[Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting stand taken by Swami

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

Does anybody say that brahmasAkshAtkAra is an experience of brahman as if
it were an external object?

Regards,
Vidyasankar

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:47 AM, sreenivasa murthy via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Dear Sri Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan,
>    Is it ever possible for a mumukshu to have sAkShAtkAra of Brahman as an
> object ? Does this concept not  contradict the Srutivakya "adRuShTam" , "
> yEnEdaM sarvaM vijAnIti taM kEna vijAniyAt, vijnAtAram arE kEna vijAnIyAt"
> etc. etc. Is Brahman available for sAkShAtkAra? What is brahmasAkShatkAra
> itself? I will be grateful to you if you could explain and clarify it.
> With respectful namaskarams,Sreenivasa Murthy
>
>
>
>
>       From: Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>; Kripa Shankar <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com>
>  Sent: Sunday, 15 January 2017 4:23 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting
> stand taken by Swami
>
> You seem have a few misconceptions. Yes, after brahma saakShaatkaara a
> "fall" is possible. Sankara says that the person should take up sannyaasaa
> and become a parivraajaka immediately AFTER saakShaatkaara to avoid this.
> This has been discussed extensively in the list before. No you cannot
> identify a person as a jiivanmukta or not, I.e., an "objective" test is not
> available. That is indeed one of the ideas expressed by the dharmavyAdha
> story or the R^ibhu story in the Vishnu purana.
>
> Furthermore I suggest that you spend some time in introspection on the
> anger you are displaying towards Ramana and his followers. Perhaps he
> wasn't a jiivanmukta, so what part of their behavior is creating so much
> agitation in you?
>
> Rama
>
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 9:06 AM Kripa Shankar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Ok, let's assume so. Still he said - he may not have been a jiivanmuukta.
> > Does that mean inspite of brahmatma saakshatkara, Jivanmukti is doubtful?
> > This is why your arguments are far fetched. Because you already arrive at
> > the conclusion first, then you try to reconcile with/justify it.
> >
> >
> >
> > If we cannot determine if a person is jivanmukta or not, is Jivanmukti a
> > mere abstract idea? Is Moksha a speculation? Because otherwise, there is
> no
> > proof if the jnani is reborn or not.
> >
> > ‎
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > 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
>