[Advaita-l] Mimamsa Question: karmabheda in SAkAs (Jaimini Sutra 2.4.8 )

Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Tue Jan 27 02:40:31 CST 2009

<<But a scientist points out that the atom when split generats subatomic
particles and gamma rays we have a big problem: we still haven't got the
ether or anything yet. >>
Science has established the equivalence of mass and energy.
Sunil K. BHattacharjya

--- On Mon, 1/26/09, Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Bhadraiah Mallampalli <vaidix at hotmail.com>
Subject: [Advaita-l] Mimamsa Question: karmabheda in SAkAs (Jaimini Sutra 2.4.8 )
To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Monday, January 26, 2009, 7:54 AM

>> I do not see any reason why an individual variation of any sort in the
>>vidhis by time, place, causation or guru/rishi ceases to be apaurusheya
>>as long as the individual variation of the yajna mirrors the yajna that
>>going on within the individual. 
>What exactly do you mean by apaurusheya here? And what is the yajna
>that goes on within the individual?
Years ago I created a dispute re: the word apaurusheya by saying that 
1. shrutis themselves did not contain a statement "Shruti is
and 2. all vedas, yajnas were born from the vedic purusha as per purusha
suktam, so how can vedas be apaurusheya? 3. If it is said that vedas are
apaurusheya because they are even greater than purusha, I would call it a
vitandavada used to justify a common saying going beyond shruti itself. I
even argued this on Shri Chinna Jeeyar Swami's list and it is all history. 
For the purpuse of this discussion I withdraw all above and accept
to the convention that apaurusheya means - not man-made: like ghata and
pata, but something naturally existing self-born, eternal. 
The concept of brahma being same one material that has no properties is
undisputed. However the term brahmajnanam depends on the creature that
is attaining it. 
All humans are made similarly, and differences between humans is only in
terms of quantity of matter and nature of karmas. This is like all atoms
aremade similarly using protons, neutrons and electrons. So the nature of
brahmajnanam would be similar.The process of how one person gets
brahmajnanam will be similar to another person. Once a person gets the
brahmajnanam (by removing the illusion/false knowledge of snake etc) the
person doesn't see any more differences, doesn't see anything else
than oneself. This is one step model of acquiring brahmajnanam. We can
think of getting brahmajnanam is like smashing the atom.    
Shrutis provide a two step method of getting brahmajnanam. Just like
atoms consist of subatomic particles and their movements and interactions,
every human (for that matter any creaturee or even plain nature) consists
of 33,000 devas, a number of rtviks, asuras etc. We dont take all these
devas, but only a limited number of objects as required at appropriate
time in the yajna. 
Now what happens when you smash an atom? Before 19th century
scientists used to think they will merge into ether. Now they know it splits
into subatomic particles. If you think smashing the atom gives you ether,
you are just fine, likewise a person's brahmajnanam is just perfectly valid
brahmajnanam when he/she thinks he/she got it. There is no dispute about it. 
But a scientist points out that the atom when split generats subatomic
particles and gamma rays we have a big problem: we still haven't got the
ether or anything yet. The resulting particles have to be resolved before
declaring we know everything about nature. Likewise when the composition
of creature by devas a nd rtviks are brought up the old model of
brahmajnanam while still valid, its explanation ceases to be correct, as per
authority of upanishats. (When at a point of time some one with this
knowledge makes an injunction at that point of time what was earlier valid
becomes invalid until the new question is resolved.) At the gross level
brahmajnanam of the individual person is still valid and the yajna is deemed
to be successful and the devas are deemed to be happy having gotten
their portions of soma and the rtviks getting their portions of the animals or
whatever. But the explanation of how it happened is still pending and needs
Just to give an example, at the body level, the contact between lips or
between any two parts of the mouth represents speech as well as the
deva named agni. This sensation is almost always felt by a yoga
practitioner as well as the common man. Some times the agni may not be
perceived but it is usually a diversion, like you divert a child's
from a toy to another toy. Speech only converts from one form into
another and agni also converts from one form into another. But agni as
such won't go away that easily. Agni himself appears theoretically because
