[Advaita-l] Binary nature of Jnana

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Praveen ji,

Since you had mentioned that you don't understand Tamil, I thought I should
clarify in case it was based on any misunderstanding of what was said in
that talk by Sri Mani Dravid Shastrinah.

If that is not the case, please ignore the message.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan




On Mon, 4 Jul 2022, 19:41 Praveen R. Bhat, <bhatpraveen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Venkatji,
>
> On Mon 4 Jul, 2022, 11:05 PM Venkatraghavan S, <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I listened to this talk - essentially what was said was that the term
>> brahmasamstha occuring in this context can only apply to sannyAsa Ashrama -
>> the reason for this is that the yaugika meaning of the term brahma-samsthA
>> can only apply to the sannyAsi.
>>
>> The yaugika meaning given by the bhAShyakAra is as mentioned by Sri
>> Chandramouli - samsthA in brahmasamthA means culmination, avasAna. So the
>> term brahmasamsthah in this context means - he whose sole purpose is
>> culmination in brahman (brahmajnAna), ie those for whom there is nothing
>> else enjoined. This obviously cannot apply to any other Ashrami, because
>> they do have other karma-s that have been enjoined for them.
>>
>> The Shruti vAkya in question, ‘ब्रह्मसंस्थोऽमृतत्वमेति’ is saying  that
>> the one who is a brahmasamsthah (a sannyAsi who has no necessity for
>> anything other than brahmajnAna, one who has culminated in Brahman) attains
>> immortality.
>>
>> I don't think the corrolaries you suggest necessarily follow from this
>> much alone - i.e. in saying that the sannyAsi attains inmortality, it does
>> not follow that no one else can attain it.
>>
> Sorry, your conclusion on my basis for questions is erroneous. If you had
> changed the order of your response to both of us, you'll likely not have
> questioned my questions! I request you to revisit my questions after taking
> the meaning of brahmasaMstha in 3.4.20 BSBB as only a sAdhaka and not
> jnAnI, because that is the point on which those questions are raised. To
> clarify, the pUrvapakSha will then mean: how can brahmasaMstha be only a
> sannyAsI? And the response given would end up meaning: because
> brahmasaMsthA means a sAdhaka whose duties can culminate in brahmaniShTha.
>
> All the bhAShya is seeking to do is to establish that brahmasamsthah can
>> only mean sannyAsi. Therefore, the force of the siddhAntin's refutation of
>> the pUrvapakshI lies primarily in dismissing the contention that the term
>> can apply to other Ashrama-s also, not in stating that jnAna cannot arise
>> in other Ashrama-s.
>>
>> Therefore the argument is that if one belongs to any other Ashrama, they
>> have an obligation to continue performing their duties even after
>> brahmajnAna, so they cannot have samsthA, samApti in brahmajnAna. That
>> would incur pratyavAya. Therefore, they cannot be the ones referred to by
>> the term brahmasamsthAh.
>>
>
> Rest of the explanation from the audio of the pATha given by you is
> exactly what I understood, except that both meanings were yaugika, one at
> samAsa level and another at upasarga level.
>
> gurupAdukAbhyAm
>
>>
>>