha d.p.
------------------------------------------------------
Regards,
Sudhakar
_________________________________________________________________________________
Aid Gujarat earthquake relief - Click the link below for IIM A CORE and
other community efforts for help
http://www.iitiim.com/WebX?14@@.ee93df4
_________________________________________________________________________________
|| http://www.iitiim.com - Networking of Minds ||
bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From Sankaran Kartik Jayanarayanan <kartik at e...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:32:33 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
From: Sankaran Kartik Jayanarayanan <kartik at e...>
nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
> Since you're saying that bhakti is love - then it begs the question :
> love for whom?
>
> 1. If it is love for yourself then we've to wonder whether it will lead
> to abhimaana. But again if it is true love of yourself without any notion of
> an ego then it is no different from atma vichaaram itself.
>
This is a nonsensical jumble of words! It's a worthless enquiry to wonder
whether or not self-love will lead to self-respect.
Yes, Bhakti in the advaitic ideal is defined as the seeking to know the
Self (vide VivekachuuDaamaNi). Of course, that implies love AND respect
for the Self, that's why it is being sought in the first place!
>From anandhudli at h...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 18:00:38 -0000
Subject: Re: VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: anandhudli at h...
I have a somewhat related question here. Many of the
Sanskrit texts in southern India are printed in
local scripts rather than in the devanAgarI script.
Kannada and Telugu scripts have similarities.
How easy/hard is it for a non-Tamil person
to learn the Tamil script as it is used in
transliterating Sanskrit texts? Any learning material
online?
My thought is that a person who knows how to read
different scripts has a larger market of available
texts in Sanskrit.
Anand
--- In advaita-l at y..., vaidya_sundaram at i... wrote:
> Namaskaram.
> I have been looking for a while with many book sellers for the
> Vaidyanatha DIkshitIyam for several months now while having the
samkshEpa
> dharma sAstram right on my desk top and using it as reference for
several
> of my day to day activities - I have posted sections from it in the
past
> to the list as well. The copy I have does not state that it is a
> translation of the vaidyanAtha dIkshitIyam though ...
> Many sincere thanks to you for bringing up the point that this
Tamil
> translation is that of the vaidyanatha dIkshitIyam.
> bhava shankara desikame sharaNam.
> Vaidya.
>
>
>
>
>
> smarur at i...
> 06/19/01 11:56 PM
> Please respond to advaita-l
>
>
> To: advaita-l at y...
> cc:
> Subject: [Advaita-L] VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
>
>
> There is a tamil translation of smrithi muktAphalam, known
> as vaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam, compiled and translated by
> Sri Venkatrama Shastry and Ramamoorthy Shastry, at the behest
> of srI KAnchi ParamAchAryAl in 1985.
>
> The details of this book are as follows:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Title: samkshEpa dharma sAstram
>
> Author: Manjakudi VenkatrAma shAstry et al.
>
> Publishers: Heritage India Educational Trust,
> #6, Sanskrit College street,
> Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004
> (Copies can be purchased form
> Dr R. Krishnamurthy shAstry,
> at this address)
>
> Latest edition: Third, 1990
>
> Pages: XXIII + 416
>
> Price: Rs. 25/-
>
> This book deals with the following topics in detail:
> varnAshrama dharma prakaranam (d.p.), Ahnika d.p.,
> Asoucha d.p., srAdhdha d.p., thithi nirnaya d.p.,
> and prAyaschitha d.p.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Regards,
> Sudhakar
>
_________________________________________________________________________________
> Aid Gujarat earthquake relief - Click the link below for IIM A
CORE and
> other community efforts for help
> http://www.iitiim.com/WebX?14@@.ee93df4
>
>
_________________________________________________________________________________
> || http://www.iitiim.com - Networking of Minds ||
>
>
> bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> advaita-l-unsubscribe at y...
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
>From Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Sender: ani at m...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:26:52 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 07
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
namo namaha.
> In fact, these three realizations, namely,
> Self-Realization,
> Realization of the un-reality of the phenomenal world and
> the Realization of the Supreme Reality are not different.
Is this the (non-)difference between the self-realisation
obtained from the shruti by dvijas and the realisation
obtained by non-dvijas from the smritis and puranas? i.e.
what dvijas obtain from the shruti is Atma-jnana, while
what non-dvijas obtain from the smritis and puranas is
brahma-jnana and ultimately these are not different? I
request members to clarify.
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:45:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: LT 2: kalyaaNii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
I am forwarding what I posted to Sanskrit-List for help few days back.
Your corrections are welcome.
Ravi
-------------------
Please correct and help me improve this text. I thank members of
Sanskrit-List for helping me out on some of the issues. As it stands
now, it is not perfect. But I have a sense of satisfaction, atleast, I
understand this text to much better extent than I did three weeks
before.
lalitaa trishatii bhaashhya of bhagavAn shrii shankara
2. kalyaaNii
Original Text:
--------------
kalyaaNaani sukhaani | yuva saarva bhaumaananda aadaarabhya
brahmaananda paryantaM taittiriiyakaadau pratipaaditaani | tat.h
tat.h upAdhi bhedeshhu avachchhinna svaruupa tayaa taani kalyaaNa
shabda vaachyaani, "etasyaivaanandasya anyaani bhuutaani maatraa
upajivanti" iti shruteH | samashhTi vyashhTivattvaM upahita
svaruupeNa sambhaviti iti matup.h samAsa upapattiH | tathaa cha
raahoH shira itivat.h samaasa antargata shhashhThii artha
bhedasya avivaxita tayaa aanaandaika vighravatii iti arthaH "vij~naanaM
aanandaM brahma" iti shruti yukta brahma svaruupa laxaNavatii iti
arthaH ||
Translation: (free style)
-------------------------
kalyaaNaani sukhaani |
kalyaaNa-s means happiness. In this sentence the words kalyaaNa and
sukha are used in plural. The reason for that will become obvious from
the following sentence.
yuva saarva bhaumaananda aadaarabhya brahmaananda paryantaM
taittiriiyakaadau pratipaaditaani |
Starting from the scale of one human bliss and ending in the bliss of
brahman is explained in detail in the taittiriiyaupanishhad [1].
Unit if human bliss is indicated by the bliss of a model youth (yuva),
who is good (saadhu), who is versed in veda-s (adhyAyakaH), who is
prompt in action, who is steady, who is strong, and who (supposing) has
all the wealth (sarva vittasya puurNasyaat) in the world (prithvii).
This is idea from the upanishhad is indicated by the term "yuva saarva
bhaumaananda" [1]
tat.h tat.h upaadhi bhedheshhu avachchinna svaruupa tayaa taani
kalyaaNa shabdha vaachyaani "etasyaivaandandasya anyaani bhuutaani
maatraaM upajivantii" iti shruteH |
shruti (bR^ihadAraNyaka 4.iii.32 [2]) states that depending on a speck
of HER bliss all other beings live. It is SHE who as the indwelling
principle in all living beings experience various degrees of bliss when
particularized by the corresponding limitation or upaadhi. Hence by the
word kalyaaNii all created beings are indicated.
samashhTi vyashhTiivattvam upahita svaruupeNa sambhavati iti matup.h
samaasa upapattiH
(see note 3)
Through the corresponding limitations SHE manifests as the iishvara and
jiva-s. When SHE is reflected in mAyA, it corresponds to HER samashhTi
or integral form, i.e., iishvara. And when reflected or limited by
avidya SHE takes on the individual form of jiiva. This nature of
possesorship arises through the upAdhi-s, and corresponds to various
degrees of bliss. SHE as brahman itself does not have these gradations,
but only the limited forms that have this sense of possesorship. Hence,
this does not affect the nirguNa brahman.
tatha cha rahoH shira iti vat samaasa antargata shashhTii artha
bhedhasyaat avivaxitatayaa, aanandaikavighrahavatii iti arthaH,
"vij~naanam aanandam brahmaa" iti shruti yukta svaruupa laxaNavatii iti
arthaH
By using compound of sixth case (genitive) indicating possessorship,
one might say "kalyaaNah asyaaH astiiti kalyaaNii"[5] that is SHE
possesses kalyaaNa hence SHE is kalyaaNii. But this cannot be explained
like this, why? When one says, raahu's head, it means raahu only. For
raahu does not have anything significant but head. So SHE is kalyaaNa
only. HER form is Solid bliss and as explained by shruti SHE is brahman
who is pure consciousness and bliss [4, bR^ihadAraNyaka 3.ix.28 -7]
In essence, this naama celebrates HER as brahman who is Bliss.
---------
Note 1:
----------
(Text taken from sanskrit site)
yuvaa syaatsaadhuyuvaa.adhyaayakaH .
aashishhTho dR^iDhishhTho balishhThaH .
tasyeyaM pR^ithivii sarvaa vittasya puurNaa syaat.h .
sa eko maanushha aanandaH . te ye shataM maanushhaa aanandaaH .. 1..
\medskip%
sa eko manushhyagandharvaaNaamaanandaH . shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya
.
te ye shataM manushhyagandharvaaNaamaanandaaH .
\medskip%
sa eko devagandharvaaNaamaanandaH . shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
te ye shataM devagandharvaaNaamaanandaaH .
sa ekaH pitR^iNaaM chiralokalokaanaamaanandaH .
shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
te ye shataM pitR^iNaaM chiralokalokaanaamaanandaaH .
\medskip%
sa eka aajaanajaanaaM devaanaamaanandaH .. 2..
\medskip%
shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
te ye shataM aajaanajaanaaM devaanaamaanandaaH .
sa ekaH karmadevaanaaM devaanaamaanandaH .
ye karmaNaa devaanapiyanti . shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
te ye shataM karmadevaanaaM devaanaamaanandaaH .
sa eko devaanaamaanandaH . shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
te ye shataM devaanaamaanandaaH . sa eka indrasyaa.a.anandaH .. 3..
\medskip%
shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya . te ye shatamindrasyaa.a.anandaaH .
sa eko bR^ihaspateraanandaH . shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
te ye shataM bR^ihaspateraanandaaH . sa ekaH prajaapateraanandaH .
shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .
\medskip%
te ye shataM prajaapateraanandaaH .
sa eko brahmaNa aanandaH . shrotriyasya chaakaamahatasya .. 4..
See the following page for a translation of these verses.
http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/tu/tu_2_8.htm
-------
Note 2
-------
mantra 32 ##[IV.iii.32]## (from sanskrit site)
salila eko drashhTAdvaito bhavaty
eshha brahmalokaH
samrAD
iti hainamanushashAsa yAGYavalkya. eshhAsya
paramA gatir
eshhAsya paramA saMpad
eshho.asya paramo loka
eshho.asya parama Ananda
etasyaivA.a.anandasyAnyAni bhUtAni mAtrAmupajIvanti || 32 ||
see http://sanskrit.gde.to/doc_upanishhat/brinew-proofed.itx
- On understanding bhedheshhu avachchinna many helped me, and thank to
Charles for pointing to the right shruti reference
----------
Note 3
----------
shrI Vidynatha Rao and shrii Peekayar of sanskrit list helped me
understand this sentence and especially the term "matup.h samasa",
following is the quote from shrii Peekayar's mail
>From Peekayar:
> I feel that the line describes the meaning of
> another word in which
> suffix 'matup' meaning '(one) has it' [by rules like
> tad asya sti asmin
> iti matup etc.] etc. e.g, gomaan, asvavaan etc.
>
> There are many other suffixes meaning the above like
> 'ini' also as in
> sragvin etc.
>
> So, if a word like let's say, 'maayin' occurs as in
> 'asmaat maayii
> srjate visvam etat' etc, and 'maayaam tu prakrtim
> vidyaat maayinam tu
> mahesvaram' , then the mahesvara happens to be the
> one with 'maayaa' in
> his control or generally 'his' [see bhagavad gita
> "daivii hyeSaa
> guNamayii mama maayaa duratyayaa"].
>
> This situation can't be explained in Shankara's
> nirvisesha advaita as
> brahman is devoid of any attributes. So, possibly
> when countered such,
> an advaitin of the Shankara school can say teh
> quoted sentence -
>
>
> > samashhTi-vyashhTiv{shd be m?}attvam
> upahita-svaruupeNa sambhavi{shd
> > be a?}ti iti matupsamaasopapattiH ?
> >
>
> > the split is -
> >
> >> samashhTi-vyashhTivattvam means the quality of
> possessing samaSTi
> >> and vyaSTi srSTis, i.e, gross and subtle
> creations.
> >
> One who/which has samaSTi and vyaSTi srSTis is
> samaSTi-vyaSTimaan/mat.
> tasya bhaavah = samashhTi-vyashhTivattvam.
>
> > upahita svaruupeNa sambhaviti iti matup.h samaasa
> upapattiH ?
>
> > This denotes that the limited essence [svaruupa
> limited by 'upaadhi']
> > of (i.e, illusory/transitory) the brahman has this
> quality is not
> > repugnant to our doctrine. the compounding with
> 'matup' etc. as said
> > above necessarily describe an entity with
> attribute and hence can't
> > denote a nirguna entity is the objection sought to
> be refuted in this
> > sentence.
>
> >
> > what is matup.h samaasa?
>
> It is a compound word with suffixes like 'matup'
> denoting a dravya with
> substantive/adjective attributes.
>From Vidyanatha Rao:
> what is matup.h samaasa?
I am not sure why it is called a samaasa. Otherwise, matup is the
grammatical term for the suffix -mat/vat used to indicate possesion.
[The u is there for ease of pronunciation. p indicates that the
position of udaata does not change. -vat is used instead of -vat if the
final or penultimate sound in the original stem is 'a', or if the final
sound is k-gh, c-jh, T-Dh, t-dh or p-bh.]
