[Advaita-l] Sankara on sannyAsa for Steadiness in GYAna (was Re: Jivanmukti - Jnana plus Sannyasa pt 5)

[Anbu sivam2]

False Sanyaasis were there from time immemorial.  We know that Adi Sankara
himself lamented of this in his famous Bhajagovindam as follows:

jaTilO muNDii luJNchhitakeshaH
kaashhaayaambarabahukR^itaveshhaH .
pashyannapi cana pashyati muuDhaH
udaranimittaM bahukR^itaveshhaH

I have heard of the jokes on these pretenders that as Brahmana Sanyasis they
will beg during the morining for the midday meal and change into bouddha
sanyasis to seek alms for the evening meal!

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Karthik prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
>
> First of all,  thanks for wasting your precious time & energy continuously
> on this poor bigoted student mails :-))  Now to your observation :
>
> I do not see any personal attack here, just a statement of fact.
>
> >  hmmm....another justificatory statement on a 'verdict' already passed
> :-))
>
> Sankara says: "BrahmasaMstha is to be completely absorbed in Brahman, with
> no other occupation but to be established in THAT. THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE
> FOR THOSE IN THE FIRST THREE ASHRAMAS."
>
> >  You should keep this in mind that in this adhikaraNa 'saNyAsa' as an
> ashrama has been eulogized since pUrvapaxi arguing here saNyAsa is not an
> injunction but a mere reference.  It is not an adhikaraNa that is meant to
> speak about different Ashrama-s & their respective phala-s.  And again, it
> does not mean as soon as one enters saNyAsAshrama he becomes a
> brahmasaMstha...Hope you would agree with me that saNyAsi here does not
> mean that people with orange clothes, tonsured heads etc.  brahmasaMstha
> is a mental state or a realized one & he could be a 'saNyAsi' in any of
> the Ashrama..And krishna calls this type of 'saNyAsi-s as 'nitya saNyAsi'
> in geeta.It is because of this reason only, to differentite karmi-s of
> other Ashrama-s shankara talks about pratyavAya sin.  If you literally
> interpret this sentence without considering the context then you will end
> in calling krishna is NOT a brahmasaMstha, vidhura, bheeshma,
> dharmavyAdha, janaka, ashwapati were not brahmasaMstha-s.  Hope you would
> not bring this type of 'anishta' to shankara bhAshya vAkya, when shankara
> himself confirms the brahmajnAni-s in atyAshrami-s & seeing the jnAni-s in
> raikva, vAchaknavi, gArgi, saMvarta, janaka etc.
>
> You maintain: "BrahmasaMstha IS POSSIBLE in the first three ashramas."
>
> >  it is because shankara himself talks about the possibility of jnAni-s
> or brahma jnAni-s in other Ashram-s & atyAshrama elsewhere in the sUtra
> bhAshya itself (for example vidhurAdhikaraNa)...It is a matter of regret
> that by holding just a single sentence from sUtra bhAshya, sofar you are
> turning your blind eye & showing me a blank slate on other more vivid
> references wherein shankara categorically addresses the jnAni-s in
> lOkavyavahAra & their {seeming} duties.
>
> Your position is diametrically opposed to Sankara's.
>
> >  I am sorry to say, the above statement is a product, which is
> manufactured in your own mental factory for which I donot have any
> 'quality control' :-))  Either you have to admit that shankara
> contradicting himself by accepting the possibility of jnAna to shudra-s
> like vidhura & dharma vyAdha after saying ONLY saNyAsi-s are brahmasaMsthA
> OR you yourself narrowing down the shankara's bhAshya vaishAlyata by
> quoting one or two sporadic quotes from bhAshya..choice is yours prabhuji.
>
> At worst, you are willing to directly contradict Sankara whenever his
> commentary does not suit your taste.
>
> >  there is no need for me to do so you know, as I have been repeatedly
> telling here that I am not at all trying to belittle the efficacy of
> saNyAsa Ashrama. OTOH, by not giving the due importance to the words of
> shankara where he talks about 'artha siddha pArivrAjya, ' karma tyAga
> asaMbhavata of the jnAni' etc. you are trying to meddle the whole issue of
> saNyAsa and jnAna.
>
> At best (if can be called "best"), Sankara is stressing on the need for
> sannyAsa to attain BrahmasaMstha, whereas you are downplaying it.
>
> >  as said above, that is your perception, I cannot help it...saNyAsa is
> not a 'green pass' to attain brahmasaMstha, even one is in saNyAsa Ashrama
> without jnAna he is not brahma saMstha, one who can be there in
> gruhasthAshrama even after the dawn of jnAna, he is brahma saMstha though
> he seemingly doing all actions (mudaiva cheshta mAtra explains shankara in
> geeta)..So, linking brahmasaMstha exclusively to saNyAsAshrama without
> knowing the very meaning of paramArtha saNyAsa is a farfetched &
> deliberate misinterpretation of shankara bhAshya vAkya.  Kindly see
> shankara's geeta bhAshya 3-4, wherein he says saNyAsa which is devoid of
> knowledge is of no use..nApi saNyasanAt eva kevalAt karmaparityAgamAtrAt
> eva 'jnAnarahitAt' siddhiM naishkarmya lakshaNAm jnAnayOgena nishThAm
> samadhigacchati na prApnOti.  So, please note it is not an offer like : '
> take saNyAsa and be brahmasaMstha'...brahmasaMstha is an open offer for
> those who do mAnasika saNyAsa with jnAna (i.e. paripUrNa ahaMkAra tyAga)
> irrespective of their external appearance & existence in 'any Ashrama'.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>