[Advaita-l] Sankara on "After GYAna" (was Re: BrahmaGYAna and jIvanmukti - 1...)
aparyap at gmail.com
Fri Nov 17 00:10:57 CST 2006
On 11/17/06, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian
> ... In any case, even a niyama vidhi implies avoidance of an
> action, and that implies an assumption of a doer who *opts* not act.
> Niyama vidhi is not compatible with the teory that there is only
> brahman "after" brahma-j~naana. You cannot impose a niyama-vidhi on
> the perfect aatman can you, it is already naishkarmya! ...
the very fact that AchArya instructs "...sAdhanabalAvalambanena
Atmaj~nAnasmRtisantatiH niyantavyA bhavati" implies that an option
exists. true, niyama vidhi cannot be imposed on the Atman, but nothing
prevents it from being recommended for a j~nAnimAtra.
just to clarify, since a time of acquisition is mentioned for
Atmaj~nAna ("samyajj~nAnaprAptAvapi..."), it follows that this
Atmaj~nAna is a chittavRtti, though in this case the buddhi assumes
the form of the self (brahmAkAra). since it is a buddhivRtti which has
newly arisen, it cannot (for a j~nAnimAtra) immediately destroy
samskArAs which exist from time immemorial (as explained in the quoted
BUBh). what this means is that the ahaMkAra (in the case of a
j~nAnimAtra) doesn't always remain akhaNDAkAra, but tends to
associates with the mind and body by force of habit. the moment this
happens, (theoretically) the brahmavit is subject to either niyama or
parisa~NkhyA vidhi (but certainly not apUrva vidhi). but this 'vidhi'
is more of a recommendation than a vidhi proper, NOT because the Atman
is beyond any vidhi, but because there exist uttamAdhikArIs for whom
sadyomukti is possible immediately after the rise of samyajj~nAna.
thus, the 'fact' that the Atman is not subject to any vidhi is not a
valid reason to explain why a 'vidhi' is not applicable to a
all the while, the Atman is not affected at all since dawn of
Atmaj~nAna, vairAgya or any form of sAdhana for that matter are only
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list