[Advaita-l] sushupati anubhava of jnAni and ajnAni

[sreenivasa murthy]

From: H.N.Sreenivasa MurthyPranms to all.
Dear Sri Sadanandaji,
      The whole essence of my friend's discussion with me was to point out the necessity of the student of Vedanta devoting to to Atmajnana / Brahmajnana / SvarUpajnana ad not to indulge in discussions on subject going on in the name of Vedanta which are not conducive to reach his guri  . The present disussions on the subject of Sushupti anubhava of a Jnani and Ajnani. In the course of his talk with me he quoted the mantra 2-2-5 of Mundaka Upanishad where in a very pointed manner says : 
              tamEvaikaM jAnatha AtmAnam                      anyA vAcO vimuMcathAmRutasyaiSha sEtuH ||
In the light of the above advice of mother Sruti, the discussions that are going on  the  subject of Sushupti anubhava of a Jnani and Ajnani come under the category of anyAvAcaH || . Secondly in what  way the Sushupti anubhava of a Jnani and Ajnani is going to assist / help a student / mumukshu in his quest of Atmajnana ?  My only request to all is that they ponder over these points with an open mind.

With respectful namaskarams,Sreenivasa Murthy
 

 

      From: kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
 To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>; sreenivasa murthy <narayana145 at yahoo.co.in> 
 Sent: Sunday, 17 January 2016 4:12 PM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] sushupati anubhava of jnAni and ajnAni
   
Sreenivasa murthyji - PraNAms

Just one question to your friend and perhaps to you to since you seem to endorse his opinion. How can one distinguishes, based on the reading here, whether one is realized or not? Does he have a litmus test to do that?  On that basis no one can ask any questions on Vedanta in this form since blind leading the blind is applicable for all. 

Someone went to Swami Tejomayanandaji and asked - Swamiji, have you met anyone so far who has realized? Swamiji said, jokiningly, that by that very question, the questioner has already resolved that Swamij has not realized and now wants to know who else has realized. There are no holos that will be developed after realization.  

Based on the answers, one can only say if one has knowledge of shastras to back up his understanding. 

So far I have not discovered any scriptural discrepancies in any answers that were provided by the discussers.  One may have a clearer understanding or one can quote the scriptures more thoroughly or have patience to do so. What is needed is clear understanding of the essence of Advaita vedanta - Brahma sathyam, jagan mithyaa, jeevo brahma eva na aparaH. The rest is only avanata vaakyaas in support these fundamental truths. 

Hari Om!

Sadananda



--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 1/17/16, sreenivasa murthy via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] sushupati anubhava of jnAni and ajnAni
 To: "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>, "Praveen R. Bhat" <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Date: Sunday, January 17, 2016, 1:52 AM
 
 H.N.Sreenivasa
 MurthyPranam to all.
 A friend of mine who is
 well versed in Shankara Vedanta,  who had gone through all
 the postings on the above subject told me thus recently :
 " Is it not much better and more beneficial if one
 attains jnana first and then afterwards  to discuss the
 'Sushupti anubhava of Jnani and Ajnani'  and come
 to an authentic conclusion ? Iis it not futile to discuss as
 Secondhand persons who have gathered information from books
 instead of discussing as Firsthand persons ?  All these
 discussions done by others other than the one who has
 cognized what he is teaching / conveying  will it be not
 like  blind leading the blind as stated in the
 mantra1-2-8of Mundakopanishad". I saw an element of
 TRUTH in what he told. What do the respected members feel
 about this?
 With warm and respectful
 regards,Sreenivasa Murthy.
 
 
 
 
       From: H S
 Chandramouli via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
  To: Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>;
 A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 
  Sent: Saturday, 16 January 2016 8:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] sushupati anubhava of
 jnAni and ajnAni
    
 Sri Praveen Ji,
 
 Reg  << Not the rope-snake, but here
 your very example of desert water
 works
 well.
 Having known that the water is nothing
 but its adhiShThAna desert sand, one
 doesn't stop seeing it as water, because
 the refraction superimposing water
 on the
 desert sand continues. Yet, one doesn't take it to be
 real water. >>
 
 and 
 << Only for vikShepa itself to be taken as real,
 AvaraNa is necessary
 .>>,
 
 Would it not be more
 appropriate to state that what was
 निरुपाधिक भ्रान्ति
 (nirupAdhika bhrAnti ) prior to Jnana becomes
 सोपाधिक भ्रान्ति (sopAdhika
 bhrAnti ) after attainment of Jnana ?? The
 corresponding illustration would
 be that of
 moonlight and the moon itself.  भ्रान्ति
 (bhrAnti ) continues as
 long as the
 उपाधि (upAdhi)  lasts, but its reality does
 not.
 
 Just a thought.
 
 Regards
 
 On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Praveen R.
 Bhat via Advaita-l <
 advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 wrote:
 
 > Namaste
 Rajeshji,
 >
 >
 > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Rajesh
 Benjwal via Advaita-l <
 > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 wrote:
 >
 > > There
 is only vikShepa, not AvaraNa. So the world is seen, but not
 as
 > > different from brahman, since
 the true nature has been revealed once and
 > > for all.
 > >
 >>>>
 > >
 > > So there is a possibility of vikshepa
 without avaraNa. Any pramanam,
 > >
 dristAntam  for that, I would like to know any reference,
 it would be
 > > helpful.
 > >
 >
 > Not the rope-snake, but here your very
 example of desert water works well.
 >
 Having known that the water is nothing but its adhiShThAna
 desert sand, one
 > doesn't stop
 seeing it as water, because the refraction superimposing
 water
 > on the desert sand continues.
 Yet, one doesn't take it to be real water.
 >
 >
 >
 > Basically you are saying if we know there is sand then
 even if we are
 > > seeing water there
 then that is only vikshepam and no avaraNa is there,
 > > right? looks perfect and it also
 leads to conclusion that for vikshepa to
 > > work avaraNa is not necessary.
 > >
 > >
 > Only for vikShepa itself to be taken as
 real, AvaraNa is necessary. The
 > jnAni
 perceives vikShepa as mithyA, superimposed on his own
 svarUpa.
 >
 > Kind
 rgds,
 > --Praveen R. Bhat
 > /* Through what should one know That owing
 to which all this is known!
 > [Br.Up.
 4.5.15] */
 >
 _______________________________________________
 > 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