------
Note 4
------
>From bR^ihadAraNyaka 3.ix.28
jAta eva na jAyate
ko nvenaM janayetpunaH
viGYAnamAnandaM brahma
rAtirdAtuH
parAyaNam.h
tishhThamAnasya tadvida iti || 7 || || 28 ||
------
Note 5
------
>From Chaganti Suryanarayanamurthy's book
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 14:01:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 07
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
--- ShrI Sankaran Aniruddhan wrote:
> namo namaha.
>
> > In fact, these three realizations, namely,
> > Self-Realization,
> > Realization of the un-reality of the phenomenal world
> and
> > the Realization of the Supreme Reality are not
> different.
>
> Is this the (non-)difference between the self-realisation
> obtained from the shruti by dvijas and the realisation
> obtained by non-dvijas from the smritis and puranas? i.e.
> what dvijas obtain from the shruti is Atma-jnana, while
> what non-dvijas obtain from the smritis and puranas is
> brahma-jnana and ultimately these are not different? I
> request members to clarify.
>
> Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
> namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam lokaSam.karam
>
> Aniruddhan
Hello :
I don't believe it has any direct relevance to dvija/non-
dvija or even smriti/shruti. It is a fundamental three fold
affirmation of the advaita philosophy which constitutes the
preface of the commentary on the brahma sutra. Please
consult the excellent notes on BSB in advaita-l archive for
a fuller explanation.
ShrI Shankara states three essential aspects of
advaita. Namely,
1. Reality of Brahman
2. Un-Reality of the phenomenal world
3. The identity of the "individual" soul and Brahman.
In a lot of recent (neo)vedanta literature, attention
is
only given to self-realization. AFAIK, Self-realization in
advaita also automatically implies the realization of the
Brahman as one's true Self and the un-reality of the world.
Also, there also seems to be a perception that any
philosophy which teaches the absolute identity of the jIva
with brahman is advaita. I don't believe this is true.
For instance, the Kashmiri Saivite philosophy is also
monistic i.e. accepts the identity of the jIva with shiva.
But, they also affirms the reality of the world, which
according to them is a spontaneous "expansion" of shiva.
I believe most advaitins would have a problem with this
explanation.
To be very honest, I have not yet grasped the advaita
position on causation. AFAIK, there are three different
views - shrishti-drishti, drishti-srishti and ajAti vAda.
I believe ShrI gaudapAdAchArya upheld ajAti vAda but later
advaitins have held differing views. I request the learned
members to clarify and explain this better.
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Sender: ani at m...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 14:23:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 07
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Shri Vivek,
> ShrI Shankara states three essential aspects of
> advaita. Namely,
> 1. Reality of Brahman
> 2. Un-Reality of the phenomenal world
> 3. The identity of the "individual" soul and Brahman.
True. But actually, what I was wondering about was,
whether any non-shruti text affirms the atman-brahman
identity. AFAIK, only shruti contains this identity. So, I
was wondering how non-dvijas could obtain brahma-jnana
from non-shruti texts. I assume that this would probably
be something like "everything is brahman". i.e. he/she
sees brahman everywhere.
> To be very honest, I have not yet grasped the advaita
> position on causation. AFAIK, there are three different
> views - shrishti-drishti, drishti-srishti and ajAti vAda.
> I believe ShrI gaudapAdAchArya upheld ajAti vAda but later
> advaitins have held differing views. I request the learned
> members to clarify and explain this better.
AFAIK, ajAti vAda is the (only) view from the paramartha
level. All advaitins admit this view. At the vyavahara
level, various theories of creation are possible, and the
guru teaches the shishya the appropriate theory depending
on how advanced the shishya is. But in the final analysis,
only ajAti is true.
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam
>From vpcnk at H...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 21:38:11 -0000
Subject: Re: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 07
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vpcnk at H...
> To be very honest, I have not yet grasped the advaita
> position on causation. AFAIK, there are three different
> views - shrishti-drishti, drishti-srishti and ajAti vAda.
> I believe ShrI gaudapAdAchArya upheld ajAti vAda but later
> advaitins have held differing views. I request the learned
> members to clarify and explain this better.
Acceptance of Ajaativaada immediately nullifies all other views.
Actually before taking up Atma Bodham, it might be useful to
understand Ajaativaada from Gaudapaadiya Kaarikaa. Vaithathya and
Alaatashaanti Praakarna is only about that.
Consciousness by nature flows outward. It might be useful to
intellectually kill the external flow by understanding Ajaativaada
and then when consciousness naturally turn inwards - it is ripe for
Atma
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 08
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 08 :
upAdAne akhilAdhAre jaganti paramEshvarE |
sargasthitilayAnyAnti budbudAnIva vAriNi ||
Translation :
The material cause and the support of all the worlds is the
Supreme God.
[The World] arises, rests and dissolves [ in to the Supreme
God ] just as bubbles in water.
Explanation :
The subject matter of this verse is causation i.e. from
where does matter come from? In the last couple of verses,
jagam(world) was discussed from the individual point of
view
i.e. as perceived by the individual. Now, it is discussed
from the cosmic point of view.
Immediate attention should be drawn to a word which we
have not seen so far in this text - paramEshvara. Ishvara
is
a very key concept in Advaita along with avidya, jnAna,
Atman and brahman, that we have seen so far. Advaita admits
of a Supreme Being ( called God in English ) who is
responsible for determining our birth as per our prarAbdha
karma.
In this verse, causation is explained with reference to
Ishvara. At the outset, it needs to be mentioned that most
Indian philosophies do not accept creation ex-nihilo i.e.
creation from nothing ( which is the official position of
the Roman Catholic Church ). Ishvara is the material and
efficient cause of this Universe i.e. Ishvara is the
Creator
and the "substance" of the Creation. This is explained as
the world arising out of God, abiding on God and arriving
in to God. This should be understood as follows : God is
the source, sustenance and destiny of the Universe.
The word "sarga" deserves special mention. It means
"arising or drawing". The correct word in sanskrit for
creation is "srishti". Hence, the world is not "created"
but
is "projected" by God, sustained by God and eventually
returns to God just as bubbles arise out of water, are
supported by water beneath and eventually "blow" out and
return to water. The bubble is nothing but a projection of
of the water below and cannot sustain itself without the
support of the water below.
|| bhava Shankara deshikame SharaNam ||
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 23:30:19 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: vaidix at h...
>ken knight wrote:
>=20
>>The path of going from tamas to rajas to satva to nirguNa is=20
>>eternal.=20
>Is there such a path?=20
There is no 'path' from satva to nirguNa. but other movements are=20
quite possible because there are just transformations. You answered=20
this question partly yourself when you said.. "It is only when the=20
guNas are in a state of equilibrium that the movement ceases.." If=20
guNas were constant and carved in stone there is no way we can=20
achieve an equilibrium because once we are under a feeling such as=20
grief, that feeling must continue to exist, and there would be no way=20
we can get over it.=20=20
>My understanding is that the Trinity of the guNa is everpresent=20
>inasmuch as where there is one guNa dominant then the other two are
>present; this is very observable in our lives.=20=20
As long as there is movement and action, all three guNas will be=20
present.=20
1. Any thing that we observe as ignorance, or incapability etc is=20
tamas.=20
2. When we ask ourselves question why, what etc about this tamas,=20
that melts tamas and rajas is created. rajas is a state of=20
instability, because it is a transitive stage between the false=20
stability namely "ignorance is bliss" and real stability "knowledge=20
is bliss".=20
3. We can use knowledge such as brahma jnAna or other worldy=20
knowledge to control rajas to think wisely and decide what to do.=20
That is satva.=20
4. We discard satva to achieve nirguNa. But usually we go back to=20
step 1, because there is always a lot of tamas remaining to be=20
melted.=20
>It is only when the guNa are in a state of equilibrium that the=20
>movement ceases and there is rest in potential and NirguNa state=20
>realised.
No, nirguNa (like turIya) can not contain any other guNas. Where is=20
the question of balance of guNas, when guNas don't exist?=20
>Having said that I welcome the movement in this topic away from the=20
>contemporary use of the word 'emotion' in English. Really the word=20
>means 'without motion' and what is usually being referred to are the
>passions. When we use the word 'love' we are in similar trouble in=20
>English. We need to use words such as 'prema' and 'lobha' if we are=20
>to penetrate this topic... as well as lookingf at the play of the=20
>guNas of course,
I didn't follow this logic. Please explain (if it needs further=20
discussion).=20
from www.m-w.com
Main Entry: emo=B7tion=20
Pronunciation: i-'mO-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, from emouvoir to stir up, from Old French=20
esmovoir, from Latin emovEre to remove, displace, from e- + movEre to=20
move
Date: 1579
1 a obsolete : DISTURBANCE b : EXCITEMENT
2 a : the affective aspect of consciousness : FEELING b : a state of=20
feeling c : a psychic and physical reaction (as anger or fear)=20
subjectively experienced as strong feeling and physiologically=20
involving changes that prepare the body for immediate vigorous action
synonym see
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 23:57:40 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
>>It is only when the guNa are in a state of equilibrium that the
>>movement ceases and there is rest in potential and NirguNa state
>>realised.
>
>No, nirguNa (like turIya) can not contain any other guNas. Where is
>the question of balance of guNas, when guNas don't exist?
There is no concept of 'balance of guNas', also because satva is the
most preferred guNa among the three. One should discard tamas for
rajas, and discard rajas for satva, then discard satva for nirguna.
Also satva is no other than prajna. This process of discarding "not
this, not this" applied to guNas is a beautiful sAdhana from gIta
which can be practiced by any one who is not competent to understand
BSB or gauDapAda.
In any case even to practice the higher books one has to use the
guNatraya vibhAga yoga every microsecond! That is because, when the
mind first acquires brahma jnAna it is only textual to begin with.
When the mind starts interacting with the body, the first reaction of
body will be tamoguNa (and you know the
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 05:30:38 -0000
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
> nanda chandran <vpcnk at H...> wrote:
>
>1. If it is love for yourself then we've to wonder whether it will
>lead to abhimaana. But again if it is true love of yourself without
>any notion of an ego then it is no different from atma vichaaram
>itself.
There is nothing to be alarmed if anything leads to abhimaana. All we
have to do now is to dissect this abhimaana and see how it happens.
The ego is entitled to have its abhimaana, like any other entity is
(such as indra, viSNu or agni) entitled to an apporpriate form of
ahbimaana.
We identify ourselves with our ego (Mr. or Ms. NNN..) for most of the
time; but we also identify with viSNu, agni etc for a few nano
seconds (within every second) without being aware of it. As we
increase our span of attention and alertness towards the deities, the
scope of ego lessens. The deities themselves dissolve into knowledge
any time, leading to liberation.
Egotism is bad, but ahbimaana by itself can not be condemned because
in that case we are denying the abhimaana to the deities also, and
the deities are not going to like it.
One manager was interviewing three candidates for a position. He asks
each of them "How do you delegate work?". One answers saying "I will
not delegate anything", he is out. Another said "I will delegate
everything", he is also out because the manager thought he will ask
him (the manager) also to delegate everything. The third one said he
will delegate according to skills and their need to know, and got
>From "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 00:50:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Yes, the Kannada and Telugu transliterations are quite close to the devanagari script. Most of the Divya Prabandham and the songs of the Nayanmars are in archaic tamil. It will be easier to learn Tamil through manipravalam which is a mixture of Tamil and Sanskrit. Lots of Sri Sookthams composed by Vedanta Desika are in Manipravala style.
Learning Material online,
there is one group which is devoted to classic tamil. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CTamil
It is a good reference guide, but the actually learnig online may be very difficult. There is a book published in the National Language Intergration Series titled "Learn Tamil in 30 days".
It will be available in htttp://www.namaste.com for $8.00
The basic introduction to the language, grammar is good, but is not comprehensive. Practice should make perfect.
Malolan Cadambi
malolan at i...
----- Original Message -----
From: anandhudli at h...
To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:00 PM
Subject: [Advaita-L] Re: VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] New file uploaded to advaita-l
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:39:57 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
From: "Savithri Devaraj" <savdev at h...>
>Hello,
>
>This email message is a notification to let you know that
>a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the advaita-l
>group.
>
> File : /invitation.jpg
> Uploaded by : paddy37in at y...
> Description : invitation for inauguration
>
>You can access this file at the URL
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaita-l/files/invitation.jpg
>
>To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit
>
>http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files
>
>Regards,
>
>paddy37in at y...
>
Namaste,
It would be nice to mention what this file is all about (inauguration of
what?) For those of us without a yahoo account, and a subscription to
advaita-L thru' that account, the URL is unreachable.
Savithri
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 08:39:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: VaidhyanAdha dhIkshithIyam
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
--- anandhudli at h... wrote:
> I have a somewhat related question here. Many of the
> Sanskrit texts in southern India are printed in
> local scripts rather than in the devanAgarI script.
> Kannada and Telugu scripts have similarities.
> How easy/hard is it for a non-Tamil person
> to learn the Tamil script as it is used in
> transliterating Sanskrit texts? Any learning material
> online?
Sanskrit written is standard Tamil is prone to error. As Tamil has
fewer alphabets than Sanskrit. It has only one "ka" as against, ka,
kha, ga and gha, and so on.
However, till recently (before Independence), many many Tamil speaking
people, used grantha script to write sanskrit (which is very easy to
learn if you know Tamil script) but now only a very few know it and
use it (probably less than a thousand, I am guessing here) and it is
not taught in schools etc.
