[Advaita-l] An instance of Advaita wrongly comprehended
rajaramvenk at gmail.com
rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Tue Apr 17 08:44:05 CDT 2012
I like the opthamologist joke but my only suggestion would be to see one right away so that we can read what Sankara has written. In ishadhikaranaman, daharadhikaranam, BG 8, 15 etc. he explains nirupadhika ishwara clearly. There is no room for your position that He is not atma, no satyasankalpa etc. in Sankara's works. Nirupadhika Brahman / Ishwara is a homogenous totality or purnam and hence negation of absolute reality of all particulars. Period.
I pointed out a mistake in your position that formless also implies nameless because Avyakta is formless but not nameless. No response. I pointed out to Sri Subrahmanian that Avyakta is not always considered insentient with reference to SB. No response.
If you agree with Sri Subrahmanian, you can very well agree with dualists. He is such a nice dualist who sees the difference between body and soul distinctly. He and Madhwas that he fights with may see a jnani's body as distinct from the Self. But as Sankara points outs in mamAtma verse quoted earlier, a jnani or god does not. His is the indescribable (lack of) view of the jewels by gold.
If a jnani sees and experiences the world just like others, then he should experience delusion and sorrow. If you agree he does not then you should agree his experience is different or ask him to consult a psychologist. I am not saying he sees a cat as a pot but he sees them in terms of their underlying reality as manifestations caused through the instrument of maya in/on Him, the Self of all.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
From: kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
Sender: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 04:12:31
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] An instance of Advaita wrongly comprehended
> > 2. If the world of objects is unreal, then how can you
> continue to see it
> > when you are a jnani? If a jnani transacts in the
> world, then you can only
> > say it is only because of residual avidya that operates
> due to prarabda.
The world is neither real or unreal - that is what is referred to as mithyaa. sat asat vilakshNam. If jnaani cannot see the world, it is about the time he has get an appointment with his opthamologist as something wrong with his eyes or with his eye-sight. Jnaana kshakshu is different from physical eye and phisological funtions. It requires wisdom-eye or viveka to see the oneness that pervades the apparent duality. Then only he is a jnaani not when his physical eye stops seeing duality.
I agree with Subbuji that not understanding advaita properly and making comments pervades lot of dvaita and vishiShTaadvaita literature, and is also obvious in these posts too. Not understanding is not a problem but misunderstanding and claiming that is what advaita says is bigger problem. It requires lot more unlearning before real learning can take place, since one has already concluded and therefore not open to learning.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list