[Advaita-l] A study of a chapter of the book `BhAmatI-samAlochanam'.
venkat_advaita at yahoo.com
Wed Apr 21 00:02:59 CDT 2010
Well I dont think the Holenarsipuram Swamigal presents that there is no Jivan Mukta.
To a Jnani, once the paramartha is realised he understands His true nature that is ever present and ever the same (if the word ever has any sense here); and that Jnani, while his body continues in the world is perceived by others in vyavahara as "living". Both these are present in the same person, and this is what is "Jivan Mukti"; He is a mukta and at the same time Jivathi api. This does not imply any "avidya lesha" in him.....The point of difference discussed here is whether Avidya lesha is a concommitant in a Jivan Mukta; not that there is no Jivan Mukta concept in the commentaries as understood by the Holenarsipur tradition.
What the revered Commentator points out as his experience while the body continues; we find very similar expressions in Ramana maharishi as well; In fact Ramana's words are clearer.
So there is nothing starlting in a Holenarsipur tradition vidwan writing about jivan muktas. In fact the Holenarsipur tradition does not have any prejudice like the self officiating treasury benches who require their self claimed baptism to be honoured by them before they accept some one as "within" their order.
Thanks & Regards,
--- On Tue, 20/4/10, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] A study of a chapter of the book `BhAmatI-samAlochanam'.
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Tuesday, 20 April, 2010, 11:29 PM
//Isn't it ironic, in a way, that vedAnta is SArIraka mImAMsA?!!//
These words of Sri Vidyashankar ji prompt me to bring to the notice of the
members a new book in Kannada, 'jIvanmukta-chatuShTaya'. This book features
four 'Jivanmuktas', as the author Vidwan Sri K.G.Subraya Sharma, presents
them: Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, *Sri Sachidanandendra Saraswati (SSS)*, HH
Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati SwaminaH of Sringeri and Pujya Kanchi
The author is one of the foremost student-disciples of SSS. The book is of
very few pages and is priced Rs.30/- It carries, at the very beginning, a
photo of SSS and the author, a young brahmacharin, pictured in 1963. One
page contains a number of commendations of the author from many persons,
including Sri Subhanu Saxena.
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
//As I understand from even your own quotation of the Bhashya in the PDF
> file, the Jiva is NEVER ever i bondage; the very understanding that I am
> bound is a misapprehension. That is why the Holenarsipur Swamigal,
> following the footsteps of the Revered Commentator, holds that this
> mis-apprehension is a facility assumed for explanation purpose, by Tradition
> and is what called "Adhyasa" or "Avidya" or "Ajnana" or "Jnana Abhava" all
> these terms used by the Revered Commentator himself as synonyms.
> I think, at this point, it would make sense to step back a little and
> answer some
> basic points for ourselves. It may help to use standard English
> philosophical terms
> for this purpose.
> Does avidyA have an ontological status or only an epistemological one? It
> to me that for the Holenarsipur Swami and followers, avidyA has no
> status whatsoever, whereas for almost every traditional post-Sankaran
> author in
> the tradition, avidyA has both ontological and epistemological aspects.
> And because avidyA has an ontological aspect to it, for the
> in the tradition, avidyA also has a causal role in the materiality of the
> For those who grant avidyA only an epistemological status, it has no
> whatsoever with materiality. This goes to the crux of the problematic
> on jIvanmukti. Everything boils down to the "problem" of the physical,
> body of the jnAnI.
> Of course, it is granted by all that a jnAnI does not care for the body and
> not identify with it. However, that does not take away the philosophical
> of its status post-jnAna. For most of the traditional sub-commentators,
> avidyA has a role in causing material embodiment, it is natural enough to
> "avidyA-leSa" with respect to the continued presence of the material body.
> those who view avidyA as purely an epistemological device, that doesn't
> sense. It is this fundamental disagreement about the SarIra that causes the
> major dispute here. Isn't it ironic, in a way, that vedAnta is SArIraka
> ps. Epistemology is that branch of philosophy that studies how we know what
> know, whereas ontology is about the nature of being.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list