[Advaita-l] Fw: On Bhamati, Vivarana, SSS

[bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com]

praNAms Sri SSN prabhuji
Hare Krishna

If you are interested only in comical discussions...let us go... till
moderators' intervention :-))

SSN prabhuji :

** Sri Bhaskar, praNAm.

** This is much better; there is aikyatA in the tri-karaNas.

bhaskar :

Oh!! thanks for your kind evaluation!!  BTW, how do you come to know about
my *third* karaNa for giving the certification of *aikyatA* :-))

SSN prabhuji :

** Since I anticipated your objection about dvaita, I later added the
remark about visishTAdvaita, which I see is ignored.

bhaskar :

Unfortunately for you prabhuji :-)) there was no vishitAdvaita school of
thought either at the time of shankara...I thought you know this simple
truth & hence ignored to mention vishitAdvaita in particular :-)) It is a
simple fact that non-advaitic *vEdAntins* (note *vEdAntins*, dont again
come up with new objections holding sAnkhya-vaishEshika etc.)never referred
by shankara...The dualistic schools which he has taken for refutation were
obviously non-vEdAntic...Please note, *at the time of shankara* if there
were schools like vishitAdvaita, dvaita etc. which are the proponents of
absolute difference between the jIva-brahma, he would have not proclaimed
with such an assurance that there was universal agreement among vEdAntins
regarding the identity of the jIva-brahma aikyatA in bruhadAraNyaka
bhAshya!!!  I am giving here one more chance to you, to go back to
bruhadAraNyaka bhAshya & check out what exactly shankara said there before
coming out with new objections.

SSN prabhuji :

I hope you know about sthAlipulAkanyAya - one doesn't check all grains of
rice to see if they are cooked. I have sampled enough of your bhAshya vAkya
quotations to develop a feel for when you deviate from the context.

bhaskar :

unfortunate thing is without knowing the context itself, you are talking
about the deviation from the context :-))Being sarcasm is part of your
discussion...I hope, you take this comment with the right spirit :-))

SSN prabhuji :

In my opinion the weak links I pointed out are self-sufficient.

bhaskar :

weak links what you think is not in my words, if at all it is there, it
will be in bhAshya vAkya...congratulations on finding the weak links in
bhAshya vAkya:-))

SSN prabhuji :

To those who think that quoting bhAshya or only Sanskrit text somehow
denotes correct or superior understanding, here is my reason for not doing
so:

bhaskar :

FYI, I never claimed my quoting of Sanskrit text denotes my superior
understanding of the concept. that is mere your superfluous assumption. I
only provided referential material in gIrvANa bhAsha to substantiate my
claims.. that you are comfortably ignored & started raising straw man
arguments by talking about sthAlipulAkanyAya..have fun prabhuji:-))

SSN prabhuji:

** I am not asking to be spoonfed, or to be educated; since you make an
accusation (that Bhamati and Vivarana brutally attack each other), my
contention is that such a charge should be supported properly with
examples, especially given the very high esteem in which the two books are
held by many others on the list.

bhaskar :

I've given you the details whatever I had in memory...atleast now, from
your end you put some effort to prove it otherwise prabhuji :-))

SSN prabhuji:

** To refresh your memory, you were the one who first referred to them,
without specific references.

bhaskar :

what type of *specific* references you are talking here??

SSN prabhuji :

It behoves you to first give the specific reference, and then state how it
supports your contention (which at that time, if I remember, was along the
lines of "anubhava is more important than Sruti as a means to realise
Brahman").

bhaskar :

again plain assumption..those quotes were to show you where shankara said
avidyA is antaHkaraNa dOsha...subsequently I had asked you to check sUtra
bhAshya utkrAntvAdhikaraNa to show your fallacy in objection that upAdhi
itself is avidyAtmaka...As usual, you never cared to comment..actually, I
liked your trick of applying the sthAlipulAkanyAya in this discussion
prabhuji...a good excuse indeed :-))

SSN prabhuji :

Why is this so? Let us assume I take up, say GitA 2-11, to prove you wrong.
You would come back and say that is not what your had in mind. This can go
on for about 650 times in GitA, and about 100 times in TaittirIya
Upanishad.

bhaskar :

let it be 1000 times, dont you think, atleast in those discussions we have
some valid, mutually accepted premise to talk something about... instead of
yours Vs mine arguments like above, it is much much better to do multiple
times *punarAvartaNa* of shruti/smruti vAkya-s..is it not ??  But,
unfortunately, your quoting of bhAshya vAkya is still an assumption & far
far away from reality :-)) you have never comeup with any bhAshya vAkya to
substantiate your claims..

SSN prabhuji:

My invitation to disucss those, I expected, would elicit the specifics from
you, and when it did not, I later clarified that such is my expectation and
also that you need not bother as I decline to discuss those with you
thereafter. I reiterate, since such a discussion is fruitless, it need not
be taken up.

bhaskar :

if you think shAstra/achAryOpadEsha based discussion is fruitless and
preferring discussions like the above is worth, I think it is better to
have these type of discussions outside the list...I dont think members
would get any benifit out of these *meaningless* discussions...Let us not
waste their precious time..what's your take prabhuji :-))

budhajanavidheyah
Senani

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar