[Advaita-l] Advaita and Madhyamika Buddhism

[Raghav Kumar]

On 19-Sep-2016 1:10 pm, "Raghav Kumar" <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Ravi Kiran ji and Chandramouli ji
>
> I understand your perspective on prakriyA-bheda vis-a-vis asAdhu-prakriyA.
> As for precluding the possibility of avidyA-nivRtti without using sanskrit,
> i am not too sure.  I was having in mind the very real situation I see
> around me as I reside in thiruvannamalai, Here many sincere people who
> AFAIK have a reasonable degree of the prerequisites and are commited to
> self-knowledge have no explicit recognition or acknowledgment that 'shruti
> is shadba-pramANa' or that the words of the upaniShat-pramANam are to be
> unfolded  or heard (i.e.,shravaNam of bhAshyam etc., is to done). They
> might study exclusively Tamil non-sanskritic works of Sri Ramana Maharshi
> (notso much the overtly Vedantic Tamil works of the Kovilur Math like
> Sorupa sAram etc.)  like the Tamil work Ulladu NArpadu.And find it quite
> sufficient for their jnana-sAdhana (in their perception.). (even without
> any help from an accomplished shrotriya like Swami Paramarthanandaji who
> has taught its Sanskrit translation sat-darshanam.) I do know the caveat
> about not doing svAtantreNa anveShaNam etc.; just that there are many who
> stick to such Tamil works. Can such an approach not lead to jnAna at all.
> We could accommodate such an approach by saying that any given independent
> text is anuvAda of vedAnta if there is nothing in the text which blatantly
> contradicts shruti even if there is no obvious adhyAropa-apavAda and thus
> we view the said text as a prakaraNa-grantha. Again I do realize that
> Ulladu Narpadu is relatively easy to accommodate as a prakaraNa-grantha
> given the couple of reference to 'veda' in it. In other cases, for e.g.,
> sometime back there was a discussion of the possibility of a
> vyAkaraNa-prasthAna by Sri Siva Senani ji which pre-dates bhAShyakAra. I
> would suggest that if appropriate care is taken, we need not dismiss such
> approaches outright as being invalid approaches. I suppose it ultimately
> boils down to who is unfolding/teaching the given non-sanskrit text.
>
> I thank you for the responses - probably I am digressing a bit from the
> main topic of the thread.
>
> Regarding the topic of the thread - it may be too much to contemplate the
> possibility of accommodating the mAdhyamika-s per se. Unless they are
> rigorous enough in their logic, in which case they will be led to being
> 'logically trapped' by a panchadashikAra who will end by saying 'AyuShmAn
> bhava' !
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
>