[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** RE: shankara speaking on behalf of or speaking to ??

Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Tue Dec 12 07:31:57 EST 2017

praNAms Sri Chandramouli prabhuji

Hare Krishna

That is right. That is what I meant. I did not get a better word than “experiencing” to state it. The word “happening” used by you perhaps conveys my understanding better. Only with one proviso. The jnani may either “experience” it or allow it to just “happen” without “experience” of the prarabdha karma phala at his will.

Ø    When shankara talks about karma phala even in saMyak jnAni-s, he talks about the pravrutti of indriya-s without any fail (avashyaMbhAvinee)  and karma phala prAbalya as well.  So, there is a pravrutti of the indriya-s in jnAni due to karma prAbalyaM.  If it is automatic / involuntary why this karma prAbalya over jnana statement from bhAshyakAra??  It is because of this reason I was wondering this statement is on behalf of jnAni-s or he is just explaining this to ‘others’ who are curious about jnAni’s actions / pravrutti??  If jnAni is not directly involved in experiencing the karma phala and it is just happening  there is no point in emphasizing  this karma prAbalyaM  and attributing the ‘influence’ of prArabdha karma phala on the samyak jnAni-s.

Reg << That means on the prArabdha karma phala a jnAni has the ‘control’ i.e he may enjoy, may not enjoy.  Then it is not an  arrow which has already left the bow on which shooter does not have any control !! >>,

prarabdha karma phala ensures “happening” of the phala much like the arrow illustration, and the jnani has no control over it. But the jnani does have control or choice over “experience” of the same as explained above.

Ø   This is good and subtle observation but I think this will not do justice to ‘pravrutti’ of vAng manaH kAya of the jnAni and as a result  kAma – krOdha of the jnAni which some traditionalists believe inevitable.

I think this answers the first four paras of your post.

Reg  << Kindly elaborate this statement bit more. >>,

The same topic was discussed extensively fairly recently, in which you had also participated I think,  wherein I had pointed out two fallouts for Brahmavidya, namely liberation from future births and Establishment in Brahmananda in this birth itself. I think you were not in agreement with the same.

Ø   I am very much in agreement with this especially when bhAshyakAra and Sri SSS saying socalled embodiment (sashareeratvaM) disembodiment (ashareeratvaM) of the jnAni is only from mithyAjnAna drushti which only ajnAni-s have. And though jnAni looking like shareeri he is indeed ashareeri only (1-1-5 sUtra bhAshya).  So my problem is only with the second observation which you are saying below :

You may please refer to the thread itself for details to avoid repetition here. Suffice it to say that in my understanding the first  fallout mentioned above is applicable to all jnanis irrespective of their actions after attainment of jnana, while for the second fallout further sadhanas are called for even after attainment of jnana. But it is not considered “prasankhyAna”.

Ø   There is demarcation between Atma vidyA (pAramArthika jnana) and establishment in brahmAnanda and you are implying that for the first fallout of vidyA is applicable to all and second fallout has to be achieved with further sAdhana !!??  So, realizing Atmaikatva vidyA (jnana)  is something different from AtmAnanda (mOksha).  My problem in this differentiation is because of my understanding i.e. jnana is nothing but mOksha and mOksha is not a separate avasthA / state.  Would like to share more about this if I get time tomorrow prabhuji.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list