[Advaita-l] Question about Sri Vidyaranya's JMV & jnani matra

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Akilesh Ayyar prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Well, if we are going by Ramana's ideas, a jnani is not a person at all.

>  It is not only ramaNa's ideas it is shankara's / shruti's view as well.  Some decades back in this very group one Sri Atmachaitanya prabhuji had written an article how there is no jnAni as an individual and there is only jnana.  And as per bhAshyakAra, ashareeratvaM is svAbhAvika dharma of Atma and the jnAni who realized this Atma jnana in its entireity was / is / will never be sashareeri and he is indeed ashareeri and brahman  only even he looks like dehavAn.  But this paramArtha jnAni is the custodian of avidyAlesha and subject to prArabdha karma as per some vyAkhyAna-s and Advaita prakaraNa grantha-s.  

So since this is the case, then there cannot really be for a jnani any avidyAlesha, any rAga-dvesha -- because the jnani is not a person. All these again *are* posited only for onlookers.

>  Yes, it Is only in the view point of onlookers but is it their own imagination ?? certainly not, because in their vyavahAra nishchita jnana guru, upadesha, his activity everything is satya only and it is surprising to see hard core advaitins raising objections and asking is everything imagination according to you like our dvaita bandhu-s ??  😊  Are we not dare enough to say even Ishwara is avidya kalpita holds his place only in vyavahAra and even shAstra is within the sphere of avidyA 😊 And bhAshyakAra himself clarifies :  all vidhi-nishesha, shAsta etc. can function as such ONLY TILL ONE REACHES THE INTUITION 'I AM BRAHMAN'.  Till that time, shankara indeed wrote bhAshya, and bhagavatpAda AkAra (which we see in photographs today) is not certainly imagination of this tiny mind.  It is indeed satya as we are yet to see 'parama satya' or satyasya satya 😊  

He says: "In sahaja samadhi the activities, vital and mental, and the three states are destroyed, never to reappear. However, others notice the Jnani active e.g., eating, talking, moving etc. He is not himself aware of these activities, whereas others are aware of his activities. They pertain to his body and not to his Real Self, swarupa. For himself, he is like the sleeping passenger - or like a child interrupted from sound sleep and fed, being unaware of it."

>  This reminds me bru. Up.  ( this again shows how mahAtma-s like ramaNa's words could easily be reconciled with mUlabhAshya and Shruti in this context).  When all the desires residing in one's heart have been got rid of, then the mortal being becomes immortal and attains brahman here, in this life,.  And now with regard to jnAni's socalled shareera it has been said here : just as the cast-off slough of a snake would lie lifeless in an ant-hill, so also does the body of the enlightened person lie there and HE IS NOW REALLY BODILESS, the prANa, brahman alone, the light of pure consciousness alone. Here in this statement it is quite evident that the effacement of the idea of one's identity with body as a result of his realization or identity with brahman, for the possession of a body was only through ignorance, while the intrinsic nature of bodilessness is revealed as soon as enlightenment dawns.  Some pro-ashtAnga yOga propagators comfortably linked this state of jnAni's body with that of body of experiencer of asaMprajnAtha or nirvikalpa samAdhi.  Where body looks like lifeless and prakaraNa-s like JMV & VC give special emphasis on this type of experience and categorize the jnAni-s based on method they adopt to come back to normal state from this samAdhi 😊  

Indeed, in the end even the very concept of a jnani is from the standpoint of onlookers, because the concept of liberation is itself in the end wrong.

>  Yes, jnAni's ultimate realization fetch him the knowledge that I am brahman devoid of all agentship and experiencing fruits of actions for all the three periods of time.  I was never an agent or experiencer even before this, nor am I such now, nor shall I be such in future.  Hence mOksha is bhUta vastu vishaya jnana, the realization of which is already there.  

> Ø     Thanks for quoting this.  But we have seen here from the socalled
> traditional camp??  The jnAni has tamO guNa pradhAna rAga-dvesha, 
> completely ignoring his svarUpa is triguNAteeta, infact, krishna asks 
> arjuna nishtraiguNyO bhavArjuna but what we are seeing here is jnAni 
> with rAga-dvesha, To say the least,  the tumor like avidyA lesha  is 
> really a poor joke on paramArtha jnAni who transcended the triguNa.  
> People often forget the bhAshyakAra vachana that even if a person has 
> an iota of avidyA  in the form of asarvAtma bhAva then that avasthA called as avidyAvasthA.
> But nowadays, we are comfortably attributing avidyA to even samyak jnAni.
>
Yes, if that is what the so-called traditional camp believes, then that is a pity :-)

>  The prefix so-called certainly has its own significance when we are addressing the stand-points of post shankara vyAkhyAnakAra-s, unfortunately they think that they are the ONLY official flag bearers of Advaita sampradaya and ultimate authority when it comes to siddhAnta despite the fact that they themselves have their own problems within the circle (like bhAmati and vivaraNa).  But when it is quite conspicuous that they are not following the mUla and sitting on the pedestal and judging others, it is quite tenable to call them 'socalled-traditionalists' as they are comfortably labellingl some others as 'asaMpradAyavAdins' openly just because others are not catering to their prejudiced conclusions.  

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar