Vedanta and Philosophy

12:12 AM

@TheDestroyer @SS by GOT do you mean Game Of Thrones?... I watched it upto 5 seasons... I couldn't get season 6.. also when is season 7 coming?..

The Destroyer

12:54 AM

@Tezz ohh.i didn't know you watch GOT. Season 7 is coming next month.

@Tezz BTW, i saw hodor episode in season 6 when in read Yoga Vasista. So, i correlated it to that episode.

@Tezz See my mail. I will give link.

Tezz

@TheDestroyer Oh Ok...

Lakshmi Narayanan

1:20 AM

@KeshavSrinivasan ROFL, MMY reference is impeccable.

Keshav Srinivasan

1:58 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan That wasn't a guess by me, his website says he's a professor at the Maharishi Institute.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan OMG! This is very strange. Given his response it is hard to take seriously, do you think there is merit to his predating Patanjali Sutras to Mimamsa Sutras?

@KeshavSrinivasan btw i replied to that mail.

Keshav Srinivasan

2:18 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan I've never heard of Jaimini and Patanjali meeting. Jaimini was a shishya of Vyasa, so he would have composed the Purva Mimamsa Sutras at the end of the Dwapara Yuga or beginning of the Kali Yuga. I'm not sure exactly when Patanjali lived, but at least my understanding is that Patanjali's Yoga Sutras were composed after Jaimini's Purva Mimamsa Sutras.

Keshav Srinivasan

2:35 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan And I've never heard the concept of Jaimini Kaivalya. And his description of the different chapters of the Purva Mimamsa Sutras bears absolutely no relation to what those chapters actually cover.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Yeah. From what you've said so far, Sankasha Kanda is for Meditation on Devatas, maybe he is seeing these devatas as qualities to meditate on?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan I can't make head or tails of a lot of what he's saying.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan He really didn't respond to both your questions either.

@KeshavSrinivasan It's like he made extra effort to avoid answering them!

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan I think he is vaguely addressing them. He's basically saying that he thinks that the Sankarsha Kanda text that's there in manuscripts is the same as the Devata Kanda Sutras, once you interpret the Sutras using all kinds of New Age mumbo jumbo involving repetition of the word "dynamism". And he's saying that he hasn't come across any translations but he plans to write one himself at some point.

@LakshmiNarayanan Anyway, I'm planning to send him a follow-up email.

Lakshmi Narayanan

2:51 AM

@KeshavSrinivasan What do you plan to ask?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan I plan to bring up more specifics, like the fact that out of the five Sutras from the Devata Kanda Sutras that we know of, the text found in the manuscripts contains only one of them, "Na Na Va Devata Pritaktvat."

@LakshmiNarayanan And I want to know where he got the whole Jaimini Kaivalya thing from. Kaivalya is indeed a concept found in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. It involves the separation of Purusha or the soul from Prakriti or matter. But Purva Mimamsa has nothing to do with Kaivalya.

@LakshmiNarayanan Kaivalya is the goal of life according to the Yoga school, but the goal of life in Purva Mimamsa is to become the next Indra, although as I said Mimamsakas wouldn't phrase it like that.

@LakshmiNarayanan Some Mimamsakas like Kumarila Bhatta did believe in Moksha though. Kumarila believed in Brahman, Moksha, etc. He even begins his Shloka Vartika with an invocation to Shiva.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Are you saying that Post of Indra is the ultimate goal a Yagna can aspire to?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah, it is.

@LakshmiNarayanan The Purva Mimamsa school thought that there were three kinds of rewards you can get in the afterlife through Yagnas. The lowest reward is existence in Swarga, the intermediate reward is freedom of movement in Swarga, and highest is sovereignty in Swarga.

@LakshmiNarayanan Although as I said they were vague on what exactly Swarga was. The only thing they were clear on is that Swarga involves happiness after death in some way.

@LakshmiNarayanan But from our perspective these rewards are easy to understand. The lowest is merely going to Swarga when you die. The middle one is being able to roam around anywhere you like in Swarga, like Indra's private gardens and all that. And the highest one is becoming the next Indra.

Lakshmi Narayanan

3:15 AM

@KeshavSrinivasan This sounds fascinating, especially given the fact that these coexisted at the same time with concepts espoused by Vyasa Sutras.

@KeshavSrinivasan How did the consider devatas higher than Indra then? For instance, Brahma

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan By the way, to be clear Jaimini, Shabara, etc. weren't unaware of concepts like Swarga being a place and gods like Indra, Agni, Surya, etc. living there. They were aware of people who believed these things, they just were skeptical of whether these things were actually true.

