[Advaita-l] Difficulty with Akhandakara Vrtti

[Venkatraghavan S]

Sri श्रीमल्ललितालालितः

Thanks for your enlightening email. It was a very helpful explanation on
some pretty subtle concepts.

Having read your emails today, I had a question which I would be grateful
if you can answer.

I note this statement made in your earlier email in relation to the
akhaNDAkAratva of the brahmAkAra vritti:

>>akhaNDAkAra of vRtti means that it doesn't illuminate any adjective or
relation. It just dispels ignorance of / illuminates one thing, either
brahman or pot without revealing it's qualities and relations.

In relation to the above statement you made, brahman by its nature is
nirguNa and asaNga - therefore by that definition of akhaNDAkAra, is it
correct to say that brahmAkAra vritti has to be akhaNDAkAra only, because
the brahman that the brahmAkAra vritti illuminates has no guNA (adjectives)
or saNga (relation)?

I ask this because you later say that  -
>>advaitin-s, like madhusUdana-sarasvatI, etc. maintain that the
brahmAkAra-vRttiH should be niShprakArikA/akhaNDAkArA, if it has to be
liberating knowledge.

Therefore, is there a brahmAkAra vritti possible that is not akhaNDAkArA
also? So brahmAkAra vritti has to be liberating knowledge.

If this question has no merit, please forgive my ignorance.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 5:02 PM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > I am a bit confused because Sri
> > Lalitalalita Yativarya said the knowledge of Brahman in Jeevanmukta is
> > not the charama knowledge.
> >
>
> ​Yes, because charama means last. And, jIvanmukta is actually having
> visions of dvaita, although as mithyA and he is practicing brahmAbhAyAsa to
> maintain his vRtti brahmAkAra.
> ​
>
>
> > Then it means he does not have Akhandakara
> > Vrtti?
> >
>
> ​He has. Let me copy-paste from previous post if you failed to grasp import
> of parts:
> 1.
> Now, the akhaNDAkAratva or niShprakAratva of vRttiH.
> Just take it as if a vRttiH dispels ignorance of a pot, etc. but doesn't
> objectify it's adjectives, it is niShprakArikA.
> prakAra means adjectives. The vRtti which illuminates base, it's qualities
> and their relation;  is saprakArikA.
>
> 2.akhaNDAkAra of vRtti means that it doesn't illuminate any adjective or
> relation. It just dispels ignorance of / illuminates one thing, either
> brahman or pot without revealing it's qualties and relations.
> Note that akhaNDAkAravRtti or niShprakAravRtti or nirvikalpakavRtti are
> synonyms in our system.
> Also, note that such vRtti is not only brahmAkArA. When one replies to
> question 'which is moon' as 'prakRShTaprakAshaH chandraH', the sentence
> generates akhaNDAkAravRtti; because the question was not about quality.
> ​
>
>
> > How can he say his Ignorance is destroyed?
> >
>
> ​Because, he has brahmAkArA vRtti.
> Although, those who accept jIvanmukti, should accept that jIvanmukta has
> avidyAlesha too. In this sense, his ignoran​
> ​ce can be said to exist. But, the avidyA in his case can't cause bondage,
> is also accepted. It only causes bhoga of sukha-duHkha.
> If people have patience, let me bring it to their notice that bhoga of
> sukha-duHkha means that they should be visioned as related to 'I',
> otherwise their appearance can't be said bhoga. So, if a GYAnI doesn't die
> immediately after GYAna to enjoy pleasure and pain, then he should also
> forget his oneness with brahman for a while. And, to get back to his
> svabhAva, he needs to remember that, and that's why brahmAbhyAsa is
> enjoined for GYAnI/vidvat-sannyAsI.
>
> So, in a sense he has aGYAna, although non-binding. From some other point
> of view, he is not aGYAnI, because he knows his identity.
> ​
>
>
> > If some person has
> > Akhandakara Vrtti he will immediately die and get Videha Mukti?
> >
>
> ​No. ghaTAkArA akhaNDavRtti can't cause your death, and so brahmAkAravRtti.
>
> I can see that you are not entertaining my idea of akhaNDAkAravRtti,
> probably because you didn't read, probably because you couldn't understand.
> So, you are talking as if akhaNDAkAravRtti is a vRtti, mental modification,
> which ones born stays​ for your life-time. Get rid of such ridiculous idea.
> By the nature, vRtti is dvi-xaNa-sthAyI(or tri). And, it is just because of
> ignorance of meaning of technical terms and neglecting study of other
> shAstra-s that such ignorance becomes rock-hard.
>
> I saw that someone explained that lack of tripuTI makes vRtti akhaNDAkArA.
> Let me make it clear that vRtti is sAvayava, because it is pariNAma of
> antaHkaraNam. So, in that sense it's always sakhaNDa.
> It was said that oneness of pramAtA-pramANa-prameya causes that loss of
> tripuTI, then let me put it that even in aparoxa of ghaTA, all three
> chaitanya-s are accepted as one. So, that will make ghaTaGYAna
> tripuTI-rahita and hence akhaNDa.
>
> While, the definition provided by me can be supported by studying/looking
> at chitsukhI/advaitasiddhi/brahmAnandI, I doubt that definition of those
> who rely only on bhAShya/vvArttika/translation could ever do that.
> And, even they could cite any sentence from what they have studied, it is
> highly susceptible that vAdirAja, madhusUdasarasvatI, chitsukha talked
> about that.
>
> I think this should end the need of more replies here and kindle desire to
> study a little more than what one has studies.
> Do not expect that I will convince you further, because it is not going to
> yield any result for you and me.
> If you have doubt, read again my reply.
> The post was written just to create a space for new ideas, not to fill you
> with what I know.
>
>
>
>
> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>