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

[Vikram Jagannathan]

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


>