@LakshmiNarayanan They were skeptical of the existence of the Devas.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Then they wanted to become the Mantras?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan No, they didn't believe in "becoming mantras".

@LakshmiNarayanan They wanted to achieve happiness in the afterlife. They were just vague on what exactly this happiness would involve.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Yes, i am aware, that's why it is fascinating to see them defend their viewpoint. What was the killing blow from Buddhism which Vedanta school couldn't even accidentally deliver to Mimamsakas' School?

Keshav Srinivasan

3:48 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan Well, Buddhists started attacking Hindu practices like animal sacrifice, and the response from Mimamsakas was extremely weak. It was basically along the lines of "We are killing this animal so that we will have happiness in the afterlife" which just comes off as cruel and heartless. They weren't even able to say something as simple as "We are offering this animal to the gods", because they were skeptical of whether the gods even existed.

@LakshmiNarayanan Whereas Adi Shankaracharya was able to defeat the Buddhists because he came from the Vedanta school, which believed in the existence of the gods, Brahman, etc. So he could give a good defense of Hindu practices.

Lakshmi Narayanan

4:07 AM

@KeshavSrinivasan Buddhists believed in Karma, it doesn't make sense that they should be bothering about animal sacrifice on the grounds that it harms the animal for your purpose - ultimately Karma will take care, so the only way they could have cornered the Mimamsakas is if they were actively promulgating their religion and attacked Mimamsakas' philosophy intentionally which i guess is what happened in the end. So, it is more of killing off a belief system than...

@KeshavSrinivasan ... it dying out because it was unappealing to the people?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan "Buddhists believed in Karma, it doesn't make sense that they should be bothering about animal sacrifice on the grounds that it harms the animal for your purpose - ultimately Karma will take care" What do you mean? The fact that ultimately Karma will take care isn't a good reason to not criticize something evil going on.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan cyclic suffering of human beings is also evil right?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah, from a Buddhist perspective all suffering is evil.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan unless the Buddhist argument is that it is evil because these rewards attained through sacrifices is temporary, i don't see how their argument makes sense. Is that their perspective that the Yagna are temporary, or further still, just plain fantasy?

@KeshavSrinivasan I understand that they are nastikas, just trying to understand if their rejection of vedas is based purely on Purva Mimamsa school.

Keshav Srinivasan

4:34 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan Well, first of all yeah, they didn't believe Yagnas lead to rewards. But second of all, their argument was "If you're killing these innocent animals just because you think it will make you happy, that's cruel."

@LakshmiNarayanan No, they rejected all schools of Hindu philosophy.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan the second argument is not independent of the first is what i'm saying.

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Well yeah, the psychological motivation for making the second argument is because of the first. But they're logically independent.

@LakshmiNarayanan In any case, what made the Vedanta school so successful is that Buddhists couldn't make something analogous to the second argument.

Keshav Srinivasan

5:54 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan By the way, I just found out that Patanjali's Mahabhashya mentions Kasakritsna's Devata Kanda Sutras three times:

@LakshmiNarayanan That's from a 1981 journal paper.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan you should include this reference into your email

@KeshavSrinivasan that jaimini kaivalya business sounds really shady now

Keshav Srinivasan

6:10 AM

@LakshmiNarayanan Haha yeah, he makes a whole bunch of dubious claims in that email.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Did you know Francis Clooney has written a comparative study on Nammazhwar's Thiruvaimozhi?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Yes, Francis X. Clooney is a Catholic priest who has written a lot of books about Sri Vaishnavism.

SwiftPushkar

@KeshavSrinivasan - Can we give answer to below question from Stotra of Adi shankaracharya called Guru astakam - यशो मे गतं दिक्षु दानप्रतापा जगद्वस्तु सर्वं करे यत्प्रसादात्
मनश्र्चेन लग्नं गुरोरङ्घ्रिपद्मे ततः किं ततः किं ततः किं ततः किं || 6

yaśo me gataḿ dikṣu dānaptratāpāj-
jagadvastu sarvaḿ kare yatprasādāt
gurorańghripadme ḿanaścenna lagnaḿ
tataḥ kiḿ tataḥ kiḿ tataḥ kiḿ tataḥ kiḿ

Translation: “My repute has travelled in all directions through my philanthropy and prowess; all the things of this world are in my hands as rewards for my virtues”, yet if one’s mind be not c…

2

Q: Vidya without a Physical Guru?

I heard from many teachings that 'Guruvu leni vidya ranimchadhu' (telugu) which means the skill or knowledge gained without guru doesn't shines. Which text says the above phrase and who says to whom? If it is true, then my doubt is that does guru has to be in-person or guru can be remote perso...

rkmdelhi.org/videos/guru-ashtakam-of-adi-shankaracharya

@Tezz @TheDestroyer ⬆⬆

@TheDestroyer - Do you know , which is the exact chapter numbers of uttar-Bhaga of skanda purana , where the Guru-Gita is , which is discussion of Shiva & parvati about guru ? .

The Destroyer

6:43 AM

@SwiftPushkar Guru Gita can't be found in Skanda Purana.

Jan 9 at 4:18, by The Destroyer

@Tezz No. Guru Gita is in Skanda Purana. Some sites say Uttara Khanda. Brahmottara Khanda is also called as Uttara Khanda. But i couldn't find it.

SwiftPushkar

@TheDestroyer - oh ok , Blogs gives the shlokas but can't trust them 😊👍👍

The Destroyer

@SwiftPushkar You can quote direct verses from Guru Gita.

2

Q: Which chapter of Skanda Purana contains Guru Gita?

Everyone is aware that Guru Gita is considered to be taken from Uttara Khanda of Skanda Puranam. But I cannot find in the links provided here. Is there any other version of Skanda Purana uttara Khanda which contains guru gita available online/offline with sanskrit text and translation? Please hel...

skanda-purana

Sanskrit documents site has Guru Gita.

SwiftPushkar

@TheDestroyer - Wow upvoted the question , ok I will quote from Sanskrit documents if given answer 😊👍👍💐

The Destroyer

7:36 AM

@Tezz June 2017.

Keshav Srinivasan

8:22 AM

@TriyugiNarayanMani A while back you asked me for the Goladhyaya chapter of Abhinavagupta's Tantraloka, citing this verse of the Chaitanya Charitamrita: vedabase.com/en/cc/antya/2/10 But the Chaitanya Charitamrita talks about the Goladhyaya of Bhaskara's Siddhanta Siromani, not the Tantraloka.

Triyugi Narayan Mani

8:48 AM

@KeshavSrinivasan Oh..Then it was a mistake by me.

SwiftPushkar

@TheDestroyer @Tezz - Added shloka from "Svetasvatara Upanishad" - 23 to my guru answer😊

यस्य देवे परा भक्तिर्यथा देवे तथा गुरौ ।
तस्यैते कथिता ह्यर्था प्रकाशन्ते महात्मन: ॥6.23॥

yasya deve parā bhaktir yathā deve tathā gurau / tasyaite kathitā hy
arthāḥ prakāśante mahātmanaḥ prakāśante mahātmanaḥ // 6.23 //

If these truths have been told to a high-minded person who feels the highest devotion for God and for his guru as for God, and then they will surely shine forth as inner experiences - then, indeed, they will shine forth.

SwiftPushkar

10:45 AM

4.9.3 "For I have heard from persons like your good self that only knowledge which is learnt from a teacher [acharya] leads to the highest good." Then he [Gautama] taught him [Satyakama] the same knowledge. Nothing whatsoever was left out, yea, nothing whatsoever was left out.

Chandogya Upanishad

Krishn Shweta

3:41 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan I just saw in one article that there were 3 vishnuswamis

Is it true?

And one doubt here:

4

Q: Eight immortals (Include Lord Hanuman) being the Chiranjivi still exist in Kaliyaga?

Hindu scripture contains a mantra about the Eight immortals: अश्वत्थामा बलिव्र्यासो हनूमांश्च विभीषण:। कृप: परशुरामश्च सप्तएतै चिरजीविन:॥ सप्तैतान् संस्मरेन्नित्यं मार्कण्डेयमथाष्टमम्। जीवेद्वर्षशतं सोपि सर्वव्याधिविवर्जित॥ Ashwathaama Balirvyaaso Hanumanshcha Vibheeshanaha Krupaha Parshur...

scripture kali-yuga

According to title, it's "8 immortals" but in sanskrit verse कृप: परशुरामश्च सप्तएतै चिरजीविन:

sapta means 7 right?

Tezz

4:05 PM

@KrishnShweta see the next verse after it.. it will make clear..सप्तैतान् संस्मरेन्नित्यं मार्कण्डेयमथाष्टमम्।

@KrishnShweta It sys Markendeya yetha Ashtamam... or Markandeya makes the eight...

@KrishnShweta In any case these 8 are just a list of Chiranjeevi... There are Other many Chiranjivis too who have lived more than kalpas... or who are living very long and now also.... like Sage Lomasa, Agastya, Valmiki etc.. etc...

Krishn Shweta

@Tezz Oh!! OK...

@Tezz Where do they live?

Tezz

@KrishnShweta Some live in Naimisha forest, Some in Badari, Some near Himavat, in Tirthas etc... etc...

Krishn Shweta

*scary *

@Tezz Thanks for the clarification.