Modern day tamils, who want to write to Sanskrit accurately use
devanAgari script, but some try to use subscripted letters like k, k_2,
k_3, k_4. Which I think is NOT a good idea
Best option available for Tamils is to revive grantha script (I have a
small text book printed in 40s teaching it) but with present political
climate in TN it will not happen. Reviving grantha script was one of
the dreams of kaanchi mahaa periyavaa.
I would say, to standardize across India, it is better to use
devanAgari alone. Having said that, I am now trying to use grantha for
my personal notes.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:17:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Dear Bhadraiah
--- vaidix at h... wrote:
> >ken knight wrote:
> >
> >>The path of going from tamas to rajas to sattva to
> nirguNa is
> >>eternal.
>
> >Is there such a path?
>
> There is no 'path' from satva to nirguNa. but other
> movements are
> quite possible because there are just
> transformations. You answered
> this question partly yourself when you said.. "It is
> only when the
> guNas are in a state of equilibrium that the
> movement ceases.." If
> guNas were constant and carved in stone there is no
> way we can
> achieve an equilibrium because once we are under a
> feeling such as
> grief, that feeling must continue to exist, and
> there would be no way
> we can get over it.
Atman cannot be 'under' grief. This is observable when
sattva/knowledge dominates. See Gita chapter two. Only
the ego/ahamkAra can become attached to the
movement....under...... through superimposition and
ignorance. I have just spent two weeks in Ireland with
someone whose husband died suddenly a year ago. She
continues to hang on to her grief because by so doing
she is able to hang on to her feeling of separation.
To give way to the feeling of love that is the
substratum of this grief would necessitate giving up
this separation, the feeling that she is the 'doer'and
the cause of movement. Sattva has also been present
for she knows what she is doing although she does not
use this language.
>
> >My understanding is that the Trinity of the guNa is
> everpresent
> >inasmuch as where there is one guNa dominant then
> the other two are
> >present; this is very observable in our lives.
>
> As long as there is movement and action, all three
> guNas will be
> present.
>
> 1. Any thing that we observe as ignorance, or
> incapability etc is
> tamas.
>
> 2. When we ask ourselves question why, what etc
> about this tamas,
> that melts tamas and rajas is created. rajas is a
> state of
> instability, because it is a transitive stage
> between the false
> stability namely "ignorance is bliss" and real
> stability "knowledge
> is bliss".
>
> 3. We can use knowledge such as brahma jnAna or
> other worldy
> knowledge to control rajas to think wisely and
> decide what to do.
> That is satva.
>
> 4. We discard satva to achieve nirguNa. But usually
> we go back to
> step 1, because there is always a lot of tamas
> remaining to be
> melted.
Sorry but I do not agree with this structure. I am
also sorry that I cannot point, at the moment, to the
correct verses but they say that whenever there is one
guNa present the other two must be there also. All
you have described above is a play of the guNas with
one being dominant in a particular event or vibration.
It has to be so in the appearance of the prakriti and
is very observable in the subtle changes in the
qualities in the twilight times.
>
> >It is only when the guNa are in a state of
> equilibrium that the
> >movement ceases and there is rest in potential and
> NirguNa state
> >realised.
>
> No, nirguNa (like turIya) can not contain any other
> guNas. Where is
> the question of balance of guNas, when guNas don't
> exist?
How do the guNas re-appear after dissolution? When
scales are balanced, in equilibrium, then imbalance is
not effecting them but imbalance remains as a
potentiality.
>
> >Having said that I welcome the movement in this
> topic away from the
> >contemporary use of the word 'emotion' in English.
> Really the word
> >means 'without motion' and what is usually being
> referred to are the
> >passions. When we use the word 'love' we are in
> similar trouble in
> >English. We need to use words such as 'prema' and
> 'lobha' if we are
> >to penetrate this topic... as well as looking at
> the play of the
> >guNas of course,
>
> I didn't follow this logic. Please explain (if it
> needs further
> discussion).
>
> from www.m-w.com
>
> Main Entry: emo·tion
> Pronunciation: i-'mO-sh&n
> Function: noun
> Etymology: Middle French, from emouvoir to stir up,
> from Old French
> esmovoir, from Latin emovEre to remove, displace,
> from e- + movEre to
> move
> Date: 1579
> 1 a obsolete : DISTURBANCE b : EXCITEMENT
> 2 a : the affective aspect of consciousness :
> FEELING b : a state of
> feeling c : a psychic and physical reaction (as
> anger or fear)
> subjectively experienced as strong feeling and
> physiologically
> involving changes that prepare the body for
> immediate vigorous action
> synonym see FEELING
Many thanks for this. Etymology is useful and I will
happily follow Yaska's direction on the subject. This
implies that finally, a word meaning is found in that
which is revealed to the individual enquirer.
My logic confounds you and I apologise also for my
failing but I am not always logical.
Your etymology is correct as far as it goes but why do
you not relate the motion...movere.. sequence back a
little further to the Sanskrit..miv, to push. If
words are verb based then the noun motion arises from
the verb to move which means to set in motion. It is
the impulse not the event. Emotion is that aspect in
consciousness which is at the beginning of movement,
it is subtly different to the movements experienced in
the coarser stucture of the passions.
What I was trying to point to when introducing prema
is that this primary form of love, arising in the
universal feeling of unity, is very different from the
love arising from duality and attachment which is the
arena for the passions. There are subtle differences
in this which English, in the contemporary context and
intention, is not able to penetrate until we have had
the grace of the insight, vijnana, through a language
such as Sanskrit,
Sorry about my faulty logic but I am trying my best,
Best wishes
Ken Knight
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] New file uploaded to advaita-l
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
That is same as what is in the following link.
http://www.slokas.com/invitation.html
After that file was uploaded by Paddy37, I changed the Advaita-L Files,
Database, Polls, etc. in such a manner that
-members can only view/download. They cannot upload.
-moderators alone can upload, and modify.
I think we should organize and use these facilities effectively. I
think the files and databases (other than admin stuff) should be used
only for traditional advaita-vedAnta related texts.
Not that we do not have space, advaita-vedAnta.org has over 500 MB
available for these purposes, but we need a lot of helping hands. As a
first step we should have all works by shankara available from our site
for people to download. Well, who will bell the cat!
Ravi
--- Savithri Devaraj <savdev at h...> wrote:
> Namaste,
>
> It would be nice to mention what this file is all about (inauguration
> of
> what?) For those of us without a yahoo account, and a subscription to
>
> advaita-L thru' that account, the URL is unreachable.
>
> Savithri
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 01:33:32 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
>ken knight wrote:
>Atman cannot be 'under' grief. This is observable when
>sattva/knowledge dominates. See Gita chapter two. Only the
>ego/ahamkAra can become attached to the movement....under......
>through superimposition and ignorance.
Agreed. As for ego/ahamkAra there are several superimpositions that
happen, such as assuming a rope as snake. But the most important
superimposition is about its own identity! The individual soul thinks
of itself as Mr or Ms NNNN instead of as brahman.
>I have just spent two weeks in Ireland with someone whose husband
>died suddenly a year ago...
I know it is hard.
>>>My understanding is that the Trinity of the guNa is everpresent
>>>inasmuch as where there is one guNa dominant then the other two are
>>>present; this is very observable in our lives.
>>
>>As long as there is movement and action, all three guNas will be
>>present.
>>
>>1. Any thing that we observe as ignorance, or incapability etc is
>>tamas.
>>
>>2. When we ask ourselves question why, what etc about this tamas,
>>that melts tamas and rajas is created. rajas is a state of
>>instability, because it is a transitive stage between the false
>>stability namely "ignorance is bliss" and real stability "knowledge
>>is bliss".
>>
>>3. We can use knowledge such as brahma jnAna or other worldy
>>knowledge to control rajas to think wisely and decide what to do.
>>That is satva.
>>
>>4. We discard satva to achieve nirguNa. But usually we go back to
>>step 1, because there is always a lot of tamas remaining to be
>>melted.
>
>Sorry but I do not agree with this structure. I am also sorry that
>I cannot point, at the moment, to the correct verses but they say
>that whenever there is one guNa present the other two must be there
>also. All you have described above is a play of the guNas with
>one being dominant in a particular event or vibration. It has to be
>so in the appearance of the prakriti and is very observable in the
>subtle changes in the qualities in the twilight times.
Hmm. This is serious! First let me confess that I also indulged in
some double talk, if any one hasn't noticed.
You first spoke about a "dominent" guNa:
>>>My understanding is that the Trinity of the guNa is everpresent
>>>inasmuch as where there is one guNa dominant then the other two are
>>>present; this is very observable in our lives.
In my reply, I supported the view that all guNas exist.
>>As long as there is movement and action, all three guNas will be
>>present.
..but soon after, I added my favorite thing (movement or action) and
gave a story of the guNas converting from one to another. That is the
start of the trouble.
You replied saying what I explained was a model of one guNa becoming
dominent, because my model creates dominence of satva in course of
time. You say that you are wish to reject my story of changes in the
guNas and want to meditate on that nirguNa brahman directly.
Perfectly fine. I have no dispute with you.
But my contention is, you can not have an equilibrium of the guNas
along with nirguNa brahman. If you do see the three guNas, you will
also see the movements that are designed for them. tamas creates some
foolish actios. rajas being emotional will definitely insist on some
hurried action. satva creates a dhArmic action. Seeing guNas alone
and not their movements or actions has a bit of logical problem. I
will explan a little more below.
I will first give a generic reply, and then a specific reply.
My generic answer to this problem, or this type of questions is that
if there is "some kind of" duality, then the "whole world of duality"
comes with it. For instance if you are just under one sense of
duality that is enough cause to see the whole world of duality
consisting of infinite number of elements interacting with each other
in infinite ways. You may have been successful in eliminating all
this duality with brahma jnAnam, but one little bit of duality such
as teacher/taught is enough for you to re-visualize the whole world,
this time most probably by your own creative effort as you have
achieved brahma jnanam; though not as an ignorant person who lives
under the duality ofcourse. For an ignorant person, duality gets
created as per the stored vAsanas, memory etc. In both cases, duality
multiplies in no time. So the moral of the story is, whether I see
one dominent guNa or a combination of guNas is irrlevant. If I see
satva alone, or if I see a combination of savta 90%, rajas 9% and
tamas 1%; both cases are to be rejected as duality.
To give a specific answer, let me repeat the Newton's experiment of a
wheel painted with 7 colors of rainbow, when turned as high speed it
appears as white. So next time if you see red color, you are not
going to say "Well, apart from this red color, there are also 6 other
colors..." and so on. At the time you see red, you only see red.
In addition, (don't tell this to your Irish friend) as per gauDapAda
an object that one existed should continue to exist. So if grief once
existed, it must continue to exist. How can grief ever convert to
happiness? A problem that once exists will continue to exist forever,
and a solution if it exists should also have existed since eternity.
That is the reason why gauDapAda expounded the ajativAda, that the
objects were never born. Grief was never there to begin with. But if
it exists once, it must continue to exist.
I fully understand that the above argument (that grief continues to
exist) actually goes against what I said, viz, sAdhaka going from one
guNa to next (tamas to rajas and rajas to satva). tamas, if it
existed, must continue to exist, and can never be converted to rajas
or satva etc. I understand that.
But there is really no conflict in what I said. Following are the
arguments based on scripture, logic and experience.
Scriptural argument: The process of a sAdhaka going from one guNa to
next is only an imitation of that letter om. It is this letter om
that is sung by the body/mind eternally, moving from vizva to taijasa
and taijasa to prajna, and then digging back into vizva for the next
object, which appears as moving from one guNa to next.
But why is the movement only in one direction? Well, the answer is,
the opposite movement had already happened in the first few seconds
after waking up from deep-sleep! So we are just repairing what
happened before.
Logical argument: I said if duality of a combination of guNas is
seen, you must also see its antidote (the movement/conversion of
guNas). If you don't see the movement (om) then the guNas will
continue to exist and there would be no way you will achieve nirguna.
The movement (om) is what convert tamas to rajas, and rajas to satva.
So at the end, we reject the whole combination of guNas and the
movement. We can't just reject the guNas alone, or the movement (om)
alone. Again, not every movement in our regular life sounds like om,
therefore the guNas don't convert, and we remain in grief not getting
that antidote.
Experience: try it out yourself.
>>>It is only when the guNas are in a state of equilibrium that the
>>>movement ceases and there is rest in potential and NirguNa state
>>>realised. No, nirguNa (like turIya) can not contain any other
>>>guNas. Where is the question of balance of guNas, when guNas don't
>>>exist?
>
>How do the guNas re-appear after dissolution? When scales are
>balanced, in equilibrium, then imbalance is not effecting them but
>imbalance remains as a potentiality.
Well my friend, there is no such thing as equilibrium. Either there
is no-duality-and-no-movement or there is duality-and-movement or
more exactly duality-and-om or to give it an exotic name duality-and-
yajna : the full blown movement. You can't have three guNas in some
proportion living happily like good neighbors.
Why? even saguNa brahman won't let this combination remain in peace!
If the suguNa brahman sees something that even remotely appears like
jaDam (tamas), it chases and confronts it like a greyhound till the
jaDam is smashed or torn into pieces, and converts into rajas etc.
(Back to the conversion story!)
>Emotion:
>What I was trying to point to when introducing prema is that this
>primary form of love, arising in the universal feeling of unity, is
>very different from the love arising from duality and attachment
>which is the arena for the passions.
As I said one form of duality is no better than another.
Best
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 08:01:41 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
>Newton's experiment
Just to clarify what I meant, the action of turning the wheel merges
the colors into white. But if you see each color independently it
will remain red, or green. The worst case is when a person wears red
tinted glasses.
