message to my friends

Gummuluru Murthy gmurthy at MORGAN.UCS.MUN.CA
Mon Aug 10 06:45:52 CDT 1998

Pardon my intrusion into this very interesting discussion. I will put my
understanding on two thoughts here, and go into the background again with
the hope that the participants will address them.

1. videhamukti of a jeevanmukta and death of an ignorant man

   videhamukti of a jeevanmukta
(a) as seen by jeevanmukta: It does not make any difference if the body
stays or falls. The Atman which He/She is pervades all irrespective of
the discarding or keeping of the body and He/She knows it.

(b) as seen by an ignorant man: sees it as death of any other human. He
laments at that. If he believes in re-births, the ignorant man thinks thst
the soul of this departed jeevanmukta would be re-born in some other form.

   death of an ignorant man

(a) as seen by jeevanmukta: the same as in (a) above. The jeevanmukta does
not see any difference between Himself and any other living being.

(b) as seen by the ignorant man: the same as (b) above. He laments at the
approaching death, cannot let go of the possessions, and if he believes in
re-birth, thinks he will be re-born to either enjoy or suffer the
consequences of his past-actions.

Now, I will add another clause to this, as seen by a vedanta student who
sees the two events as well as his/her own death. The vedanta student
(who is a mumukshu and is after atma-jnAnam, yet has not overcome the
desires and the ego) sees a difference between jeevanmukta and an ignorant

(a) videhamukti of jeevanmukta: The vedanta student knows that it is
discarding of the body. The jeevanmukta attained moksha and will not be

(b) death of an ignorant man: The vedanta student sees this as death. The
subtle body of the departed ignorant man carries forward the prArabdha
karma of that man, it will be re-born in another form.

(c) death of the vedanta student (himself): The Isha upanishhad verses
14-18 describe fully the views of this departing entity and will be a
classic read for any serious student of vedanta (As this post is already
getting too long, and as I do not want to color the Isha upanishhad
content with my personal view, I will not give a translation here).


Actionlessness and desireless action

These two words were used in the debate, and in my view, they refer to
at different levels of understanding. As long as one is embodied (or
thinks, is embodied), is not there action all the time ? May be minimal
action in some cases, but still action. This point came up in Jaladhar's
and my discussion on Karma and sannyAsa. Desireless action is there for
a mumukshu, but actionlessness is there only for jnAnam in embodied form.


I hope the participants will also address these points in their debate.

Gummuluru Murthy

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list