Emotion is a wonderful thing, it elevates us to a high level of devotional ecstasy. However, when it comes to philosophy, emotion has no place. We must be guided only by pramANAs. Great Acharyas decorating Sri Ramanuja Darshanam are meticulous in this regard. There are only three pramANAs, namely, Shastras, anumanam (logic), and pratyaksham (observation). Of these three, Shashtras are the foremost pramANam. In this matter of chetanam v. achetanam we must be guided only by shashtra pramANam as taught to us by our great Acharya parapmaparai of Bhagavad Ramanuja. The Acharyas of this great tradition have taught us that there are three realities, chetanam, achetanam, and Iswaran. All three are real. Achetanam is as real as Iswaran. In the case of dadhipandan, let me repeat again, only the jIvatma in the pot got mOksham, not the pot. So, this act of granting moksham has nothing to do with the pot itself. Lord Krishna did not grant moksham to the clay pot, only to the jIvatma residing in the pot. Therefore granting mOksham to the jIvatma i.e. chetanam, could not prove or disprove that the clay pot (jadam) is real. Indeed the clay in the pot is real, but that fact comes from shashthras not from the fact Sri Krishna granted moksham to the jIvatna residing in the pot. Also, please note, for an advaitin, not only the clay pot (jadam) is unreal, the jIvatma (ajadam) as a separate entity from Paramatma is also equally unreal. So the argument that Krishna (Paramatma) granting moksham to one "unreal" entity, proves the reality of another "unreal" entity will be unconvincing to an advaitin. Let me also submit that statements such as Lord Krishna can convert matter (achetanam) to spirit (chetanam) are emotional exaggerations. These emotions cannot stand up to careful scrutiny. The three realities chit, achit, and Iswaran are eternal, i.e. they were not created by anyone. There is no pramANam to claim that Iswara can create chit from achit [matter (energy) into spirit (sic)]. Absence of pramANam precluding a claim cannot be offered as its proof. If this is the standard for proof anyone can claim anything that is not explicitly denied. Vishnu puranam or Bhagavadam does not deny anywhere that Krishna hated Gopikas. So can we say Krishna hated Gopikas? After all, shashthras don't deny this. But this is obviously absurd. Even though the original statement was well motivated, the line argument if accepted will inevitably lead to untenable conclusions. We have to be careful when we make claims for Sri Vaishnavam. Great Acharyas of our tradition such as Swami Sri Desikan overcame enormous opposition by strictly adhering to the truth without diminishing or exaggerating anything. So, the least we could do to respect this great tradition is to not give in to emotional speculations on matters that are philosophical. Before making sweeping statements in the name of Sri Vaishnavam, please check and make sure such statements are indeed supported by Sri Vaishnavam. -- adiyEn At 07:45 PM 9/17/2002 -0700, Narender Reddy wrote:
maya and does not exist in reality. Contrary to the advaithic thought, Lord Krishna SHOWED that the JADAM (achethanam) is REAL, thus supporting and proving the Viaishnava thought.
.... the sastras do not say that the super soul (Paramathma; thripada vibhuthi) can not tranform the achethana into chethanam or spirit.
To subscribe to the list