[Advaita-l] Causal Body

[Jay Nelamangala]

Dear SadAnanda,

Still you have not answered my question which I will repeat again
So, if you think you don't need sAkshee-D,  let us know
the apparatus that you use to distinguish between true and false
knowledge-A.

I expect an answer from you, before answering your flood of questions.

> How does each saakshee evaluate the knowledge of that particular brain
> is correct knowledge or incorrect knowledge? If two saakshees  evaluate
> (assuming that they have a means for evaluation) a given knowledge each
> in their own way which is the correct and which is incorrect knowledge
> here.
>

sAkshee is chEtana-svaroopa.  My school accepts gradations in
chEtana-svaroopas. So although in the case of  "vritti-jnAna" of a loukika
thing such as a jar,   we are all same,  when it comes to the knowledge of
Parabrahman, this gradation does matter.  A higher "soul"  becomes Guru
and a lower "soul" becomes his student.   So, knowledge-D flows from
Guru to student, and as parama-chEtana,  Parabrahman is the Highest Guru
for all.

Now, look at knowledge-A.   There can be no Guru,  no shishya,  because all
are
the same One undifferenciated Brahman.  There is nothing to be taught,
because
Parabrahman is beyond all notions.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
To: <ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Causal Body


>
> --- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> >  Then again, just as everyone has a single
> > brain, single sAkshee, so also there is only one correct knowledge
> > for everyone and there are many varieties of incorrect knowledge for
> > everyone.
>
> Jay
>
> Let me understand first the model you have presented- for each brain
> there is one single saakshee - so for different brains different
> saakshees- right? Now for which saakshee's brain which knowledge is
> correct and which knowledge is wrong and on what basis? What instruments
> they use to evaluate if a particular knowledge is correct or incorrect.
> How does each saakshee evaluate the knowledge of that particular brain
> is correct knowledge or incorrect knowledge? If two saakshees  evaluate
> (assuming that they have a means for evaluation) a given knowledge each
> in their own way which is the correct and which is incorrect knowledge
> here.
>
> > Let us take perception itself, since every one is familiar with it.
> > Knowledge-D by nature presents that which is real.
>
> Question- What do you mean by 'by nature' something is presented as
> real? What is that nature that occurs natually and what is 'real' and on
> what basis that reality is determined here? Jay, you are assuming lot of
> things here.  How do you establish the reality of an object that is
> perceived and how does one perceives any object anyway - 'by nature and
> real' has no meaning to me unless you explain the process and establish
> the reality of that process by some norm.
>
> >It presents its
> > object as it is.  For example,  "this is a jar"  - the jar is in a
> > particular
> > point of time and space and it has the property, 'jarness'.
>
> Hold it sir. Please explain more clearly the process here - 'Which'
> presents the object as it is and how? How does the time and space are
> perceived -are time and space perceived separately by what senses and
> how?  Can you explain that process for me?   I perceive the jar by what
> means.   What is this blessed 'jarness' and how does 'it' present 'this
> jarness' of the jar by what sense - and what is that jarness anyway for
> 'it' to present.  Go slow Jay.  Give me the details how the perception
> of the jar and the jarness - and the time and space  occur. Where is
> this jarness of the jar- how each of it is perceived 'by nature'?
>
> > It is so
> > apprehended by knowledge-D and the knowledge-D is consequently
> > called "yathArtha".  It is this knowledge-D that is taken to be true.
>
> what is that 'it' is so apprehended by 'knowledge' - I am completely
> lost here - knowledge apprehends some thing here - what is that
> 'knowledge' that apprehends - what and how? The whole process is unclear
> to me. How this knowledge did came in to picture here.    Is knowledge
> outcome or the means here? Am I missing something here?
>
> > If the conditions of perception are wrong,  like defects in sense
> > organs
> > or abnormal conditions such as a glittering object or insufficient
> > light,
> > then the knowledge-D that is produced becomes false.
>
> Again who determines whether something is defective or not? Since you
> said each saakshee is different with different brains.  Each is
> apprehending what it perceived through their sense- brain complex - who
> determines it is false knowledge - on the basis of some other saakshii
> and his brain? How does that saakshii know what is right knowledge and
> what is worng knowledge to establish the norm - Does it mean one
> saakshee's knowledge is false and other saakshee's knowledge is right? -
>
>
> >
> > So, correct knowledge-D is svatah pramANa which sAkshee-D validates.
>
> Jay - you made a big jump here.  when the senses are defective and if
> one does not know that they are defective - now possessor of that brain
> and saakshee - takes what it received and on what basis it is going to
> validate or invalidate this info fed by the senses?  Please explain the
> so called validation or invalidation by a saakshee and on what norm? If
> that particular saakshee is not familiar with those norms then what
> happens - is it correct knowledge or incorrect knowledge? I am still
> puzzled about the jarness of the jar, though?
>
> > sAkshee-D apprehension of untruth is conditioned by the absence of
> > coherence.  For this reason, the apprehension of untruth is "paratah".
>
> Now you are bringing few more terms here - truth and untruth. Now
> 'coherency and 'incoherency' is again on what basis - Things look
> coherent to you is incoherent to me and I am sure vice versa.  My
> saakshee is validating my knowledge and your saakshee yours.  Now who
> establishes coherency here? Mine is absolutely coherent, may not be by
> your norms. Now validated knowledge by my saakshee, does that comes
> under true or false knowledge? You seem to be bringing some other
> validation criteria to say real or unreal - independent of any
> particular saakshee-s. Am I right? Which saakshii establishes those
> norms and on what basis? What is the criteria of acceptance of those
> norms? Faith - beliefs - then how can one say that is a valid knoweldge
> non-negatable by all saakshees?
>
> > But in knowledge-A,  the truth may be determined at the present time,
> > but there is no guarantee that the knowledge-A will not be sublated
> > at a future time.
>
> Does A - stand for advaitic knowledge? - let us discuss that later once
> we understand knowledge-D correctly.
>
> Jay - I am trying to understand the saakshii-D and knowledge-D process.
>
>
> Hari OM!
> Sadananda
>
>
> =====
> What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is
your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> want to unsubscribe or change your options? See:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> Need assistance? Contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>