[Advaita-l] Please answer to this

Venkatraghavan S agnimile at gmail.com
Tue Oct 20 11:28:19 CDT 2015


Thanks for the reference, SadAji.

Its quite a coincidence, but I was listening to Swami Paramarthananda's
talk on the bhAshya of BrahmArpaNam sloka only last week.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan
On 20 Oct 2015 15:24, "kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Chandramouliji - PraNAms
>
> Just found the reference to the 16 samaanadhikaranams. I am quoting part
> of Ken Knight article and the referenced book which is available in the
> archives of advaitin list for those who want to have the reference.
> --------------------
> This work is from a monograph entitled Mahavakyas byDr. T.N Ganapathy
> He was at the Department of Philosophy, Ramakrishna
> Mission, Vivekananda College in Madras and the work
> was printed in 1982.
>
> In this book 16 samanaadhikaranas are dicussed.
>
> ...................
> Although I had got the monograph because of interest
> in the Mahavakyas I have found it very useful for some
> insights into grammar.
> Happy reading
>
> ken Knight
> --------------------------------
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 10/20/15, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Please answer to this
>  To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>, "H S Chandramouli" <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>  Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2015, 9:58 AM
>
>
>  Chandramouliji - Yes. Swami Paramarthanandaji did indicated
>  that there are apparently 16 samaanadhikaranas. The four
>  that were mentioned here are apparently discussed by
>  Shankara in his Brahma sutra bhashya - not remember where
>  exactly. I think the sixteen samaanaadhikaranas were
>  discussed in the other list by Kennith or so, and it may be
>  available in the archives. If I find it I will post it here.
>
>
>  The lakshnaas - jahat, ajahat and jahat ajahat lakshanas
>  were discussed by Sadananda yogindra in his Vedanta saara.
>
>  About Ghataaksaasha -  currently we just finished
>  discussing the Avachcheda vaada and Abhaasa vaada - in
>  relation to Jiiva in the Vichaarasaagara class. I am
>  planning to write on it sometime soon. That may also be
>  pertinent in terms of bhaamati vs vivarana schools, since
>  avachchedavaada is attributed to Mandana Misra and
>  Abhaasavaada to Sureswara, vidyaranya, etc. although
>  Shankara does not endorse either one, but uses both
>  arguments.
>
>  As Subbuji pointed that the fundamentals - 1. Brahma satyam
>  2. Jagan mithyaa 3. JivaH brahma eva na aparaH - forms the
>  basic tenets of Advaita Vedanta that all aacharyas
>  subscribe. The rest are only considered as prakriyas that
>  help to understand the mahaavaakyas. Shaastras do not
>  discuss these - only acharyas discuss these to extract
>  tatparya as Subbuji indicated.
>
>  Hari Om!
>  Sadananda
>
>  --------------------------------------------
>  On Tue, 10/20/15, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>  wrote:
>
>   Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Please answer to this
>   To: "kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>,
>  "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>   Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2015, 9:19 AM
>
>   Sri
>   Sadananda Ji,
>   Sri
>   Bhagavatpada also uses Mukhya Samaanaadhikaranam apart
>  from
>   Badha Samaanaadhikaranam to explain tat
>   tvam asi by way of the classic illustration of Ghatakasha
>   and Mahakasha. Just a passing
>   observation.
>   I have heard Sri Paramarthananda
>   Swamiji discuss Samaanaadhikaranam in some other context ,
>  not the
>   one you have mentioned. I think he covered both the above
>    in that context under the fourth category by calling it
>   Lakshya Lakshana  Samaanaadhikaranam. I am recalling
>   from memory and could be wrong. But an interesting point
>  he
>   made was that one scholar has listed as many as sixteen
>   types of Samaanaadhikaranams  and that he (
>   Sri SP ) was only covering four of them in the talk. Just
>  as
>   supplementary info.
>   Regards and
>   Pranams
>      .
>   On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at
>   9:06 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>   wrote:
>   Shree
>   Venkataraghavan- PraNAms
>
>
>
>   Shruti itself has both bheda vaakyaas and abheda vaakyaas.
>   Shankara takes abheda vaakyaas as primary and bheda
>  vaakyaas
>   as secondary. While Ramanuja takes the other way around.
>   Both accept that Brahman is both material and intelligent
>   cause. Only Dwaita does not accept that.
>
>
>
>   Both Ramanuja and Shankara use samaanaadhikara to account
>   tat tvam asi statements. Ramanujauses visheshana
>   visheshyaabhyam samaanaadhikaranam while Shankara uses
>   bhaadaayam samaanaadhikaranam.
>
>
>
>   Madhva uses some sources which are not really accessible
>  to
>   any body to justify his stand.
>
>
>
>   Just a note
>
>
>
>   Hari Om!
>
>   Sadananda
>
>
>
>
>
>   --------------------------------------------
>
>   On Mon, 10/19/15, Venkatraghavan
>   S via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>   wrote:
>
>
>
>    Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Please answer to this
>
>    To: "A discussion group for Advaita
>   Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>,
>   "Harsha Bhat" <harsha9519 at gmail.com>
>
>    Date: Monday, October 19, 2015, 1:36 PM
>
>
>
>    Sri Harsha,
>
>    What difference does it possibly make? Whether
>
>    someone wins a debate or
>
>    not, how is that
>
>    going to help?
>
>
>
>    I for one am
>
>    not a historian, so I cannot say who won, or even if a
>
>    debate
>
>    took place, but frankly I don't
>
>    care.
>
>
>
>    However one thing is
>
>    for sure - it is absolutely evident that advaita
>
>    siddhAnta stems directly from shruti.
>
>    Therefore, even if some clever person
>
>    wins a
>
>    debate today, someone cleverer can come tomorrow to
>   disprove
>
>    him,
>
>    but as long as his siddhAnta is at odds
>
>    with vedA it cannot be right.
>
>
>
>    However, a shruti based siddhAnta can never be
>
>    disproved, because of the
>
>    very fact that it
>
>    comes from the VedA.
>
>
>
>    Therefore I'm not so interested to know the
>
>    history of the debate, what I'm
>
>    concerned with is to understand the shruti
>
>    established advaita siddhAnta
>
>    correctly.
>
>
>
>    Regards,
>
>    Venkatraghavan
>
>    On 15 Oct 2015
>
>    17:14, "Harsha Bhat via Advaita-l" <
>
>    advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>
>    wrote:
>
>
>
>    > And one more
>
>    point I forgot to mention,
>
>    >
>
>    >
>
>    >
>
>                That  madhva pandith also said that
>
>    even
>
>    > shankaracharya lost in debate with
>
>    vedavyasa,he also adds that ,
>
>    > even in
>
>    some shankara vijaya says that adi shankara lost in
>   debate
>
>    with
>
>    > vedavyasa.
>
>    >
>
>    >
>
>    > So,please tell me
>
>    whether in any shankara vijaya there is a topic of
>
>    > shankaracharya losing debate with
>
>    vedavyasa?
>
>    >
>
>    > Or it
>
>    is also one among maadhva's  crooked up stories?
>
>    >
>
>    >  Any knowledgeable
>
>    person,please answer....
>
>    >
>
>    >
>
>    > regards,
>
>    > Harsha Bhat
>
>    >
>
>    > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Srirudra
>
>    <srirudra at gmail.com>
>
>    wrote:
>
>    >
>
>    > >
>
>    Dear
>
>    > > Whether should replace
>
>    weather.This type of mistaken spellings are
>
>    > > provided by the iPad .So one should
>
>    be careful while forwarding the
>
>    > >
>
>    mail.R.Krishnamoorthy.
>
>    > >
>
>    > > Sent from my iPad
>
>    > >
>
>    > > > On
>
>    15-Oct-2015, at 7:46 PM, Harsha Bhat via Advaita-l <
>
>    > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>
>    wrote:
>
>    > > >
>
>    >
>
>    > > Namaskara,
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    1)      Madhvas are very famous for loose talk and
>   they
>
>    always down
>
>    > grade
>
>    >
>
>    > > other philosophy and its acharyas.
>
>    > > >
>
>    > >
>
>    >
>
>    > > > When talking about this
>
>    with a famous madhva pandith,he said not only
>
>    > we
>
>    > > > madhvas
>
>    ,advaithis also down grade madhvas.
>
>    >
>
>    > >
>
>    > > > He said vidhyaranya
>
>    called madhvachrya as madhu named devil. Which
>
>    > comes
>
>    > > in
>
>    > > > soura purana.
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    Weather it is true?
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > > Weather vidhyaranya called
>
>    madhva as madhu named devil?
>
>    > > >
>
>    If so,where ? in which book?
>
>    > >
>
>    >
>
>    > > >
>
>    >
>
>    > > Please reply ,so that  I can answer him...
>
>    > > >
>
>    > >
>
>    >   2) And also,he said vidhyaranya got
>
>    defeated by akshobhya theertha in
>
>    > >
>
>    > vakhyartha of "tat tvam asi"...
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    In respect of that, vidhyaranya installed a vijaya
>   sthamba
>
>    in
>
>    > mulibagilu
>
>    > >
>
>    > for respecting akshobhya theertha...
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    Weather it is true that  vidhyaranaya got defeated by
>
>    akshobhya
>
>    > theertha
>
>    >
>
>    > > for  vakhyartha of tat tvam asi?
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    Or it is just dvaithi's crooked up story for down
>
>    grading other
>
>    > > philosophy
>
>    > > > acharyas?
>
>    >
>
>    > >
>
>    > > >
>
>    > > > regards,
>
>    >
>
>    > > Harsha Bhat
>
>    > > >
>
>    _______________________________________________
>
>    > > > 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
>
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
>
>   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
>


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list