[Advaita-l] avidA and brahman
elisabeth-sylvain at sympatico.ca
Tue Oct 31 08:07:53 CST 2006
"If all that exists is Brahman, where is the "room" for such as a thing as
i think lIlA is the key linked to this question. Isn't it ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "S Jayanarayanan" <sjayana at yahoo.com>
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta"
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: SSS on "Effort after GYAna" (was Re: [Advaita-l]
>I will answer all of your questions if you can answer the following
> question for me:
> "If all that exists is Brahman, where is the "room" for such as a
> thing as avidyA?"
> In case you think I'm "objectifying avidyA", how about answering the
> equivalently posed question from a "subjective" perspective:
> "Who or what is the locus of avidyA?"
> Let us first accept that fitting avidyA into a two-fold logic is
> IMPOSSIBLE. It is not for nothing that advaitins have declared avidyA
> to be anirvachanIya. Given this, your attempt to raise objections
> like "How is it possible for Swami Vidyaranya to claim that avidyA
> remains after attainment of BrahmaGYAna?" can only be answered (if it
> is at all possible) with an appeal to analogies.
> Here's an analogy:
> Most people believe that the water they drink is, chemically
> speaking, H2O. This "fact" is well-documented in many advanced
> science books. **Strictly speaking**, that is actually false! It
> turns out that more correctly, the water that people drink is
> actually H+, OH-, and H2O, all in chemical equilibrium. This more
> accurate description of water may be dealt with in greater detail by
> a chemist working on the specific topic of the "Self-ionization of
> Water", where he painstakingly provides the exact content of H+ and
> OH- ions in water at room temparature that people usually drink. It
> is futile and quite meaningless to say, "I have the quote from a
> Nobel-prize winner saying that water is H2O. Therefore, this
> disproves the chemist who says that it also contains H+ and OH-
> The point is: it is *generally* held that avidyA is completely
> removed for people who have attained saMyak- and aparoksha-
> BrahmaGYAna. This is accepted by everyone, including Swami
> Vidyaranya. This is the ABC of advaita and known to the beginners in
> the subject, whereas Swami Vidyaranya is speaking at the PhD level!
> It is futile to point out that there are quotes in scripture to the
> effect that BrahmaGYAna implies mukti, because Vidyaranya takes pains
> to point out that he is not contradicting this. It is only for some
> *rare souls* that in spite of attaining saMyak- and aparoksha-
> BrahmaGYAna (NOT merely "intellectual scriptural knowledge"), avidyA
> still remains undestroyed. It is this particular case that is dealt
> with in greater detail by Swami Vidyaranya in his Jivan-mukti-viveka.
> This has been accepted as correct by Ramana Maharshi as well as H.H.
> Chandrasekhara Bharati Mahaswamigal who speak of these cases, and I
> believe that Sankara also hints of the same case in his
> Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Commentary 1.4.7.
> Basically, it is wrong to speak of avidyA as "0 or 1" in stricly
> digital terms as you have done below.
> I hope that is clear,
> PS: I definitely feel that I have to start a series explaining the
> differences between BrahmaGYAna and mukti, and will do so sometime
> --- bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com wrote:
>> praNAms Sri Karthik prabhuji
>> Hare Krishna
>> I.e. trace of vAsanAs still remain in this BrahmaGYAnI who has
>> attained BrahmaGYAna with infirm qualifications. Only these
>> BrahmaGYAnIs will have to practise vAsanAkshaya to attain mukti.
>> > Here it is implied that all brahmajnAni-s are not mukta-s...is
>> it not
>> (a) brahmajnAni + vAsana = Not mukti
>> (b) brahmanjnAni - vAsana = mukti
>> kindly clarify whether (a) type of brahmajnAni who has vAsana-s or
>> lEsha is jnAni in an absolute sense...obviously, IMHO, these
>> pertain to (a) are not brahman in absolute sense..coz. shruti is
>> after brahmajnAna *bhidhyate hrudaya grantiM, chidyante sarva
>> saMshayAH...sadyO mukti is what emphasized here for category (b) I
>> Karthik prabhuji :
>> VidyAraNya considers objections like the ones you have given above,
>> where quotes from scripture seem to indicate that "knowledge of
>> Brahman destroys ignorance completely", and his reply is that this
>> refers to those who have attained BrahmaGYAna with firm
>> bhaskar :
>> prabhuji, I am not clear here...kindly clarify whether there are
>> two types
>> of brahmajnAni-s like below ??
>> (a) one is who attained brahmajnAna with firm qualification who
>> does not
>> have any vAsana & has realized his true nature without any trace of
>> (b) another one who is attained *mere brahmajnAna* (is it mere
>> intellectual understanding of shAstra vAkya or something special
>> than it)
>> with the residual avidyA in him??
>> I dont know how (b) canbe classified as brahmajnAna/i in an
>> sense....if (b) is not belongs to brahma jnAni in absolute sense
>> declared by shruti then what is the point here that needs to be
>> ?? We can easily conclude (b) is the process involved in absolute
>> brahmajnAna i.e. krama mukti as prescribed for manda & madhya
>> adhikAri-s...for which I believe Sri SSS does not have any
>> objection...prabhuji, am I missing something here?? pls. clarify
>> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list