[Advaita-l] Ramana's method
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Wed Oct 10 12:58:08 CDT 2012
Since you brought up the name of Patanjali may I share a bit of my thoughts on this. Patanjali was a great scholar and he is said to be an avatara of bhagavan Adisesa. Even his Mahabhasya is known as Phani bhasya, thus referring it to be a work of Adisesa. In Jivanmuktiviveka also we find reference to the Adisesa's Pancasiti (the verse 81 of Pancasiti, for example). Adi Sankaracharya's guru Govinda Bhagavadpada, was considered to be an avatara of Patanjali. This might indicate that Govindapada was good in what Patanjali taught. Patanjali's influence is very clear in Gaudapada's Mandukyakarika as well as in his Sankhyakarikabhashya. Such being the case Patanjali could be considered as the Adi-Advaitin, if we leave aside the the Advaitins of the Vedic age. Probably led by this influence of Patanjali the great advaitin Adi Sankaracharya wrote one bhashya on the Sankhyakarika, another bhasya -Yogasutravivarana on the Yogasutra, and yet another bhshya
on the Svetasvatara upanishad.
The Advaitins seem to have forgotten these three bhashyas of Adi Sankaracharya. Not only that, I am surprised that in spite of all these evidences the Advaitins today seem to have also forgotten the Pancasiti (Aryapancasiti) of the adi-advaitin Patanjali. Come to think of it, even Abhinavagupta's Paramarthasara, which is the root-text of the Kashmiri Shaivism, is just a copy of Aryapancasiti.I feel that it will help the Advaitin's greatly if they read the Aryapancasiti of Patanjali, along with the Sankara-bhashyas and the Gaudapada-bhashyas.
From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 2:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Ramana's method
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
> In fact Dr.Mani Dravid SastrigaL who is perhaps unmatched in scholarship
> had this to say: It is enough for a mumukshu to take up just one text,
> even a prakaraNa grantha like 'aparokshanubhuti' or 'Atmabodha' and
> sincerely practice what has been taught there. There is no need for
> delving into countless texts, bhashyams, etc.
> praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> I dont know in which context Sri Mani Dravid shAstrigaL said some
> prakaraNa grantha is enough for brahma jignAsa. Is he intended here to
> say even for the sAdhaka-s who have vedAdhikAra, prakaraNa grantha would
> suffice without any veda shAstrAdhyayana?? If prakaraNa grantha-s
> themselves act as valid pramANa for the brahma jignAsa why there is so
> much emphasis on shAstras' antya prAmANyatva?? Kindly clarify.
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
The problem lies in what one understands by the term 'shAstra'. Even those
who do not have vedAdhikAra are not barred from studying the BhagavadgItA
which is one of the prasthAnatraya. Supposing a person studies the gitA
along with the Acharya's bhashya, will that not be called
shAstrAdhyayana/upadesha? The 'antyaprAmANya' will happily apply to this
too. In fact one will get more clarity of the Upanishadic literature from
the Gita and the bhashya since the smRti is admitted to be following the
shruti and a kind of vyAkhyAnam of the shruti. The Bh.Gita has enough
content to address and even engender true brahmajijnAsA. 'tadviddhi
praNipAtena pariprashnena sevayA., upadekShyanti te jnAnam jnAninaH
tattvadarshinaH.' Shankara even goes to the extent of adding here that the
'tattvadarshI' is an aparoksha jnAni.
For 'svAdhyAya' of the 'shauch santoSha tapaH svaadhyAya
IshwarapraNIdhAnAni niyamAH' of the Patanjali sutras, the Vedanta Acharya
Sadashiva Brahmendra says: 'it is a study of adhyAtma works.'
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list