[Advaita-l] Meet on Advaita Vedanta in Bangalore - May 7 to 8. 2013
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Fri May 10 11:50:59 CDT 2013
Sankara Vedanta Mimansa Bhashyam by Holenarsipur Swamiji SSS Page 20 and 21
has analysed the Panchapadika Teeka of the Mithyajnana Nimitta in Sankara
Adhyasa Bhashya -
Atra Shruta Hanih Ashruta Kalpana Ca Kriyate Teekakarena Iti Sphutam -
The Teekakara Padmapada is doing Shruta Hani because he is disregarding the
Bhashya and he is also doing Ashruta Kalpana. He is imagining different
things not present in the Bhashya.
'The compound word 'Mithyajnana' has to be resolved into Mithya Ca
Tadajnanam Ca' False Ignorance. Here Mithya means Undefinable. and Ajnana
means the inert potency of Avidya, in contrast to consciousness. And the
word Nimittaha means having that potency as its material cause.
Now this interpretation is vitiated by the following defects -
In the first place it ignores what is expressly stated in the Bhashya and
inserts something never referred to in the Bhashya. For the Bhashya says
that all human procedure is due to misconception, but the author of the
Tika disregards this express statement and makes the original mean that the
unreal appearance of egoity etc in the Atman is the effect of the material
cause - a hypothetical potency of Avidya- which inheres in the essential
nature of Atman and that this cause has to be assumed to be attached to
Atman for the simple reason that otherwise we cannot account for the
appearance of false phenomena. In the second place while the objection is
that the mutual superimposition of the Self and the not Self is against all
reason, the reply brings in something irrelevant to the context, for it
says that we have all to assume that there is a hypothetical Avidya potency
clinging to internal and external things.'
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 5:53 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
> I am sorry that some of the jijnAsus who went to the venue today, Thursday,
> were disappointed. There was not enough time for me to convey the calling
> off of the program on Thursday on the List as I was busy with other things
> On the topics of avidyA persisting in suShupti there indeed was a
> vociferous debate, as it could be expected. At one occasion Vidwan Mani
> Dravid SastriNaH (MDS) read out a brahmasutra bhashya portion for the sutra
> 'sa eva tu karmAnusmRtiushabdavidhibhyaH' 3.2.9, the highlights of which
> // Here, the question discussed is whether the one who has attained union
> with the Sat during deep sleep rises from sleep or a different one. The
> objection is that there is no rule that the same jIva who went to sleep
> emerges therefrom. Just as when in a reservoir a drop of water is put it
> becomes one with the water there. When one takes out a drop of water from
> there, it is impossible that it is the same drop which was put there.
> To this the siddhAntin says: it is the same jIva that comes out from
> After a fairly fine discussion on this, the objector's example is taken up
> for settlement: In the drop-water analogy it is quite alright that there
> is no way of differentiating it is not possible to take out the 'same'
> drop. But in the case of the jiva, however, there is this* differentiating
> factor called: karma and avidyA. *//
> When this highlighted sentence of the bhAShyam which explicitly says that
> there is avidyA that is the differentiating factor for the jIva, the party
> that does not accept this made a protest saying that:
> 1. Sri SSS had given a footnote to that bhashya (as usual) to give it a
> different interpretation.
> 2. The above bhAShya has to be seen as gauNa, the mukhya being the ones in
> the Br.up. Bhashya which forms the basis for them to conclude that there is
> no avidyA for the jiva in suShupti.
> In any case, the visiting scholars put their point in perspective whether
> the hosts agreed to it or not.
> Another point that occupied a good deal of time and debating is the term
> 'avidyA' in the bhashya: avidyAkalpite nAmarUpe.....in the context of
> Ishwara's mAyA, shakti, etc. The hosts' view was that Ishwara, shruti,
> etc. is avidyA kalpita When MDS presented the extremely significant point
> that 'we know that Ishwara is the jagatkAraNam ONLY from the shruti pramANa
> and that such knowledge is not an effect of adhyAsa, the contending party
> literally cited the portions from the adhyAsabhAShya : 'tametam
> evamlakShaNamadhyAsam paNDitAH avidyeti manyante' and that the term avidyA
> in the above sutra bhashya was indeed this adhyAsa of the jIva, and that
> the adhyAsa bhashya itself says: all pramANa prameya vyavahAra including
> the vidhi-pratiShedha shAstra and even mokSha shAstra operated in the realm
> of avidyA, MDS felt extremely sorry for them.
> On the sidelines I had a brief discussion with him where it could be
> appreciated that: The above adhyAsa bhAShya vAkyam does not say that the
> shruti, Ishwara, etc. are jIva adhyAsa kalpita. What it says is only the
> adhyAsakalpita kartRtva-bhoktRtva bhAva makes the jIva a candidate for
> karma/mokSha. And therefore the avidyAkalpite nAmarUpe...term means only
> another term for mAyA, shakti, avyakta, etc.
