[Advaita-l] Shankara and Kriya Yoga

rajaramvenk at gmail.com rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Thu Jun 6 12:07:08 CDT 2013

Shruti is not apaurusheya because its author has been forgotten. It is apaurusheya because it has always been known to be without author and opposing arguments have been refuted by mimamsakas and vedantins to this day. If there is no apaurusheya shruti, then how can one - for the first time - find out that there will be result for yajna in a future birth or there will no rebirth? These are unseen results and has to be learnt from another who should learn from yet another and so on. 

The source of knowledge about what constitutes shruti is sampradaya. Controversy has to be resolved through evaluation of supporting arguments. Even if we can't resolve, we can accept as shruti what is common to all. A statement - so called shruti or otherwise - should not contradict what is common shruti pramana to all. 

If I told you I taught Sankara logic, will you accept?  You will ask for evidence because you are not a gullible person. Basically, you will ask "When?". If I said 1200 years ago, you will say Sankara lived 2500 years ago or vice-versa. You will ask "What else I remember from that time period?" And verify the facts against what is known through historical studies. Have the followers of Babaji done such critical study?  On the contrary, we see sringeri acharya enquiring in to the truth of his own experience critically. If we don't do that we will be left with no option but to blindly accept any statement by any one as true and beyond question. We know that it is not the case and hence the need for discrimination between truth and delusion. 
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:26:44 
To: <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Shankara and Kriya Yoga

praNAms Sri Rajaram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Hare Krishna. It is amazing how a brilliant and learned scholar such as 
you should fail to differentiate between apaurusheya and paurusheya sabda 

>  At the outset a disclaimer note :  I am not a learned scholar nor a 
brilliant at any stretch of your favourable imagination on me..For that 
matter I am not even qualified to be called as a sincere student of 
advaita...My priorities with regard to advaita sAdhana always occupies the 
last bench. So, you can always take my words with a pinch of salt :-)) And 
when it comes to the demarkation line that you would like to draw  between 
apaurusheya and paurusheya shabda pramANa is still unclear to me.  By the 
way how would you certainly determine a certain statement in a book ( 
think that  the title of which you donot know) is apaurusheya or otherwise 
!!??  I am still at puzzle.  Various tradition within trimatasta-s have 
varied opinion on what supposed to be the apaurusheya texts..I hope I dont 
have to bring-in the controversies that exists between dvaitins & 
advaitins with regard to Agama prakaraNa of mAndUkya.

All pramanas including sabda can lead to incorrect conclusion due to wrong 
application as detailed out in tarkasangraha but without apaurusheya 
shruti laying the foundation there can be no eternal knowledge. 

> since I am a student of advaita vedAnta, I dont have any problem here to 
accept shAstra is the pramANa for eternal knowledge..But I dont think this 
stand would force me for unconditional acceptance of the apaurusheyatva of 
veda-s.  Like any other paurusheya pramANa grantha-s (i.e. smruti & nyAya 
prasthAna) shruti also a pramANa for which author/s are anonymous. 

BTW, Sringeri Periyava does not believe his own experience blindly. He 
validates it through other means. It is detailed out in the book. 

>  I dont want to debate on this issue on behalf of kriya yOga 
followers...But I am interested to know which shruti pramANa you would 
give to prove the fact that HH received the yOga instruction from shiva in 
dream!!??  If it is not possible but accepted as truth based on guru vAkya 
I dont know why kriya yOga followers should not do that same way and 
declare the bAbAji is the kriya yOga guru of shankarAchArya!!??

Let us say the statements of Krishna, Sringeri Periyava and Babaji are 
equally unverfiable and only an object of sraddha. If Krishna's statement 
is determined as true, it serves the core purpose of directing the mind 
towards sarvajna nitya ishwara. If Sringeri Periyava's statement is 
determined to be true, it directs the mind towards sarvajna nitya ishwara 
again. If Babaji's statement is determined to be true, it directs the mind 
towards Babaji, who is at best a jAti smara jIva or a chiranjeevi. 

>  One could easily sense the subjective attachment to one particular 
personality or institution.  For that matter if bAbAji's statement is 
determined to be true, it does not directs the mind towards bAbAji, it 
directs the mind towards Ishwara / god only...through dhyAna & adhyAtmika 
jeevana one can bring god into life is the basic teaching of kriya yOgin-s 
I believe..

One who has determined the value of discrimination between eternal and 
non-eternal will not give in to such a distraction. 

>  I agree with you...but sorry to say that my mind is still struggling to 
capture the knack of determination, hence there is lot of distraction.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list