[Advaita-l] (no subject)

[Bhaskar YR]

sAshtAnga praNAms Sri Vidya prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Sri Vidya prabhuji :

Ah, read the bhAshya on gItA 18.19. If you keep an open mind, you
will understand why bhagavAn uses sAMkhya and how Sankara
bhagavatpAda views such usage. Apply a samAna-nyAya to yoga
system too.

guNasaMkhyAna-SAstraM guNa-bhoktR-vishaye pramANam eva |
paramArtha brahmaikatva-vishaye yadyapi virudhyate, tathApi te hi
kApilAH guNa-gauNa-vyApAra-nirUpaNe 'bhiyuktAH iti tac-chAstram
api vakshyamANArtha-stuty-arthatvena upAdIyata iti na virodhaH |

bhaskar :

prabhuji, kindly tell me what we should conclude from the above
statements??  Do you mean to say here whereever shankara uses the word
sAMkhya it will be invariably *sAMkhya* as a system that shankara endorsed
by saying *na virodhaH* ??  No prabhuji that is not the case...Though
sAnkhya-s puruSha is *asangi* as per their system he is not ONE but anEka,
they say for each sharIra there is one Atma..do you think we have accept
this doctrine also since shankara above saying one part of sAnkhya system
is according to vEda??  Moreover, it is to be noted that sAMkhya cannot
mean everywhere sAMkhya shAstra (or kApita sAHkhya--sAMkhya as a dualistic
system propagated by sage Kapila)..For example see gIta 2-39 :  where Lord
says to arjuna : eshA te abhihitA sAMkhye..shankara says here eshA te
thubhyaM abhihitA uktA sAMkhye paramArtha vastu vivekavishaye buddhiH
jnAnaM sAkshAt SokamOhAdisaMsAra hEtu dOsha nivrutti kAraNAM....can we link
this interpretation to match with classical sAMkhya system prabhuji??  See
another example in gIta 13-24 : dhyAnenAtmani pashyanti.....anyE sAMkhyena
yOgena...Here our Acharaya writes, sAMkhyaM nAma ime satvarajastamAmsi
guNAH mayA drushyAH, ahaM tebhyaH anyaH tadvyApAra sAkshi bhUtaH nityaH
guNa vilakshaNaH AtmA iti chitanaM yeshaH sAKhyaH yOgaH....prabhuji, you
know the problem if we link this interpretation with that of classical
sAMkhya system...No need to mention here, sankara talking about shrutyukta
sAnkhya yOga as described in gIta by Lord krishna. No doubt when shankara
talks about * prOchyate guNasaMkhyAne* (18-19) it is indeed kApila sAMkhya
shAstra only...but if you see the various other references in the gIta
bhAshya itself, it cannot always carry the same meaning...Sometimes sAMkhya
means (a) secondless Atma jnAna as per vedanta (b) a means to attain
AtmajnAnanishTa through saMnyAsa (c) vivEka as enshrined in shruti-s and
finally (d) sAMkhya as a classical system of kapila...

We have to apply this same rule (nyAya) to the word *yOga* & samAdhi also
prabhuji...Take for example the term yOga in 4th adhyAya...shankara in the
introduction to this chapter clearly says : yOyaM yOgaH adhyAyadvayena
uktaH jnAnanishTAlakshaNaH saMnyAsaH, karmayOgOpAyascha...gItAsu cha
*sarvAsu ayameva* yOgO vivakshitaH bhagavatA...Here it is quite evident
that yOga means jnAnanishTa lakshaNa saMnyAna...At no stretch of our
imagination, we can link this to *yOgAH chitta vrutti nirodhA* of
PY...Importantly shankara continues to clarify that in all through the gIta
bhagavan meant yOga as AtmajnAnanishTa & for that karma yOga as
upAya...That is the reason why elsewhere Lord says jnAnayogena sAMKHyAnAm
karmayogena yOginAM...etc.  We cannot interpret terms like yOga & samAdhi
etc. in each and every place of bhAshya in favour of PYS to accommodate PYS
& its practices...Had PYS been closely knitted in shankara bhAshya & full
support of shankara as later vyAkhyAnakAra-s believe, shankara would not
have taken all the trouble to declare that sAMkhya means vEdAntic jnAna &
yOga means vEdAntic dhyAna...interestingly, shankara makes this stand clear
immediately after talking about popularity of these systems in its
classical sense..If at all yOga (PYS) is one of the means for AtmajnAna,
why shankara has taken all the trouble to  particularly point out that here
yOga is NOT YS as popularly understood by majority people but it is
vedAntic dhyAna??  See KaTa shruti for another example where shankara calls
yOga as niyOga only (I cannot recall the exact reference here from that
shruti, but it is clearly mentioned like that)..

Moreover, it is tobe noted that at many places in prasthAna trayI bhAshya
one particular opinion is refuted by the logical devices of a rival school
(sometimes it may be nyAya school, sAMkhya school or yOga school)...say for
example in some contexts, buddhists doctrine has been refuted by shankara
by using logical devices of tarkika-s. and elsewhere these logical points
of tArkika-s have been refuted by view points of mImAmsaka-s & finally
mImAmsaka-s view points have been rejected by vedAntic siddhAnta..as we
know, at one place in sUtra bhAshya (2-2-29 ?? not sure) while refuting
vijnAnavAdins vAda, shankara vehemently argues about the superior reality
of waking state to dream state...but same shankara while commenting on the
kArika-s says that there is NO significant difference between these two
states & both are same.. somany cases like this we can find in all through
the commentary. But merely contextual support to one siddhAnta by Sankara,
one cannot decide and declare immediately that those declarations itself
the final teaching of Sanakara. This rule is applicable to the system of
yOga & sAMkhya as well..


Again, prabhuji, I dont know, with all these background when someone says
yOga as a dualistic system & it is veda viruddha..they immediately jump on
the neck & fires the statement that  you are going against saMpradAya...But
at the same time they go to the extreme to refute tattva vAda which is
another dualistic system :-)) Why on the earth we have to refute dvaita
vAda when we are adopting somany of their spirituall practices like bhakti,
saguNOpAsaNa etc. etc. what is the need for us (advaitins) to define the
concept of parAbhakti which differs from dvaitins' concept of dualistic
bhakti?? It is because though they (dualists) are practicing shrutykta
upasanAdhi spiritual practices, they go against the parama siddhAnta of
shruti-s (atleast as per advaita)i.e. Atmaikatva..I think the same is the
case with the system of another dvaita shAstra i.e. yOga shAstra..Even
though there is a place for some limbs of yOgic practices in vEdAnta
sAdhana, it is nothing but *paramata* /tantrAntara only which maintains the
duality eternaly.  Hence their (PYS) usage of standard terminologies like
yOga, dhyAna, samAdhi etc. differs from that of classical vedanta system...

Anyway, this is the way I'd like to look at the issues, especially when
other systems eulogised in the system of advaita vEdanta...  I've been
repeatedly telling (atleast more than 108 times :-)) & still saying that
those who want to follow shankara's advaita *as it is* donot have any
hidden agenda to exclude the practices of yOga system..

Sri Vidya prabhuji thanks for your kind time & patience...Kindly forgive me
if at all I am argumentative & biased in my discussion with you sofar...

Your humble servant
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar