neti neti

[Anand Hudli]

 Gummuluru Murthy wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Mar 1998, Anand Hudli wrote:
>
>>  My question was intended to be more rhetorical than anything else!
>>  But your answer does point out one thing. It presupposes the
>>  (at least apparent) existence of "anything and everything that
>>  claims its absolute status." Unless we admit such an (albeit
>>  apparent) existence there is no use of the "neti neti" principle.
>>  In broad terms, this apparent existence is of Ishvara (God),
>>  jiiva (individual soul), and jagat (the world), the so-called
tripod.
>>  This tripod is what is negated to arrive at Brahman.
>>  This is what I was trying to convey.
>>
>>  Anand
>>
>
>Namaste.
>
>I think even the jivanmukta sees the jagat and the jeeva. Except, that
the
>jivanmukta knows them to be unreal. Thus, neti, neti is denying the
>reality of these items, not denying their existence. Thus, neti, neti
has
>a definite role.
>
  Considering the fact that the upanishadic principle "neti neti"
  is taught by a Guru to a disciple who is not necessarily a
  jiivanmukta already, I do not see why only a jiivanmukta should
  be using it. Your response above seems to be implying that.
  If a non-jiivanmukta should be using "neti neti", he certainly
  cannot have realized, to begin with, that the jagat, jiiva, and
  Ishvara are not real. When he learns the "neti neti" principle
  from the Guru, he then realizes the unreality of jiiva, etc.

  A more important point I am trying to make here is that according
  to advaita, ajnaana or avidyaa has no beginning, but it does have
  an end for those receive jnaana! From some of the points made on
  this list, it seems to me that some people here are of the opinion
  that ajnaana has no beginning and no end either because it simply
  does never exist. While this may be true from the paaramaarthika
  view, we (at least most of us!) are not born liberated. So we
  accept that there is ajnaana which must be got rid of.  The
  argument that if one merely thinks he is liberated he is indeed so
  and if he thinks he is in bondage he is indeed so, is faulty in that
  it makes a mockery of shruti and various teachings that our
  Achaaryas have left behind.

 Anand


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com