[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: The five pUrva pakshis of vaitathya prakaraNa

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sri Bhaskar,

I think your questions all stem from questioning the concept of kAraNa
sharIra and prAjna's association with it. I don't wish to enter into that
debate. I will briefly answer your questions, though I don't want to get
into a debate on the reasons. You can safely ignore my email if you wish.

Question: What exactly is this kAraNa shareera??
A: anirvachanIya anAdi avidyA rUpam sharIradvayasya kAraNamAtram
satsvarUpAjnAnam nirvikalpakarupam yadasti tad kAraNa sharIram.

Q: If it is a sort of avidyA then prAjnA is associated with avidyA in
sushupti right prabhuji??
A: Yes.

Q: Then in this avidyA state of prAjnA, can shruti claim there veda is
aveda, deva is adeva etc.??
A: I do not see why this is incompatible with that.

Q: It has been said there in shruti like this just to denote the fact that
it is ekeebhUtaM.
A: Yes.

Q: But we are saying here prAjnA has the upAdhi here (kAraNa shareera)
hence he is not trustworthy.  Clarification: I did not say untrustworthy. I
said any objective assessment of the reality of a system cannot be done by
a participant in the system.

Q: but OTOH, shruti saying  veda is aveda because ashareeraM vAva santaM na
priyApriye sprushataH how??
A: I do not see how ashareeram vAva santam na priyApriye sprushatah applies
to prAjna. The context of the mantra is not sushupti, nor is this referring
to the status of Atma in sushupti as far I know.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> Kindly pardon me, first of all I have not read the link you provided as I
> am not able to open the link. I am just going by whatever written in the
> mail.   You said prAjnA is not  trustworthy has to be ignored along with
>  vishva and taijasa as he ( prAjna) is associated with kAraNa shareera.
> What exactly is this kAraNa shareera??  If it is a sort of avidyA then
> prAjnA is associated with avidyA in sushupti right prabhuji??  Then in this
> avidyA state of prAjnA, can shruti claim there veda is aveda, deva is adeva
> etc.??  It has been said there in shruti like this just to denote the fact
> that it is ekeebhUtaM.  But we are saying here prAjnA has the upAdhi here
> (kAraNa shareera) hence he is not trustworthy but OTOH, shruti saying  veda
> is aveda because ashareeraM vAva santaM na priyApriye sprushataH how??  It
> is again because here prAjnA is sarvOpAdhivinirmuktaH is it not !!??
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>
> *From:* Venkatraghavan S [mailto:agnimile at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, November 04, 2016 4:42 PM
> *To:* Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
> *Cc:* A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>; Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> *Subject:* Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [Advaita-l] The five pUrva pakshis of
> vaitathya prakaraNa
>
>
>
> Namaste Sri Bhaskar
>
>
>
> I don't understand why this is relevant or a problem.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Venkatraghavan
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
>
> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> I donot know whether the below is pUrvapaxi's stand or siddhAnta.  When
> prAjnA is still associated with kAraNa shareera why veda is aveda, deva is
> adeva etc.  there in sushupti ??  Atra veda aveda is acceptable to us even
> though prAjna is associated with his kAraNa shareera/ avidyA, if it is the
> stand of the siddhAnti ??
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Advaita-l [mailto:advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org] On
> Behalf Of Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l
> Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 4:12 PM
> To: Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
> Subject: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [Advaita-l] The five pUrva pakshis of
> vaitathya prakaraNa
>
> Namaste Sri Ravi Kiran,
> Because prAjna is still associated with kAraNa sharIra, and therefore part
> of kAraNa prapancha. Only from turIya's perspective, which is completely
> disassociated from all sharIras, can the judgment be made.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan
> >
> > Therefore any judgment made by either the waker or dreamer observer
> > cannot be taken as absolutely true. Hence, Vedanta says that the
> > judgment of reality by vishvA or taijasA or prAjna is not acceptable.
> >
> > >> could follow vishvA or taijasA part, in the above line of argument,
> > but, why prAjna is unacceptable above?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Please find below a link discussing the five pUrva pakshis appearing
> >> in the vaitathya prakaraNa.
> >>
> >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/46044985/Five%20pUrva%20
> >> pakshis%20of%20vaitathya%20prakaraNa.pdf
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Venkatraghavan
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>