he is the first one to get soma and he grabs most of it leaving hardly
anything for other devas. When a person gets brahmajnanam as a parallel
activity among interesting events happen among the devas, 1. agni may
not grab his portion of soma at all saying not this, not this(and speech will
disappear as a consequence) and yajamana leaves household duties and
becomes a mendicant, or probably the yajamana found a faster tack to
completion of yajna. 2. agni may be persuaded by rtviks not to grab his
soma, so other devas can have it (thereby you see all other devas one by
one) and all the actions as per the Shruti will happen and the yajanama
and his wife (symbolically) achieve completion of yajna and in parallel to
this yajna, in the outside world the PERSON (within whom all this yajna was
happening) who saw the snake now realizes the true nature of that object
gets brahmajnana in parallel while his internal yajna was getting completed.
This is the two step model. The two steps happen in parallel, not one after
another!! I mean while what we see as the PERSON from outside gets his
brahmajnanam, internally the yajna happens successfully.   
So the parallel process as represented by the internal yajna is equally
apaurusheya because it represents the interactions between the devas
who are themselves born from non-duality and merge into it. These parallel
processes by devas and rtviks also appear like different forms of
>>It is always a good idea to find common approaches to the vidhis by
>>consensus. But if some of them are conditionally wrong so be it. It all
>>depends on the knowledgeable persons being present at that time.
>So, everything is left to chance or to some mysterious providence? The
>authority of the veda does not work that way.
Finding a common approach is similar to doing a well known pranayama,
which is a standard method to obtaining brahmajnanam. The person who
realizes thruth by removing false knowledge is also doing an internal
pranayama in parallel. The pranayama that was started some times may
not work because of individual's current situation (which was not realized
the beginning) which demands a different pranayama; e.g. when a past
karma comes out suddenly into play. This can very well happen because
unknown (Prajapati) is also mapped as one of the devas. Now we have a
new situation that was not foreseen before, so a remedy has to be done
for the damage already happened and a new strategy has to be evolved to
complete the yajna. In the outside world the PERSON may have to light a
lamp to observe the object more clearly. Such variations in yajna are very
much legitimate and they become a part of Shruti and therefore
 >>The process by which one person learns is similar to how another
>>person learns, but there are also differences, so there would always be
>>different archetypes. When there is a disconnect between the vidhis
>>and the real yajna within, the vidhis cease to be apaurusheya... unless
>>expiation is done which puts yajna back on track. The vidhis demand
>This makes absolutely no sense. A fault in the performance of a yajna
>calls for expiation. It has no bearing whatsoever on the apaurusheyatva
>of the vedic injunction that underpins that yajna.
What is fault by the way? How can a fault happen when things were
started correctly with complete knowledge? A fault that occurs as surprise
to organizers of yajna is a form of tamoguna which creates the risk that 
original scheme of the yajna may cease to be apaurusheya.
The expiation removes this tamoguna and makes the necessary correction
to yajna hence granting its apaurusheya status. 
>>the performers' minds be also synchronized, don't they? The
catch is
>>only people with brahmajnanam> can recognize this. If at least the
>>person doing expiation doesn't have brahmajnanam that may
>>another expiation and so on going into a loop and we are thrown out of
>>the yajna. A person with the> brahmajnanam will anyway occupy the
>>right place before the yajna starts. So we may be fine. 
>A person with brahmajnAna does not initiate or participate ritually in any 
>yajna. The only right place for a brahmajnAnI in a yajna is to be a witness
>to it. In fact, only one who is not a brahmajnAnI is a performer of any
>act, including yajna-s.
If the person's life is portrayed as a yajna in parallel, then the person
no choice other than participate in it. The brahmajnani is a witness to the
external objects like snake & rope as well as the internal devas, rtviks
yajna. Adding another 33,000 characters to the story doesn't make any
difference to the brahmajnanam of the brahmajnani. 
Hotmail® goes where you go. On a PC, on the Web, on your phone. 

Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list