[Advaita-l] MOKSHA or MUKTI

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji
Hare Krishna


  *   I think one decade back we had debated ( not a friendly discussion at any stretch of imagination 😊  ) this topic viciously in both advaitin and Advaita-L group.  I doubt you were there at that time.  Though I dare not to say I have completely understood your explanation with regard to “is” and “no” in this context, it would be nice to see some fresh air to clear the dirt. Anyway, here is my thoughts if at all it is worthy :

I think the argument between the two camps is because of a misunderstanding of the meaning of the words "is" and "no" in the above sentence.  Does the existence denoted by the verb "is", pAramArthika sat? Does the negation referred to by "no", a pAramArthika niShedha, or a vyAvahArika niShedha? As I see it, if both sides see what is meant, there is no room for argument at all.

The right meaning of the sentence "there is only jnAna", is as an akhaNDArtha vAkya, and thus "is" and "jnAna" refer to the svArUpa mAtra of That, and not to the samsarga between "jnAna" and "is". So the meaning of the sentence is just like satyam jnAnam anantam of taittiriya.



Ø     To make a short summary of ‘is’ & ‘no’ in that discussion:  one camp (the ‘is’ camp)  was saying during the post jnana period (after samyak jnana / absolute realization) there is continuity of identification with bhautika shareera by the jnAni and due to avidyA lesha / prArabdha karma he is prone to get rAga-dvesha but survival of these vrutti-s are very short (in time span) and his jnana would mitigate against these bhAvana.  If you want to have the absolute ‘freedom’ from these vrutti-s he has to shed his mortal coil thence there is a gap between paramArtha jnana & absolute mOksha.  The another camp (the ‘no’ camp) clarifying their stand that jnAni is ashareeri only since ashareeratvaM is his svarUpa jnana as he is brahman here in this very life though he is looking like dehavAn : vidvAn sa ehaiva brahma yadyapi dehavaaniva lakshyate sa brahmaiva san brahmApyeti.  So during the post jnana period though he is looking like sashareeri he is not dehavAn hence no question of avidyA lesha,  no question of rAga-dvesha in him.  If at all it appears that he is engaging himself in questionable action, the socalled action and interpretation of it is only by  the ajnAni-s who donot think beyond BMI.  In short a strict NO NO to jnAni’s rAga-dvesha / avidyA lesha.  And linking continuation of shareera due to avidyAlesha and linking it with prArabdha karma and treating both avidyAlesha and prArabdha karma  as synonyms is quite untenable as there is no direct link that can be established between jnAni’s action and his remnants  of avidyA.

I agree. Any exhortation to do nothing but remain in samAdhi all the time is born out of a misunderstanding - for samAdhi is as much vyavahAra, as any other laukika activity.


Ø     However, some stalwarts of Advaita sampradaya categorically declared that shravaNAdi shAstra jnana is like an instruction manual helping the aspirant  to  understand the intricacies  of ‘swimming’ if you want to really experience the ‘joy’ of swimming you have to dive in the pool and swim.  In short mind inert state samAdhi experience is mandatory to ‘practically’ enjoy the ONENESS of Atman.  Hence shAstra vAkya janita jnana is vrutti rUpa jnana and samAdhi is ‘phala rUpa jnAna’.


  *   Hope I am not opening the can of worms once again here.


Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar