[Advaita-l] BrahmaGYAna and jIvanmukti - 5 (Other References)

[S Jayanarayanan]

--- Stig Lundgren <slu at bredband.net> wrote:

[..]

> Also Satchidanandendra Saraswati Swamiji held VivekachUDAmaNi in
> high 
> esteem. For instance, he translated this work into Kannada, and he 
> considered it indispensible for those seeking moksha. It is true
> that he 
> didn´t believe this work to be of Adi Shankara´s pen, and he did
> critizise 
> some parts of the book.

Criticism should be leveled only after every effort has been made to
resolve all contradictions.

For example, we have the following statements in the upanishhads:

KaTha 1.2.20: "The desireless man sees the Self."
BR^ihadAraNyaka 3.5.1: "After Self-realization, one renounces
desires."

The above statements *appear* to be contradictory, but are they
really? The first statement does speak of Self-realization after
renunciation of desires, but allows for the possibility of
Self-realization before renunciation of desires. Also, perhaps the
two statements are speaking of two different kinds of students.

> But nevertheless, he considered
> VivekachUDAmaNi a 
> most important work within the Advaita Vedanta tradition.
> 
> 
> As
> > I've pointed out, the VivekachUDAmaNi actually follows the JMV
> quite
> > closely, and H.H. even quotes the JMV as an authority in his
> > commentary. It is therefore reasonable to say that the JMV is
> part
> > and parcel of the advaita-vedAnta tradition.
> 
> 
> That JMV is part and parcel of the Advaita Vedanta tradition was no
> doubt 
> Satchidanandendra Swamiji´s opinion too. In fact, Swamiji wrote a
> Sanskrit 
> work called pAramahamsyamImAmsA which borrows from and referers to
> JMV. 
> Satchidanandendra Swamiji considered VidyAranyA´s views on
> prArabdha karma 
> not to be fully in line with Adi Shankara,

I'd be interested to know why exactly SSS felt that the JMV's views
were not fully in line with Sankara.

> but this doesn´t imply
> that JMV 
> would be useless or outside the Advaita Vedanta tradition. It is
> one thing 
> to say that a work is not by Shankara´s pen -- or perhaps that it
> even 
> differs from Shankara´s views in some details -- but another thing
> to say 
> that the work does not belong to the Advaita Vedanta tradition. To
> my 
> knowledge, Satchidanandendra Swamiji never said that any of those
> works 
> written by later advaitins did not belong to the Advaita Vedanta
> tradition.
> 
> Warmest regards
> Stig Lundgren 
> 


Respectful regards,

Kartik


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile.  Get started!
http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail