[Advaita-l] Advaita-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 29

[Kotekal, Srinivas [Non-Employee/0200]]

>
> >> 
> >> If you read Shruti vAkya "ekam eva advitiiyam" as "there cannot be
> >> anything
> >> other
> >> than Brahman" ; then following fundamental question arises ;
> 
> >Hold it right there Srinivas - when you say the question arises - you
> >are already in the realm of ignorance. 
> 
> Stop...Stop..Sadananda-ji...
> 
>> I questioned so because you quoted "ekam eva advitiiyam" in the first
>> place.
>> Right ? If my question is in domain of ignorance, why can't you and
>> your
>> assertion of "ekam..." is also be in the same domain in the first
> place ?!?.
> For that matter, why can't statement's owner, Shruti, itself be in
> such
> domain ?... you tell me ?
> 
>> Why do you consider Shruti and its statement is in non-ignorance
>> domain but
>> any questions about them are in ignorance domain ? 
> 

>Sorry - I donot understand the question - what domain are you taking
>about. The shruti is addressing only the ignorent fellow - not a
>j~naani. Your question sounds like why cannot chemistry knowledge be in
>the domain of chemistry ignorance, if I say chemistry is taught to the
>one who is ignorant of chemistry.    I get the feeling you are just
>wasting my time Srinivas. Mundaka defines para and apara vidya and see
>under what catergory the veda-s are put, if that is what your question
>is. 

You agreed shrutis are for ignorant and you also said jnAnis will not
question shrutis. But you failed to address the question how would one
becomes jnAni in the first place ? You are assuming some people are jnAni
somehow and they do not need shruti. This is absolutely baseless assumption.


For your information, Sri Vyasa Himself has said in first sutra "athAtho
brahma jignyAsa" (Then, therefore let us examine the subject of brahman) ;
this means real person (who wants to be jnAni) will enquire the subject of
brahmn by questioning and analysis. No one will just assume they are jnAni
like you did.


> >J~naani will not ask  such questions. 
> 
>> Then, what is the difference between non-Hindu and JnAni ? both will
>> not
>> question about "ekam eva advitiiyam" anyway. Or, if non-questioning is
>> considered as jnAni laxaNa, every child in this world is jnAni to say
>> so !

>You are kidding! I expected better questioning from you. you are using a
>converse statement and posing the question.  What kind of questioning is
>that my friend.  I said j~naani knows and therefore he does not ask -
>does that imply that whoever does not ask is a j~naani.  Did I make a
>statement that not askig questions is a sufficent and necessory
>qualifications for j~naani - Dear Srinivas, why do you want to waste our
>time with such silly questions. 

You only said "J~naani will not ask  such questions" and by saying so you
try to avoid me asking fundamental question about "ekam eva advitiiyam". The
more funny thing is ; you yourself only quoted that shruti in support of
your view ! Now you are trying to avoid my question !

Nice try, Sadanada-ji.


>Sorry I ventured to answer your post. There is no point for me to waste
>my time or your time in trying to clarify your misunderstanding of
>advaita.  

If you don't have time to discuss, that's fine with me but understand the
objections.

Regards,
Srinivas.

This communication is intended solely for the use of the addressee and may
contain information that is legally privileged, confidential or exempt from
disclosure.  If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any 
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly 
prohibited.  Anyone who receives this message in error should notify the 
sender immediately and delete it from his or her computer.