01-27-2005, 02:50 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Sunder+Jan 26 2005, 11:25 AM-->QUOTE(Sunder @ Jan 26 2005, 11:25 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> In our discussion, we should stick to Shruthi Pramana. Here, we are asking for Shruthi Pramanas for a simple reason. If I were to take Sri Ramakrishna's definition as a Pramana without backing from Shruthi/Smrithi, then we are begging upon someone's first-person experience as opposed to relying on the Vedas which are the Shabdham (the APAURUSHEYA - "Word of God".) [I know I am using the xtian cliche for Shabdham, and it's time we reclaim the phrase back like we claim back the Swastika.]
What you call Vignani is what an Advaitin calls Brahmagnani or Gnani for short. Chandogya upanishad says Vignana (experience) is higher than Dhyana (contemplation), but BHALAM is higher than Vignana, as a bhalavaan can shake up a 100 vignanis. "Balam vava vijnanad-bhuyah api ha satam vijnanavatam eko balavan akampayate" (http://swami-krishnananda.org/chhand/ch_3b.html#8)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sundar ji,
1. It is reasonable to assume that all the Acharyas interpreted the shastras according to their own experience. So first person experience can not be avoided. Nevertheless you are absolutely right that scriptural evidence should be provided.
2. I do not think a Brahmajnani and a Vijnani are same conceptually. Correct me if I am wrong but a Brahmajnani considers the world and Sagun Brahman to be unreal or mithya. A Vijnani according to Ramakrishna's concept accepts Nirguna Brahman, Saguna Brahman, Jiva and Jagat as all real. A Vijnani sees that Brahman has become all this. A Vijnani's position closely resembles the position of the Rishi of Svetasvatara Upanishad when he says that Brahman is the boy, the girl, the old man, the blue bee, the green Parrot etc. A Brahmajnani does not accept Maya shakti as real but as anirvachaniya. A Vijnani accepts shakti as Brahman. A Vijnani finds that Maya shakti and Brahman are inseparable as seen from the following quote from Sri Ramakrishna:
Brahman and Sakti are inseparable. Unless you accept Sakti, you will find
the universe unreal - 'I', 'you', house, buildings, and family. The world
stands solid because the Primordial Energy stands behind it. If there is no
supporting pole, no framework can be made, and without the framework there
can be no beautiful image of Durga.
After attaining Perfect knowledge one realizes that they are not different.
They are the same, like the gem and its brilliance. Thinking of the gem, one
cannot but think of its brilliance. Again they are like the milk and its
whiteness. Thinking of the one, you must think of the other. But you cannot
realize this non-duality before the attainment of Perfect Knowledge.
Attaining Perfect Knowledge one goes into Samadhi, beyond the twentyfour
cosmic principles. Therefore the principle of 'I' does not exist in that
state. A man can not describe in words what he feels in samadhi. Coming
down, he can give just a hint about it. I come down a hundred cubits, as it
were, when I say 'OM' after samadhi. Brahman is beyond the injunction of the
Vedas and can not be described. There neither 'I' nor "you" exists.
- Sri Ramakrishna
I will reply the rest after this post.
What you call Vignani is what an Advaitin calls Brahmagnani or Gnani for short. Chandogya upanishad says Vignana (experience) is higher than Dhyana (contemplation), but BHALAM is higher than Vignana, as a bhalavaan can shake up a 100 vignanis. "Balam vava vijnanad-bhuyah api ha satam vijnanavatam eko balavan akampayate" (http://swami-krishnananda.org/chhand/ch_3b.html#8)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sundar ji,
1. It is reasonable to assume that all the Acharyas interpreted the shastras according to their own experience. So first person experience can not be avoided. Nevertheless you are absolutely right that scriptural evidence should be provided.
2. I do not think a Brahmajnani and a Vijnani are same conceptually. Correct me if I am wrong but a Brahmajnani considers the world and Sagun Brahman to be unreal or mithya. A Vijnani according to Ramakrishna's concept accepts Nirguna Brahman, Saguna Brahman, Jiva and Jagat as all real. A Vijnani sees that Brahman has become all this. A Vijnani's position closely resembles the position of the Rishi of Svetasvatara Upanishad when he says that Brahman is the boy, the girl, the old man, the blue bee, the green Parrot etc. A Brahmajnani does not accept Maya shakti as real but as anirvachaniya. A Vijnani accepts shakti as Brahman. A Vijnani finds that Maya shakti and Brahman are inseparable as seen from the following quote from Sri Ramakrishna:
Brahman and Sakti are inseparable. Unless you accept Sakti, you will find
the universe unreal - 'I', 'you', house, buildings, and family. The world
stands solid because the Primordial Energy stands behind it. If there is no
supporting pole, no framework can be made, and without the framework there
can be no beautiful image of Durga.
After attaining Perfect knowledge one realizes that they are not different.
They are the same, like the gem and its brilliance. Thinking of the gem, one
cannot but think of its brilliance. Again they are like the milk and its
whiteness. Thinking of the one, you must think of the other. But you cannot
realize this non-duality before the attainment of Perfect Knowledge.
Attaining Perfect Knowledge one goes into Samadhi, beyond the twentyfour
cosmic principles. Therefore the principle of 'I' does not exist in that
state. A man can not describe in words what he feels in samadhi. Coming
down, he can give just a hint about it. I come down a hundred cubits, as it
were, when I say 'OM' after samadhi. Brahman is beyond the injunction of the
Vedas and can not be described. There neither 'I' nor "you" exists.
- Sri Ramakrishna
I will reply the rest after this post.