> Both parties agreed to disagree, sticking to their guns. The hosting
> Swamiji said that he hoped to see agreement, aikamatyam, on the various
> contentious issues through such meets.
> When the topic of yoga abhyAsa like samAdhi for Advaita jnana in addition
> to vedanta vichAra came up, I pointed out the 'gItAshAstrArtha vivekaH'
> book where Sri SSS had admitted that the sixth chapter of the BG has a
> great content of Patanjali yoga where he has enumerated the very sutras
> from there, including samadhi but at the same time bringing out the
> difference between yoga and vedanta in the content of the samadhi, one or
> two from the hosting party made a note of it while some did not appear to
> be knowing it. When I stated this, then the hosts made the observation
> that the practices like yama, niyama, etc. were not alien to vedanta and
> that their utility is admitted. Then the question of nididhyAsanam came up
> and I brought out the bhashyam for the br.up.
> 'shrotavyo....nididhyAsitavyaH' " sa nishchayena dhyAtavyaH' and the
> dhyAnam itself being elaborated by Shankara in the Chandogya bhashya
> beginning: vijAtiya pratyaya anantarita sajatIya pratyaya pravAhaH' which
> MDS presented for everyone to hear.
> Then the question of 'vAkyArtha jnAnam from padArtha jnAnam' was taken up
> for discussion. What would give one brahmajnAnam is the correct knowledge
> of the (tattvamasi, etc.) vAkyArtha which itself depends upon the correct
> understanding of the words there: tat tvam and asi. I put a question, in
> English, to the scholars, one of whom, Sri GoDA Venkatesha SastriNaH, who
> retired from Reserve Bank of India, 'All the senior scholars here can be
> definitely said to be quite knowledgeable about the padArtha and the
> vAkyaartha; they can even teach this (which ultimately is: tat and tvam
> padas are essentially pure consciousness alone) to others too, and could it
> be said that they have no brahma jnAnam or that their knowledge is paroksha
> and not aparoksha? To this the eminent scholar said: I am sorry to reply
> Sir, that the question you have put is beyond the scope, maryAdA, of this
> sadas as it touches the personal aspect of the scholars assembled here.
> Jnanam is a matter of one's internal recognition, sva hRdaya pratyayaH (a
> bhashya expression in BSB 4.1.15) and no one would say it out. In any
> case, the conclusion from the bhashya is that liberating jnAnam depends on
> padArtha/vAkyArtha jnAnam.
> There were some twenty, men and women, in the audience who even put
> questions and obtained answers. The event was interesting to me in many
> respects as I could get to hear a lot of Sanskrit and bhAShyas. The entire
> set of questions planned to be discussed could not be completed. Since
> some of the scholars had planned to leave on Wednesday itself, the
> organizers felt there will not be much discussion on Thursday and hence the
> abrupt decision to call it off.
> There were heated arguments, spiced with humor too. Of course no need to
> say that we were treated with very tasty upahAra, bhojanam and pAnIyam from
> time to time. The hosts were extremely hospitable.
> I am delighted to say that the Advaita vedanta pATha pravachana paddhati is
> going on in various places. In Chennai Sri goDA shastriNaH is conducting
> line-by-line bhashya class with Tamil explanation three days a week and
> some forty people attend regularly. Here itself the Swamiji is conducting
> some five hours of class every day and some fifteen people attend. This is
> just a sample.
> Swamini Svatmabodhananda (nee Smt. Lakshmi Muthuswamy) was present on both
> days, though I did not recognize her as I had not seen her before. I
> learned about the identity after she wrote to me today.
> (I have not checked the above write up for errors)
> warm regards
> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
> > praNAms Sri Anand Hudli prabhuji
> > Hare Krishna
> > I went there with my son today morning hoping to listen to finer
> > points in advaita, but was told the meeting ended yesterday because some
> > of the scholars wanted to leave early.
> > > thanks for the information prabhuji..when I went there around 11 AM,
> > nobody was there!!
> > Apparently, a summary of the topics discussed was presented by Shri
> > Advayananda Saraswati, after the sadas had ended.
> > > I think that must be an interesting summary.. Sri Subbu prabhuji may
> > give us more details of it. No need to mention here that Sri Advayananda
> > Saraswati is from Mattur (purvAshrama Sri ChandramouLi Avadhani) younger
> > brother of Sri Ashwatha Narayana Avadhani, a direct disciple of Sri SSS.
> > I was told the topics discussed included suShupti, the role of Yoga in
> > advaita in the context of shravaNa, manana, and nididhyAsana.
> > > Very very interesting topics indeed...suShupti and its treatment in
> > shankara bhAshya is always quite interesting, especially when it comes to
> > kAraNAvidya in bhAvarUpa. And the role of yOga as well in jnAna mArga
> > sAdhana prakriya.
> > > Infact I went today with a question about jnAni's kAma krOdha
> > (vipareeta pratyaya) due to prArabdha/avidyAlesha which I was planning
> > ask if there is any leisure period or in question & answer session :-)
> > Anyway, I missed the opportunity.
> > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> > bhaskar
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list