[Advaita-l] Binary nature of Jnana

Praveen R. Bhat bhatpraveen at gmail.com
Sun Jul 17 04:59:43 EDT 2022

Namaste Raghavji,

> Because if the "essence" is not shAbda it's not clear how the following two
> are different.
> 1. "Essence of akhaNDA vAkyArtha" being the pramANa in the later janma.
> 2. the samskAra (of all sAdhanas short of pramA) itself is sufficient to
> mediate and trigger the delayed onset of the pramA at the appropriate time.
> Like I said if 1. involves shabda recollection while 2. does not, then 1.
> stands distinguished it from 2. Otherwise both would be called
> smaraNatmaka.

I feel that the real difficulty is using the most appropriate word for what
happened in Vamadeva's case, with each word being restrictive and having a
different sense as we know. I particularly find comfort in Venkatji's use
of pUrva-saMskAra (as a broad word) resulting in pramANa working giving
rise to pramA. Even more driving, as contrasted with smaraNa, would be
pratyabhijnA, which the person who goes through himself may not be able to
explain as to what and how exactly happened, but all that he can relate to
is spontaneity of it, when pratibandhakas went away, especially when you
mention Bhagavan Ramana's case.

> (We don't know exactly in the case of Sri vAmadeva but if we are willing to
> examine Sri Ramana Maharshi's account, there seems to be no particular
> shAbda recollection whatsoever. The artha sphuraNa actually seems to
> precede the words he gave to express what happened in the awakening event
> in Madurai.

This is perhaps why he insisted to trace the source of the words, which is
really a tall order all in itself! As an aside, I recall from somewhere
that Bhagavan had mentioned that he was a sadhu or a rishi in the earlier
janma. All this is a resultant siddhi, but to return to the topic, as I see
the more he read Vedanta books in various languages brought to him by
devotees and followers asking questions at times, he could relate to the
teaching in those as if "I know this". He ended up stating that he knew
through "anubhava" what Bhagavatpada said in Vivekachudamani, though he
couldn't recall the vAkyas as taught in earlier janma as being taught.
Again, this is all what I could surmise as a possible samanvaya with
sampradAya when I myself was trying to do so years back.
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That, owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list