[Advaita-l] Taittiriya Upanishad question
bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Tue Apr 12 06:17:47 CDT 2011
Your reaction is full of inaccuracies and an example of your complete
misunderstanding of the Purana episode.
> I would rather try to understand these episodes with more esoteric
meaning than to literally interpreting these episodes to prove jnAni's
'maithuna' at the wrong time !!
- Where is it said that Kashyapa prajapati used his 'power' *
> succmbing to the untimely demand of his wife and 'fulfilling' that
demand (intentionally or unintentionally does not matter here) with 'his'
involvement shows the lack discrimination.
- What is that 'power'?
> A 'power' that every gruhastha have to do his 'vaMshOddhAra' :-)) It
may not be materializing things from thin air.
- The power that is being discussed in this thread pertains to a Jnani
ability to provide another person objects of enjoyment. The specific
is that of Yama - Nachiketa.
> And in kashyapa-diti case you are talking about the jnAni's power of
'maithuna' is it not?? dont you think there strikes a similarity in these
two examples to prove the theory of jnAni's kAma & krOdha.
If you equate this to the Kashyapa episode you are gravely erring.
> I am not equating these episodes, but your purpose of narrating these
two episodes is one and the same i.e. jnAni's kAma, krOdha & his
While Yama offered to provide legitimate objects and opportunities of
enjoyment, Kashyapa never did anything like this.
> according to your understanding of these episodes, one jnAni tried to
tempt a genuine sAdhaka & another jnAni '(in)discriminately' exposed
himself to the illegitimate demand of his wife...right??
While Yama persuaded Nachikta by all means, Kashyapa strongly dissuaded
Diti by a
> yama, one jnAni did the right think ultimately (after testing his
pupil) by revealing the 'mruthyu rahasya' whereas another jnAni, kashyapa
brahma after all that great lecture to dissuade his wife, finally 'agreed'
and 'involved' himself to fulfill the illegitimate demand of his wife
- Where is it said that Diti, his other wife, is a Jnani? Pl. provide
the pramana reference.
> when you first narrated this episode to prove your point, I think you
had said this...I remember that you mentioned in that post : diti (another
jnAni), wife of kashyapa brahma..pls. check it out as I donot have that
mail with me.
- If you have read the entire episode that was presented verse by verse
(translation) on this list some months ago, you would not be making
completely incorrect remark that the Prajapati 'indiscriminately'
in maithuna. The entire episode highlights Prajapati's discrimination
not as you have misunderstood. In fact this discourse is a fine
discrimination. It contains the Prajapati's own praise of Lord Shiva's
> If you interpret this episode literally, it shows that prajapati has
done only 'lip' service to the vairAgya & finally yielded to his wife to
meet the demand.
- For your information, this example was solely given to show that a
jnani *can* have maithuna.
> I never said jnAni become impotent after realization to prompt you to
give this example...BTW, not only this example, you have taken somany
instances out of context from rAma, ramaNa maharshi, rAmakrishna parama
haMsa, shankara bhagavadpAda lives to prove jnAni's ahaMkAra, mamakAra,
kAma, krOdha etc.
This was specifically given in reply to your specific question
doubting/questioning this possibility: How can a Jnani who has no bhAva of
'another' have such feelings with regard to the opposite sex.
> My doubt has firm base in shruti & shankara siddhAnta..because shruti
says: kena kim pashyet etc. ?? and shankara repeatedly insists avidyA
nivrutti is ahaMkAra nivrutti & result is atyantika abhAva of
saMsAra..Whereas you are comfortably telling us jnAni too has
maithunecche, capable enough to do maithuna that too at the wrong time, he
shows krOdha sometime, he weeps sometime due to mamakAra etc. I think you
have extended your examples by giving one person's example who after
'realization' got two children in saMsAra. From this you are floating a
'upa siddhAnta' that 'saMnyAsa' is not the must (contrary to your own
argument in favour of saMnyAsa)to attain brahma jnAna.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list