headers
srikanta | 1 May 2008 10:10
Picon

Discussion on pratityasamutpada regarding

To Sri ramesh krishnamurthy
You have written that there is a misunderstanding on my part regarding my
statement that Pratitya-samutpada was developed as an alternative to
Yogachara vijnanavada.Not at all.there have been different branches of
Buddhism,like Vaibhasika,sautrantika.there are again the schools which
hold satkaryavada and asatkaryavada.The Vaibhasikas believe in
satkaryavada and the there is external world.Vasubandhu who developed the
Yogachara Vijnanavada was a vaibhasika and later learnt the sautrantika
from Kashmir.His stepbrother Asanga who wrote the Mahayanasutralankara was
a sautrantika.The sautrantika view contains both the vijnanavada and the
pratitya-samutpada based on the teachings of Buddha.It is said that the
Buddha taught differently to his disciples.The pratitya-samutpada theory
is in its seed form in the earlier Buddhist canons."sarvam ksanikam,sarvam
nairatmyam,nirvanam santam""sarve nissvabhavah".you can read those books.
there are also books written by western scholars on Vasubandhu.Though the
Madhyamaka philosophy was later developed by Nagarjuna,there have been
rivalry in the different branches of Buddhism.Later the vijnanvada was
developed by Dinnaga and Dharmakeerthi.It was during that time the
mimamsakas under Kumarila Bhatta counteracted the Vijanavada view( see
Alambana pariksa by Dinnaga).Kumarila's book on Tarka
sastra,tuptika,srauta prakasika contains many references on this.
                                                      N.Srikanta.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
srikanta | 1 May 2008 13:18
Picon

Discussion on pratitya-samutpada regarding

To
Sri.Anant Bhagawath
I do not understand when you said that you cannot understand the purport
of the first 10-12 lines.i have answered the point of Sri.ramesh
Krishnamurthy.You can refer to them.there are many books on yogachara
vijnanvada of Vasubandhu(Vasubandu:Stefen Anacker).You have said that the
Finite Automaton is acausal.the machine can start from anywhere in
sequence.True,but it must keep in storage from where it has started.There
is no process in nature which starts without a cause,and does not produce
an effect.But,the Madhyamaka view of Pratitya-samutpada strives to prove
that,the cause-effect relationship is futile,as they hold that all process
is without substance(svabhava),sarve nissvabhavah,so taught the
Buddha.Buddha also taught differently to his disciples,and based on this
diferent ranches of Buddhism were developed based on these teachings,and
were contradictory to each other.You may refer to the "abhavadhikarana"in
the sutra:Na abhavah upalabdeh,where the Vijnanavada view that there is no
external world is examined(Bauddha pariksha).At the end of this
sutra,Shankara states that these views of the Buddha are in  contradiction
to each other.If these views are held,then it shows that Buddha was a
"prajapadveshi"(hater of mankind).Those who are wellwishers of the good
must highly reject them.
you have writen even Prof.Radhakrishnan has accepted that Gaudapada has
accepted the innovative ideas of Yogacharavijnanvada and Madhyamaka
views.I donot accept Prof.Radhakrishnan's views as authentic,as I have
made indepth studies of Yogachara Vijnanvada and Madhyamaka theories,and
no where the Gaudpada's views concur with them.I am in the finishing stage
of my theses which establsishes this crosscorrelation
of Buddhism with Upanishadic views.I am interested to discuss karika by
Karika with those who are interested to know the purport of the karikas.
                                                    N.srikanta.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ananta Bhagwat | 1 May 2008 15:05
Picon
Favicon

Re: Discussion on pratitya-samutpada regarding

Sri Srikanta

1/ I suggest, as a practice, you include the mail against which you are making a point.
2/ Tripitaka (Pali canon) is the earliest source of Buddha's direct teaching. In the second basket (Sutta
Pitaka) this pratItyasamutpada formula is included (ref my earlier mails on this topic). In spite of your
verbose explanation, I fail to understand how could this principle be formulated as an alternative to
yogAcAra which came much later?
3/ If you say that gauDapAda influnced Buddhism rather than the other way round, I have personally no
problem with this position if there is enough evidence. However, I prefer to hold on to a position based on
his kArikA's that gauDapAda was quite knowledgeable about Buddhism and asserted upanishadic principle
of Atman = brahman by using some of Buddhism's own arguments and referring some Buddhist texts.

ananta

----- Original Message ----
From: "srikanta@..." <srikanta@...>
To: advaita-l@...
Sent: Thursday, May 1, 2008 4:48:34 PM
Subject: [Advaita-l] Discussion on pratitya-samutpada  regarding

To
Sri.Anant Bhagawath
I do not understand when you said that you cannot understand the purport
of the first 10-12 lines.i have answered the point of Sri.ramesh
Krishnamurthy.You can refer to them.there are many books on yogachara
vijnanvada of Vasubandhu(Vasubandu:Stefen Anacker).You have said that the
Finite Automaton is acausal.the machine can start from anywhere in
sequence.True,but it must keep in storage from where it has started.There
is no process in nature which starts without a cause,and does not produce
an effect.But,the Madhyamaka view of Pratitya-samutpada strives to prove
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ananta Bhagwat | 1 May 2008 19:32
Picon
Favicon

Re: Discussion on Pratitya-samutpada and Advaita

Sri Ramesh

Yes, after your mail I went through the listed messages. The issue (mAdhyamaka), it seems, had generated
lot of heat at that time. In fact most of the issues which we (the new comers like me) are discussing now had
been discussed as early as Y2000 with enthusiasm, passion, and combativeness.

ananta

----- Original Message ----
From: Ramesh Krishnamurthy <rkmurthy@...>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l@...>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:24:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Discussion on Pratitya-samutpada and Advaita

2008/4/29 Ananta Bhagwat <ananta14@...>:
<<These similarities between advaita and <mAdhyamaka + yogAcAra> have
been discussed in many Indian philosophy textbooks and papers (and
possibly also on this advaita-vedAnta blog).>>

Indeed, this issue has been discussed on this list before. The
"stronger" opinion seems to have been that it is _not_ quite
appropriate to equate the shUnya of mAdhyamaka with the brahman of
advaita (ref alAtashAnti prakaraNa of mANDUkya, where gauDapAda
explains that the firebrand itself is the AdhAra for the appearance of
the circle of fire).

My own understanding is that the shUnya of mAdhyamaka is closer to
what we call mithyA rather than brahman, but others might differ.

Ramesh
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sundaresan, Vidyasankar (GE Infra, Water | 1 May 2008 23:23
Picon
Favicon

Re: Discussion on Chandogya 8.6.6


>In his Email of April 29,2008,Ramesh krishnamurthy wrires that
>earlier,Vidyasankar has posted the role of Yogasastra in
>Brahmasutrabhashyas of Shankara.However,Sahankara's view is that
whereever
>Yogasastra is not in contradiction to Vedas,Yogasastra could be
>accepted.whereever it is in opposition to the vedas it should be
>rejected.No where in his bhashyas he has mentioned about kundalini
yoga. 

As you may be aware, I had posted a series on Advaita Vedanta and its
relationship to Yoga. The whole topic of Sruty-anusAra-ananusAra
acceptance/rejection of Yoga (or for that matter, any other smRti
tradition) was discussed in some fair detail. These postings are at

http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-September/01824
2.html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-September/01825
5.html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-September/01829
6.html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-October/018353.
html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-October/018355.
html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-October/018429.
html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-October/018448.
html
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-October/018453.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
srikanta | 2 May 2008 09:02
Picon

Discussion on pratitya-samutpada

Tio
Sri.Anant Bhagawath
I have explained sufficiently the development of different branches of
Buddhism.If you want suffcient proof about my statement you may refer to
"sarvadarshan sangraha'by Vidyaranya where he has in detail explained how
the different schools of Buddhism,especially Yogachara and madhyamaka
views are in opposition to each other.
You may study in detail carefully the Gaudapada karikas,from the Ist
prakarana,the Agama prakarana,the Iind Vaithathya prakarana,IIIrd the
adwaitha prakarana and the IV th the Alatashanti prakarana.I did not say
that either Buddhism or Gaudapada influenced each other,but that we can
see clearly that what Gaudapada is explaining in his karikas is Adwaitha
and not Buddhism as is generally held.That is all.
                                                         N.Srikanta.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
srikanta | 2 May 2008 09:22
Picon

Discussion on the role of yoga in Adwaita.

"I have posted a series on Adwaita Vedanta and its relationship to
yoga,the whole topic of sruti-anusara-ananusara acceptance/rejection...."

From the commentaries of Shankara no where it is said other systems are
necessary to obtain jnana.again and Again he says that what is necessary
is removal of ajnana or avidya.without right perception any amount of
Yoga,dhyana will remove avidya.this is the hallmark of Shankara's stand.

"Shankara fully takes into account the contribution that Yoga and other
darshanas make towards qualifying us for that jnana".

shankara no where has made this observation that other darshana contribute
for samyagjnana.Otherwise where is the necessity for vedanta?.Moreover,if
other darshana contribute for jnana,then where was the necessity for
puvapaksha and siddhanta?He only points out that in these darshanas if
they contain certain points which donot violate Vedas,they may be
accepted,not with reference to their systems or practices.

"After all,if the immediate perception for jnana of Brahman is that easy
to attain we would all be sadyomuktas right now living out perfect
exemplary lives"

Yes,the jnana is hard to attain,but shankara says that it si everyone's
reach.It is for us to see whether we are sadyomuktas or whether we are
leading perfect exemplary lives(sadyomukti is not different from perfect
exemplary life) or not,but with all these systems cluttered up in our mind
and these futile practices,the sadyomukti will sure be elusive.
                                                N.srikanta.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ananta Bhagwat | 2 May 2008 10:10
Picon
Favicon

Re: Discussion on pratitya-samutpada

jnAna-dAtA sukhi bhava!

ananta

----- Original Message ----
From: "srikanta@..." <srikanta@...>
To: advaita-l@...
Sent: Friday, May 2, 2008 12:32:32 PM
Subject: [Advaita-l] Discussion on pratitya-samutpada

Tio
Sri.Anant Bhagawath
I have explained sufficiently the development of different branches of
Buddhism.If you want suffcient proof about my statement you may refer to
"sarvadarshan sangraha'by Vidyaranya where he has in detail explained how
the different schools of Buddhism,especially Yogachara and madhyamaka
views are in opposition to each other.
You may study in detail carefully the Gaudapada karikas,from the Ist
prakarana,the Agama prakarana,the Iind Vaithathya prakarana,IIIrd the
adwaitha prakarana and the IV th the Alatashanti prakarana.I did not say
that either Buddhism or Gaudapada influenced each other,but that we can
see clearly that what Gaudapada is explaining in his karikas is Adwaitha
and not Buddhism as is generally held.That is all.
                                                         N.Srikanta.

_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
srikanta | 2 May 2008 13:55
Picon

to Sri.anantha Bhagawath

There is nothing to be given nor to receive for something which is ever
present.
                                                        N.Srikanta
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
srikanta | 2 May 2008 14:35
Picon

Discussion on the role of yoga in vedanta

with reference to the above topic of discussion, Sri vidyasankara
sundareshan replies to my Email in the Adwaita list:
"i have posted a series of Adwaita vedanta and its relationship to
yoga,the whole topic of sruti-anusara-ananusara acceptance/rejection"....

I have gone through almost all of the Shankara bhashyas on
Brahmasutras,Upanishad bhashyas,and the bhashya on Bhagawadgita,no where
he has stated that other darshanas are indispensive for
Brahmajnana.Infact,he emphasizes again and again,that avidya nasha by
right perception alone is enough for samyagjnana,that is the hallmark of
Shankara vedanta.

"Shankara fully takes into account the contribution that yoga and other
darshanas make towards qualifying us for that jnana"

Shankara only says in BSB that what is said by other darshanas like
Sankhya or Yoga is acceptable in so far as it is not violating the
Vedas.No where he has said Yoga must be practiced or dhyana must be
practiced for obtaining samyag jnana.Otherwise if by other darshanas like
Yoga and sankhya Brahmajnana could be obtained where is the necessity for
Vedanta,and the detail exposition by stating the Purvapaksha,Siddhanta
and refutation of these darshanas by Shankara.?

'After all,if the immediate perception for jnana of Brahman is easy to
attain,we would all be sadyomuktas right now living out perfect exemplary
lives'
Yes,Shankara says that it is hard to attain,but empahsizes that it is
within every body's reach.the avidya or the ajnana cannot be removed by
any amount of yoga practice or by lifelong dhyanas or mantras,it can be
removed only by right perception obtained from vedanta vijnana,hearing,the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane