[Advaita-l] Fw: Re: waking, dreaming, sleeping, as mutually supportive
shrao at nyx.net
Sun Oct 25 10:19:06 CDT 2009
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> My answer is, there is no scriptural sanction for non-brahmin to don ochre
>> robe for such permission would have then given a valid reason as to their
> Sorry, that is where you are dead wrong. That there is scriptural sanction for
> all dvija-s to enter the traditional saMnyAsASrama is affirmed by sureSvara in
> his vArttika on the bRhadAraNyaka. As you know, dvija includes all those who
> have the upanayana saMskAra.
For my own curiosity, does Sureshvara give an authority from श्रुति or
स्मृति for his position?
I'm afraid I personally completely agree with your interlocutors on
the other side of this debate -- I am not aware either of any
acceptance by any classical scholar in any of the traditions of your
position, or of any historical instance of a non-ब्राह्मण being
ordained/accepted as a सन्न्यासी by tradition. The examples of the
Lingayat मठ, etc., are not exactly convincing as they can be
considered as accepted by (acquiesced in?) by [some of] the Smarta and
Vaishnava orthodoxy alike for social or political reasons. It is not
unseen, for example, for [some of] our Swamis to deal quite cordially
with bishops, Buddhist भिक्षुs, etc.; this surely does not mean they
accept the ordainments of the Roman Catholic Church or Mahayana
Buddhism as legitimate and conforming to tradition. In private,
orthodoxy (certainly in the classical, as opposed to neo-Vedantic,
traditions) is scarcely more receptive of the Lingayats than of the
Buddhists or others.
It is also of note that the विशिष्टाद्वैत tradition insists that its
सन्न्यासीs continue to wear the sacred thread and perform their
नित्यकर्मs such as सन्ध्या, and criticizes both the Smarta and
Vaishnava traditions for not accepting this practice. This is perhaps
a counterexample to the claim that a सन्न्यासी is considered to be
beyond वर्ण; at least in that tradition, he is not.
I do not see any strong objection arising from the doubt that someone
not becoming a सन्न्यासी is ipso facto excluded from ज्ञान, etc.; see
for instance Sankara on Bhagavad Gita XVIII-46: स्वकर्मणा पूर्वोक्तेन
प्रतिवर्णं तमीश्वरमभ्यर्च्य पूजयित्वा अाराध्य केवलं
ज्ञाननिष्ठायोग्यतालक्षणां सिद्धिं विन्दति मानवो मनुष्याः and the
clarification thereon by Anandagiri.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list