[Advaita-l] Spiritual Clarifications

[Kaushik Chevendra]

Namaste respected sir. I will try to clarify the questions with respect to
my understanding.

> (i)     yes, we definitely understand that pot is clay as well as perhaps
> a ladle is clay as well and also a spoon is clay as well. But how can we
> just ignore the Name-Form-Function practical reality. In a situation where
> we need to use a pot, we can only use that and not a spoon or ladle. So, in
> all practical interactions, Name-Form-Function is so important, so what
> true benefit we get by simply just recognizing that at a pAramArthika level
> it is clay but vyAvahArika level it is pot etc.? So what? How does such a
> superficial knowledge benefit?
>
The "true benifit" is mukthi. Which comes only through the understanding
that everything is brahman. To understand this we need to see how is that
possible. And hence the substratum being the mud and the pot is the
superimpostion. How? If the sense aren't there to perceive it, will there
be any form to perceive? Is there any difference between mud and pot if the
eye isn't there to perceive the shape and give a name to it?

> (ii)    Extending this same example, yes pot is not different from clay,
> similarly ear ring is not different from gold, etc. Agreed, but still, ear
> ring is not pot, neither clay is gold.. so ultimately, at that level, they
> are then different, right.. so on and so forth.. So, am back to same
> dilemma that posed in my earlier point.
>
The example of pot and mud is used to explain, brahman and the world. One
should not bring about other implications of it. A simile or an example
used to explain a phenomenon is restricted to it.

>
>
> (1) Do Vaishnavities accept the content of Tatva Bodha? I feel that 90%
> contents are generic and hence applicable universally, except perhaps
> Vaishnavites interpretation of Moksham. What is the opinion here?
>
Depends on who these "vaishnavas" are. If they are smarthas, then they hold
it authoritative. If not they won't. Just as an advaitin won't hold
madhvacharyas work of" sadachara smriti" which is also generic as
authoritative.

>  (b) They claim that in Advaita, there is no moksha for animals, birds,
> women or non-brahmins and that Advaita has Moksha only for male, brahmis
> and sanyasis, where as in their sampradaya any living thing can get
> moksha.. is this true?
>
What sampradaya? There are many schools of vaishnavas. The visitadvaita,
dvaita, achintya, etc. Depends on which one. In advaita everyone qualifies
for mukthi, if not in this life. But the madhwas hold some to be eternally
bound.

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://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
>