[Advaita-l] The Enlightened Eminently Engage in Empirical Endeavors - Part 3
v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Wed Mar 3 11:35:00 CST 2010
This post is to mention a correction in the Part 3 of the article:
/ All this is brought out by Shankara Himself in the Sutra bhashya quote
1.4.15 where He uses the word: ‘sva-hRdaya pratyayam brahma bhAvam’ which
means the Brahmanhood of oneself is experienced by oneself in one’s own
In the above, the Sutra Bhashya reference should read: 4.1.15.
Om Tat Sat
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 10:58 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
> This is the concluding part.
> Part 3
> That a Jnani has a body, shareeram, was confirmed by Shankara Himself in
> the Brahma sutra bhashya quote we saw already. That a Jnani has a mind,
> intellect, etc. is undeniable. That all these are localized is also
> unquestionable. And such a mind holds a reflection of consciousness (RC)
> is also proved beyond doubt. It is only in a RC does a person experience
> ignorance, samsara. It is with the RC only he does sadhana. It is only
> in the RC he realizes his own Brahman nature. It is in the RC alone he
> retains that realization. All this is brought out by Shankara Himself in
> the Sutra bhashya quote 1.4.15 where He uses the word: ‘sva-hRdaya pratyayam
> brahma bhAvam’ which means the Brahmanhood of oneself is experienced by
> oneself in one’s own localized RC. Elsewhere in the Gitabhashya (13.2) He
> has categorically confirmed that Avidya too is experienced as a pratyaya, a
> thought. Surely, for being experienced as an object, vishaya, avidya has
> to be a bhAva padArtha. An unreal object, like a rope-snake, can be an
> object of experience. But certainly a vandhyA putra, or a hare’s horn can
> not be a vishaya for experience.
> When we say that a Jnani’s mind is an expanded one what we mean is His
> vision of the Universal Self. This does not mean that his
> Self-realization, hunger, thoughts, pain, pleasures, etc. are reflected
> in/experienced by the unenlightened and vice versa.
> Shankara’s views on the Enlightened one’s Empirical Engagements with an
> essentially localized BMI has been provided above in the form of His
> Sureshwaracharya’s views on the above are available in the Brihadaranyaka
> Up. Bhashya Vartika 1.4.10. In the Taittiriya Up. Bhashya Vartika too he
> gives his views. Ref. 3.77, 78, 79, 81, 82.
> In the Naishkarmya siddhi too Sureshwara gives his views about the Jnani’s
> BMI owing to prArabdha karma. For instance he says in 4.62:
> //If a person who has realized the non-dual reality could behave as he
> liked, then what is the difference between a dog and the seer of truth in
> respect of eating what is prohibited?//
> Surely, the above can be said only where there is the possibility of a
> Jnani, in a localized BMI, to be engaged in empirical transactions. If
> there is no possibility of a BMI for the Jnani, Sureshwara cannot say the
> Swami Vidyaranya has said in the Panchadashi:
> jnAninA charitum shakyam samyak rAjyAdi loukikam
> [It is very well possible for the Jnani to engage in empirical duties such
> as administering a Kingdom]. We have seen specific cases of this in the
> Logic has it that a body that has taken birth, given the occasion for
> Knowledge to dawn, will not vanish upon realization. This is because, as
> Shankara has clarified, Brahman Knowledge is an antidote for avidya alone
> and is not an opposing force for the BMI. Shankara has stated His own
> experience in this regard in the Sutra bhashya quote 1. 4 15.
> In no place does Shankara say that the Jnani’s BMI is an imagination on the
> part of the onlookers. In the Gita bhashya He comments in a place: the
> actions of a jnani is superposed by the ignorant. What He means by this
> is: the others believe that the Jnani does these actions with the ‘I am the
> doer’ feeling. That alone is the superimposition. If this is not
> admitted, all the instances quoted by Krishna, etc. will be contradicted.
> So what more evidence do we need to prove the fact of Jivanmukti, BMI,
> praarabdha, etc. for a Jnani?
> There is this ‘catch-22’ situation in denying empirical engagements to the
> enlightened: (According to the internet Urban Dictionary: ‘catch-22’ is: A
> *situation* where both choices would have negative impacts on oneself.)
> 1. Shankara is not an enlightened Acharya.
> 2. The Commentaries that we have in the name of Shankara are authored by an
> Shankara will have to be regarded as an unenlightened one. Why? Because
> He wrote the Bhashyam. The Bhahsyam can be written only by using the BMI.
> These are not there for an enlightened. As a result of this, we have to
> deem the bhashyam that we have now to be a product of some unenlightened
> person. If we accept Shankara as a Jnani, we cannot hold him to be a
> bhAshyakAra. The bhashyam also will lose its revelatory nature,
> prAmANyam, as it is not authored by a Jnani.
> This absurdity can be avoided only if we take the path of the Shruti, the
> Sutra, the Gita, Shankara, Sureshwara, etc. and accept the concepts of
> Jnani, prArabdha, localized BMI for him, etc.
> There is further difficulty for those who, in their ignorance of the
> Scriptural methods as taught by Shankara, insist that there is no BMI for a
> jnani. If the Acharya who has introduced this skewed thinking born of his
> personal understanding is deemed a Jnani by his followers, then his
> words/writings will be an impossibility as they have to be done with the BMI
> only. If he is regarded as not enlightened, then his words will have no
> prAmANyam in this very matter. The Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.8 describes such
> a case as ‘andhenaiva neeyamAnA yathA andhAH’, the blind leading the blind.
> Empirical engagements of an enlightened cannot be there in the following
> · The person kills himself immediately after realization. (But lo!
> This is also not possible for he won’t have a body to be killed or any
> instrument he can use to kill himself!!)
> · The Jnani expends his prArabdha and dies a natural death. (This
> is the natural, scripturally admitted way.)
> · The Jnani immediately after realization goes into irreversible
> samAdhi and the body withers away in time.
> Anubhava or Experience of Jnani-s is also proof for their having a
> localized BMI. Shankara Himself has expressed it in no uncertain terms.
> Logic too is in support of this. Shankara gives the logic: Jnanam is the
> dispeller of the wrong notion of one’s embodiedness. Jnanam is NOT the
> destroyer of the body. The body, born of natural forces will meet its end
> in the natural course. Shankara gives this logic in several places in the
> Thus, in the foregoing we have considered all the possible sources,
> pramanams, to establish that the Enlightened ones Eminently Engage in
> Empirical Endeavours.
> It is the opinion of this author that the various topics dealt with here
> are self-explanatory. If anyone needs further clarification on any of the
> topics the best recourse is to go to the very source books, references for
> which are amply provided.
> (The above article is dedicated to the Acharyas of the Vedantic tradition
> who have handed down the esoteric wisdom with the utmost clarity in their
> infinite compassion to the seeking humanity.)
> Shreesadguru charanAravindArpaNamastu
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list