---How about the Blue Pearl? What does Shankara say about that?
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The problem here is in characterizing Shankara's views only in
terms of his commentary on the Brahma Sutras. It is well established
that the Brahma Sutra-s deal with bridging the variant perspectives
found in the major Upanishads. Shankara's Brahama Sutra commentary is
concerned with demonstrating that gnosis (jnana) or Brahma-vidya of
the unconditional (nirguna) Brahman is both a direct and indirect
means for vedantic realization. However, if we want to discuss
Shankara then we need to take a wider perspective which is inclusive
of his commentaries on the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads. Taken
together, these sources deal with action (karma), meditation
(upasana) and direct knowing (jnana).
>
> And by the way, Shankara's wider view is the source for
Maharishi's original explanatory model of the three fields of life
which preceded the formulation of the Science of Creative
Intelligence.
>
> Shankara's commentary on the Bhagavad Gita is the oldest among
the older commentaries still existing today. Shankara was also the
first to accept the Bhagavad Gita, along with the Brahma Sutras and
the Upanishads, as one of the three foundations (prashtana traya) of
Vedanta. His Bhagavad Gita commentary discusses Yoga, as does the
Gita itself. It has also been noted by some scholars (particularly
John Arapura) that Shankara does not superimpose upon the 18 chapters
of the Gita a division into three topical sections dealing with
karma, bhakti and jnana, respectively. Rather he discusses the two
resolute observances (nishta-s) 1. jnana-yoga for the knowers
(sankhyanam) and 2. karma-yoga for the yogin-s. These "nishta-s" are
found in Gita 3.3 and are often mis-translated into English
as "paths". However, according to Shankara, these resolute
observances (nishta-s) are not two separate paths but rather two
stages on the single path to brahma-vidya.
>
> I have not found anyone here on FFL who has read Adi-Shankara's
commentary on the Bhagavad Gita, even though Maharishi made a point
about it in his Gita commentary. Remember Maharishi's line about
Shankara teaching not just transcendental knowledge but also
transcendental devotion?
>
> What about his commentaries on the principal Upanishads? If you
had this teaching you would understand what it means that the purusha
in the heart and the purusha in the sun are one. You would recognize
that the doorway leading from the purusha in the heart to the purusha
in the sun was the krsna-tara, the black-star in the right eye. You
would no longer think that Shankara's teachings were just a bunch of
abstractions for intellectuals who think too much.
>
> So what? Yah, so what.
>
>
> ivan_galeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to Shankara's commentary on Brahma sutras there
is no mention
> of Yoga as such path. Shankara dropped off philosophy of Yoga
system.
> Both paths have basis in Brahmanic rituals but the later one is
> characterized by transcending rituals (advaita Vedanta). In both
paths
> Unity is possible to reach; in first after total pralaya; in second
> immediately.
>
> > According to Marshy, the Purusha is totally separate
> > from the gunas born of nature, prakriti. What is needed
> > is not a metaphysics, but a PRACTICE, that can be used
> > to isolate the Purusha from the prakriti: TM is that
> > effortless technique.
>
> Purusha (Atman) can be experienced as if isolated, but real nature
of
> Purusha (Atman) is Brahman, totality. There is no isolation in
Brahman
> state of consciousness. Yoga leads to turya and turyatit
(kaivalya),
> Vedanta leads to Unity of Atman and Brahman.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your
story.
> Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
>
