[Advaita-l] Re: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 1, Issue 32

[Srikrishna Ghadiyaram]

Hari Om !!

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> Dear SriKrishna,
> 
> All these saints or 'yati's are no ordinary people.
> They have to be respected by all,  even if we 
> do not subscribe to their school of thought fully.
> Each AchArya has come here for a definite purpose, 
> and they have done their part.  
> 
> > I know some situations where in some one born in
> > Madhva or Visishtadvaitings have  adopted sanyasa
> > order in Advaita. I have not come across any
> reverse
> 
> People have also run away from sanyAsa to lead
> married life.
> It all depends on that individual person.   A
> mandana mishra
> who was a buddhist became surEshwarAchArya of
> naishkarmya
> siddhi fame.   The first four students of Sri Madhwa
> were all
> great advaitic scholars of their times.   
> 
> > situtions. Also, modern mystics who claim to have
> > attained 'realisation' only support 'Advaita' why
> is
> > it so ??
> > 
> Any personal experience is 'limited to' and 'limited
> by' that person
> hence the need for an apourushEya vEda.
> "tamEvam vidvAn amrita iha bhavati nAnyah panthA
> ayanAya vidyatE"
> There should be a reason why Veda insists on the
> knowledge of
> Parabrahman, don't you think?
> 

There is no dispute that the Knowledge of Brahman is a
blessing. Neither am I saying that the mystic
Experience is 'superior' to the Vedic pramana. What I
am asking is about the DIRECT experience of the
mystic. Is it in any way different in 'quality'
envisaged in the Vedas ??  If it is not so, then why
are people insisting on explanations which are not
supported by these DIRECT experiences ? I am not
worried that the mystic is not prescribing certain
theories of evolution etc. etc.  I am purely
interested in that DIRECT knowledge. Is it Advaitic or
Dvaitic ??

Om Namo Narayanaya !!

Srikrishna



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com