[Advaita-l] akhanDaakara-vRtti‏

[Durga Janaswamy]

Hari Om,
Pranams.

Namaste श्रीमल्ललितालालितः

Thank you for appreciating the manner of raising my doubts.
As suggested by you, now I have started reviewing your email-postings since May-01, 2015 in the archives of 'advaita-vedanta.org mailing list' .
Your teaching style is different. It is stimulating, to say the least, to me and other members of advaita-l group. Few times, some frustration is getting spilled in to emails.

I have learned a lot in last few days. I will be communicating with you shortly with my doubts.

Thank you and regards
-- durga prasad



________________________________
> From: lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com 
> Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 10:04:53 +0530 
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] akhanDaakara-vRtti‏ 
> To: janaswamy2001 at hotmail.com; advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org 
>  
> Nice way to present questions. It makes providing answers easy. 
>  
> श्रीमल्ललितालालितः 
> www.lalitaalaalitah.com<http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com> 
>  
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Durga Janaswamy via Advaita-l  
> <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org<mailto:advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>>  
> wrote: 
> Hari Om, 
> Pranams. 
>  
>  
> Namaste श्रीमल्ललितालालितः 
>  
> You wrote 
> "1.  Now, the akhaNDAkAratva or niShprakAratva of vRttiH. 
> Just take it as if a vRttiH dispels ignorance of a pot, etc. but  
> doesn't objectify it's adjectives, it is niShprakArikA. 
> prakAra means adjectives. The vRtti which illuminates base, it's  
> qualities and their relation;  is saprakArikA. 
>  
> 2.akhaNDAkAra of vRtti means that it doesn't illuminate any adjective  
> or relation. It just dispels ignorance of / illuminates one thing,  
> either brahman or pot without revealing it's qualties and relations." 
>  
> Doubts: vRttiH  is dispelling ignorance of say,a परिच्छिन्न​ pot. 
> 1. Why it is called akhaNDAkAra of vRtti? What is the reason for using  
> the term 'akhaNDa'? 
>  
> ​If you try to find meanings of both parts in the term akhaNDAkAra,  
> then you will be able to find that akhaNDa and AkAra both are technical  
> terms of our system​. They don't mean what they appear to say. 
> I've give meaning of both terms in old posts. Check them. 
> Now, the vRtti is called akhaNDAkAra because it dispels ignorance of a  
> single(akhaNDa) entity. 
> That single entity may be pot or devadatta or chandraH or brahman. 
>  
> 2. Can it be called आवरण भंगत्व of vRttiH? Is there a difference  
> between आवरण भंगत्व and akhaNDAkAratva? 
>  
> ​Don't use Sanskrit terms if you don't know their correct meaning and  
> uses, is my suggestion to all here. It just makes us feel that we, who  
> know their meaning, are in alien world who are abusing our language. 
>  
> Now, I've to take help of imagination to know what did you mean. But,  
> my imagination fails. So, make your statement clear. 
> ​ 
>  
> 3. As per this definition, any vRttiH that dispels ignorance of any  
> vastu, परिच्छिन्न​ or अपरिच्छिन्न, has akhaNDAkAratva.  Am I right? 
>  
> ​No. It may have akhaNDAkAratva, if it reveals that vastu, परिच्छिन्न  
> or अपरिच्छिन्न , without revealing it's attributes and relations -- is  
> the correct expression. 
> ​ 
>  
> 4. Is the characteristics of  of dispelling ignorance of परिच्छिन्न​  
> vastu and अपरिच्छिन्न vastu same? 
>  
> ​Make it more clear. What do you mean by sameness of the characteristic  
> of dispelling ignorance(अज्ञाननिवर्त्तनस्वभावः) ? 
> It is same for all vRtti, because vRtti is अज्ञानविरोधी or it itself is  
> अज्ञाननाश. 
> You may need some more study to understand wht I'm trying to mean by  
> second option, so ignore that. 
> But, the difference of viShaya makes vRtti different too. So,  
> considering viShaya, their is no similarity in any two vRtti revealing  
> two different viShaya-s. 
>  
> For Keshava, 
> vishiShTaGYAna needs visheShaNaGYAna, was told be me. You ignored even  
> when I told you to read that. Anyway, following your view that  
> 'niShprakArakaGYAna' is always brahmaviShaya'; 
> their could be no vishiShTaGYAna for amukta, because visheShya is not known. 
> even before brahmaGYAna, everyone realizes kevala-brahman by  
> niShprakArakavRtti(because the result of that = sprakArakaGYAna is seen  
> everywhere); so their is no need of brahmaGYAna and all are mukta. 
> both options are absurd. So, the original theory is wrong. 
>  
> And, the objections about how will the kevala-ghaTa revealed. The  
> answer is as kevala-ghaTa, as you said. 
>  
> And, the rule of viShayatA = AkAra is torn apart if  
> ghaTaviShayaka-niShprakAraka-GYAna reveals something else, i.e.  
> brahman. 
>  
> For some other people who claim to have studied vedAntaparibhAShA; 
> Just see a few lines there which talk about niShprakAraka-pratyaxa.  
> Author has used akhaNDAkAra-word too there. 
>  
> The best solution I found here is : Since my learning is like this, I'm  
> not going to accept whatever others say, even if appears logical to me  
> and is supported by old teachers. 
> Someone has a similarly good solution: I'll not tell what I know, just  
> go on clearing my doubts. 
> Someone does even good: He claims I'm reading you carefully. When asked  
> to look at some supporting logic already provided, he ignores and  
> continues with imagination. 
>  
> Anyway, it is a good exercise for those who have studies shAstra-s for  
> they need to learn how to refute all these absurd ideas which are being  
> spread by Missions and bAbA-s and vedAntAchArya-s through books and  
> lectures and writings. 
> Although, my teachers and friends just ask me to ignore these views for  
> these germinate because of ignorance of Sanskrit and shAstra-s. I think  
> it gives me a challenge to think. 
>  
> Please, bear with my sharp words if they apply to you. If they don't,  
> please enjoy. 
>  
> No more answers today. 
> I request durgA jI to continue. I'll reply when I find time. 
> Please, post a big letter with points and then sit back till I reply.  
> Because, if you bombard me with posts, I'm definitely going to ignore  
> most of them because they consume too much time. 
>  
> Thanks. 
>  
> ​ 
>  
>  
> Thank you and regards 
> -- durga prasad 
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________ 
> 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<mailto:listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org> 
>