What we write

Vaidya N. Sundaram sundaram at ECN.PURDUE.EDU
Mon Nov 3 12:33:43 CST 1997


 On this discussion regarding what we write, I would like to clarify a
few points. When I said " ... My contention is that, we as list members do
not say or imply our own view points. We quote from authorities and
scriptures ..." I only meant to address Allan's comments:

On Mon 27 Oct. Allan wrote:

     Yes, I too wonder if anyone on this list in particular
    "knows how to attain jnanihood". There are a handful of
    people among us who seem to imply they are jnanis and
    they might then be able to tell us how to attain
    jnanihood, but I doubt whether anyone on this list is
    a perfectly realized being.

    If any list member is a jnani (a perfectly enlightened
    being) then please take pity on us and simply say so.
    If you are not a *perfectly* enlightened being then
    please admit this by by your silence. If there *were*
    any "pretenders to the throne" out there they might
    just gracefully pretend to have not even read this  :-)


 To say that we are jnani's or not is pointless. It is even more absurd
to expect one who is also on the path to come forth and lead or give
pointers to the right direction.  The right direction is pointed
out in the scriptures and by great Acharyas from time to time. In his
list, we quote them, and also state the source when we do so. There is
thus no confusion about the souce. **  We as list members do not say or
imply our own view points regarding the proper direction or path to
realisation. Saying list members give direction is not true at all. **

At 10:06 AM 11/2/97 -0330, Gummuluru Murthy wrote:

> I hesitate in accepting this fully. Often I expressed my understanding of
> the analysis of the great achAryAs like Shri Shankara. Also, quite often,
> I expressed my understanding of a matter. Is it necessary to have a
> scriptural reference or a great acAryA's commentary all the time ? I agrre
> that if we do not follow either a great teacher's commentary/work or the
> upanishhad or gita itself, it can become a free-for-all. But, here we are
> practising advaita. Practising advaita is knowing what we are and a
> bookish or intellectual knowledge is not sufficient. I am interested in
> hearing List members' views on this.

 I fully agree that understanding the Bhashyas of AdiShankara is itself
quite a task and it helps if list members express their understanding.
But saying that ** there are a few listmembers among us who imply they
are jnanis and wish to tell us the way ** is totally false.

On Mon, 3 Nov 1997, Greg Goode wrote:
> This might be a matter of the rules of this list.  Some lists are strict about
> forbidding personal experiences, and instead demand that the discussion be
> scholarly.
> For my 2 cents' worth, I would like to hear (and maybe write about)
> personal experiences AS
> WELL AS scholarly quotes.  What about others?

Again, I greatly appreciate members taking the time to express their
understanding of the Sutras and Bhashyas. Personal experiences are
inherent in such expressions. No doubt about that.

What is not so obvious is the distinction between understanding of ideas
and concepts and turning them around and going further to postulate the
next step. I firmly believe my concept of the next step is very different
from a lot of other advaitic followers. I draw the line here.

Sri Jnaneswari has written a commentary on the Bhagavad Gita. So has
Prabupada. So has YogAnanda Paramahamsa. And so has Sri AdiShankara.
Very often you will find one author contradicting the others directly.
As a disciple of Advaitic philosophy, I am inlined to accept Sri
Shankara's views. That is why I say again that we as list members do
not state our own view and only quote authorities and scriptures.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list