[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

When we and people like SSS are sitting and reading Sankara Bhashyas in
this Century we are forgetting one thing. Direct disciples like Padmapada
heard directly from MukhaKamala of Adi Sankara. They understood better from
hearing and maybe doubt clearing from the Guru. They had this advantage but
we don't have it. We are only Likhita Paathakas. We are Adhamas in
understanding Sankara Bhaashyas.

 When there is a Conflict between SSS and Padmapada we have to choose
Padmapada only. Take Mithyaajnaana from Adhyaasa Bhaashya. . SSS saying it
is Mithyaa Jnaana and Padmapada saying Mithyaa Ajnaana and Bhaava Roopa.
Padmapada is correct. Maybe Adi Sankara told Padmapada directly.

Another mistake is People now think we can study original Bhashyas like
text books. They are not TEXTBOOKS.

On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 at 3:44 PM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Praveen prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
>
> I couldn't resist responding, although we have been avoiding any
> discussion/ debate with each other. :)
>
> >  But you are always welcome to have a friendly chat with me prabhuji
> barring vedAnta and related discussions :-)...This request is because I
> lack that 'yOgyata' to understand your mails and do the debate in a
> meaningful way... hope you would love to have a fight with 'samAna
> skanda-s' :-) Anyway, my clarification to your below observation.
>
> Even though you haven't read the entire thread as you stated, this is a
> *very interesting* interpretation of Vidyasankarji's statement. :)
>
> >  Yes, I have not read the whole thread but I do read all the mails
> coming from Sri Vidya prabhuji's desk.  So, hope you would agree 'very
> interesting' interpretation of mine 'ON' Sri Vidya prabhuji's mail is not
> so interesting & exciting  :-) Anyway, if I am misinterpreting Sri Vidya
> prabhuji's statement my apologies to him.
>
>  I'm quite certain he did NOT mean that, but to not rely on
> interpretations and comparisons of research scholars. All prakaraNa
> granthAs are indeed considered as valid in the tradition.
>
> >  You may be right in your observation and at the same time I am right
> according to my perception.  See this is how the 'original' documents being
> interpreted differently by different people :-) Since for you anything and
> everything under the Advaita tradition banner is OK, you tempt to interpret
> statements like this in that way...and for me mUla bhAshya and prasthAna
> traya have more validity than other prakaraNa and vyAkhyAna-s,  I too
> tempted to interpret statements like this in my own way :-) After reading
> different interpretations of the same statement, what bystander will do??
> He would wait for the clarification from the originator of original
> statement..is it not??  This is what the scenario I explained in my
> previous mail and importance of sticking to the originals :-)
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh