[Advaita-l] Samnyasa and Sankara's position?

[H S Chandramouli]

On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 7:03 PM Akilesh Ayyar <ayyar at akilesh.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 8:20 AM H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Slightly off the main topic of this particular post, but which is relevant
>> for this thread as it has comeup in other posts in this thread, Sri
>> Bhagavatpada makes this observation in his Bhashya on Mundaka Upanishad
>> enjoining sanyasa for attaining jnana
>>
>> << ज्ञानमात्रे यद्यपि सर्वाश्रमिणामधिकारः, तथापि संन्यासनिष्ठैव
>> ब्रह्मविद्या
>> मोक्षसाधनं न कर्मसहितेति ‘भैक्षचर्यां चरन्तः’ (मु. उ. १ । २ । ११)
>> <
>> http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/Mundaka?page=1&id=MD_C01_S02_V11&hl=%E0%A4%AD%E0%A5%88%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B7%E0%A4%9A%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%82%20%E0%A4%9A%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%83
>> >
>>  ‘संन्यासयोगात्’ (मु. उ. ३ । २ । ६)
>> <
>> http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/Mundaka?page=3&id=MD_C03_S02_V06&hl=%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%AF%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%97%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D
>> >
>>  इति च ब्रुवन्दर्शयति । >>
>>
>> <<  j~nAnamAtre yadyapi sarvAshramiNAmadhikAraH, tathApi
>> saMnyAsaniShThaiva
>> brahmavidyA mokShasAdhanaM na karmasahiteti ‘bhaikShacharyAM charantaH’
>> (mu. u. 1 | 2 | 11) ‘saMnyAsayogAt’ (mu. u. 3 | 2 | 6) iti cha
>> bruvandarshayati | >>.
>>
>> He follows this up there itself with
>>
>> << यत्तु गृहस्थेषु ब्रह्मविद्यासम्प्रदायकर्तृत्वादि लिङ्गं न तत्स्थितं
>> न्यायं बाधितुमुत्सहते ; >>
>>
>> << yattu gRRihastheShu brahmavidyAsampradAyakartRRitvAdi li~NgaM na
>> tatsthitaM nyAyaM  bAdhitumutsahate >>,
>>
>> He has indeed stated his stand vis a vis instances of gruhasthas like
>> Janaka, Yajnavalkya etc  attaining jnAna.
>>
>
> Namaste Chandramouliji,
>
> I think by this last passage he just means to say that the example of
> householder sages can never show that the doing of rites or a sense of
> doership ever *combine* with knowledge to cause liberation. That does not
> mean these individuals were not fully liberated, nor that the householder
> mode of life prohibits the acquisition of brahma jnana. Knowledge alone
> liberates, not karma, but that does not mean ashrama sannyasa required for
> the highest knowledge.
>
> In the commentary at the end of Mundaka at 3.2.11, Sankara says of
> "parama-rsibhyah" -- "those great seers, starting with Brahma, through whom
> that knowledge was successively handed down..." which clearly includes
> householders, that they in fact "directly saw and realized Brahman."
>
>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>

Namaste Akilesh Ayyar Ji,

Not so in my understanding. The first statement cited by me from the
Mundaka Bhashya  is the declaration part by Sri Bhagavatpada. The rest is
by way of clarification/response to objections. All I am saying is Sri
Bhagavatpada has indeed addressed the objection and given his views. It may
be accepatable or not. That is a different issue. As pointed out in my
earlier post, there are several instances in the Bhashya where Sri
Bhagavatpada has unambiguously declared that according to Shrutis, Ashrama
SanyAsa is mandatory for attaining jnAna as well as for its fructification
once attained. Undoubtedly later commentators have taken a different view
aslo. Especially current day commentators. However, in my understanding,
the position of sri Bhagavatpada is clear and unambiguous. But while
bringing out different views even in respect of the position of Sri
Bhagavatpada may be of interest to some extent, in my view any discussion
on the finality of his position will not be fruitful.

Regards

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 1:57 AM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 6:36 PM Akilesh Ayyar via Advaita-l <
>> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Namaste Bhaskarji,
>> > >
>> > > May I ask how you would interpret the Aitareya introduction excerpts
>> > that I
>> > > posted? I would be quite interested to know. Particularly these
>> quotes:
>> > >
>> > > *Not so... the constant habit of resorting to any particular house of
>> > one's
>> > > own is prompted by desire. When there is no clinging to any particular
>> > > house of one's own, there follows begging alone, as a matter of
>> > course...*
>> > >
>> > > and
>> > >
>> > > *From the fact that a fresh injunction of renunciation, despite its
>> > > emergence as a matter of course (as in the case of a man of
>> > illumination),
>> > > is met with [footnote: In Br. Up. III v. I. etc. -- 'Knowing this very
>> > > Self, the Brahmanas renounce...and lead a mendicant life."] ,it
>> becomes
>> > > evident that it is obligatory for the man of illumination.
>> >
>> >
>> > The shruti passage quoted above has been interpreted differently by two
>> > authorities:
>> >
>> > In the Jivanmukti viveka, Sri Vidyaranya takes this passage as authority
>> > for vidvat sannyasa.  In the gloss to the Brihadaranyaka Bhashya for
>> this
>> > passage, Sri Anandagiri says 'this is a reference to paroksha jnana.'  I
>> > had pointed out this remark by Anandagiri ( I think in two places) to
>> > renowned scholars some years back. Members here may please verify the
>> above
>> > and give their opinion.
>> >
>> > regards
>> > subrahmanian.v
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>