Prakarana Granthas of Adi Sankara

[ken knight]

--- kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at YAHOO.COM>
wrote:
> Once Vidyashankar give a list of the texts  that are
> definitely attributed to Adi Shankara - I think his
> article may be in the archieves of the advaitaL list
> -
> May be Ravi or Jaldhar can halp to pull it out.  If
> not if Vidya finds time he can repost it for the
> benefit of the those who are interested.
> Aparokshanubuuti is attributed to Shankara but not
> dR^ikdR^isya viveka.


Namaste all,

A book that I use on this subject is written by a
historian,  Govind Chandra Pande, 'Life and Thought of
Shankaracharya.'  It was first published in 1994 and
no doubt other works have since become available but
for a throrough, critical study of all the work then
available in this field, by a historian and
philosopher, then I found this very valuable as I had
but little background in the subject.

> In the final analysis what Ken says is right.  But
> during the stage of sadhana and when one is trying
> grasp concepts clearly, contradictions from one text
> to
> the other will be unsettling to the intellect.

As others have said, to be unsettled can be profitable
as the rajasic impulse in necessary to stir up the
tamasic and allow sattva to prevail.
It is the impulse to grasp which needs to be kept
clean of claims such as right and wrong.
The word 'but' emerges from the discriminating faculty
as two possibilities will always arise.  It is when we
reach out and hold on to one possibility as 'good' or
'bad' that trouble appears as it is always based upon
a qualified view  of whom 'I am' so that our
experience becomes 'I am this or that, I know or I do
not know.'
You are right to note that ultimately 'Ken is right'
and right to note 'the stages of sadhana.' My point
being that 'my' experience of the working of 'my' mind
is that it likes to place itself somewhere and say 'I
am at that stage'. Without the presence of an external
or internal guru, we soon find ourselves in a
cul-de-sac.
Two stories that are very old jokes:
'A man goes into a doctor's surgery with a penguin on
his head. He sits down.
"How can I help you?" asks the doctor.
"Can you get this man off my feet!" demands the
penguin.'

When we change our point of view away from seeing
ourselves as limited human beings then our normal view
can appear to be amusing.

'Some tourists are driving around in Ireland and
become lost. They ask a local for directions to their
hotel.
"Go down this road until you pass a white house where
Mary was born and go on  to a crossroads. Turn right
and then right again by the field where the cow with
five legs fell in the river until you come to a
bridge. Go carefully over the bridge and turn left
along the lane until you come to a dead-end. This is
because you have gone too far, back-up and take the
muddy path between Sean and Pat's barns, through the
white gate and across the field and you will find the
main road...this story can go on for ages...and turn
left to your hotel.
But if I was you, I would not start from here."

So here is our problem: To start from here, from our
deluded point of view, is necessary but to start from
such a point of view is not advisable.
We begin in Om and end in Om and are lost when we do
not realise the ever-present Om in between.
Fun, isn't it,

I hope that this is not too far away from the thread
on the authority of texts. It seems relevant from my
point of view this morning but later will probably be
seen to be totally irrelevant. I think I need to take
Upadesha Sahasri out with me when I walk the dog and
sit in the sun and read awhile,

Om sri ram

Ken Knight


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®
http://movies.yahoo.com/