[Advaita-l] Taittiriya Upanishad question

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> By saying so Shankara confirms that not only does the Jnani have a mind, he
> 'desires', wishes, and that the Jnani has an ahankAra too:  the word मह्यं
>  ' for me' shows this.
> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> Again, I am afraid,  out of context proof.  It can be noted that this
> maNtra & bhAshya are not meant to prove jnAni's ahaMkAra & mamakAra.  It s
> an eulogy of brahmavidya and an appreciation of importance of brahma
> vidyA/jnAni.  The 'saNdarbha' (context) here is glorification of
> brahmavidyA!!  Noway, it can be taken as proof to prove jnAni's 'ahaMkAra'
> and his 'kAma'.  The jnAni is 'AptakAma' & 'AtmanishTa' how can he desire
> for mundane wordly things by keeping his individuality intact by
> entertaining the 'bhOktrutva' bhAva in him !!??



The Jnani need not and will not entertain bhoktRtva.  Shankara has clarified
this in that famous statement: pUrvasiddha kartRtva-bhoktRtva-viparItam hi
akartRtva-abhoktRtvasvarUpam brahma aham asmi....This is the realization of
the Jnani.  Yet, there can be kartRtva and bhoktRtva for the mind-body owing
to prArabdha.  The said mantra of the Mundakopanishat is in that sense.

//मनसा संकल्पयति, मह्यं अन्यस्मै वा.// He can 'desire' to have an Ashram or
write a bhAShyam as Shankara has Himself expressed explicitly in the
Gita/Taittiriya Bhashyam, which sentences are only too well known.  He can
very well do something for the sake of someone else too as Vishwamitra
created a swarga for Trishanku.   Surely Shankara's writing the Bhashyam and
His 'desire' to conquer His opponents (अतो जेष्यामि सर्वान्) does not prove
that He was devoid of AptakAmatva or AtmaniShThatva.  What stuti is involved
in His own utterances about Himself?

It is true that this mantra of the Mundaka is not meant by the Upanishad to
be a proof for the presence of mind and body, which are  anyway 'siddha'.
But it should not be also taken to be a 'lie' that the upanishad is speaking
by saying the Jnani can make a samkalpa, by his mind, for something for
himself or another.  If it were a lie then the very purpose of the mantra is
lost.  Innumerable are the cases where Jnanis have helped people, not
necessarily spiritual aspirants, to attain their worldly longings.



>  As Sri vidyA prabhuji just said, literal reading of these sentences would
> definitely lead to 'arthahAni' and 'siddhAnta hAni' as well.
>

Sri Vidyashankar ji has also just said this:

// And there is also a description of how by a mere saMkalpa alone and no
effort, kAma-s come to fruition, any loka is attained, etc, (the passages
you have quoted). //

Shankaracharya has carefully stated what to take as stuti when the context
is that.  The Jnani's satya-sankalpatva is also explicitly stated by
Shankara in that Mundaka Bhashya.  Even in the Kathopanishat (1.1.24)
bhashya, while the mantra did not say that, Shankara adds in the bhashya:
सत्यसंकल्पः हि अहम् देवः as Yama's words when assuring a lot of things to
Nachiketas.  Shankara thinks that Yama senses that Nachiketas might have
doubts about Yama really materializing these things for him and therefore
wants a word of reassurance from Yama Himself.  Surely this is not a eulogy
.  This mantra is another example for the Jnani's ability to create /
provide objects of desires for 'another' person to enjoy/experience.
Nowhere does Shankara say that these are stuti-s.

Regards
subrahmanian.v