[Advaita-l] Jivanmukti - Jnana plus Sannyasa pt 4

[Bhaskar YR]

Dear Bhaskar-ji
Pranams

praNAms Sri shyam prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Sri S prabhuji :

I have provided with six posts consisting primarily of references to both 
Shruti, Shankarabhashyas and Sureshwaracharya's vartikas - what you have 
provided is a stray reference in the Sutrabhashyas to shudras being 
eligible for jnanaprapti which is irrelevant

bhaskar :

I donot know how you have come to this conclusion...whether it is one or 
hundred quotes...please mind that it has been said by shankara 
bhagavatpAda himself...So, considering the present context of the 
discussion, my quote is quite relevant & without any ambiguity dismisses 
your theory that 'JEEVAN MUKTI OR SAMYAKJNAANA POSSIBLE ONLY IN SANYAASA 
ASHRAMA'.  Please also note I've not yet taken your another declaration 
that : jeevan mukti is a subsequent stage of a samyakjnAni & 
samyagdarshana & jeevanmukti/mOksha are NOT one and the same..

So, prabhuji kindly note though I've one evidence from shankara bhAshya it 
is more strong & convincing as against your out of context irrelevant 
hundreds of quotes from shankara bhAshya. btw, IT IS NOT JUST ONE QUOTE, 
I've quoted more than one in my lead post on sanyAsa in shankara vedanta 
:-)

Sri S prabhuji :

and names of jivanmuktas that begin with avatara purushas Maryada 
Purushottama Rama and Bhagwan Krishna....and then you continue on with 
more mythological figures Dhruva, etc whose jivanmukti has no connection 
whatsoever with the shravana manana nidhidhyasana of Advaita Vedanta. That 
in itself should tell you something.

bhaskar :

I am sorry, you are wrong again in your assessment, shankara himself has 
taken the example of bhagavAn krishna and says : yathA bhagavatA 
vAsudevasya kshAtradharma chestitaM na jnAnena samucchiyate purushArtha 
siddhaye, tadvat phalAbhisaMdhi ahaMkAra abhAvasya tulyatvAt 
vidushaH...so, your claim that avatAra purusha-s shold not be taken as 
example does not hold water.  And then, your next claim that mythological 
figures have not done shravaNa, manana & nidhidhyAsana...Is there any 
substantial proof for you to prove that these characters have not 
completed the obligation of shrvaNAdi sAdhana??  How come you are assuming 
that they were illiterates as far as veda & vedAnta jnAna is concerned?? 
And again even if I take your stand that they are jeevan mukta-s but not 
familiar with vedAnta sAdhana, then it is clear that saNyAsa is NOT A MUST 
for saMyaK jnAna & jeevan mukti. 

And again, prabhuji, please note I am not only talking about mythological 
characters, I am talking about the characters which shankara himself 
quotes in sUtra bhAshya.  For example, raikva, vAchaknavi, saMvarta, 
dharma vyAdha, vidhura etc.  And FYI, some shruti characters also would 
tell us brahma jnAni-s in shruti are not ALWAYS sanyAsi-s..For example : 
yamarAja, nachiketa, uddAlaka, svetaketu, bhrugu, pippalAda etc. So, your 
accusation against me does not have any meaning. 

Sri S prabhuji :

It is ironic that you are adamant about adoptinig a stance that is totally 
contrary and diametrically opposed to what Shankara actually says, despite 
volumes of evidence to the contrary, and instead prefer to start invoking 
every blessed Mahatmas name starting from Lord Rama and Lord Krishna. If 
you start saying "Ishwara" didnt need to take "sannyasa" - so why should a 
seeker, then there is no sane discussion possible.

bhaskar :

yes, no sane discussion is possible when one particular want to narrow 
down the purports of shankara..As usual you are taking two examples of 
rAma & krishna & beating around the bush!!  For your agony, out of these 
two forms of Ishwara, one form has already been taken as an example from 
bhAshyakAra himself.  And he called a kshatriya, Arjuna a samyagjnAni 
without recommending him A MUST SANYAASA...What we need to have to do 
objective analysis of all these is little bit of open mind..

Sri S prabhuji :

With regards to Bhagwan Ramana he did not even need self-enquiry to be 
enlightened and he spent close to two decades leading a monastic life in 
the caves of Arunachala after his initial self-experience.

bhaskar :

And again he came back, mingled with public, talked & answered questions, 
loved cow, cut vegetables in kitchen...so do you think he was not a jeevan 
mukta 'sanyAsi' coz. he is not meeting your saNyAsi requirement Or do you 
want to see jnAni's inaction in action??  choice is yours..

Sri S prabhuji : 
 
I have myself said if you read through my posts that for a uttama adhikari 
a single sentence of tat tvam asi may suffice to have jnana, jnananishta 
and jivanmukti all in one stroke - the emphasis here is on uttama adhikari 
which as far as I am concerned is almost always only a theoretical 
possibility.

bhaskar :

quite irrelevant to the present discussion..see your subject heading we 
are talking about jeevan mukti which should be 'according to you' ALWAYS 
JNANA + SANNYASA'...adhikArabedha you can ascribe ONLY to mumukshu-s not 
jnAni-s..

Sri S prabhuji :

All my six posts - in case you have read them completely - are primarily 
direct quotes of Shankara's bhashyas -can you please point out one 
instance where you feel I have indulged in "speculation"? 

bhaskar :

I am not telling you that you are indulged in speculation on 
saNyAsa...Those who follow shankara bhAshya, it is conspicuous for them 
that shankara time & again strongly recommends & insists on the sarvakarma 
saNyAsa &  sanyAsAshrama for jnAna prApti.  But in the attempt of showing 
the importance of sanyAsa, you are denying the possibilities of 
jnAnOtpatti to OTHER ASHRAMI-S..that is I think too naive & 'toe in the 
mouth' like justification.

Sri S prabhuji : 

Honestly, I am surprised to see this coming from someone who repeatedly 
references the idea of belonging to a sampradaya that lays exclusive 
emphasis on being a follower of the "original" or "pure" Shankara 
siddhanta, especially considering the fact that Shankara's stance about 
formal sannyasa and jivanmukti is as unambiguous as can possibly be. 

bhaskar :

Let us stop talking about one's own saMpradAya, guru etc.  Let this 
discussion continue without bringing in personal guru parampara & 
saMpradAya etc. ...Hope you could do that.

Sri S prabhuji :

Yes Mundaka does say whoever knows this truth gets the knots of avidyA 
undone - the very same Mundaka also says "vedanta-vijnana-sunischitarthah 
sannyasa-yogad yatayah shuddasattvah te brahma-lokeshu parantakale 
paramrtah parimuchyanti sarve.

Those monks to whom the entity presented by the vedantic knowledge has 
been FULLY ascertained AND who ENDAVOR assiduously with the help of the 
Yoga of MONASTICIM become free – - Monasticism is meant as a subsidiary of 
the knowledge of Brahman FOR ITS FULL MATURITY. The same Upanishad also 
says that this BrahmavidyA should be imparted ONLY TO THOSE WHO HAVE 
FORMALLY EMBRACED SANNYASA.

bhaskar :

again no objection from side, I am in full agreement with this..As far as 
your last sentence, i.e. BrahmavidyA should be imparted ONLY TO THOSE WHO 
HAVE FORMALLY EMBRACED SANNYASA...should be understood contextually 
without reading too much into it...otherwise, you may have to conclude 
shruti itself erred elsewhere by imparting brahma vidya to a boy like 
nachiketa of Katha, svetaketu, chUdAla of chAdOgya, vAruNi of taitireeya..

Sri S prabhuji :

Do you find this compatible with your uniquely novel idea of the terms 
vedanta vijnana being synonymous with sannyasa? 

bhaskar :

Kindly see shankara bhAshya on 18-49 especially his clarification on 
'saNyAsena adhigacchati'...

Hari OM
Shri Gurubhyoh namah
Shyam

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar