[Advaita-l] Paper on SSS

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

The paper is finally (more or less) ready. I have not spent a whole
lot of time proof-reading, except using an automatic spell checker. So
I apologize in advance for annoying typos.

I asked the list moderators, Jaldhar, Vidyasankar and Ravi to start a
discussion.I have  included suggestions of Jaldhar and Ravi regarding
the introductory message below, and the rules.

Introduction
------------------

Dear List-members,

In the past we have had some discussion on the topic of SSS versus
traditional interpretations. You will find the link to an article at
the end of the page, summarizing 4 major philosophical issues with
SSS's interpretations. The paper is fairly long, 39 pages with enough
white space to make it easy to read.

Also please read the "rules" file, for joining in the discussion. The
rules were formulated by me because some list-members are prone to

a) replying without understanding the content of the original mail, and
b) frequently derail discussions with messages that have no bearing to
the one being discussed.

Please note that contrary to what many/some of you might think, I have
come a full circle on this. A while back, when Sri Subhanu Saxena
posted his original message on SSS, I argued against it. But later, I
read many books of SSS after that and changed my opinion. I even sent
a mail to Sri Subhanu thanking him, and told him that I now agreed
with SSS's interpretations. Over the course of the next 2 years, I
found major philosophical issues, and gained a new found appreciation
and respect for the genius of Vidyaranya and Citsukha, among others. I
realize now, even more than ever, what kind of a novice I am in these
topics. I also now find myself back in square 1, but with a much
sharper understanding (I hope). This paper is also only an effort to
sharpen my own understanding.

Please do not enter the discussion if you are already convinced by
SSS, and feel the need to proselytize the rest of us. On the other
hand, if you are open minded enough to think that you might be
mistaken, please join. After all, if you are open minded enough to
think 1200 years of advaitins were mistaken, you should be at least
open minded enough to consider the possibility that just one other
person criticizing them could actually be the one who is mistaken!
By the same token, this paper is not an attempt in my part to
proselytize anyone, and I remain open to the possibility that I am
mistaken. If I can change my mind twice, I can certainly change it
thrice :-).

Please choose a relevant subject line, and if shifting gears indicate
it by changing the subject line. Do not quote the entire digest if you
are receiving it as a digest. Also, please change the subject line
from digest to the original topic, so it's not confusing.

The best method to distinguish these messages from others may be
to include something distinct. I suggest SSS, example subject line:
"SSS: Epistemicity of avidyaa". This will enable members not interested
in this topic to delete these messages also.

You can find the pdf file and rules text at:

http://www.geocities.com/balasr/shank_new_approach.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/balasr/rules1.txt

Thanks!

Rama