[Advaita-l] mental effort
vishy1962 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 28 00:54:05 CDT 2008
Dear Shri Vyasji
I am certainly not against scriptures or books. After all they are the boat(s) that help you to cross over the river of ignorence. Let us be thankful to the boat for helping us to cross, but after crossing the river, there is no point in carrying over our heads for the sake of gratitude.
About the experience....
One might read 100 books to know that " sugar is sweet". But it would
remain just a knowledge unless he himself tastes it. Otherwise " sweet" would remain just
anothet word in his mind. yes . he become " Jnani'. Again he can teach 100 others about taste of sugar even without realizing what the word ' sweet' really means. Than tose 100 would again become literate/ knowledgable. Atleat the person who had tasted (Yogi) can attempt others too to taste.... even without knwing the word ' sweet'
Correct me, if I am wrong
--- On Sun, 27/7/08, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
From: Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] mental effort
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Sunday, 27 July, 2008, 8:12 PM
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Vishy wrote:
> He always says that there can be many amny teachers who can
> just reproduce what has been read from scriptures, but they always
> remain mere teachers. But Truth can be understood only from those who
> have experienced and they seldom speak.
Of course Brahman has to be known (not experienced Brahman is experienced
by all beings at all times. Most don't know it.) but why this unnecessary
prejudice against books?
If you read a shastra you are receiving sensory input from a physical
organ (namely the eyes) which is converted into thought and understood to
a lesser or greater degree based on your intellect. If you listen to the
words of a jnani you are receving sensory input from a physical organ (the
ears) which is converted into thought and understood to a lesser or
greater degree based on your intellect. What is the difference?
It is even more absurd if one objects to "mere teachers" reproducing
is read. Especially considering it is usually done by oral instruction. If
Rshi Yajnavalkya is a jnani and his teachings are recorded
how is somone telling you that any less a "direct experience" than if
some contemporary tells you their "direct experience" face to face?
I think all this "experience" talk is just an excuse for illiteracy.
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on http://help.yahoo.com/l/in/yahoo/mail/yahoomail/tools/tools-08.html/
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list