[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Seeking clarification on Bri. Up. Mantra 1-4-2
H S Chandramouli
hschandramouli at gmail.com
Sun Apr 20 06:37:51 CDT 2014
Dear Sri Sadanandaji,
At the outset, my apologies for wrongly addressing you. I adopted it as I
found the same in some of the earlier posts addressed to you by other
Concerning the current issue, I must confess that perhaps I did not
understand your question at all properly. But the worse part of it is I
seem to be missing it even now. Maybe when other members respond and the
discussion proceeds further the issue might get clearer for me.
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 3:54 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Chandramouliji - PraNAms
> Thanks for taking time to explain. If I may request, you can address me
> just as sada or sadananda since that is the given name, while kuntimaddi is
> my village name where my fore fathers settled. It is not important but just
> for info.
> 1. The explanation appears to be valid, except for the fact that our
> understanding (at least mine) is once one has gained knowledge of oneness,
> the aagaami and sanchita are burned out by jnaanam and praarabda is for the
> current BMI and when the current BMI drops there is no further karma to
> propel the next birth.
> 2. If in the previous janma, even if had the desire to become viraj and
> did the requisite upaasana, once one has gained the knowledge of oneness,
> the desire gets sublimated in that jnanam since there is nothing other than
> oneself- just as he asks where is there to be afraid of since he has
> understood oneness, what is there to be desired for also has to come for a
> jnaani - prajahaati yadaakaamaan sarvan partha monogataan. Just as Krishna
> says - these actions of mine do not bind me, even though they are propelled
> by desires to establish dharma and remove adharma.
> Here is the possibility that I think more consistent with the rebirth and
> at the same time having some knowledge of oneness.
> He has partial knowledge and not complete knowledge of absolute - as in
> understanding only the twam padartham and not- tat and asi parts -as in the
> simple enquiry of who am I - I am the only subject and everything else is
> object of my cognition. This is what direct method people do claiming that
> there is no need of scriptural study; and also some disciples of Ramana
> Maharshi who think all one has to do is just sit down and do who am I
> The fact that that jiiva took birth as viraj has to imply that he did not
> have the complete knowledge of aham brahmaasmi since he was lonely and
> wanted a company of other jiivas for his happiness as the Upanishad
> describes in subsequent mantras. Therefore he created his wife, etc.
> The question I was posing also is Shankara's explanation in relation the
> objection he himself raised in his bhaashya in terms of how he got the
> knowledge and even if he has the knowledge of oneness, why was he born and
> if so that knowledge become useless to eliminate the janamas in the future.
> The objection raised was valid one.
> My specific concern was I found that the elaborate response to that
> objection did not address the question, as I understood, unless I missed
> something in that explanation - hence seeking clarification.
> I could explain by the simple fact that his knowledge was incomplete and
> hence he is born with that partial knowledge- reminds me of jadabharata
> Hari Om!
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list