[Advaita-l] Re: Vivekachudamani vs Bhashyas (S Jayanarayanan)

[nanda chandran]

>Where is Shankara here saying that GYAna is not mukti? He merely says
>that more effort is necessary to *maintain* GYAna = mukti. Not that
>mukti itself is to be obtained AFTER GYAna. This GYAna = mukti may
>require stabilization, indeed Shankara says:
>
>shruti mahAvAkya --> GYAna = mukti (needs stabilization)
>
>Whereas to the author of the VC, GYAna obtained from the mahAvAkyas is
>NOT mukti. In other words,
>
>shruti mahAvAkya --> GYAna --> vAsanAxaya --> mukti
>
>There is a clear separation between GYAna and mukti for the author of
>the VC, for whom GYAna is NOT mukti. In this regard, the VC rather
>feels like the jIvanmuktiviveka of Swami Vidyaranya, where it is said
>that AFTER obtaining GYAna, one must strive for mukti!

Jnaana is a highly ambiguous term in the Vedaanta and can mean different 
things in different contexts. The chapter "Tat tvam asi" in the Upadesha 
Saahasri is highly instructive on the distinction between jnaana in various 
contexts.

Verse 77 – “knowledge is used only in a secondary sense to mean a change 
called action, the meaning of a root. A modification of the intellect called 
an action ends in a result in itself which is the reflection of knowledge, 
the Self. It is for this reason that this modification is called knowledge 
in a secondary sense just as the action of cutting a thing in to is 
secondarily called its separation in two which is the ultimate result of the 
action of cutting the thing”.

Verse 79 – “the knower is eternal knowledge only – the knower and knowledge 
are not different as they are in the argumentative philosophy”.

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail