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

[V Subrahmanian]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
Date: Jan 28, 2017 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting
stand taken by Swami
To: "Kripa Shankar" <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com>
Cc:


On Jan 28, 2017 12:10 AM, "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Shankar's is not talking if samadhi.

Correction:

Shankara is not talking of samadhi.

vs



Study the prasthanatraya bhashyas under a qualified Acharya and try to
understand the meaning correctly.
>
> vs
>
> On Jan 28, 2017 12:00 AM, "Kripa Shankar" <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>> This is why it's impossible to debate on philosophical grounds. Because
people try to reconcile with their own understanding. Anyasya abhavam
happens only during samadhi. If I knock on someone's door and get the reply
- who's there? , what should I answer? Or should I ask the question back -
who is that who is asking me who's there?
>>
>> Para vidya stands on apara vidya. Apara vidya is not a joke, it's not
vain exercise. It's not an illusion. Without aparA vidya, if the shastras
only taught para vidya, then the Brahma Sutras would have been a blank
page. A teacher would be equal to a stone. Upanishads would consist of
nothing. ‎
>>
>> Please forgive me if I say anything wrong but Mixing up para and apara
in cheesy one liners is not Vedanta. It's not the pinnacle of shankara
siddhanta. It is in a way, mocking the philosophy. Something like a parody.
>>
>> Again, if you are willing to analyse it critically, then you have to
consider that there is no tvam pada in this self-inquiry method.
>>
>> Regards
>> Kripa ‎
>>
>> yo vedAdau svaraH prokto vedAnte cha pratiShThitaH |
>> tasya prakRRiti-lInasya yaH parassa maheshvaraH ||
>>   Original Message
>> From: V Subrahmanian
>> Sent: Friday 27 January 2017 11:01 PM
>> To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
>> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very
interesting stand taken by Swami
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Kripa Shankar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> Namaste Praveen,
>>
>> Even self inquiry cannot be the cause of jnana. As Sadananda has already
stated, there is no tvam padaartha which differentiates the Vedantic
method. Go on, come up with a justification for that :D
>>
>> I am just saying he is not a Vedantin and his teachings are not Vedanta.
>>
>> https://newearthpulse.wordpress.com/2016/03/04/there-are-no-others/
>>
>> Questioner: "How are we to treat others?"
>> Ramana Maharshi: "There are no others."
>> The pinnacle of Vedāntic realization has been taught by Shankara thus:
>>
>> परमात्मव्यतिरेकेण अन्यस्याभावं विस्तरेण अवादिष्म । [Bṛ.up.bh
<http://xn--nig.up.bh>āṣyam 4.4.6]
>>
>> [We have elaborately stated already the non-existence (absence) of any
other than the Supreme Self.]
>>
>> The above realization is based on the following:
>>
>> Bṛ.Up.Bh <http://xn--nig.up.bh>āṣyam: 3.5.1 concluding paragraph:
>>
>> ब्रह्मैव सर्वमिति प्रत्यय उपजायते । स ब्राह्मणः कृतकृत्यः, अतो ब्राह्मणः
; निरुपचरितं हि तदा तस्य ब्राह्मण्यं प्राप्तम् ; अत आह — स ब्राह्मणः केन
स्यात् केन चरणेन भवेत् ? येन स्यात् — येन चरणेन भवेत्, तेन ईदृश एवायम् —
येन केनचित् चरणेन स्यात्, तेन ईदृश एव उक्तलक्षण एव ब्राह्मणो भवति ; येन
केनचिच्चरणेनेति स्तुत्यर्थम् — येयं ब्राह्मण्यावस्था सेयं स्तूयते, न तु
चरणेऽनादरः ।
>>
>> Translation by Swami Mādhavānanda:
>>
>> ....and becomes a knower of Brahman, or accomplishes his task: he
attains the conviction that
>> all is Brahman. Because he has reached the goal, therefore he is a
Brahm~a. a knower of Brahman ; for then his status as a knower of Brahman
is literally true.
>>
>> Therefore the text says: How does that knower of Brahman behave?
Howsoever he may behave. he is just such - a knower of Brahman as described
above.
>>
>> The expression, 'Howsoever he may behave,' is intended for a tribute to
this state of a knower of
>> Brahman, and does not mean reckless behaviour.
>>
>>
>> If the above is not Vedanta, nothing else is.
>>
>> vs
>>
>>
>>
>> If you agree with this, then there is no debate. It then proves that he
cannot be considered as jnAni. You can call it whatever you want -
Neovedanta or mysticism or a cult. But you have been arguing that he is a
jnAni and his teachings are Vedanta. ‎
>> ‎
>> ‎Regards
>> Kripa ‎
>>
>> yo vedAdau svaraH prokto vedAnte cha pratiShThitaH |
>> tasya prakRRiti-lInasya yaH parassa maheshvaraH ||
>>   Original Message
>> From: Praveen R. Bhat
>> Sent: Friday 27 January 2017 5:46 PM
>> To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
>> Cc: Bhaskar YR
>> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very
interesting stand taken by Swami
>>
>>
>>

Shankar's is not talking if samadhi. Study the prasthanatraya bhashyas
under a qualified Acharya and try to understand the meaning correctly.

vs
On Jan 28, 2017 12:00 AM, "Kripa Shankar" <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> This is why it's impossible to debate on philosophical grounds. Because
> people try to reconcile with their own understanding. Anyasya abhavam
> happens only during samadhi. If I knock on someone's door and get the reply
> - who's there? , what should I answer? Or should I ask the question back -
> who is that who is asking me who's there?
>
> Para vidya stands on apara vidya. Apara vidya is not a joke, it's not vain
> exercise. It's not an illusion. Without aparA vidya, if the shastras only
> taught para vidya, then the Brahma Sutras would have been a blank page. A
> teacher would be equal to a stone. Upanishads would consist of nothing. ‎
>
> Please forgive me if I say anything wrong but Mixing up para and apara in
> cheesy one liners is not Vedanta. It's not the pinnacle of shankara
> siddhanta. It is in a way, mocking the philosophy. Something like a parody.
>
> Again, if you are willing to analyse it critically, then you have to
> consider that there is no tvam pada in this self-inquiry method.
>
> Regards
> Kripa ‎
>
> yo vedAdau svaraH prokto vedAnte cha pratiShThitaH |
> tasya prakRRiti-lInasya yaH parassa maheshvaraH ||
>   Original Message
> From: V Subrahmanian
> Sent: Friday 27 January 2017 11:01 PM
> To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting
> stand taken by Swami
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Kripa Shankar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Praveen,
>
> Even self inquiry cannot be the cause of jnana. As Sadananda has already
> stated, there is no tvam padaartha which differentiates the Vedantic
> method. Go on, come up with a justification for that :D
>
> I am just saying he is not a Vedantin and his teachings are not Vedanta.
>
> https://newearthpulse.wordpress.com/2016/03/04/there-are-no-others/
>
> Questioner: "How are we to treat others?"
> Ramana Maharshi: "There are no others."
> The pinnacle of Vedāntic realization has been taught by Shankara thus:
>
> परमात्मव्यतिरेकेण अन्यस्याभावं विस्तरेण अवादिष्म । [Bṛ.up.bh
> <http://xn--nig.up.bh>āṣyam 4.4.6]
>
> [We have elaborately stated already the non-existence (absence) of any
> other than the Supreme Self.]
>
> The above realization is based on the following:
>
> Bṛ.Up.Bh <http://xn--nig.up.bh>āṣyam: 3.5.1 concluding paragraph:
>
> ब्रह्मैव सर्वमिति प्रत्यय उपजायते । स ब्राह्मणः कृतकृत्यः, अतो ब्राह्मणः ;
> निरुपचरितं हि तदा तस्य ब्राह्मण्यं प्राप्तम् ; अत आह — स ब्राह्मणः केन
> स्यात् केन चरणेन भवेत् ? येन स्यात् — येन चरणेन भवेत्, तेन ईदृश एवायम् —
> येन केनचित् चरणेन स्यात्, तेन ईदृश एव उक्तलक्षण एव ब्राह्मणो भवति ; येन
> केनचिच्चरणेनेति स्तुत्यर्थम् — येयं ब्राह्मण्यावस्था सेयं स्तूयते, न तु
> चरणेऽनादरः ।
>
> Translation by Swami Mādhavānanda:
>
> ....and becomes a knower of Brahman, or accomplishes his task: he attains
> the conviction that
> all is Brahman. Because he has reached the goal, therefore he is a
> Brahm~a. a knower of Brahman ; for then his status as a knower of Brahman
> is literally true.
>
> Therefore the text says: How does that knower of Brahman behave? Howsoever
> he may behave. he is just such - a knower of Brahman as described above.
>
> The expression, 'Howsoever he may behave,' is intended for a tribute to
> this state of a knower of
> Brahman, and does not mean reckless behaviour.
>
>
> If the above is not Vedanta, nothing else is.
>
> vs
>
>
>
> If you agree with this, then there is no debate. It then proves that he
> cannot be considered as jnAni. You can call it whatever you want -
> Neovedanta or mysticism or a cult. But you have been arguing that he is a
> jnAni and his teachings are Vedanta. ‎
> ‎
> ‎Regards
> Kripa ‎
>
> yo vedAdau svaraH prokto vedAnte cha pratiShThitaH |
> tasya prakRRiti-lInasya yaH parassa maheshvaraH ||
>   Original Message
> From: Praveen R. Bhat
> Sent: Friday 27 January 2017 5:46 PM
> To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> Cc: Bhaskar YR
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting
> stand taken by Swami
>
>
>
>