The mind according to Sri Shankaracharya.

Srikrishna Ghadiyaram srikrishna_ghadiyaram at YAHOO.COM
Wed Sep 11 11:47:18 CDT 2002

Hari Om !!

--- Kiran B R <kiranbr at ROCKETMAIL.COM> wrote:
> >
> >I do not have any FUNDAMENTAL doubts like what a
> >brahmavid is . Please read your definition of what
> is
> >a brahmavid.
> >
> >Do not put new words in my mouth that I said
> >'mANDUkyA' is unscientific. Do not irritate me, by
> >joining me in your group. I do not belong to your
> >group of FUNDAMENTAL DOUBTS men. Do not call me
> your
> >friend in your group.
> >
> Well, you were the one who said don't search for a
> scientific answer,
> search in the 'mANDUkyA' and 'bhAshya' instead! What
> does that mean?


I wrote earlier:

"If you need more, scientific answer, you can continue
to waste your life time, pursuing further.

You will save yourself a lot of trouble, if you read
mANDUkya and bhAshya and listen to it from a true
advaitic teacher and scholer."

In the above sentences I did not advocate that you
should not search for a scientific answer. Instead I
said, if you want a more scientific answer than what
was explained by sage Vasishta and Swami Sivananda,
you can confinue( in your present method of enquiry)
and waste your precious life time.

I added that if you follow the complete system
explained in mANDUkya listening from a scholar (who is
not a DIUBTS monger, and understands Sanskrit, and a
true Advaita teacher (meaning who has studied
systematically and has some prior experience of
expounding the truths), you will save a lot of trouble
of your own search because answers are there in those

So, all along, without even listening what the others
have been saying and determining why they are right,
you presume that they are wrong because they do not
have the same thought pattern such as yours, (eg, yes
or no questions), you keep on furthering your own
idiotic logic, and quote sentences out of place and
with distorted meaning (which you have done in my
case, for example). This is unscientific.

> >You must keep silence until your brain starts
> working.
> Silence comes when the brain *stops* working!

Now, your brain is not working, it is causing havoc
for your learning. It is dormant now or Tamasic. That
is why you do not understand the TRUTH. Alternatively,
your brain needs to work in the Sattva mode.

In the Devi Gita/Chandi patha it is explained that the
intelligence is of three kinds: Sattva, Rajas, and
Tamas. Your apparent 'intelligence' which seems to
work logically is working in the tamasic zone. For a
person to understand the truths of scriptures, it
needs to work in the Sattvic zone. (yA dEvI sarva
bhUteshu BUDHI rUpENa samsthitA, namah tasyai namah
tasyai nah tasyai namo namaha - three times namah

No, From silene brain (mind) comes out. and merges
again into it.

silence is ever present it does not come from some

> >It is easy to get oil out of sand, it is easy to
> >search for a hare's horn, but one can not convince
> a
> >FOOL. You must read and understand Bhartruhari
> >Subhashita, so you know how well a person who
> >questions like you, compares to a FOOL.
> >
> I don't need to read any Subhashita to conclude that
> a person questioning
> like me compares to a FOOL! I never claimed to be a
> learned person! I came
> to this list *because* I am a FOOL! It is a FOOL who
> asks questions. Not a
> learned person!

No, you are wrong again.

It is a FOOL who simply starts with a doubt and ends
with a doubt. A learned person questions and seeks and
answer. He is willing to shed his pre-conceived
notions, and seeks only TRUTH, not truth of his own

I explained that if some one is not able to answer a
FOOL, it is not that TRUTH does not exist. It is the
nature of a FOOL that no-one can convince him on the

> >Spare me from your instinct to question the
> >definitions of an established subjects.
> Why? Where does it hurt?!

Because  I am here to know the subject as is known to
them. I am not going to come and fight you in your
house. I better take what you have to offer, if I like
or quit.

> > You write your
> >own definitions in a book of your own and read for
> >yourself. I am not here to learn your definitions.
> Don't learn my definitions! Who asked you to learn
> my definitions?! If an
> idiot says 2+2=5, why do you go ahead and 'learn'
> that 2+2=5? Why are you
> scared of even clearing his doubts? Why are you
> scared of asking yourself
> whether 2+2=5 or not?! Why? Have you forgotten the
> answer? Or did you
> always assume that 2+2 is something else because
> someone told you?

Because it is a FOOL who is asking this, and there is
no way to convince a FOOL. This fact is know after a
few initial attempts.

Life is small and I better use it for pursuit of TRUTH
and not waste it to convince a FOOL.

Om Namo Narayanaya !!


Yahoo! - We Remember
9-11: A tribute to the more than 3,000 lives lost

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list