[Advaita-l] Jivanmukti - Jnana plus Sannyasa pt 4

[S Jayanarayanan]

--- On Tue, 9/29/09, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> My aim (as the title of my series
> indicates) is to show that the 
> traditional position is this - without sannyasa, even if
> one acquires 
> samyag Jnana, it does not confer the fruit of jivanMukti. 
> 
> praNAms shyAm prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> 
> Quite funny observation.  So according to you Janaka,
> who was a 
> chakravorthy  was not a jeevan mukta,

Even Sankara allows for the possibility that Janaka was not a jIvanmukta in his commentary on Gita 3.20:

"atha aprAptasamyagdarshanAH janakAdayaH tadA karmaNA sattvashuddhisAdhanabhUtena krameNa saMsiddhimAsthitA iti"

"If it be held that Janaka (and others) did not attain to GYAna, then it can be said that they achieved purification of the mind (sattva-shuddhi) which gradually led to liberation."

Note that Sankara permits for the lack of saMyag-GYAna by Janaka.

> avatAra
> purusha-s like rAma, krishna 
> were not jeevan mukta-s,

Sankara and Sureshvara repeatedly say that one achieves GYAna only from the shruti - how then can it be that Krishna didn't need the shruti for his own enlightement? The reason is that Krishna was born enlightened, and never came under the spell of avidyA in the first place.

I suppose there can be a clause: "IF one is born enlightened, THEN does not have to take sannyAsa to steady one's GYAna."

The clause is so obvious that it is unnecessary to point it out in a discussion.

But it is indeed a general rule (exceptions proving the rule) that one who has attained to GYAna in the householder state must take up sannyAsa to steady the GYAna.

> vidhura & dharmavyAdha-s,
> who  were shUdra-s, not 
> jeevan mukta-s,

It can be said that even though Vidura and others may have had GYAna, they may have lacked steadiness in their GYAna.

[..]

Regards,
Kartik