[Advaita-l] akdhandaakara vRitti - My mistake

[Ravi Kiran]

Stretching the imagination:

Imagine a (unitary) conscious particle (knowing) in
(infinite)unbound-empty-space (no limits, no objects what-so-ever) .. what
can it possibly know, other than itself ?

namastE

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Keshava PRASAD Halemane via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> namastE.
> IMHO: Don't we (re)cognize blueness in blue color, only in relation to the
> non-blueness in all non-blue-objects . . . So, then it is all relative . .
> . meaning duality of contrasts or rather multiplicity of contrasts that
> helps us perceive . . . How do we (re)cognise empty-space ? What are the
> key identifying-&-distinguishing attributes / characteristics / features /
> properties of empty-space ? Perhaps (IMHO) by "object-abhAvatva" - earlier
> i cognised an-object-in-space and now that object is gone and what remains
> is empty-space; but no cognisable attributes, right? Maybe or may not
> be! The limits of a finitely-bound-empty-space may be (re)cognised by such
> limits, and the limits separated in space through a 'distance-measure'. So,
> then the concept of a distance measure can be considered as a key attribute
> for empty-space! Now, that is maths, geometry in particular!
> Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa jaayatE jantuḥ |
>  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra |  brahma
> jnaanaat hi braahmaNah ||
>
>
>      On Monday, 6 July 2015 2:00 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>
>  Sri SadAji,
> What attributes do attributes have? What is the attribute of blueness
> itself? The answer has to be nothing - but still it is possible to perceive
> blueness. So it is possible to perceive an attributeless thing.
>
> If not, how can one cognise Brahman, an attributeless thing?
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
> On 6 Jul 2015 09:06, "kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Rameshji - PraNAms
> >
> > That was my first post -Here we are referring to jnaana phalam although
> > there is no phalavyaapti for the Vedanta jnaanam.  I was told that I was
> > wrong. I waited to get clarification from Swami Paramarthanadaji. In
> > response to my question of what is akhandaakaara vRtti he mentioned (or
> to
> > be more precise I heard) the Vedanta jnaana vRitti that eliminates the
> > jiiva-brahma abhinnatvam and makes us understand the ekatvam. It is not
> > phalam but the jnaana vRitti that eliminates the bhinnatvam of
> > jiiva-brahma. I was told that I am wrong again. I am not sure if I am
> wrong
> > or the definition is incomplete as it is claimed that it applies to
> > perception of objects too.
> >
> > It can apply in the case of soyam devadattaH since we have two
> operations-
> > 1. Direct perception of the current devadatta where the current
> attributes
> > of Devadatta are involved, and 2. recollection of past perception from
> > memory where that devadatta with different attributes are involved. Hence
> > in the knowledge of soyam devadattaH, this is that Devadatta, the
> > attributes of this and that Devadatta are to be discarded since they are
> > contradictory, and only take the essence of Devadatta -The process is
> > bhaagatyaga lakshana where part of it rejected  and part is retained;
> the
> > contradictory vishshaNaas are rejected and unifying one is filtered since
> > there is only one Devadatta.
> >
> > Note that in the first perceived Devadatta, we do not perceive him devoid
> > of attributes but with current attributes. When we recall, we recall the
> > past Devadatta with past attributes. Now we use Viveka that sees
> > cognitively the changeless Devadatta in the changing devadattas. Hence it
> > is not direct perceptual knowledge, but can only be known by those who
> have
> > the Viveka (who can pick up the changeless ones in the changing ones).
> > Hence the example is used to understand tat tvam asi -using baadhyaayam
> > samanaadhikaranam or discard the contradictory qualifications while
> > retaining the essence.  Only a trained mind can do that.
> >
> > We also note that in the direct perception, the knowledge is always
> > attributive knowledge since senses can only gather attributes.  In the
> > recollection (internal perceptions) we do not have sense input, but still
> > in recollecting a cow or horse we do recollect the viseshnana sahita
> > viseshya , the object with attributes the recollection of cow differs
> from
> > that of horse.
> >
> > When we see for the first time since we have no memory of the past, then
> > the cognized object is stored with a  name . Second time perception
> > involves direct perception that cause cognition and recollection from
> > memory past similar attributive object and matching (sometime if the
> > recollection is vague or fuzzy) the attributive content, we say,  this
> is a
> > cow or He is Devadatta, etc. Vishishtaadvaita says the first time
> cognition
> > is indeterminate and the second time on the cognition is determinate.
> >
> > The point remains however that only without the attributive content the
> > object cannot be cognized – In seeing we see form of an object. But in
> > hearing we have to go by the attributive sound to compare whether it is a
> > cat or dog that is not seen but heard. In the case of lightning we see
> > first then we hear later since we have learned that velocity of the light
> > is greater than sound – even though both happened at the same time. All
> > these aspects are involved in perception shabda, sparsa, ruupa, rasa and
> > gandha- where sometime direct contact with the object with sparsa and
> rasa
> > is involved for cognition and recognition.
> >
> > Hence I maintain  based on our experiences, that there cannot be
> > perception of an object without visheshanas since by definition one
> object
> > differs from the others because of visheshanas only.  I cannot say I have
> > indeterminate perception of cat, cow and horse here – it is like blank
> > perception without the attributive content. If theoretically it is
> > formulated then it has no relevance to human experience.
> > Therefore I am not sure what akhadaakaara vRitti in perception of unitary
> > objects is.
> >
> > Hari Om!
> > Sadananda
> >
> >
> >  Sunday, 5 July 2015 9:49 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> >  wrote:
> >
> >
> >  On Sun, Jul
> >  5, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Keshava PRASAD Halemane via Advaita-l
> >  <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> >  wrote:
> >
> >  namastE. praNaams
> >  My Dear
> >  श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
> >  I am continuing further on the same line of
> >  thinking . . .
> >  Irrespective of the object
> >  being objectified, the akhanDAkAra-vrtti  always
> >  corresponds to the brahmAkAra-akhanDa-vRtti
> >
> >
> >  This would
> >  mean..
> >
> >  akhanDAkAra-vrtti is
> >  of the svayam-prakAsaka Brahma vastu alone, hence get Its
> >  brahmAkAratva
> >
> >  since
> >  akhanDAkAra-vrtti on any object does not dispel the ajnAna
> >  of Brahman
> >
> >
> >
> >  which illumines the real
> >  brahma-vastu in any/every/all object(s); that is the vision
> >  of a brahma-jnAni - even when looking at any object the
> >  brahma-jnAni sees the brahma-vastu in any/every/all objects
> >  being objectified.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  Here it is
> >  understood that, because of the brahma-jnAna alone, one sees
> >  the real Brahma vastu everywhere ( sarvAtma bhAva) and not
> >  because of akhanDAkAra-vrtti on that object, uncovered the
> >  real brahma-vastu, dispelling the ajnAna of Brahman
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  So, my understanding about the
> >  akhanDAkAra-vRtti is that it goes far beyond any/every/all
> >  viShEShaNas and reaches the real brahma-vastu any illumines
> >  it, rather than stopping short at the level of the
> >  viShEShaNas as in the case of other
> >  anEka-AkAra-vRttis.
> >  Keshava PRASAD
> >  HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa jaayatE jantuḥ |
> >  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt
> >  vipra |  brahma jnaanaat hi braahmaNah ||
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>