Likewise if the guNas are observed individually they will remain so
forever. Some times one may be overtaken by a particular guNa which
is dominant. But when someone goes through the conversion process
from tamas to rajas and rajas to satva and discards satva at the end
it is the equivalent of enjoying the fruits of this world fully with
no remainder left. This way, rajas is put to productive use and is
inbuilt in sAdhana.
But in reality neither the guNas exist nor the conversion.
bhaktiyoga is not the only path that has emotions such as love etc.
jnAna yoga also has its quota of rajas for the simple reason: We know
that 'self' includes gross body, right? Do you honestly think the
body will give up without putting up any resistance?
Also if we accept the ritualistic version of jnAnayoga (indra etc)
that path again involves going through as much bhakti and rajas as
bhakti yoga. This path is more complicated compared to regular
dvaita. In this, normal thinking is fully replaced by interactions of
deities.
In the final analysis it can be proved that there is an abheda
between the paths. When a person is walking on any path,
simultaneously the person is also walking on other paths knowingly or
unknowingly. Now if someone is walking on all the paths, where is the
path?
Best
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 15:38:18 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
> Likewise if the guNas are observed individually they will remain so
> forever.
This is true only if it is concluded that the objects (fuNas etc)
have independent existence.
But the conclusion itself is premature and false, because the
perceiver is not taken into account.
So if we take the perceiver into account, the above statement is not
entirely true.
Now, direct deconstruction of any object such as any guNa (such as
tamas), using 'Not this, Not this', is also possible, without
completing the model consisting of all three guNas. The logic needs
to be filled in.
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 15:39:55 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
Fixed typos:
> Likewise if the guNas are observed individually they will remain so
> forever.
This is true only if it is concluded that the objects (guNas etc)
have independent existence.
But the conclusion itself is premature and false, because the
perceiver is not taken into account.
So if we take the perceiver into account, the above statement is not
entirely true.
Now, direct deconstruction of any object such as any guNa (such as
tamas), using 'Not this, Not this', is also possible, without
completing the model consisting of all three guNas. The logic needs
to be filled in.
>From "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 11:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Learning grantha script
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: "Ravisankar S. Mayavaram" <miinalochanii at y...>
> Sorry if I am encroaching in too much. I searched the web if
> anywhere I could get the grantha script character chart.. I
> didn't succeed.
I received a mail with this statement. I searched using google and
found a valuable site.
http://www.sainatham.de/
This site sells books to learn grantha script, and it also sells many
good books like sahasranAma of devata-s, sandhya vandanam, etc in
grantha script.
I stopped my search after I found this link.
Also, in IITM there is an effort going on to create a grantha font.
http://sdlcfsn.cs.iitm.ernet.in/tidbits.html
This site is currently down. Last year I contacted them to find out if
the font is ready, it was not at that time.
I feel this grantha script has to be simplified by dropping
samyuktaaxaras and writing in a simple linear form like Tamil and
English, writing above and below, and combined symbols will deter many
beginners.
BTW,I do plan to scan the small book I have and keep it on www, but not
in the coming year, as I overwhelmed with other commitments.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Subject: RE: [Advaita-L] Learning grantha script
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 12:04:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Dear Ravi,
Thanks a lot for this information.. I have sent a mail
to Sainatham pub. asking about the books..
I appreciate it.
Regards,
chandrasekaran.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ravisankar S. Mayavaram [mailto:miinalochanii at y...]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 11:32 AM
To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Advaita-L] Learning grantha script
> Sorry if I am encroaching in too much. I searched the web if
> anywhere I could get the grantha script character chart.. I
> didn't succeed.
I received a mail with this statement. I searched using google and
found a valuable site.
http://www.sainatham.de/
This site sells books to learn grantha script, and it also sells many
good books like sahasranAma of devata-s, sandhya vandanam, etc in
grantha script.
I stopped my search after I found this link.
Also, in IITM there is an effort going on to create a grantha font.
http://sdlcfsn.cs.iitm.ernet.in/tidbits.html
This site is currently down. Last year I contacted them to find out if
the font is ready, it was not at that time.
I feel this grantha script has to be simplified by dropping
samyuktaaxaras and writing in a simple linear form like Tamil and
English, writing above and below, and combined symbols will deter many
beginners.
BTW,I do plan to scan the small book I have and keep it on www, but not
in the coming year, as I overwhelmed with other commitments.
=====
ambaaL daasan
Ravi
sharaNAgata raxakI nivEyani sadA ninnu nammiti mInAxI
http://www.ambaa.org/ http://www.advaita-vedanta.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>From anandhudli at h...
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 19:46:00 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: anandhudli at h...
--- In advaita-l at y..., vaidix at h... wrote:
>
> The type of emotion in bhakti can not be limited to love only. Any
> one of the nine major rasAs, or the more complex ones like viraham
> (not being able to live without) qualifies the relationship between
> the bhakta and the paramAtma.
Yes, but the underlying emotion of all these rasas is
only love. That is why the Narada bhakti sUtra uses
the term "parapremarUpA" in referring to bhakti.
An analogy can be given. Emotions are like asuras or
demons because if we yield to them, we lose our
discrimination (viveka) capacity, and the capacity
to use our head. They may make us irrational because
actions based on emotions alone cannot be analyzed
logically. However, among these emotions there is Love
which stands out like PrahlAda among the daityas.
As long as PrahlAda is treated with harshness and
cruelty, there is no hope for us. But when PrahlAda,
the very incarnation of bhakti, is made the ruler
of the asuras by the grace of Ishvara/narahari, no other
situation can be more ideal! As long as the other asuras
are within the control of PrahlAda and recognize him as
the King (of emotions), there can be no
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 04:46:09 -0000
Subject: Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
>Sri Anand Hudli wrote:
>..the underlying emotion of all these rasas is only love.
Very true. viSNu is the ultimate provider of love and compassion.
There is nothing that this viSNu expects from any one, all He looks
for is a mouth to feed (agni).
But somehow some other deities seem to monopolize or hijack this food
on the way (varuNa or indra or somebody else...?). While love is the
underlying emotion, other rasas get in, also for a reason. There is
nothing out of scope for an advatic seeker to deconstruct. (No more
speculations on this.)
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 00:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: Emotions and Advaita
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Dear Bhadraiah,
Very many thanks for the fullness of your reply which
needs careful reflection. We are closing in and
removing finer and finer veils.....I know that it is
impossible to close in on that which is everywhere but
the exercise for the intellect is correct practice. No
action can lead to revelation but as Adishankara
directs the aspirant, direct experience and sruti are
advised.
I am 'flat out' teaching for the next three days so
forgive me if I do not get back to you immediately. I
would like to bring some refs. into our discussion
which I am finding most valuable. This topic is one
often raised by a friend who has had some contact with
advaitin teaching but we have not probed too far
beyond my first statements to you,
Many thanks for your efforts,
Ken Knight
--- vaidix at h... wrote:
> >ken knight wrote:
> >Atman cannot be 'under' grief. This is observable
> when
> >sattva/knowledge dominates. See Gita chapter two.
> Only the
> >ego/ahamkAra can become attached to the
> movement....under......
> >through superimposition and ignorance.
>
> Agreed. As for ego/ahamkAra there are several
> superimpositions that
> happen, such as assuming a rope as snake. But the
> most important
> superimposition is about its own identity! The
> individual soul thinks
> of itself as Mr or Ms NNNN instead of as brahman.
>
> >I have just spent two weeks in Ireland with someone
> whose husband
> >died suddenly a year ago...
>
> I know it is hard.
>
> >>>My understanding is that the Trinity of the guNa
> is everpresent
> >>>inasmuch as where there is one guNa dominant then
> the other two are
> >>>present; this is very observable in our lives.
> >>
> >>As long as there is movement and action, all three
> guNas will be
> >>present.
> >>
> >>1. Any thing that we observe as ignorance, or
> incapability etc is
> >>tamas.
> >>
> >>2. When we ask ourselves question why, what etc
> about this tamas,
> >>that melts tamas and rajas is created. rajas is a
> state of
> >>instability, because it is a transitive stage
> between the false
> >>stability namely "ignorance is bliss" and real
> stability "knowledge
> >>is bliss".
> >>
> >>3. We can use knowledge such as brahma jnAna or
> other worldy
> >>knowledge to control rajas to think wisely and
> decide what to do.
> >>That is satva.
> >>
> >>4. We discard satva to achieve nirguNa. But
> usually we go back to
> >>step 1, because there is always a lot of tamas
> remaining to be
> >>melted.
> >
> >Sorry but I do not agree with this structure. I am
> also sorry that
> >I cannot point, at the moment, to the correct
> verses but they say
> >that whenever there is one guNa present the other
> two must be there
> >also. All you have described above is a play of
> the guNas with
> >one being dominant in a particular event or
> vibration. It has to be
> >so in the appearance of the prakriti and is very
> observable in the
> >subtle changes in the qualities in the twilight
> times.
>
> Hmm. This is serious! First let me confess that I
> also indulged in
> some double talk, if any one hasn't noticed.
>
> You first spoke about a "dominent" guNa:
> >>>My understanding is that the Trinity of the guNa
> is everpresent
> >>>inasmuch as where there is one guNa dominant then
> the other two are
> >>>present; this is very observable in our lives.
>
> In my reply, I supported the view that all guNas
> exist.
> >>As long as there is movement and action, all three
> guNas will be
> >>present.
>
> ..but soon after, I added my favorite thing
> (movement or action) and
> gave a story of the guNas converting from one to
> another. That is the
> start of the trouble.
>
> You replied saying what I explained was a model of
> one guNa becoming
> dominent, because my model creates dominence of
> satva in course of
> time. You say that you are wish to reject my story
> of changes in the
> guNas and want to meditate on that nirguNa brahman
> directly.
>
> Perfectly fine. I have no dispute with you.
>
> But my contention is, you can not have an
> equilibrium of the guNas
> along with nirguNa brahman. If you do see the three
> guNas, you will
> also see the movements that are designed for them.
> tamas creates some
> foolish actios. rajas being emotional will
> definitely insist on some
> hurried action. satva creates a dhArmic action.
> Seeing guNas alone
> and not their movements or actions has a bit of
> logical problem. I
> will explan a little more below.
>
> I will first give a generic reply, and then a
> specific reply.
>
> My generic answer to this problem, or this type of
> questions is that
> if there is "some kind of" duality, then the "whole
> world of duality"
> comes with it. For instance if you are just under
> one sense of
> duality that is enough cause to see the whole world
> of duality
> consisting of infinite number of elements
> interacting with each other
> in infinite ways. You may have been successful in
> eliminating all
> this duality with brahma jnAnam, but one little bit
> of duality such
> as teacher/taught is enough for you to re-visualize
> the whole world,
> this time most probably by your own creative effort
> as you have
> achieved brahma jnanam; though not as an ignorant
> person who lives
> under the duality ofcourse. For an ignorant person,
> duality gets
> created as per the stored vAsanas, memory etc. In
> both cases, duality
> multiplies in no time. So the moral of the story is,
> whether I see
> one dominent guNa or a combination of guNas is
> irrlevant. If I see
> satva alone, or if I see a combination of savta 90%,
> rajas 9% and
> tamas 1%; both cases are to be rejected as duality.
>
> To give a specific answer, let me repeat the
> Newton's experiment of a
> wheel painted with 7 colors of rainbow, when turned
> as high speed it
> appears as white. So next time if you see red color,
> you are not
> going to say "Well, apart from this red color, there
> are also 6 other
> colors..." and so on. At the time you see red, you
> only see red.
>
> In addition, (don't tell this to your Irish friend)
> as per gauDapAda
> an object that one existed should continue to exist.
> So if grief once
> existed, it must continue to exist. How can grief
> ever convert to
> happiness? A problem that once exists will continue
> to exist forever,
> and a solution if it exists should also have existed
> since eternity.
> That is the reason why gauDapAda expounded the
> ajativAda, that the
> objects were never born. Grief was never there to
> begin with. But if
> it exists once, it must continue to exist.
>
> I fully understand that the above argument (that
> grief continues to
> exist) actually goes against what I said, viz,
> sAdhaka going from one
> guNa to next (tamas to rajas and rajas to satva).
> tamas, if it
> existed, must continue to exist, and can never be
> converted to rajas
> or satva etc. I understand that.
>
> But there is really no conflict in what I said.
> Following are the
> arguments based on scripture, logic and experience.
>
> Scriptural argument: The process of a sAdhaka going
> from one guNa to
> next is only an imitation of that letter om. It is
> this
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From vpcnk at H...
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:10:37 -0000
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vpcnk at H...
>The ego is entitled to have its abhimaana, like any other entity is
>(such as indra, viSNu or agni) entitled to an apporpriate form of
>ahbimaana.
This is almost the crux of the whole issue - the basis of the ego and
atman have be clearly understood. There's no ego without the atman.
But on the contrary the atman is self-existent and doesn't depend on
anything else for its existence. And it should be remembered again
and again : the immortal cannot become mortal - the jiva cannot
become the Atman by removing avidhya - the Atman is ever pure and
liberated.
You as you are, are obviously not the Atman - for you experience
duality/pain in the world. But still the Atman is an integral part of
you - nay, it is only you in a deeper sense.
So concepts like - false you and real you, avidhya and atman, jiva
and atman - are all various way to approach the truth which is only
you in the ultimate sense. These subtle psychological distinction
between the jiva and the underlying truth, have given rise to
concepts like Atman, anatman etc which themselves have spawned
elaborate philosophical systems.
And the greatest obstacle to realizing the truth is also only you -
in the form of ahamkaara or ego - and abhimaana is a double edged
sword - Patanjali specifically warns against it - if not understood
properly it will only take you further away from the Atman - it will
take you away from yourself.
It is said that an elderly relative of Ramana visited him in
Thiruvannamalai and on seeing him fell into a saashtaanga namaskaaram
exclaiming that : "I see nothing of the young Venkataraaman that I
knew as a small boy".
Ramana, it is said, replied with a smile : "oh! that curious little
chap, he disappeared a long time back"!
Ramana's answer chilled me to the very bone - when I read it a few
years back. It shows how strong the hold of our
ego/identity/abhimaana/self love - is on us. It is not so much that
you'll become the Atman, rather if you let it it will become you. But
even this is only a way of
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:35:20 -0000
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
--- In advaita-l at y..., vpcnk at H... wrote:
>>The ego is entitled to have its abhimaana, like any other entity is
>>(such as indra, viSNu or agni) entitled to an apporpriate form of
>>ahbimaana.
>
>This is almost the crux of the whole issue - the basis of the ego
>and atman have be clearly understood. There's no ego without the
>atman. But on the contrary the atman is self-existent and doesn't
>depend on anything else for its existence.
Absolutely true. Thers is no ego, no agni no nothing. Only self
exists. Everything springs from the self.
(Ch.U.7.26.1): 1. 'To him who sees, perceives, and understands this,
the prana springs from the Self, hope springs from the Self, memory
springs from the Self; so do space, fire, water, appearance and
disappearance, food, strength, understanding, reflection,
consideration, will, mind, speech, names, sacred hymns, and
sacrifices, verily, all this springs from the Self.
>And it should be remembered again and again : the immortal cannot
>become mortal - the jiva cannot become the Atman by removing
>avidhya - the Atman is ever pure and liberated.
>
>You as you are, are obviously not the Atman - for you experience
>duality/pain in the world. But still the Atman is an integral part
>of you - nay, it is only you in a deeper sense.
Once you accept that 'me' or 'you' is something other than Atman,
these is no way Atman can ever be realized. Once something other than
Atman is known to exist, it must continue to exist as per
gauDapAdAchArya and by that token it must be immortal. But as we know
it is not immortal, so it shouldn't have existed in the first place.
But now why does something that doesn't exist appear as existing? Is
there something wrong with the observer? Does this observer have any
avidya?
To begin with, I never agree that avidya exists. I do not even agree
about ajnAna. To say something is avidya or ajnana is again a way of
passing the buck, if not an insult to the intellect. Worst case, it
is some pending jnana to be revealed. There should be nothing that is
not Brahman. If you deconstruct avidya and ajnana you will only find
self. avidya and ajnana are only born of our inability to face the
unknown. They don't really exist on their own.
But now, why do Acharyas say 'get rid of that avidya'? Again, there
is no conflict. 'One who has a teacher knows. For him the delay is
for that long only till he is not delivered.' (Ch.U.6.14.2). After
the teacher has taught about how to get rid of the avidya, it
shouldn't exist any more, and everything must be Brahman. It might
take some time to reflect.
>So concepts like - false you and real you, ...
I do not agree about 'false you'. Even a dream object, at the time of
dreaming, appears as real. If there is a castle in the air, and if
there is a ladder, you will climb the ladder as if it is real. Even
in this real world, if you feel hungry or tired your so-called 'false-
self' asks you to get back home. So your so-called 'false-self' is
real at that point of time, and rejecting it is pseudo-advaita.
>These subtle psychological distinction between the jiva and the
>underlying truth, have given rise to concepts like Atman, anatman
There is no anatman or anatta. It is a Buddhistic influence you must
get rid of if you want to be an advaitist.
All these objects that appear as false-self that is Mr or Ms NN, or
the deities agni etc, are only an expression of Existence. None of
these expressions can be ruled out while we are using them in real
life.
If Existence can't have the right to express itself, who else should
have that right? Non-Existence?
If it is non-existence, how does it express itself? In words or
actions? Whose words and whose actions?
As we are expressing ourselves and acting, it must be surely
existence that is speaking. Ofcourse the catch is, one should not
only think of one's own expressions and actions as an expression of
existence; but include all other expressions and actions found in the
nature as well. In my opinion, running away from action leads us
nowhere. So consider and include 'all actions' of the universe.
Rejection by 'not this, not this' is also a valid inquiry, but it is
a more rigorous method that needs some skill to avoid common
mistakes. Without the necessary skill, one ends up throwing the baby
along with the bathwater.
>And the greatest obstacle to realizing the truth is also only you -
>in the form of ahamkaara or ego - and abhimaana is a double edged
>sword - Patanjali specifically warns against it - if not understood
>properly it will only take you further away from the Atman - it will
>take you away from yourself.
I fully understand that durabhimAna is bad. What about Krishna's
killing of Shishupala when the latter said 100 bad things about
Krishna? Can we say Krishna has abhimana?
We are just actors in a drama directed by Existence. Like the actors
who some times take on the forms of Rama or Ravana, we only take on
different forms at different times while mostly living like NN. In
that sense it is perfectly correct to show abhimana as per the role
we take on as NN or wife or husband, or son or daughter, father,
mother, boss, subordinate, friend or whatever. But we should also
realize and accept the abhimana of all jIvas and deities, the will of
nature, etc. If it is a higher deity, we even submit to His/Her
abhimana, because we are lower. Again, that higher deity was only
ourselves a microsecond ago (but not now when we are NN)!
(Subduing abhimana? may be a Buddhistic.. you know
>From vsundaresan at h...
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 19:25:08 -0000
Subject: Re: Sankara Vijayam Contradictions
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vsundaresan at h...
> Markanteya samhita contains 100 khandas. Events in Sankara's life is
> narrated in the 72nd khanda(7th and 8th parispandas). Markanteya
Samhita
> was first published in Telugu script in the Kalarathnakaram Press,
Madras
> in 1897. Manuscript copies of this work are found in the Oriental
> Institute Library - University of Mysore(catalogue of Sanskrit
> Manuscripts - S.No. 18179 )and in the Adyar Manuscripts Library (Sri
> Sankara Bhagavatpadacarya - A.Kuppuswami, 1991, Pub. by
S.Radhakrishnan,
> Chennai).
I responded to this earlier, but the message got lost during the
recent crash. So, here is a brief response.
This is the first time I am hearing of a printed edition of the
Markandeya Samhita. I presume the mss and edition mentioned here
are not of the Pancaratra text of the same name. I will try to
research this further when I visit Chennai next.
Best
>From vpcnk at H...
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:48:42 -0000
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vpcnk at H...
> There is no anatman or anatta. It is a Buddhistic influence you
>must get rid of if you want to be an advaitist.
By ascertaining that the Self "exists", "does not exist",
"exists and does not exist", or again "does not exist and
does not exist", the non-discriminating man does certainly
cover IT up through ideas of changeability, unchangability,
both changability and unchangability, and non existence.
These are the four alternative theories through a passion
for which the Lord remains ever hidden. He who sees the
Lord as untouched by these is omniscient.
- Gaudapaada Kaarika, Alaatashaanti Praakarna verses 83 and 84
> If Existence can't have the right to express itself, who else
>should have that right? Non-Existence?
>
> If it is non-existence, how does it express itself? In words or
> actions? Whose words and whose actions?
There's no dissolution, no origination, none in bondage,
none striving or aspiring for salvation and none liberated.
This is the highest truth.
- GK, Vaitathya Praakarna, verse 32
> But we should also
> realize and accept the abhimana of all jIvas and deities, the will
of
> nature, etc. If it is a higher deity, we even submit to His/Her
> abhimana, because we are lower. Again, that higher deity was only
> ourselves a microsecond ago (but not now when we are NN)!
Things that exist internally as long as thought lasts and
things that are externally related to two points in time
are all imaginations. Their distinction is not caused by
anything else.
- GK, Vaitathya Praakarna, verse 14
> (Subduing abhimana? may be a Buddhistic.. you know what.)
The dualists confirmed believers in the methodologies
establishing their own conclusions, are at loggerheads with
one another. But we non-dualists have no conflict with them.
- GK, Advaita Praakarna, verse
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 01:13:49 -0000
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
>vpcnk at H... wrote:
> - Gaudapaada Kaarika, Alaatashaanti Praakarna verses 83 and 84
> - GK, Vaitathya Praakarna, verse 32
> - GK, Vaitathya Praakarna, verse 14
> - GK, Advaita Praakarna, verse 17
There is no way I can disagree.
What people talk about as existing, or non-existing, discriminating
or non-discriminating, changeable or unchangeable, hidden or
expressed, are these all different forms of speech. Speech is what is
known (Br.U.1.5.8), speech is the support, speech is the crutch,
speech is the abode, and speech is what gives the sense of touch
(sparza). When speech is never born it is asparza.
>From "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <vsundaresan at h...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 03:32:48 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
From: "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <vsundaresan at h...>
> > (Subduing abhimana? may be a Buddhistic.. you know what.)
>
>The dualists confirmed believers in the methodologies
>establishing their own conclusions, are at loggerheads with
>one another. But we non-dualists have no conflict with them.
>
>- GK, Advaita Praakarna, verse 17
We have to be careful when using translations. May I enquire about the
source of this translation?
The verse in question reads,
svasiddhAnta vyavasthAsu dvaitino nizcitA dRDhaM |
parasparaM virudhyante tair ayaM na virudhyate ||
The first sentence in the translation quoted above is okay. But not
so with the second. "tair ayaM na virudhyate" should not be translated
as "But we non-dualists have no conflict with them."
taiH = by them (should not be translated as "with them")
ayaM = this (i.e. ajAti, not to be translated as "we non-dualists")
na virudhyate = not contradicted (not "have no conflict").
Thus, the simple translation should be, "this is not contradicted by
them." The "this" is a reference to verse 16, which says that different
theories of creation given in Sruti are means (upAya) to bring about
the realization of Brahman, and do not indicate an ultimate principle
of duality and difference.
Advaitins affirm non-duality as the paramArtha principle. There is
certainly a conflict with those who are committed to duality as an
ultimate philosophical principle. For the sake of non-conflict with
dualists, a non-dualist cannot compromise on non-duality. And in turn,
the dualists certainly have a conflict with non-dualists, whether the
non-dualists have a conflict with them or not.
Gaudapaada's next verse reveals that he is very much aware of this
problem. Thus, he says, advaitaM paramArtho hi dvaitaM tadbheda
ucyate | teshAmubhayathA dvaitaM tenAyaM na virudhyate ||
What he is telling us is the following. Different kinds of dualistic
theories contradict one another (parasparaM), but no dualistic theory
contradicts advaita.
This (ayaM) non-duality is not contradicted (na virudhyate) by the
dualists (taiH).
If he wanted to say, "we have no conflict with the dualists", he would
have said, "na virodho'smAkaM teshAM" - na virodhaH = no conflict (exists)
asmAkaM teshAM - (between) us and them. (Skt. usage typically
requires the possessive case (asmAkaM and teshAM) with virodha). Such
a sentence would even fit with the metre! But Gaudapaada has chosen
not to use such a pada in his verse.
I hope the nuance is clear in Gaudapaada's wording.
Namaskarams,
Vidyasankar
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>From vpcnk at H...
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 09:05:08 -0000
Subject: Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vpcnk at H...
> Thus, the simple translation should be, "this is not contradicted by
> them."
True the verse simply means non-duality is not contradicted by them.
But can you explain why Gaudapaada says so? Why is it that the
theories of the dualists do not contradict non-dualism?
If you explain that I'll show you why, "non-dualists have no conflict
with
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:28:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Apologies
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Sorry for the break in the Atma Bodha posts.
I shall resume it shortly.
Thanks,
-Vivek.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <vsundaresan at h...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: Re : Philosophical debates and hoaxes
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 17:43:01 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
From: "Vidyasankar Sundaresan" <vsundaresan at h...>
>True the verse simply means non-duality is not contradicted by them.
>
>But can you explain why Gaudapaada says so? Why is it that the
>theories of the dualists do not contradict non-dualism?
>
>If you explain that I'll show you why, "non-dualists have no conflict
>with dualists".
Because the lord is not touched by the catushkoTi, and because
when the jIva that was asleep due to beginningless mAyA awakens,
advaita knowledge arises (anAdimAyayA supto ...).
But dualists who are firmly committed to duality as an ultimate
principle would not agree. ...
Vidyasankar
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:56:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 09
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 09 :
saccidAtmanyanusyUte nitye viShNau prakalpita: |
vyaktyo vividhAssarvA hATake kaTakAdivat ||
Translation :
The Existence and Consciousness, the Eternal, the
All-Pervasive ViShNu is the cause of this manifold
Universe;
Just as gold is the cause of various ornaments.
Explanation :
The causation of this world is being explained further.
In the previous verse, we saw that God is the substratum
of this Universe and that the Universe "emerges" from God.
That concept has been further explained in this verse.
God, who is Existence and Consciousness, projects this
world out of Himself/Herself i.e. God is the material cause
of this world. Just as various ornaments are made out of
gold i.e. gold is the material cause of the ornaments. But,
the true nature of gold remains unaffected by this process.
Gold still remains gold no matter what form it may be
fashioned in to.
Note the use of ViShNu for God. The meaning
of ViShNu is "One who pervades [the Universe]". It is
intentended to convey that God is unlimited by time, space
or causation. Also, ShrI Shankara in his works does not
exclusively use ViShNu for God. He switches frequently
between ViShNu, Shiva and Shakti. It only goes to show that
people who fight over which God/Godess( or for that matter
Allah, Jehovah, Jesus etc. ) is higher are yet
to grasp the higher teaching that is Atma Bodha.
|| bhava Shankara deshikame SharaNam ||
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:39:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PGS : Atma Bodha - Verse 10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan <v_ganesan at Y...>
|Hari AUM|
Atma Bodha Verse 10 :
yathAkAsho hrShikesho nAnopAdhigato vibhu: |
tadbhedAdbhinnavadbhAti tannAshe kevalo bhavet ||
Translation :
Just as Space(Akash), which is all-pervasive(vibhu) appears
to be confined due to limiting adjuncts(upAdhi), the Truth
(hrShikesh) also appears to be limited due to limiting
adjuncts(upAdhi).
On destruction of these limiting adjuncts, the Truth is
realized to be One( kevalo bhavet ).
Explanation :
This verse explains one of the key concepts in Advaita
- limiting adjuncts or upAdhis. Space is everywhere but
it appears to be confined to objects such as pots, rooms
etc. Of course, space cannot be confined; it is only our
ignorance which assigns boundaries to the all-pervasive
space.
Similarly, Brahman is un-limited by anything. Time,
Space, Causation, qualities etc. do not condition Brahman.
In our ignorance, we assign such qualities to Brahman.
Once these limiting adjuncts(upAdhis) are removed ( by the
method of sublation ) then we realize Brahman as It Is.
Of course, since our Atman is Brahman as per advaita, it
follows that Atma-jnAnam leads to the removal of false
identification with these limiting adjuncts.
|| bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam ||
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Subject: Kaivalya
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 20:55:15 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
sri:
Dear Sadhakas,
I wish to know more about the concept of Kaivalya in Advaita. I would appreciate explanations of concepts from the prasthanatraya bhaasya of Sri Adi Sankarar or subsequent acharyas.
Thanks in advance,
Malolan Cadambi
malolan at i...
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 05:54:23 -0400
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Kaivalya
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
>sri:
>
>Dear Sadhakas,
>
>I wish to know more about the concept of Kaivalya in Advaita. I
>would appreciate explanations of concepts from the prasthanatraya
>bhaasya of Sri Adi Sankarar or subsequent acharyas.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Malolan Cadambi
>malolan at i...
>\
Malolan Cadambi -
Namaskaar.
Nice to see you in advaita-L list. Is Kaivalya you mean moksha - In
my notes on Brahmasuutra, from the past few posts, I am discussing
nature of moksha in adviata. Happy to discuss the specifics you want
if I know what exactly you are interested in.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice
>From vaidya_sundaram at i...
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 17:17:14 -0000
Subject: New member introduction: Vijayan Kiliyil
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidya_sundaram at i...
----- Forwarded by Vaidya Sundaram on 06/27/01 12:15 PM -----
My dear Bandhu
As needed by you, I give below a brief introduction about me ;
I am 45 years old Hindu Nair from Kerala State, now staying in Surat,
Gujarat for last 25 years, University Graduate employed in a big
private corporate.
Born and brought up in Kerala under the strict control and
supervision of my father and uncle. The whole family is highly
relegious and having deep faith in Hinduism, highly cultured and
attach high values for relations. I am deeply touched by the
teachings of saints of our PURANAs and GURUs of BHARATIYA history.
The principles of Mahabharata, Ramayana, Gita, whatever the little I
could understand so far, have influenced me a lot and has a bearing
on my life.
Joining the mailing list will help me to penetrate my awareness into
the source of life itself non-dualism and could help me to become
very simple, direct, uncomplicated, strong enough to hold awareness
within enough so that awareness itself can completely dissolveitself
into its own essence, the origins of all - the Vedaas. I trust the
news letters that I would receive are ought to have the powers to
purification of mind and lead a way towards light.
Yours sincerely
Vijayan
>From "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Kaivalya
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:39:18 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
sri:
Dear Sri Sadanandagaru,
Here is briefly what Kaivalyam is described as:
"Kaivalyam is a state of enjoying one's self.In the process of jgnAna yoga one would arrive at the state of athma-sakshAtkAram, i.e. beholding one's self. This stage is called kaivalyam. This is short of the ultimate goal of moksham."
This is however a Visisthadvaitic interpretation. Kaivalya is seen short of the ultimate goal of moksha, which is attainment of paramapAdam.
I wish to know what specifically the state of athma-sakshAtkAram is known according to Sri Adi Sankarar.
Is arriving at the state of athma-sakshAtkAram the same as attaining kaivalyam?
Adiyen Daasan,
Malolan Cadambi
"ayarvaRum AMARARKAL ADHIPATHI YAVANAVAN " -- Swami Nammalwar
<Here Swami Nammalwar praises Lord Varadaraja of Kanchi as Amargal (Devaas) Adhipathi (Lord) (Lord of Devaas)>
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From sureshsmr at h...
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 20:36:12 -0000
Subject: Significance of Tiryak-pundram
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: sureshsmr at h...
Dear Devotees,
Could any explain to me the following two points:
1.The significance of having Tiryakpundram (Vibhooti - three parallel
lines) on the forehead.
2.The ignificance of Shivalingam.
3.Is there any Vedic reference to worship of Lord Shiva through
Shivalingam?
Iti Sajjana
>From "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Reply-To: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:20:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Vaidya Sundaram" <vaidya_narayanan at y...>
All three of your questions are addressed in the vidyeshvara samhita of the
Shiva purana - I don't have a copy off hand, but I para phrase from memory
below.
1. Significance of tiryakpundram - the Shiva purana merely states that this
is to applied by the devotee on the fore head and the joints of the arms
etc. The Shiva purana also states that a particular mantra should be chanted
while doing so and I do not know which one it actually refers to. I have
requested clarification from my teacher in India. I can post that to the
list and hope one of the members can point out what it is. The more common
mantra that I have seen several people recite is the mrityujaya mantram that
occurs in the Shri Rudram as well (triyambakam ...) leading a lot of people
to explain the application of the vibooti as protection of the devotee.
However, I have not seen this specifically validated (or invalidated!) in
the Shiva Purana itself. However, the general context in which it is seen in
the purana is where the methods of cultivating devotion to Shiva are
elaborated. I think that the primary reason for the application of viboti
could be as simple as that - cultivates bhakti for Him.
2. The significance of the Shiva lingam was actually discussed in this forum
in the recent past - check the archives on escribe with this as the subject
line. Apart from that, the Shiva purana also has very interesting passages
where Lord Shiva is Himself explaining it to Vishnu and Brahma after he puts
and end to their fight about who among the two of them (Vishnu and Brahma)
is "superior". Lord Shiva states there quite emphatically that the form less
form of the shiva linga is to be preferred to the idol form with hands/legs
etc. HE qualifies the lingam form as a representation of the "unmanifest"
while the idol form is the representation of the "manifest" - to me this
sounds very similar to sections of other purana literature wherein God is
said to create the world as a spider would create a web from itself and
after sometime, retract the web into itself. In this respect, HE is then
both the material and efficient cause of creation. The idol form would then
have "qualities" which would quite logically happen only after creation and
while the Lingam form represents that which is the ONE from which
manifestation and creation happened. In this respect, the Shiva purana also
refers to form of the linga and sizes and methods of worship. Makes very
interesting reading for anyone who wants to engage in Shiva bhakti.
3. I don't know of references per-se but the purana actually glorifies Him
in words such as "He who is spoken of in the Vedas" and "He who the Vedas
themselves worship" etc ... don't have the references on hand.
On a different note, I have found that the shiva purana is an excellent
source of elucidation of Truths in an easy to understand manner. Everything
from the meaning and significance of AUM to creation to dissolution to
vedantic idelas of one-ness/samadhi etc are clearly brought out.
bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
Vaidya.
----- Original Message -----
From: <sureshsmr at h...>
To: <advaita-l at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 3:36 PM
Subject: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
> Dear Devotees,
>
> Could any explain to me the following two points:
> 1.The significance of having Tiryakpundram (Vibhooti - three parallel
> lines) on the forehead.
> 2.The ignificance of Shivalingam.
> 3.Is there any Vedic reference to worship of Lord Shiva through
> Shivalingam?
>
> Iti Sajjana vidheyaha
> Suresh
>
>
> bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>From vaidix at h...
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 22:35:42 -0000
Subject: Re: Kaivalya
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vaidix at h...
Dear Malolan Cadambi
Is kaivalyam derived from 'kEvala' which means 'only', meaning one
only without a
>From "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Re: Kaivalya
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:50:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Malolan Cadambi" <mcadambi at y...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Sri Bhadriah,
Kaivalyam is the state where athma-sAkshAtkaram is fully known (as a result of jnAna yogA). I wish to know more in detail the state of athma-sAkshatkAram according to Sri Adi Sankarar.
1.) Is athma-SakshatkAram the same as the realisation of "aham brahmAsmi"?
2.) If yes, then is attainment of Kaivalya the same as the realisation of "aham brahmAsmi"?
I am looking forward to Sriman Sadanandagaru's explanations on this topic.
Best Wishes,
Malolan Cadambi
"Shruthi Shirasi VidIpthE brahmanI srinivAse" - Mangala Slokam of Sri Bhaasyam
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 06:08:25 -0400
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Kaivalya
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Shree Malolan Cadambi
As I understand, The root cause of samsaara being the lack of
knowledge of ones own self, the only liberation is gaining that
knowledge. There is nothing in between. When I know myself as myself
I will know that there is nothing other than myself, myself being the
existence-consciousness-bliss. or sat chit ananda swaruupa - sarva
bhuutastam aatmaanam sarva bhuutani ca aatmani - Hence realization is
not gaining something that is not of my intrinsic nature but
understanding that nature of myself - aham brahma asmi thus
follows.
Hence there is no separate kaivalyam that is different from 'what is
referred to as aatma saakshaatkaaram' or realization of oneself.
There is however, a jiivamukata state and videha mukta state.
Jiivanmukta is one who has realized that who one is while the body is
alive. In adviata vedanta, the body is not really the problem where
the body includes all the three shariira-s - sthuutal, suukshma and
kaaraNa shariira. What is the problem is identifying that I am the
achetana body rather than the self which is chetana swaruupam. Hence
jiivan mukta is possible and in fact that is only way of realization
since upaadhi-s are needed for one to commit a mistake that I am the
upaadhi-s and transcending that notion is the realization. But even
after realization, the body -s still function - that state where one
has realized aham brahma asmi - but yet the bodies exist - is the
jiivan mukta state. What is said is that the body has to undergo its
prarabda - when that prarabda is exhausted, the body drops off and
one attains the vedaha mukti, that may be referred to the ultimate
state. But from my understanding he has already realized what need
to be realized and there is nothing else to realize. From his point
he has reached ultimate. The body will be functioning more for the
benefit of the society or samashhTi vaasanas . I would say the
totality or brahman himself will be using that upaadhi-s for the
benefit of the society until the body drops off.
Hence for your question is there a kaivalyam, separate from aatma
sakshaatkaaram - my answer is no. From Bhagavaan Raamanuja's point,
as you know, self-realization is different from god-realization. One
is in a way liberated in the state of self-realization but he will
not be enjoying that infinite bliss with the Lord. There is some
problem in understanding infinite bliss by finite aatama (anu
pramaaNa). That may be a separate issue.
In advaita there are no two levels of realization since there is only
one to start with - two levels of moksha discussed from the point of
upaadhi-s - jiivan mukta and videha mukta.
There is of course a stage path described - in stages through
different loka-s ending up with Brahma loka etc- From my
understanding these are only fields where one goes from predominant
tamasic to predominant satvic environments - which is more conducting
for contemplation and hence realization. I do not think this is
referred to kaivalyam either.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>sri:
>
>Dear Sri Sadanandagaru,
>
>Here is briefly what Kaivalyam is described as:
>
>"Kaivalyam is a state of enjoying one's self.In the process of
>jgnAna yoga one would arrive at the state of athma-sakshAtkAram,
>i.e. beholding one's self. This stage is called kaivalyam. This is
>short of the ultimate goal of moksham."
>
>This is however a Visisthadvaitic interpretation. Kaivalya is seen
>short of the ultimate goal of moksha, which is attainment of
>paramapAdam.
>
>I wish to know what specifically the state of athma-sakshAtkAram is
>known according to Sri Adi Sankarar.
>
>Is arriving at the state of athma-sakshAtkAram the same as attaining
>kaivalyam?
>
>Adiyen Daasan,
>
>Malolan Cadambi
>"ayarvaRum AMARARKAL ADHIPATHI YAVANAVAN " -- Swami Nammalwar
><Here Swami Nammalwar praises Lord Varadaraja of Kanchi as Amargal
>(Devaas) Adhipathi (Lord) (Lord of Devaas)>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From sarigela at T...
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:06:57 -0500
Reply-To: sarigela at t...
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: sarigela at t...
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
From: sarigela at T...
Quoting sureshsmr at h...:
>
> Could any explain to me the following two points:
> 1.The significance of having Tiryakpundram (Vibhooti
- three parallel
> lines) on the forehead.
Anand wrote a nice article on Bhasma dharana
sometime back
it is here
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m2344.html
Satish.
>From Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Subject: RE: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:47:15 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Dear Anand,
Followers of other dharSans usually regard the traditional
bhasmam as being the ash from crematory grounds and even
consider it inauspicious... But we wear the bhasmam of
cow dung, ghee etc., these days.
Can you or any other knowledgeable member please enlighten
some more in this regard ?
Thanks,
chandrasekaran.
-----Original Message-----
From: sarigela at T... [mailto:sarigela at T...]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 7:07 AM
To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Quoting sureshsmr at h...:
>
> Could any explain to me the following two points:
> 1.The significance of having Tiryakpundram (Vibhooti
- three parallel
> lines) on the forehead.
Anand wrote a nice article on Bhasma dharana
sometime back
it is here
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m2344.html
Satish.
bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>From ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Kaivalya
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: ken knight <hilken_98 at Y...>
> I wish to know more about the concept of Kaivalya in
> Advaita. I would appreciate explanations of concepts
> from the prasthanatraya bhaasya of Sri Adi Sankarar
> or subsequent acharyas.
Dear Malolan,
Sorry to come into this discussion a little late but
Maths pupils and new puppy...I am English and share
Yudhistira's view of dogs when he reached the summit
of Mt. Meru...have been taking up all 'spare' time.
Here are some of possibilities from my study of
Kaivalya.
I have two translations of Kaivalya Upanishad...Swami
Chinmayananda and K. Narayanasvami Aiyar. Both easily
available.
The following is from a recently deceased
Shankaracharya who held one of the disputed seats of
Jyotir Math, Badrinath...HH Sri Shantanand Saraswati:
'Being alone means being independant and free. All the
waiting on the help of others becomes unnecessary. As
long as there is another, there will be a charge.
To be alone is to be pure, free of all impediments.
Anything else apart from the self is an impediment. It
holds, obstructs, seeks ransom. The 'other' is the
bonds of Prakriti. Prakriti is triformal and therefore
complex. In the rise of a sankalpa, prakriti arises
with its multiple tools and manifests creation. Then
there is the Nirodha system through which everything
is merged into its respective cause. The ultimate
situation arises when all causes are merged into the
last cause. There the Absolute remains Himself. When
this process is completed and one does not find
oneself different from Brahman then that is the state
of kaivalya, solitariness, in advaita. In this state
all movements, prapancha, causes, effects and absence
of things etc. seem like a mental dream. Since it
does not have real existence, it has no authority to
bind and one is not taken by confusion about one's
independence or freedom. 'I am a man' 'I am the
doer', all such illusions have no effect. To do what
comes naturally is one thing and to make a mission out
of it is another. To do one's duty is necessary to
communion 9lokasangraha) If natural duties are not
attended to by the wise then others will copy and
absolute confusion and conflict will build up. All the
necessary and natural actions are performed by
Prakriti with her various tools. Therefore there is no
need to superimpose them on oneself and cook up a
claim. The claim is the illusion. Prakriti is the
doer, not the Self. Fortunately Prakriti does not have
the facility to claim. Therefore all claims are
illusion and superimposition.'
I could give you more detail if necessary buit there
plenty in that for study.
Finally, I have noted the taste of kaivalya in the
reported spiritual experiences of people who know
nothing of Kaivalya or advaitin philosophy. From these
I coined the phrase 'aloneness in all-one-ness' for an
understanding of kaivalya.
However in the above there may be some leads for you.
I will send more if wanted,
Peace and Happiness
Ken Knight
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>From vpcnk at H...
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:09:54 -0000
Subject: Re: Kaivalya
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: vpcnk at H...
One of the common misconceptions in Advaita are is that in
liberation everything is one and so when we're liberated we'll have
the feeling/knowledge of being everything and everything being us - a
feeling of oneness.
"There's neither plurality nor *unity* ..." - Gaudapaadiya Kaarika.
Advaita is non-dualism not "monism". It is differencelessness rather
than unity i.e when liberated the sage doesn't seen things external to
him as different from him - but that doesn't mean that he sees them
all (including himself) as one.
Don't make the mistake of assuming that they are but two sides of the
same coin and are ultimately the same. Differencelessness is a state
of the quiesced mind and quite different from oneness (which is atbest
grand imagination) - it has a direct implication on Advaita spiritual
practice.
Contemplate on what "asparsha"/contactless in Gaudapaada's Asparsha
yoga,
>From "venkata subramanian" <venkat_advaita at r...>
Date: 29 Jun 2001 10:18:39 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Karma
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "venkata subramanian" <venkat_advaita at r...>
hello everyone.
can anyone give a correct definition of Karma ?
S. Venkata Subramanian
Venkat_advaita at r...
____________________________________________________
Buy Feng Shui Package for Rs. 151/- only, at http://shopping.rediff.com/shopping/fengshui_mailer.htm
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:53:27 -0400
Subject: Notes on BSB I-i-4-1K
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Notes on BSB I-i-4-1K
sadaashiva samaarambhaa.n sha~Nkaraachaarya madhyamam.h |
asmadaachaarya paryantaa.n vande guruparamparaam.h ||
I prostrate to the lineage of teachers starting from Lord Shiva who
is ever auspicious and with Bhagavaan Shankara in the middle and all
the way up to my own teacher.
vaatsalya ruupa.n triguNairatiitaM
aananda saandram amalairnidhaanam.h .|
shrii chinmayaananda guro praNiitaM
sadaa bhaje.aha.n tava paada pa~Nkajam.h ||
Who is the very embodiment of motherly affection who is beyond the
three guNa-s, who is full with bliss, and who is the very source of
purity who is the best among the teachers, Shree Chinmayaananda, to
his lotus feet I (sadaa) always prostrate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
samanvaya adhyaaya - I
spashhTa brahma li~Nga vaakya samanvaya paada- i
samanvaya adhikaraNam.h .-4
suutra: tat tu samanvayaat.h .-1K
Shankara presented four arguments why Brahman cannot be result of
upaasanaa and hence brahma-upaasanaa is not needed, or required or
even valid after one obtains brahma j~naanam. The last argument was
that Brahman is not an "object of", but is the upaasakaa himself, who
is the subject, and subject cannot be an object. In response to the
last siddhaanta, puurvapakshi raises a counter objection as follows:
If vedantin argues that brahma upaasanaa is not possible because it
is not an object, then the vR^ittikaara asks a counter question. In
that case, he says even the brahma j~naanam is not possible, since
brahma j~naanam involves Brahman becoming an object of knowledge. In
fact in the same Upanishad, it says - anyat eva tat viditaat atho
aviditaat adhi | (Kena 1-4). Further it says:
yasya amataM tasya mataM mataM yasya na veda saH |
avij~naataM vijaanataaM vij~naatam avijaanataam.h || (Kena 2-3)
Those who think they do not know, they know, and those who think they
know, do not know, since Brahman is not an object of knowledge. Thus
the Upanishad very clearly says Brahman cannot even be an object of
knowledge. Hence if siddhaantin claims that Brahma upaasanam is not
possible then puurvapakshi argues that, in that case even brahma
j~naanam is also not possible, since Brahman can not be an object of
knowledge. Then the statement brahma j~naanena mokshaH is also wrong
since BrahmanaH aprameyatvaat, avishhayatvaat, avij~neyatvaat ca. If
you accept that brahma j~naanam is not possible then you cannot
declare that Vedanta is pramaaNam for brahma j~naanam because
pramaayaaH eva asambhave pramaaNasya pramaaNatvam katham siddhayet.
If it is not an object to be known, then where is the question of
validity of means of knowledge. PramaaNa is meant for gaining valid
knowledge and if that knowledge is impossible, how can Vedanta be a
valid pramaaNa? - Then the third suutra, shaastrayonitvaat will be in
trouble since there is no valid pramaaNam, while the suutra claims
that Vedanta shaastra is the pramaaNam. Therefore siddhaantin is
totally wrong.
For that Shankara answers - yes Brahma j~naanam is not possible - in
fact Brahma j~naanam is not required. This is because we have
repeatedly said that Brahman is all the time evident in the form of
consciousness. It is swayam siddhaH or swayam jyotiH bhavati.
atraayam purushham svayam jyotiH bhavati - BR^i.Up (Ref?)
jyotishaam api tat jyotiH tamasah param uchyate| Giita 13-18
na tatra suuryo bhaati na chandrataarakaM
nemaa vidyuto bhaanti kuto.ayamagniH |
tameva bhaantamanubhaati sarvaM
tasya bhaasaa sarvamidaM vibhaati || ( Katha-2-2-15)
Nothing is required to reveal consciousness because consciousness
reveals everything - shaastram need not reveal consciousness - in
fact consciousness reveals shaastram too.
Hence Shankara repeatedly says- na aatma j~naanam or Brahma j~naanam
sampaadaniiyam - There is no need to gain aatma j~naanam or brahma
j~naanam. We need not work for one thing and that is to gain the
knowledge of Brahma j-naanam. Then why all these suutra-s starting
with atha ataH brahma jij~naasa - then therefore inquire into the
nature of Brahman? Why then does the advaitin talk about acquiring of
brhamaj~naanam - brahma j~naanena mokshaH (if it is swataH siddham
where is the need of brahma j~naanam) and also the need of shaastram
as pramaaNam that says - tat vij~naanaartham sa gurum eva
abhigachchhet - to gain that knowledge one should approach a teacher.
These are important questions raised.
Now Shankaraacharya explains these using samanvaya adhikaraNam -
Hence the beauty of Shankara Bhaashyam - where many of the questions
an advaitic student has, are methodically answered by Shankara in the
pretext of puurvapaksha-siddhaanta bhaashya. That is an important
reason why one should study suutra bhaashya - which is to establish
oneself firmly in the abiding knowledge of the nature of the reality.
Shankara says our problem is not in knowing aatman or Brahman, our
problem is the misconception or misunderstanding of aatman which
requires a correction. The self-evident 'I' is mistaken for
something other than 'I'. The mistakes have to be eliminated. The
unmistaken I remain - Shankara says in Upadesha Saahasrii (II-18-4)
siddhaat eva aham iti asmaat yushhmat dharmaH nishhidyate |
rajjvaam iva ahidhiiH yuktyaa tat tvam iti aadishaasanaiH ||
Similar to the negation of the notion of snake from a rope based on
pratyaksha pramaaNa, notion of non-self from everything seen is
negated from 'I', based on shruti pramaaNa that says 'that thou art'.
So when I used the word aham 'I' , two things are evident - the I-
the self is evident as the aatma, and the anaatmaa - the body mind -
is also evident as 'this'. The self is evident as a
self-consciousness entity and this - the whole world including idam
shariiram etc, are also evident because of the same consciousness.
(Refer to the definition of adhyaasa - satya asatya mithuniikaraNam -
mixing up of real and unreal is adhyaasa). Thus two things are
shining intimately one is self-shining and other anya adhiina
prakaashaH - shining in the light of consciousness - tasya bhaasaa
sarvam idam vibhaati. When two things are shining intimately the
anaatma dharma or properties of non-self are superimposed on
consciousness out of sheer ignorance - I am father, mother, son,
employee, sukhii, duHkii etc due to this superimposed limitations of
the anaatma on the self. Hence shaastram is required not to reveal
Brahman but to remove the false notions of limitations due to
superimposition or adhyaasa. This removal of limitations is in the
form of vR^itti - a mode in the mind - and that vR^itti is called
'aham brahma asmi'. In the antaH karaNam a thought should take place
or a cognition should take place as aham brahma asmi. When it is
said - aham brahma asmi - I am not knowing any thing new - but I am
freeing ignorance that made me superimpose the limitations of anaatma
on myself. The limitations of anaatma still remain, I also remain as
I am - but what is negated is I am 'this' is negated (this standing
for all upaadhi-s) and "I am what I am" as brahma asmi is realized.
The dropping of the limitations is an intellectual process involving
vichaara or inquiry using shaastra as pramaaNa. This process is
called aatma j~naanam or brahma j~naanam. In this j~naanam - I am
not seeing anything new, I am not experiencing anything new, I am
only removing something old - or dropping of something - that is my
wrong notions about myself. This is just like dropping of the notion
of a snake which is never there to start with, in the knowledge of
rope. We are not gaining rope as if it is new - it was rope all the
time but we are dropping our notions that it is snake in the light of
knowledge of the truth. I am not acquiring, seeing or experiencing
anything new. Another example is 'snaanam iva' - like taking bath.
Why one should take both? -One can formally say that I want to gain
freshness - but what is actually done is getting rid of the dirt in
the body which does not belong to the body. The dirt is adhyaasa or
superimposed on the body and getting rid of it using a detergent is
the means of attaining what is swataH siddham or reaching my natural
state. The role of detergent is not to bring freshness but to get
rid of adhyaasa that does not belong to one. In the processing of
taking bath, both dirt and the detergent that is used to remove the
dirt, both are removed leaving myself to myself.
Hence aatma-j~naanam is possible not in the form of new experience
but in the form of
intellectual elimination of limitations. Shankara
writes in his bhaasyam - pramaatR^i pramaaNa prameya ruupa tripuTii
nivR^ittiH eva aatma-j~naanam - elimination of three aspects -
knower, known and knowing is the role of aatma-j~naanam. akarataa,
abhoktaa - aj~naataa- aham eva - see adhyaasa bhaashya for details.
Such an aatma-j~naanam can come only through shaastram - hence
shaastram is the pramaaNam. brahma bodhaka ruupena shaastram na
pramaaNam, parantu ahdyaasa nivartaka ruupena shaastram pramaaNam
-not for teaching the knowledge of brahman but for eliminating the
superimposed error shaastra is pramaaNam. In fact Shankara quotes a
suutra -siddhantu nivartakatvaat - shaastram is pramaaNam not because
it reveals Brahman but because it removes the superimposed
limitations. Hence such a pramaaNam is called nishheda ruupa
pramaaNam. Hence brahma j~naanam is possible in this sense and
shaastra pramaaNam is also possible.
With this the fourth argument is completed: that is- brahma upaasanaa
is impossible but brahma j~naanam is possible indirectly in the
elimination of aj~naana.
Until now Shankara was refuting the arguments of a vR^ittikaara in a
general sense, hereafter Shankara takes up specific statements and
questions of vR^ttikaara and answers them.
1) The first argument is related to vR^ittikaara statement in
parallel to bhaaTTa and praabhaakara matam-s that kevala j~naanena
prayojanam na asti - mere knowledge is useless. It has to be combined
with karma or upaasana to be effective. In support of this, all of
them quoted jaimini suutra - 'aamnaayasya kriyaarthatvaat
aanarthakyam atadarthaanaam' - Veda will be useful only if it
instigates one into some action or other. Statements that do not
propel one into action are useless or apramaNam - kriyaa sambandha
rahitam vaakyam apramaaNam. Hence vidhi vaakyaani pramaaNaani,
arthavaada vaakyaani apramaaNaani - statements of command are
pramaaNam and statements of non-commands are apramaaNam, since they
do not involve action. Shankara negates them through a wonderful
argument. - Shankara asks -do you accept nisheda vaakyams in the
vedas as pramaaNam? These are statements of don't-s, like hi.nsam
na kuryaat - you should not harm anyone. kalamjam na bhakshayet -
you should not eat meat. suram na pibet - you should not drink liquor
- these are nishheda vaakyaani. The puurvapakshi-s accept that they
are pramaaNa vaakyam as valid as vidhi vaakyams. Now Shankara asks -
what action is involved in nishheda vaakyam-s for them to be
accepted as pramaaNam. I should not drink liquor - is the statement -
after knowing that from veda-s what action is expected of me?
Shankara says - avoidance of action is an absence of action. Hence
nishheda vaakyam-s do not instigate any action but only instigate
inaction - it is audaasiinyam - When we ask somebody what are you
doing and he may answer - I am doing nothing - but doing nothing is
not a doing - it involves doing no action. nishheda vaakyam only
instigate actionless-ness but not action. Hence even though kriyaa
sambandham is not there, the puurvapakshi-s have accepted nisheda
vaakyam-s as pramaaNam. Shankara extends their own logic and states
that kriyaa sambandha rahitam vedaanta vaakyam api pramaaNam eva, sa
prayojanatvaat, nishhedha vaakyavat. vedaanta
vaakyam-s are also pramaaNam even though no action is involved,
exactly like nisheda vaakyam. Hence the above jaimini suutram cannot
be applied indiscriminately.
2. Puurvapakshi asks if brahma j~naanam gives moksha then all the
students of Vedanta should be mukta purusha-s or liberated
individuals since they all studied Vedanta and gained knowledge.
Puurvapakshi says I have interviewed several who have studied Vedanta
for many many years and even teach vedanta to others. But if you ask
them if they are liberated - we hear only if's and but's and no one
claims himself as jiivanmuktaH. It is obvious that Vedanta j~naanena
moksham na sidyati - upaasanena sidyati - is the claim of
vR^ittikaara. Shankara says - I have never said a student of vedanta
will be free - only a knower of Vedanta is free from samsaara -
avagata brahmanaH or j~naata brahmanaH na tu sruta brahmanaH - the
one who has understood Vedanta is free not one who has listened to
Vedanta. ( One gentleman approached Swami Chinmayanandaji and asked
- swamiji I have been hearing your lectures. I understand it very
well. I understand that I am brahman and not this upaadhiis, the
body, mind and intellect - but then how come I am still suffering?
Swamiji smillingly asked him back - Sir this is also my question -why
are you suffering when you understood that you are Brahman? (JK
puts this beautifully- It is an understanding as "understanding as a
fact", not as an understanding as an "understanding as a thought").
Hence true knowledge and sa.nsaara can never go together. As long as
I doubt, my freedom and my knowledge is doubtful. As long as
knowledge is clear, the freedom can never be doubted. j~naanam and
bandha can never go together. If there is a doubt - the doubt will
be in the form - I know aatma or brahman is free but only my doubt is
whether I am free or not - that means there is still a doubt whether
I am aatma or Brahman or not. If I know I am aaatma and if I know I
am Brahman which is free from all limitations then where the
question of bondage? Hence listeners are many but knowers are few.
Knower is the one for whom "I am free" is a fact and not a thought.
Listener is one for whom "I am free" is the information contained in
the upanishads. A listener will say - upanishads say I am free - , a
knower will say - I am free is not an upanishadic information it is
ever established fact- Hence Shankara reiterates that where there is
j~naanam there is no question of sa.nsaara. Therefore after j~naanam,
no upaasanaa is required.
3) VR^ittikaara's next question was if vedanta-j~naanam -aham
brahmaasmi - gives moksha then why does Vedanta prescribe
nididhyaasanam after Vedantic study. aatmaa vaa are drashhTavyaH,
shrotavyaH mantavyaH nididhyaasitavyaH - it prescribes after mananam
nididhyaasanam which clearly means meditation which is nothing but
upaasanam. Hence after the study of Vedanta, scripture says the
nididhyaasanam must be done which is nothing but upaasana. By saying
nididhyaasitavyaH, it is imperative that one must do upaasanaa.
Hence through upaasanaa alone one gains moksha.
We will for the next post for Shankara's answer to this important
question of vR^ittikaara.
End of the post
********
Notes on Brahmasuutra-s are now stored in a folder and can be accessed at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/files/Notes+on+Brahmasuutra/
for personal study.
***Copyright Protection - These notes are copyright protected.***
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From csksudhir at y...
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:01:28 -0000
Subject: Re: Significance of Tiryak-pundram
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: csksudhir at y...
Namastae,
> elaborated. I think that the primary reason for the application of
viboti
> could be as simple as that - cultivates bhakti for Him.
In this context I would like to add a quote by my guru - "The bhasma
is worn on the body as a reminder, a reminder that the body
constituted
of the five elements (pancha bhoota) will eventually be burnt to
ashes. Hence let us not be attached to this body"
Pranaam,
Sudhir
Krishnam Vandae
>From "vijayanji" <vijayankiliyil at r...>
Date: 29 Jun 2001 12:27:51 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: RE: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "vijayanji" <vijayankiliyil at r...>
Dear Chandrasekharan
Let me share few points on Vibhuti.
1. The 'Vibhuti' [sacred ash], is a near-patented product of the southern part of the country and wear/apply it on various parts of the body, especially after a bath. Originally, 'Vibhuti' was derived as the highly potent 'Bhasma' [ash] arising out of 'Homams' performed with a plethora of medicinal herbs and leaves.
Sixteen varieties of medicinal leaves would be fed to cows. The dung of these cows would be collected after allowing sufficient time for digestion. The collected dung would then be formed into cakes-form and dried in the sun. 108 types of herbs, and twigs ['Samithi'] of high medicinal value would be used in the 'Homam' in which the dried dung cakes would be added. Six types of medicinal leaves would also be burnt along with these.
The residual ash, 'Vibhuti', retained the wonderful curative powers of its ingredients. It had excellent diuretic properties. For instance, smearing of "vibhuti" on the forehead after a bath in cold water would absorb the excess moisture in the head region and thus guard against sinus trouble.
Similarly, "Vibhuti" would be applied to other phlegm-prone areas such as the throat, chest, etc. Hence the practice of smearing 'Vibhuti' all over the body started off as a medicinal application, became a custom.
2. Applying of Bhasma also help -to an extent- prevent man from committing crimes/sins, because, it is part of Sanskar, and Sanskar help protect Dharma.
3. Bhasma is considered to be Kaam-Naashak (reduces Aasakthi )
More enlightening lines are most welcome.
Best regards
vijayan
========================
------------- Original Message --------------
Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...> wrote:
To:"'advaita-l at yahoogroups.com'" <advaita-l at yahoogroups.com>
From:Chandrashekaran Venkataraman <vchandra at a...>
Date:Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:47:15 -0700
CC:"'anandhudli at h...'" <anandhudli at h...>
Subject:RE: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Dear Anand,
Followers of other dharSans usually regard the traditional
bhasmam as being the ash from crematory grounds and even
consider it inauspicious... But we wear the bhasmam of
cow dung, ghee etc., these days.
Can you or any other knowledgeable member please enlighten
some more in this regard ?
Thanks,
chandrasekaran.
-----Original Message-----
From: sarigela at T... [mailto:sarigela at T...]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 7:07 AM
To: advaita-l at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Quoting sureshsmr at h...:
>
> Could any explain to me the following two points:
> 1.The significance of having Tiryakpundram (Vibhooti
- three parallel
> lines) on the forehead.
Anand wrote a nice article on Bhasma dharana
sometime back
it is here
http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m2344.html
Satish.
bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
____________________________________________________
Buy Feng Shui Package for Rs. 151/- only, at http://shopping.rediff.com/shopping/fengshui_mailer.htm
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:23:38 -0400
Subject: Mangala slokas- with meaning
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Friends,
A friend of mine wanted some Mangala slokas with the meaning that can
be chanted during a Marriage of a couple. The chanter is not any
older than the couple. If you can e-mail the info. to Dr. Chandra
Pande at <pande at a...> with at copy to
k_sadananda at h..., I will be very thankful.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:43:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Mangala slokas- with meaning
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...>
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, K. Sadananda wrote:
> Friends,
>
> A friend of mine wanted some Mangala slokas with the meaning that can
> be chanted during a Marriage of a couple. The chanter is not any
> older than the couple. If you can e-mail the info. to Dr. Chandra
> Pande at <pande at a...> with at copy to
> k_sadananda at h..., I will be very thankful.
>
I don't understand. The Mangalashtakam the priest chants during the
saptapadi? If he doesn't know this you need to get a better priest.
Or is this something a member of the wedding party is going to say? In
that case why bother? He can bless them in English or whatever language
he knows.
Marriages are getting more and more theatrical these days. No wonder the
divorce rate is soaring.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...
>From Rajesh Venkataraman <rajesh_venk at y...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: RE: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Rajesh Venkataraman <rajesh_venk at y...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
8. When any object is consumed by fire, it becomes charred. If that black residue is burnt again, it becomes white ash. White ash continues to remain white even when burnt again. This shows that white is the ultimate and black is proximate to it. Science tells us that diamond and coal are basically one. White and black are not colours. The primary colours get separated from the objects to which they are attached when subjected to the test of fire and ultimately white. Similarly, in the mental and spiritual place, the Ultimate Reality is Siva, who is white and proximate to Him is Parvati, who is dark. When we test everything in the fire of Jnana, or true knowledge, the residue is Siva. Ash in the material plane corresponds to Siva in the spiritual plane. We smear our bodies with the sacred ash to remind ourselves of Siva and the fact that the ultimate goal of life is Siva
- http://www.kamakoti.org/miscl/divine50.html
---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year!
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
[Non-text portions of this message have been
>From "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:13:49 -0400
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Mangala slokas- with meaning
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
From: "K. Sadananda" <sada at a...>
Jaldhar
You may have a point! Thanks for sharing your wisdom.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
>
>
>I don't understand. The Mangalashtakam the priest chants during the
>saptapadi? If he doesn't know this you need to get a better priest.
>
>Or is this something a member of the wedding party is going to say? In
>that case why bother? He can bless them in English or whatever language
>he knows.
>
>Marriages are getting more and more theatrical these days. No wonder the
>divorce rate is soaring.
>
>--
>Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...>
>
>
>bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>advaita-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice
>From Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Sender: ani at m...
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:08:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] Significance of Tiryak-pundram
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Re: the worship of Siva as linga in the vedas:
The mahAnArAyaNopaniSad has a "SivopAsana-mantrAh" section
where Siva is referred to by different names which end in
"lingAya namah". For example, "UrdhvAya namah, Urdhva
lingAya namah, hiraNyAya namah, hiraNya lingAya namah" and
so on. But I'm not sure whether this is with particular
reference to shiva-linga worship.
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam
>From "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...>
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2001 07:23:34 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Grhastha Chaturmasa begins today
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at b...>
Just a quick reminder. Chaturmasa for sannyasis begins on Guru Purnima
which is this Thursday.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at b...
>From Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Sender: ani at m...
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 10:28:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: purvashrama and sannyasa names
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
namaste,
I was wondering why Bhagavan Adi Sankara should have the
same pUrvASrama and sam.nyasa names, while all other
people in the parampara have different names in the two
ashramas. Is it that we don't know his pUrvASrama name?
But doesn't the mAdhava Sankara digvijaya say that he was
named Sankara by his parents? I request members to
clarify.
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam
>From Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
Sender: ani at m...
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 10:43:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: buddhism vs pUrva mImAmsa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...>
namaste,
I think kumarila bhatta and not Sankara is credited with
centering arguments mainly against buddhism. If I remember
right, Sankara is supposed to have mainly argued against
purva mimamsa. Now, if buddhism is very close
dialectically to advaita, how is it possible that kumarila
bhatta, who was a purva mimamsaka, could defeat buddhism
and then a century or two later, Sankara could defeat
purva mimamsa? Does it just depend on the intellect of the
people arguing? I request members to clarify.
Sruti smRti purANAnAm Alayam karuNAlayam
namAmi bhagavatpAda Sam.karam
>From Rajesh Venkataraman <rajesh_venk at y...>
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Advaita-L] buddhism vs pUrva mImAmsa
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Rajesh Venkataraman <rajesh_venk at y...>
--- Sankaran Aniruddhan <ani at e...> wrote:
> namaste,
>
> I think kumarila bhatta and not Sankara is credited
> with
> centering arguments mainly against buddhism. If I
> remember
> right, Sankara is supposed to have mainly argued
> against
> purva mimamsa. Now, if buddhism is very close
> dialectically to advaita, how is it possible that
> kumarila
> bhatta, who was a purva mimamsaka, could defeat
> buddhism
> and then a century or two later, Sankara could
> defeat
> purva mimamsa? Does it just depend on the intellect
> of the
> people arguing? I request members to clarify.
>
Please see
http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part12/chap3.htm
I request learned members to elaborate, if possible,
on what has been said in 'Tarkapadam' and
'Bauddhadhikaram' that Paramacharya mentions.
Hari Om..
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list