[Advaita-l] real and unreal - eternal

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 4:13 AM,  <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
> SV, it is a good analysis. Can you please quote any textual references to show that Sankara or any notable advaita acharya >considered vyavahara as non-eternal?

There are many --

1.  srI.gauDapAda's  kaarika --

yathA cha svapnamAye dR^iShTe asadrUpe, tathA vishvamidaM dvaitaM
samastaM asat.h dR^iShTam.h | kketyAha -- vedAnteShu | 'neha nAnAsti
kiJNchana', 'indro mAyAbhiH', 'Atmaivedamagra AsIt.h',
'brahmaivedamagra AsIt.h', 'dvitIyAdvai bhayaM bhavati'......

Just as objects perceived in dreams and in illusions are unreal, this
perceived world, the duality is entirely unreal. 'Where is this?' to
that (gauDapAda says): in the shrutis such as neha nAnAsti kiJNchana,
Indra assumes multiple forms through mAyAs , Only the AtmA existed in
the beginning, Only Brahma existed in the beginning, the presence of a
second, indeed, causes fear...

2. If you accept Shankara is the author of commentary on GK, Shankara
while starting the commentary on vaitathya prakaraNa (of GK) says that
this prakaraNa is meant to prove the falsity of world using anumAna --

tatra upapattyA.api dvaitasya vaitathyaM shakyate.avadhArayituM iti
dvitIyaM prakaraNamArabhate |

kArikA:
antaHsthAnAttu bhedAnAM tasmAjjAgarite smR^itam.h | yathA tatra tathA
svapne saMvR^itatvena bhidyate || 4||

Shankara's bhAShya:
jAgraddR^ishyAnAM bhAvAnAM vaitathyamiti pratij~nA | dR^ishyatvAditi
hetuH | svapnadR^ishyabhAvavaditi dR^iShTAntaH | yathA tatra svapne
dR^ishyAnAM bhAvAnAM vaitathyaM tathA jAgarite.api
dR^ishyatvamavishiShTamiti hetUpanayaH | tasmAjjAgarite.api vaitathyaM
smR^itamiti nigamanam.h |

The objects seen in the waking state are false -- thus is the
to-be-proven statement. 'On the account of it being perceived', thus
is the antecedent. 'Similar to the objects seen in the dream' is the
analogy. 'The perceptibility of false objects in dream is
indistinguishable from that of the objects in the waking state', thus
is the upanaya (application of antecedent). 'Therefore, the objects of
waking state are also false, thus is known' is the conclusion.



3. svapne yadvat  prabodhe (upadesha sAhasrI).

Here, one might object this evidence and they might quote Shankara's
denial of equating jagat to dream from his BSB 'na svapnAdivat.h'.

But look further in BSB itself,  Shankara answers it right there
itself: antaHsthAnAtsamvR^itatvena cha svapnadR^ishyAnAM bhAvAnAM
jAgraddR^ishyebhyo bhedaH | dR^ishyatvamasatyatvaM cha
avishiShTamubhayatra |

On the account of (their being) within oneself and concealed, the
objects of dream are different from those in the waking state.
(However), the perceptibility and (thereby) falsity of both are
indistinguishable.


4. avidyAprabhavaM sarvam-asat- tasmAdidaM jagat.h" (all this world
originates from avidyA, ignorance, and is therefore unreal, upadesha
sAhasrI, 2.17.20)

5. brahma satyam jaganmidhyEtyEvam rUpO vinischayaha, sOyam nityAnitya
vastu vivEkaha samudAhrutaha (vivEka-chUDAmaNi sloka 20)
(note the emphasis here on one should have vivEka on what is eternal
and what is non-eternal, and putting this jagat (vyavahAra) under
non-eternal category)



>
> In my understanding, it is eternal (pravahara nitya).
>

Not really. It "seems" eternal as long as one is not realized.

See what Sri.Shankara has to say in this regard ---

sarva-vyavahArANAmEva prAk brahmatma-avijnyAnAt satyatva upapattEhe
svapna-vyavahArasya prAk prabOdhat" - Sri Shankara BSB (II.1.14)
(Before coming by realization it is but proper to regard all our
worldly activities as real, as our activities in dream seem real to us
till we wake up )

prAk prabOdhAt samsAritvabhigamaha
(Before the dawn of realization we have to concede the reality of samsAra )

na cha dvaitasya anritatva-buddhihi prathamamEva kasyachit syAt |
(Nobody thinks from the very outset that duality is false )

prAk brahmAtmatvadarshanAt vishayAdi-prapanchO vyavasthitaroopO bhavati |
(Prior to the realization of the identity of Atman with Brahman, the
world of senses and other things have their definite form.)

dEhAtma-pratyayO yadvat pramANatvEna kalpitaha loukikam tadvadEvEdam pramANam
tvAtma nischayAt |
As long as the idea of the Self is identified with the body
consciousness so long i.e, till the realization of the true nature of
Atman, the world perception, the reality of the world is also equally
valid.



>
That is why it is tenable to say that within >vyavahara, there are
eternal entities (e.g.
>Vedas, Ishwara) and non-eternal entities (e.g. objects produced by karma).

It is not tenable to say so. You may say so **as long as one is not
realized** . That is the key


>If  vyavahara (incl. >Ishwara) is negated by knowledge of
>brahman, we have a category of eternal unreal (Ishwara, Vedas) in advaita. Is it not?

They  are unreal, period. No question of their eternity. Unreal, by
definition, must be non-eternal  as per anvaya vetirEka of definition
of satyatvam as I quoted in my previous mail (citing vedAnta
pAribhASha etc)

/SV