[Advaita-l] Fw: Re: vedAntins at the time of shankara
kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com
Mon Sep 18 14:28:31 EDT 2017
----- Forwarded message ----- From: Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com>To: A. Discussion Group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>Sent: Monday 18 September 2017, 9:29:31 PM ISTSubject: Fw: Re: [Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of shankara
Just thought of clarifying what I am saying. Although Bhartrprapancha is favouring jnana-karma samucchaya, it can be reconciled under the vyavahara plane as described by Bhaskarji. So why didn't Shankara consider it as mere prakriya bedha? In Bhamati and Vivarana too, Bhamati requires manas-shuddhi for aparoksha jnana which is nothing but moksha. How is this prakriya bedha and not Bhartrprapancha's view?
On Monday 18 September 2017, 8:27:05 PM IST, Aditya Kumar via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
You have simply copy/pasted the portions irrelevant to the discussion mixing it with the bitterness of your own mind. Bhartrprapancha is not against 'jnana removes avidyanivritti' - your brand new requirement. The point of disagreement is that Shankara says 'jnana alone' leads to moksha.
Your take home points are as incorrect as any of your statements.
While you have conveniently rejected any fundamental difference between V and B as to how aparoksha jnana is generated, you seem to strongly believe that it was a critical point in the very previous paragraph!
So the sub-commentators thought of saying things which meant nothing? Ashrayatva is a mere technicality? Whatever that means! This difference is solely for research purpose? really? why would anyone research something pointless? A simple question - If Brahman is the ashraya of avidya, how does avidya nivritti take place in a jiva?
On Monday 18 September 2017, 7:16:18 PM IST, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list