Re: aatma saakshaatkaaram
From the Bhakti List Archives
K. Sadananda • Thu Jun 07 2001 - 05:25:27 PDT
Shree Rajagopalan
Thanks for your kind mail. The question was actually posed not by me
but by Shree Krishana kalale who is himself a scholar. What I wrote
was only from my understanding. Here are my thoughts regarding the
issues you have addressed.
>. Eventhough, I am ignorant of
>many things, what I hear from learned people like you is that
>paramporul that has been described by vedas cannot be perceived
>by us. I also have heard that whatever the concept of vedas
>that is applicable to us is also applicable to all other things
>(including living and non-living).
Yes, indeed. Most of the achaarya-s agree on three fundamental
pramaaNa-s, pratyaksha, anumaana and shabda. Nayyyayika-s and
Advaitins consider three more, upamaana, arthaapatti and anupalabdi
while Bhagavaan Ramanuja and Madhva consider the later three as part
of anumaana pramaaNa only. Any knowledge generally involves karaNam
or instruments and these are also referred to as pramaaNa in the
general sense of the word.
Pratyaksha is perceptual knowledge and involves the five senses and
some classify manas or mind is also an instrument of pratyaksha since
one can recollect from memory or have a mental vision of the object.
Hence direct perception is what you see right now and memory is
recollection of what one saw earlier by direct perception. The
implication in the question of Shree Krishna Kalale 'aatmasaaskhaat
karaNam' - involves sa akshaat - directly seeing through the eye. I
have assumed that he is referring to only paramaatma saakatkaaram and
not sakshatkaaram of ones own aatma since in Adviata one equates
atma and paramaatma. Since this forum is not meant for discussion of
Adviatic philosophy I will refrain from the discussion of the
validity of that equation. In the pratyaksya pramaaNa normally
implies the objective vision through the instruments, senses and the
mind behind the senses. As Bhagavaan Ramanuja rightly points out
without the attributes one cannot perceive the object and therefore
every object existing (or perceived) must have attributes. If I want
to 'see' the Lord, the Lord should have attributes hence the
conclusion that Lord is ananta kalyaaNa guNa ashraya or locus of
infinite auspicious qualities. But in Vedanta 'seeing' is used in a
generic sense - When one understands a subject we say ' Yes I see
what you mean' - Here seeing is not by senses but understanding by
the mind. - that also involves ' a thought' in the mind and I am
aware of the 'thought' too or I see the thought. Hence even the
philosophies are referred to as 'darshhana-s' - vision of the truth -
that which is seen by the seers. Hence saakshaat kaaram is not
necessarily a vision in the objective sense but seeing through the
mind the vision of the reality as enumerated by Shabda pramaaNa. One
cannot see through the eyes and say here is the Lord then it becomes
part of pratyaksha pramaaNa. His existence cannot not argued
logically either that is by anumaana pramaana since anumaana pramaana
requires validation by pratyaksha only - what is known in tarka
shaastra as vyaapti j~naanam. Hence scriptures or here Vedas become
only means of knowledge or valid pramaaNa. Hence I quoted the
MunDaka sloka in terms of the nature of the reality that it is not
perceptible.
But for dhyaanam or meditation one needs an object or locus for
meditation - one cannot meditate on some bhaabaabuubu - Hence Lord is
described in a form that is conducive for mental vision and can form
a locus for dhyaanam. Bhagavaan Ramanuja justifies the form of the
Lord using scriptures as a basis, yet the vision of or saakshaat
kaaram of the Lord is not like seeing an object out there through
the mind, either through the senses or through the memory but using
what is termed as j~naaa kshakshu or wisdom eye - one should have
that wisdom in order to see that Lord - or for saakshaat kaaram -
For bhakti one needs a locus - since the nature of the reality is
such that locus is not directly perceptible by the senses and mind
but it requires an understanding - j~naana kshakshu or wisdom eye.
In my understanding, this is nothing but 'intuition' which comes into
play when the mind is in contemplation (I did not intentionally use
the term meditation here - since meditation is not a verb involving
action or karma). This j~naana kshakshu develops when one
contemplates on the study of the scriptures through aachaarya or
teacher who can interpret the scriptures properly. j~naanam that
Advaitins talk about is different from this. Hence Bhagavaan
Ramanuja emphasizes that j~naanam leads to Bhakti or sharaNaagati.
SharaNaagati involves complete surrenderence - manasaa vaacha
karamaNa and one can surrender only at the altar of Love or Bhakti.
Hence in my understanding saakshaatkaaram is the clear vision of the
Lord through j~naana kshakshu which is required for pure Bhakti that
involves ananyachinta.
>
>Eventhough, I cannot quote the verse, I remember the meaning of
>one IshaVasyaupanishad, saying your path is enlightened if you
>proceed in line with your enquiries, and your previous knowledge
>by continuing to study the scriptures rather than get struck in
>the conclusion(which may lead to darkness).
Absolutely. A mind in conclusion is the mind that is closed for
knowledge. At the same time one has to be careful. One should not
blindly accept what is said but take the help of scriptures and
aachaarya and use the mind to go beyond the mind - like pole vault-
use the pole to go beyond the pole - since that is all we have.
>
>Best Regards,
>Ramanan Rajagopalan
I wrote whatever came to mind and may not all be relevant to the
topic of discussion and also may not all be agreeable to many - Hence
place take it as only my current understanding of the problem.
Hari Om!
Sadananda
--
K. Sadananda
Code 6323
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington D.C. 20375
Voice (202)767-2117
Fax:(202)767-2623
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--------------------------------------------------------------
- SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Next message: cadambi srinivasan sampath: "a ? on vaishnavism"
- Previous message: krishna_kumar_s_at_vsnl.net: "Atthi Varadarajar."
- In reply to: Ramanan Rajagopalan: "Re: aatma saakshaatkaaram"
- Next in thread: Ramanan Rajagopalan: "Re: aatma saakshaatkaaram"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
