[Advaita-l] Athato Brahma Jijnasa
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Wed May 4 11:57:25 CDT 2011
Do you mean to say that Vedantadeshika did not understand the Kenopanishad ?
Then again why not consider Mother Sita's response when she was asked which of the four brothers was her husband?
--- On Wed, 5/4/11, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Athato Brahma Jijnasa
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 4, 2011, 2:41 AM
Namaste Sri Sriram
Good explanation but there can be some counter arguments.
The Sutra Athato Brahma Jijnasa is the first. It is explaining why we
must study Vedanta. Before studying Vedanta if someone tells the
Brahman of Vedanta cannot be known like an object of enquiry and it is
Neti Neti how is it possible to start the studies? This is Vedanta
Then Visishtadvaitis argue the Sruti is not explaining Nirguna Brahma
will replace Saguna Brahma. We cannot give up Saguna Sruti and take
only Nirguna Sruti as correct. This is the Advaiti position. We have
to take both and explain properly. It is like this.
Draupadi was playing with her friends in the garden. They see
Sahadeva, Nakula, Arjuna, Bheema, Yudhisthira there. The friends asked
her to show her husband. But Draupadi was shy to point out. The
friends point to Sahadeva and Draupadi says Yes. They point next to
Nakula and Draupadi says Yes. They point to Arjuna and Draupadi says
Yes. They point to Bheema and Draupadi says Yes. They point to
Yudhisthira and Draupadi says Yes. But they are all Pandava brothers
and there is no enemity between them. No brother will eliminate
another brother. They all must be taken as Draupadi's husbands.
I hope you see this point.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Venkata sriram P
<venkatasriramp at yahoo.in> wrote:
> Dear Mr. Murty,
> There is a fascinating story about neti neti vichara.
> Mother Sita alongwith Her friends was playing in a garden. Accidentally, they all happen to see Rama, Lakshmana, Bharata, Shatrughna in the same garden. By then, Mother Sita got engaged with Lord Rama.
> Having seen them together, friends of Mother Sita ask Her to show Her husband Rama.
> Keeping in view of the sAstra maryAda, Mother Sita neither uttered the husband's name nor pointed Lord Rama among the brothers with Her index finger. This is Mother Sita's pativratA lakShaNa.
> The friends of Mother Sita, point towards Shatrughna, but Sita says No; then again point towards Bharata, Sita says No; they point towards Lakshmana, Sita says No. Now, the only person left out was Lord Rama who was odd man out. Invariably without questioning Sita, they understood that Lord Rama was Mother Sita's fiancee.
> So, the purpose of our study of sAstras is something similar to the method adopted by the friends of Mother Sita in identifying who exactly was Rama, the husband of Sita.
> Sita adopts the "neti - neti" method of elimination and when finally Lord Rama is left out, She shies away putting Her head down as a mark respect towards Her husband.
> Sastras shy away and become silent here.........
> "jnAnAd eva tu kaivalyaM" says the Sastra and the Jnana is here defined as "sva-swarupa jnana" which is "sAkShi" & "nirguNa".
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list