C ya.

Keshav Srinivasan

5:05 PM

@LakshmiNarayanan I just replied to Peter Freund's email.

@LakshmiNarayanan I forwarded it to you.

Lakshmi Narayanan

5:16 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan Good reply, hope he takes time to read what you are actually saying and respond to that. One thing, i think you should have mentioned that your understanding is backed by so and so commentary/scripture to show more basis.

@KeshavSrinivasan He can't take it lightly then in any circumstance and his taking it that way would ensure his ignorance in this matter in that case.

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Well, I don't think I'm telling him much that he doesn't already know. His website is pretty thorough; some of the articles he's uploaded there cover a lot of what I'm saying.

@LakshmiNarayanan And I'm sure he knows that at least on a literal interpretation, the Purva Mimamsa Sutras are about performing Yagnas, it's just that he subscribes to an incredibly weird interpretation of them.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Then it is super crazy that agnim doesn't have anything on his viewpoint rostered already.

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah, the stuff on his Devata Kanda Sutras website is perfectly sensible and uncontroversial. He doesn't go babbling about dynamism and Jaimini Kaivalya and all that.

Lakshmi Narayanan

5:32 PM

btw i just started reading N S Junankar's paper, "The Mimamsa concept of Dharma", in this he says that Mimamsa theory has two pramana based on two different kinds of objects. These two kinds of objects are empirical(DrishtArtha) and Sabda(AdrishtArtha). Then he says this, "The objects of both these kinds are real and independent of our mind. The objects of the empirical pramAnas are already in existence (bhuthArtha) and can therefore be presented to our sense-organs. The objects of the Sabda pramAna are yet to come into existence (bhavyArtha) and cannot therefore

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Let me explain to you what that quote is saying. As I told you before Purva Mimamsa recognizes two realms, the visible realm and the invisible realm. Pratyaksha or perception and Anumana or inference tell you about objects that already exist in the visible world. Like if you see an apple then you know there's an apple that already exists in the visible world. And if you see smoke you can infer that there is a fire that already exists in the visible world.

@LakshmiNarayanan Whereas Sabda Pramana tells you about what does not yet exist in the visible world. Like the Vedas may say "If you perform the Agnihotra, then you will go to Swarga." You going to Swarga is not something that has already happened, but it's something that will happen in the future if you perform the Agnihotra.

@LakshmiNarayanan Sabda Pramana is the only way of knowing what objects only exist in the invisible realm, and how those objects will result in future in rewards and punishments that you'll experience in the visible world.

SwiftPushkar

5:48 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan - Good Afternoon to you & @LakshmiNarayanan - Good Night 2 u 😊💐👍👍🌛🌞 TC ,Bye 🌷

Lakshmi Narayanan

@SwiftPushkar Good Night :)

@KeshavSrinivasan Oh Ok, so it's like the Yagna pulls objects from the invisible world to the visible world?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan The Yagna creates an object called an Apurva in the invisible world, and then at some point in the future that object leads to results in the visible world.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Are the Vedas themselves described by Sabda Pramana i.e., the Vedas?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan Sabda Pramana does refer to the Vedas (and other scriptures). But when he talks about the objects of Sabdapramana, he doesn't mean the Vedas, he means the future results of Karmas.

@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah, the Vedas talk about a great many subjects, including the Vedas themselves, as well as subjects like Brahman and the gods. But the Purva Mimamsa school thought that all statements in the Vedas about objects that already existed were meaningless.

Lakshmi Narayanan

6:06 PM

@KeshavSrinivasan Then why were those statements there in the first place acc. to Mimamsakas?

Keshav Srinivasan

@LakshmiNarayanan So for instance, if the Vedas say "Indra performed the Agnishtoma and then defeated Vritrasura in battle. So if you want victory in battle you should perform the Agnishtoma." then Mimamsakas would say that you cannot conclude from that that a god named Indra actually killed a demon named Vritrasura. Because Indra killing Vritrasura, if true, would be something that already exists in the world, and thus the Vedas can't meaningfully talk about it.

@LakshmiNarayanan Mimamsakas believed that such statements were mere Arthavada, i.e. statements which just serve to glorify an action. So in the example I gave, the statement "Indra killed Vritrasura" is just a way of encouraging people to do the Agnishtoma, because it really does lead to victory in battle. It doesn't mean that Indra actually killed Vritrasura.

Lakshmi Narayanan

@KeshavSrinivasan Oh Ok.

@KeshavSrinivasan I'm feeling very sleepy, ttyl! Good day.

Keshav Srinivasan

6:33 PM

@LakshmiNarayanan Good day for me, good night for you :-)

Transcript for

Vedanta and Philosophy