[Advaita-l] Inward and outward contemplation

[Ven Balakrishnan]

Dear Sri Bhaskar-ji

This is the link to the sutra bhasya book, which appears to have been written by SSSS.

http://www.adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/english/english_books_toc.php?book_id=014&type=english&book_title=S%27ankara%27s+Sutra-Bhashya+%28Self-Explained%29 <http://www.adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/english/english_books_toc.php?book_id=014&type=english&book_title=S%27ankara%27s+Sutra-Bhashya+(Self-Explained)>

I find that SSSS interprets Sankara in a straight-forward, faithful manner, without the mental acrobatics that others seem to go through.  But as I do not claim to be a jnani or a teacher, all I can do is raise what others I respect have said; my opinion is irrelevant - ask me if I become a jnani about no-mind and the perception of the world.  Until that point it is speculation.

I would note that throughout BSB and Brhad bhasya, Sankara frequently points out that the Self alone presides in deep sleep, and the limiting adjuncts only arise during the waking and dream states.  So in essence, what we really are is That which remains in deep sleep, and everything else is a superimposition of ignorance.  Sankara also frequently talks about the absence or particularised consciousness in deep sleep, and compares it to when Knowledge arises.  Hence SSSS can talk about the no-mind state in the quote I referenced. 

In this vein, it is useful to quite Sankara in BSB 4.1.3 (translated by Sw Gambhirananda):
"The criticism is also unfounded that no one will be left over to practise the Vedantic path and that direct perception etc. will be outraged. For the transmigratory state is conceded before enlightenment, and the activities like perception are confined within that state only, because texts as this, "But when to the knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what?" (Br. II. iv. 14), point out the absence of perception etc. in the state of enlightenment.”

Figurative or literal?  No point in discussing until we get there, at which point it won’t matter.

venkat




> On 9 Sep 2021, at 11:04, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at hitachi-powergrids.com> wrote:
> 
> praNAms Sri Ven Balakrishnan prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> 
> I think I gave the source of the quote originally - it is from his “Sankara’s sutra- bhasya”, c. P88.
> 
>>> Sri SSS written comprehensive commentary on shankara's sUtra bhAshya ( very big two volumes) in Kannada.  In Sanskrit sUtra bhAshya vivechini etc. Is this book written by Sri SSS himself prabhuji??  Or is this translation??  I don’t think Sri SSS written complete sUtra bhAshya commentary in English.  
> 
> Related to this discussion is the following from SSSS’  "The Essential Shankara”, translated by Gangolli, note 184:
> 
>> Perhaps translation of Sri SSS's shankara hrudaya.  Since I know Kannada, I don’t see translations but those who read these translations are of the opinion that these translations are not upto the mark.  But I don’t see any  problem in what you quoted below.  But I would like to interpret it slightly in a different way.  
> 
> One who has attained Liberation through the doorway of (or by virtue of) Jnaana is devoid of a body (Ashareeri); for, 'Sashareeratwa' (embodiedness) is 'Mtthyaa Jnaana Krita' (a resultant projection of misconception or a delusion). 
> 
>> Don’t you think so prabhuji??  If you don’t kindly explain your understanding.  ArambhaNAdhikaraNaM of sUtra bhAshya talks how this laukika vyavahAra  be sublated.  shAreerAtmatvasya bAdhakaM saMpadyate rajjvAdi buddhaya eva sarpAdibuddheenaam.  bAdhite cha shAreeratmatve tadaashrayaH samastaH svAbhAvikO vyavahArO bAdhitO bhavati.  This sublated knowledge is what is termed as jnAte dvaitaM na vidyate ( kArikA 1-18) if you look at this you might come to know the meaning of jnana is devoid of a body and how ashareetatvaM is quite svAbhAvika for the Atman or Atma jnAni.  
> 
> But for the Jnaani the mind does not exist as a separate entity or phenomenon at all; he has attained by virtue of Jnaana a supra-state of 'Amanastha' (no-mind-ness: in other words, his mind has lost all its content and substance to merge or become one with its very source, Atman).
> 
>> here too I don’t see any controversy is we see the contextual implication of lakshyArtha instead of taking it literally.  Anyway point to be noted above is the statement : for the Jnaani the mind does not exist as a separate entity or phenomenon at all.  The clincher is :  not existing AS A SEPARATE ENTITY.  See the bruhadAraNyaka for example : 
> 
> //quote//
> 
> But when to the Knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what, what should one smell and through what, what should one taste and through what, what should one speak and through what, what should one hear and through what, what should one think and through what, what should one touch and through what, what should one know and through what ? Through what should one know that owing to which all this is known.
> 
> //unquote//
> 
> While explaining this shankara clarifies :
> 
> //quote//
> 
> : “When to the knower of Brahman everything such as name and form has been merged in the Self and has thus become the Self, then what object to be smelt should one smell, who should smell, and through what instrument? Similarly, what should one see and hear? Everywhere an action depends on certain factors; hence when these are absent, the action cannot take place; and in the absence of an action there can be no result. Therefore, so long as there is ignorance, the operation of actions, their factors and their results can take place, but not in the case of a Knower of Brahman. For to him everything is the Self, and there are no factors or results of actions apart from It."
> 
> // unquote//
> 
> ( these are all the translations of shankara bhAshya by Swamy mAdhavAnanda) provided to me by Sri Ramesam Vemuri prabhuji in one of his private mails to me.)
> 
> And one humble request, instead of just saying : see this is what Sri SSS said, kindly elaborate what is your stand on those observations, whether you are agreeing or disagreeing.  If you are contesting Sri SSS's observations, please come up with supportings prasthAna traya and your thoughts on that .  So that I can atleast understand what is your point of view.   
> 
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar