[Advaita-l] Prapatti

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Only a true sannyasi can attain that status of a jivan mukta. Otherwise, it
> is only a self deception.


In the tradition of Advaita there have been many non-sannyasins who have
been regarded as Jnanis; jivanmukta-s.  The Bh.Gita itself says about
Janaka and Shankara adds the name of another King: Ashvapathi.  Very
recently Sri Venkata Subba Rao, a householder lived in Sringeri who was a
Jnani.  In fact Vidyaranya says in the Panchadashi:  A jnani can happily
engage in activities like governing/ruling a kingdom. The Br.Up. has the
case of AjAtashatru, a kshatriya, king, who was a Jnani and a brahmaNa
BAlAki submitted himself to him for brahmavidyA.  The case of Yajnavalkya
with two wives is also popular in the Br.Up. In fact according to the
Jivanmukti viveka Yajnavalkya, the Jnani, chose to embrace sannyasa only
after he found the worldly engagement too distracting. The Kathopanishad
has  the Jnani-Guru is Yama, a householder.  The Taittiriya Up. has VaruNa,
the father, instructing his son BhRgu on Self-knowledge.  So is the
Uddalaka-Shvetaketu episode of Chandogya where Tat tvam asi is taught a
case of the teacher-father being a Jnani. My own Acharya, the author of
Sridakshinamurti stotram in two volumes, was not a sannyasi but the
Sringeri Acharyas held him in great regard as a Jnani.  Sri Umesh, the
author of several books on Yoga and the earlier Sringeri Acharya is not a
sannyasi.  If it is said Vairagyam is essential for Jnana/jivanmukti that
is fine.  But an insistence on sannyasa is not admitted in Advaita.  Dharma
vyAdha, Vidura, etc. were not sannyasins but jnanis.


> I am not opposed to intellectually understanding
> Advaitam but realisation is only for one who has truly transcended all
> desires. Even such atma rama Jnanis, Bhagavatam says, are attracted to the
> super-excellent qualities of Hari. Madhusudana, a jivan mukta and a
> paramahamsa sannyasi, says "let those who have truly controlled the mind
> meditate on the white light (nirguna brahman) if they want. for us, who are
> devoted, let the blue light that runs here and there in vrindavan be
> forever the object of vision and goal"
>

Getting attracted to the divine qualities of Hari/Shiva is not something
that makes those people opt for Brahmaloka. In fact Self-realization
automatically terminates a person's bodily life at the end of that current
life, whether he likes it or not.  The case of AdhikArika puruShas is
different owing to their extraordinary  upAsana accomplishments.  The word
'forever' is 'chiram' in the original verse.  'chiram' means 'for long',
which means 'as long as my body lasts'.

>
> >
> > Nonetheless, if someone is particularly interested in going to
> vaikuNTha, a
> > saMpradAyavid AchArya is likely to advise him/her to concentrate on
> > saguNopAsana and not bother with the j~nAna mArga.
> >
>
>  I am aware of that but it is difficult. Adi Sankara, as Sri Subrahmanian
> pointed out, transported his mother to Sri Vaikuntham. She rejected jivan
> mukti and kailasha prapti as not fit for her. This is akin to prappatti. I
> wanted to know if there is a valid Vedic ritual for saranagati.
>

But I have not said: AryAmbA rejected jivanmukti. First of all it is not
stated that it was offered to her and she rejected. At least, I am not
aware of such an offer by Shankara at her dying moments. No one can offer
this to someone who is not internally prepared for Atma jnanam.  She was an
exalted soul is not in doubt as the very birth of Shankara was owing to her
penance / observations / Bhakti.  Hence her attaining to a virtuous loka.
As far as I know there is no mention of any case in the Veda/Upanishad or
Purana of a person who was capable of attaining Jivanmukti but rejected it
to choose krama mukti.  Krama mukti happens by default to certain people
and not by choice.  That they have chosen to be upasakas is a different
matter.

subrahmanian.v