[Advaita-l] sushupati anubhava of jnAni and ajnAni
rbenjwal at gmail.com
Sun Jan 17 04:17:22 CST 2016
I got some convincing answers here and I got some from outside the forum
also, I would like to share two which may be helpful.
1- The locus of avidhyA is not mind. avidhyA is not mere absence of
knowledge but it is a positive entity. It is accepted as kAraNa sariram. So
at them level of kAraNa sariram there is no mind but still there is avidhyA
so mind cannot be locus of avidhyA.So once it is removed, it is gone and
now change in mental condition will not affect it.
AvaraNa completely get destroyed vikshepa shakti continue for sometime
which we accepted as prArabdha. Because AvaraNa is destroyed the prArabdha
is understood as mithyA. This mithyA prArabdha which is there because of
still active vikshepa shakti. This is known as avidhyA lesa vAda.
Second answer is as per dristi sristi vAda.
2- After jnAnam there is no vahyavhArika jEva which will continue and which
could be ajnAni again. Therefore there is no jEvanmukti this only an
arthavAda. With jnAnam prArabdha also get destroyed completely. This is
only to answer ajnAni that how the body is still surviving it is accepted
that prArabdha remains. So there is no chance of avidhyA coming back.
Thanks fro all the replies.
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Sreenivasaji,
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 12:22 PM, sreenivasa murthy <
> narayana145 at yahoo.co.in
> > wrote:
> > A friend of mine who is well versed in Shankara Vedanta, who had gone
> > through all the postings on the above subject told me thus recently : "
> > it not much better and more beneficial if one *attains jnana first*
> How else?!
> > and then afterwards to discuss the 'Sushupti anubhava of Jnani and
> > Ajnani' and come to an authentic conclusion ?
> If there is an authentic conclusion, that is discussed in the same works of
> the tradition that make up Vedanta study. And that is the entire pursuit.
> > Iis it not futile to discuss as Secondhand persons who have gathered
> > information from books instead of discussing as Firsthand persons ?
> How would anyone know whether one is a "first hand person" or a "second
> hand person"? As long as the people discussing are shrotriya or are trying
> to be so, it is very helpful. That is, it is a further assumption that
> people on the thread/ list are gathering information from books. Books are
> reference tools unless people can hold and remember everything with their
> > All these discussions done by others other than the one who has cognized
> > what he is teaching / conveying will it be not like blind leading the
> > blind as stated in the mantra1-2-8of Mundakopanishad".
> Please refer the context of Mundaka mantra 1.2.8, if not in a book, then
> with someone you put your trust in. It talks of those worldly people who
> consider karma or aparavidyA as the last word and considers themselves to
> be great. It is not in the context of people wanting to be free and raise
> questions to learn that. On a related note, Bhagavatpadacharya considers
> shrotiyatA to be one of the two qualifications to have, if not a more
> useful one than brahmaniShThA.
> Kind rgds,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
> [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
e:rbenjwal at gmail.com | w:ractors.com |
Please consider your environmental responsibility. Before printing this
e-mail message, ask yourself whether you really need a hard copy.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list