[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'Satyasya Satyam..' of the Upanishad explained in the Bhagavatam (corrected)

[Sundar Rajan]

>
> Namaskar,
>
>
>
> >>
>
> For the last reference (HOSS p42), I personally consider it a futile
>
> exercise to talk definitively about the state of a jnani when I am yet an
> ajnani. Let me first gain the jnana to then realize for myself what is
> annihilated and what remains. One person says Brahman alone exists, another
> says the universe will continue to be perceived; I do not wish to
> definitively judge one or the other as I am yet to understand the
> distinction and nature of my Self versus my antahkarana. Maybe they are
> both right but from these two distinct perspectives - Self versus
> functioning antahkarana.
>
> >>
>
> This response from Vikram-ji caught my attention. I’ve seen similar
> remarks before — “Let me first become a jnani, then I’ll respond.”
>
> It reminded me of something Sri Ramakrishna once said: that one is *out
> of the game* after realization. He gave the example of the card game *nax*
> :
>
> “Whoever scores above seventeen is out of the game. I have scored too many
> points and am out of it.”
>
> In other words, when true jnana dawns, the very one who might post, argue,
> or reconcile differing views is gone. The salt doll that set out to measure
> the ocean dissolves completely and cannot return to describe its depth.
>
> Ok. That may be too poetic, let us try a more pragmatic example — such a
> person might simply see no point in belonging to this group and may never
> post again.
>
>
>
> Here is the reference to the Game of Nax:
> In *The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna*, he once told his devotees:
>
> “Do you know the game called ‘nax’? It is a card game.
> Anyone who scores more than seventeen points is out of the game.
> Those who score less are still in it.
> I have scored too many points and am out of the game.”
>
>

> Regards,
>
> Sundar Rajan
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 1:32 PM Vikram Jagannathan via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Namaskaram Michael ji,
>>
>> Will keep it shorter this time :)
>>
>> << There is no doubt we view the appearance of body and karma. The issue
>> however concerns the view from Jnana itself - if pramatr, pramana, prameya
>> are dependent on avidya, where is there 'a' jnani, 'the' jnani or the
>> instruments to recognize duality or duality itself?  Are there many
>> jnani-s
>> or just one Jnanatvam?  >>
>>
>> Actually, this triputi is from our perspective too, and not from Jnana's
>> perspective. From Jnana's perspective, it is the homogenous Chaitanya
>> alone
>> and nothing else whatsoever; no triputi. We view the continued appearance
>> of the jnani's body and karma (BMI-V) due to our ignorance. This continued
>> appearance of the jnani's BMI-V recognizes duality and interacts with it;
>> again from our perspective alone and for our own benefit. There are as
>> many
>> jnani-s as we perceive as many jnani's functioning BMI-V. Jnana,
>> all-through, is one and non-dual.
>> As a recap:
>> 1. Chaitanya's perspective = paramarthika perspective - universe is asat
>> 2. Ajnani's perspective = vyavaharika ajnana perspective - universe is sat
>> 3. Jnani's perspective = there are 2 sub-perspectives - 3a. and 3b.
>> 3a. Jnani's perspective from the jnani's perspective = paramarthika
>> perspective - universe is asat
>> 3b. Jnani's perspective from the ajnani's perspective = vyavaharika jnana
>> perspective - universe is mithya
>>
>> We at times blur the difference between 3a and 3b; this causes confusion.
>>
>> << Agreed but only if the teaching of avidya-lesa etc. is confirmed by
>> bhasya, reason and universal experience. Brahman, moksa, avidya are all
>> the
>> adhyaropita teachings of sastra. I don't see the upaya of
>> adhyaropa/apavada
>> fundamentally presented by post-Sankara authors. >>
>>
>> Avidya-lesa indeed aligns with adhyaropa-apavada principle. The
>> attribution
>> of avidya-lesa to the jnani is indeed adhyaropa. We perceive a
>> tattva-darshi jnani guru imparting jnana upadesha. We can either
>> a) explain that this is due to avidya-lesa, due to our own avidya or
>> b) the tattva-darshi jnani guru is actually not a tattva-darshi jnani guru
>> or
>> c) Advaita is no longer advaita but becomes dvaita, with plurality
>> becoming
>> eternally unsublatable.
>>
>> With a) the Advaita siddhanta remains completely self-consistent as the
>> perception of this avidya-lesa is only due to our own avidya. When we
>> overcome our avidya, then all avidya and avidya-lesa is completely removed
>> and it is Chaitanya alone.
>> With b) the teachings of the so-called tattva-darshi jnani guru (including
>> Bhagavan Krishna) becomes falsified
>> With c) Advaita siddhanta is utterly destroyed
>>
>> Both b) and c) are not conducive to Advaita siddhanta and are stances
>> taken
>> up by several purvapakshas.
>>
>> << --tattva-darshi jnani - is this person knowable to the ignorant? Do you
>> just assume this of our guru? I've had the blessing of sitting at the feet
>> of several teachers who I believe were tattva-darshi jnani-s. However, not
>> one claimed such status yet they taught in a manner that convinced me they
>> were full blown jnani-'s. So how are we to determine whether this
>> charismatic guy is a jnani engaging in the world or still, despite a pure
>> personality and pristine teachings may still be afflicted with empirical
>> attachments? It is not an uncommon phenomena to learn of the scandalous
>> demise of one of the spiritual heroes. Let us not assume by personality
>> but
>> determine by challenging the teaching to resolve doubt what is authentic
>> Vedanta. >>
>>
>> True. One has to first become a jnani to recognize another jnani.
>> Important
>> to note that Jnana is one non-dual, but from our current perspective
>> (ajnani perspective) the BMI-Vs of the jnanis are several and distinct.
>> Therefore, from our current perspective it is appropriate to say that one
>> BMI-V which has gained the Brahmakara-vritti-jnana (aka jnani) is capable
>> of recognizing another BMI-V which has also gained this
>> Brahmakara-vritti-jnana. All the while the absolute Jnana (Chaitanya) is
>> one and non-dual. However, there are some clues in the scriptures
>> including
>> the stithaprajna-lakshna and shraddha / maha-viswasam (absolute trust and
>> faith) is quite essential. Beyond this, it is actually not the student
>> approaching a teacher's feet, but in actuality it is the teacher coming to
>> a prepared student.
>>
>> << "the entity' you are giving entity status to snake where indeed the
>> only
>> entity is rope. >>
>>
>> Correct, but I do not know this until the dawn of rope knowledge. Until
>> then, the entity is the snake as it is my current experience taken to be
>> real. And any back-reference to this prior experience will also have to
>> term the entity as a snake only.
>>
>> << Addendum citations and notes: >>
>>
>> I don't see any contradictions from any of your quoted references (except
>> the last one - HOSS p42). Do you feel any of them contradicts what we have
>> discussed so far?
>>
>> For the last reference (HOSS p42), I personally consider it a futile
>> exercise to talk definitively about the state of a jnani when I am yet an
>> ajnani. Let me first gain the jnana to then realize for myself what is
>> annihilated and what remains. One person says Brahman alone exists,
>> another
>> says the universe will continue to be perceived; I do not wish to
>> definitively judge one or the other as I am yet to understand the
>> distinction and nature of my Self versus my antahkarana. Maybe they are
>> both right but from these two distinct perspectives - Self versus
>> functioning antahkarana.
>>
>> prostrations,
>> Vikram
>>
>>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>