[Advaita-l] A matter for Adjudication

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
Hare Krishna

It seems you have all the time in the world to write comprehensive 
multiple mails every day :-))Whereas,  being a gruhasta, hired for doing 
something otherthan vedAnta vichAra at office, I cannot spend time as much 
as you can :-)) Once in a blue moon day I would get some breathing time to 
concentrate on these issues during my official hour...Anyway, I wont let 
you disappointed :-)) Here we go :

Subbu prabhuji :

This opinion is wrong.  Many, most people who have a fairly good knowledge
of the tradition and ways of SSS are quite aware that he has spared 
Sureshwaracharya from the
blacklisting of post Shankara Advaita Acharyas.

bhaskar :

This is only biased view of yours due to very limited knowledge of Sri SSS 
works.  What do you mean by Sri SSS spared sureshwara from blacklisting?? 
do you think he has only this mission of black listing all the 
vyAkhyAnakAra-s without any scrutiny of their works? how familiar you are 
with his works like naishkarmya siddhi, kleshApahArini ( an exhaustive 
commentary in sanskrit on NS), taitireeya bhAshya vArtika, mAnasOllAsa, 
vEdAnta vichArada itihAsa?? do you know how indepth analysis he has made 
with regard to sureshwara's works also & proved that unlike bhAmati & 
vivaraNa vyAkhyAna, vArtika prasthAna is more sincere to mUlabhAshya?? 
Yes, Sri SSS has his views against vyAkhyAnakAra-s but mind you it was not 
the intention of Sri SSS to blacklist the popular names in tradition to 
gain recognition...IMO, it is high time for you to abstain from making 
personal comments on Sri SSS without any base. 

Sri Subbu prabhuji :

Could you kindly clarify what you mean by the term:  *sArvatrika 
pUrNAnubhava *?  And how you contrast it from
*vaiyuktikAnubhava*(individual/personal experiences like asamprajnAtha or 
nirvikalpa samAdhi)

bhaskar :

See, if you eat masAla dOsa & chutney at vidyArthi bhavan in the early 
morning without bringing it to the notice of anybody & 'enjoyed' that dOsa 
chutney...that enjoyment even if you announce in public the description of 
that enjoyment is mere your personal anubhava..If you experience samAdhi 
at one particular point of time in your innermost recesses of your heart 
that is 'your' anubhava, restricted to your own explanation of that 
anubhava.  Though we cannot deny the credibility of these peculiar 
experiences of individulas, these unique experiences cannot be a pramANa 
for the brahma jignAsa...After all it is your personal experience, no one 
can prove whether it is true or false..it is purusha tantrAdhArita, 
kAlaparimita, vaiyuktika (unique) anubhava..Hence, you cannot comeout of 
some mystic experience and say, see I had been there in nirvikalpasamAdhi 
from early morning 4 to 6, based on my experience I will say brahman is 
ONE without second, so you have to accept the advaita which is 
ultimate..If you do that, immediately, a dualist would comeforward and say 
: "see, I have the darshana of bhagavAn krishna today in brAhmi mahUrta, 
during a course of discussion, he said, these mAyAvAdins making mess of my 
sandesha in geeta, you tell all ajnAni-s in the world that I am the 
supreme godhead and these puny jeeva-s should not think tattvamasi, let 
them  do archana, upAsana to reach by abode vaikunta I'll take care of 
their yOgakshema, this is the ultimate saNdesha...Which one is parama 
pramANa to realize the ultimate truth here?? Ofcourse, as you know, both 
of them based on the vaiyuktikAnubhava of respective individuals who are 
preaching two different siddhAnta-s...it is only shraddha in one 
individual you are saying other person's interpretation wrong or 
interpreting his siddhAnta differently to match your book (as you did in 
purandaradAsa devara nAma:-))..is it not?? And now what is purNAnubhava?? 
anubhava which is neither indriyAnubhava or vedanAnubhava and which is 
universal to one and all like agnirushNa....

We  can talk about this sArvatrika anubhava later..but first do note that 
your individual experience (no matter how sublime & divine it would be) 
cannot hold water in brahma jignAsa.. 

Sri Subbu prabhuji:

Quite ironically,  SSS while translating the word 
स्वहृदयप्रत्ययं
ब्रह्मवेदनं देहधारणम् .. of the Bhashya for BSB 4.1.15 
says: ತನ್ನ ಹೃದಯಕ್ಕೆ *
ಮಾತ್ರ* (ತಿಳಿಯಬರುವ,,) [known ONLY to oneself..].  Is this the 
 *sArvatrika
pUrNAnubhava or the **vaiyuktikAnubhava*? 

bhaskar :

It is the anubhava that jnAni realizes that is sArvatrika & pUrNa to one 
and all (sarvAtmabhAva) & that is reason why it is also called 
samyakjnAna...and mind you, shankara does not say here this 'sva-hrudaya 
pratyayaM is the result of some individual's unique experience at some 
particular point of time...No need to mention here that you are quoting 
above bhAshya vAkya out of context to prove that vaiyuktikAnubhava is 
pramANa for brahma jignAsa...

Sri Subbu prabhuji:

Please also be informed that whether it is the sAkshAtkAra had by vichAra 
or
samAdhi, the experience is always of the nature of 'sarvoham' 'pUrnoham',
etc. and never otherwise. 

bhaskar :

you have gone wrong again, shankara says both in sushupti & samAdhi the 
jeeva experiences the same 'experience' whereas sarvOham or pUrNoham is 
NOT avasthA vishesha jnAna....

Sri Subbu prabhuji:

So, your distinguishing these two types is devoid of any purpose or 
meaning. 

bhaskar :

My distinguising these two anubhava-s are very much in line with shankara 
bhAshya, if you dont see any purpose in it that is only due to your 
limited understanding of shankara siddhAnta prabhuji, I cannot help it 
:-))

Sri Subbu prabhuji :

It is only in the case of non-advaitic sAkShAtkAra, like for example of 
the Patanjali's system, the anubhava is of
the type of an individualized soul. 

bhaskar :

what is that non-advaitic sAkshAtkAra in patanjali's system??  please be 
more specific...

Sri Subbu prabhuji :

This is because that sAdhaka has trained in the shAstra that admits nAnA 
jeeva-s. 

bhaskar :

contextually shankara also accepts nAnA jeeva vAda & says adhikAri 
purusha-s even after samyak jnAna and dehAntara still take birth as per 
the instructions of Ishwara & they take another deha with the aid of that 
famous 'prArabdha' karma...So, you contention in favour of eka jeeva vAda 
is wrong and against bhAshya..in sUtra bhAshya shankara says in the case 
of bondage continue to attach another upAdhi, then the talk of another 
jeeva becomes 'necessary'...bhAshyakAra has accepted contextually both eka 
jeeva & nAnA jeeva vAda, you cannot wish away this stand of shankara by 
selectively quoting some bhAshya vAkya-s..it is quite obvious that when 
samashti antaHkaraNa (upAdhi) is considered the ONE and ONLY self is 
called mahAn Atma but when vividhOpAdhi considered the nAnA jeeva vAda too 
valid..Hope you are aware of shankara's difinition about 'bhOkta' & ' 
hiraNya garbha' in sUtra bhAshya. For that matter atharva saMhita says : 
shataM sahasramayutaM nyarbhudamasankhyeyaM svamasmin nivishtaM...Please 
note nAna jeeva vAda is not an alien theory in shankara 
siddhAnta...Contextually we have to understand these concepts carefully.

Sri Subbu prabhuji :

In their case there will be no 'sarvAtmatva anubhava' that Shankaracharya 
points out in the Br.Up.
1/4/10 for the mantra '.  तस्माiत् तत्सर्वमभवत् [owing 
to the realization of Its own Self, Brahman came to realize that It is the 
ALL.]

bhaskar :

again out of context & selective quote...do you know shankara's 
explanation on apAntaratama-s which gives us the impression that jeeva & 
Ishwara bedha is eternal & paramAtma keep on instructing these jeeva-s 
todo jnAna prachAra?? 


Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar