Re: aatma saakshaatkaaram
From the Bhakti List Archives
• June 7, 2001
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 ]