[Advaita-l] additional doubts!!

[V Subrahmanian]

> > yes, I used the nAstika in that sense only..I repeat my question
> onceagain with this clarification.  Can a paramArtha jnAni (or non-dual
> absolute knowledge) be a nAstika (totally unaware & uninterested in veda
> shAstra and existence of brahman/Ishwara??)..Even this is possible, I dont
> think there is any accommodation available for this type of jnAni-s in
> traditional abode.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>

I think Buddha is an example for the above description.  He might not be
exactly 'unaware of Veda...' .Yet, Shankara says in the Mandukya kArikA
bhashya 4.99:

//ज्ञानज्ञेयज्ञातृभेदरहितं परमार्थतत्त्वमद्वयमेतन्न बुद्धेन भाषितम्। *यद्यपि
बाह्यार्थनिराकरणं ज्ञानमात्रकल्पना च अद्वयवस्तुसामीप्यमुक्तम्*। इदं तु
परमार्थतत्त्वमद्वैतं वेदान्तेष्वेव विज्ञेयमित्यर्थः॥//

The word 'na bhAShitam' of the kArikA is also significant.  It does not say
'Buddha did not know' but only says 'he did not say'.  Then where is the
objection? Buddha might have known the paramArtha tattvam that is taught in
the upanishads (तं तु औपनिषदं पुरुषं पृच्छामि).  However he did not teach it
with the Upanishads as the pramANa.  As a VedAntin GaudapAda or
Bhagavaatpada will not accept any teaching that comes without the vedAnta
pramANa as the basis.  That is a reason why the Vedantin objects to the
sAnkhya's pradhAna as jagatkAraNam.  The Vedantin AchArya is there to teach
the tattva to those followers of the Veda, Astika-s.  For them it is not
tarka or any other book that becomes the basis for the teaching; it has to
be firmly based on the Vedanta with tarka as an aid to the
teaching/understanding. For the Vedaanta Acharya a Jnani is a 'shrotriya
brahmaniShTha'.

Otherwise, what becomes the 'yard stick', if we might say so, in deciding
the aparoksha jnAna, is the presence of amAnitvAdi, great vairAgyam, tRpti,
santoSha, aananda AvirbhAva, shAnti, bhayarAhityam, kRtakRtyatA etc.  Those
who have a knowledge about Buddha through stories/legends will easily vouch
for the presence of the above in him.  Advaita Acharyas have known to have
cited one or the other legend associated with Buddha in driving home the
importance of the above qualities. That is avirodha.

In a similar context Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati SwaminaH in the
VivekachUDAmaNi commentary has argued that any person who is said to have
accomplished a very great position in adhyAtma could not have done so
without basing his sadhana on the teaching of the Veda either directly or
indirectly.  Even satyam vada, dharmam chara stems from the Veda.  So, even
if a person says his mind is the guru or some other person or book is his
guru, ultimately all teaching leading to adhyAtma unnati has to be traced to
the veda.

Regards,
subrahmanian.v