[Advaita-l] Vikalpa, Savikalpa, and Nirvikalpa

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Tue Sep 11 04:31:23 CDT 2012

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <
lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:

> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com>
> lalitAlAlitaH <http://dooid.com/lalitaalaalitah>*
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:08 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> > it is this aparokSha Atma jnAnam that
> > automatically results in AtmasmRti santati and puts an end to all other
> > chitta vRtti (nirodha).  This automatically results in jivanmukti,
> shAnti,
> > etc.
> >
> Atyantika doesn't mean automatic.

I was aware of this but what I was saying is: without requiring any further
practice for nirodha there sets in a continuous AtmasmRti santatiH.

> Atyantika-nirodha means ultimate cessation of mind which is caused by
> GYAna. And as GYAna doesn't destroy mind of a GYAnI, so this cessation has
> to be of nature of mithyAtva-nishchaya.

I think we have to look into the following too while saying the above:

Here is one instance in the BG bhashyam for 3.17.  In the bhashyam
Bhagavatpada says: (it is shown as avatArikA for this bhashyam)
स्वयमेव वा शास्त्रार्थस्य विवेकप्रतिपत्त्यर्थम् 'एतं वै तमात्मानं विदित्वा *
निवृत्तमिथ्याज्ञानाः* सन्तः ब्राह्मणाः मिथ्याज्ञानवद्भिः अवश्यं
कर्तव्येभ्यः पुत्रैषणादिभ्यो व्युत्थायाथ भिक्षाचर्यं
शरीरस्थितिमात्रप्रयुक्तं चरन्ति न तेषामात्मज्ञाननिष्ठाव्यतिरेकेण अन्यत्
कार्यमस्ति' इत्येवं श्रुत्यर्थमिह गीताशास्त्रे प्रतिपिपादयिषितमाविष्कुर्वन्
आह भगवान् -

the shrutyartha of br.up.3.1.5 which we have discussed in another forum
('prayojaka jnAnam' term used by Anandagiri saying it forms the basis for
further sadhana culminating in aparokSha sAkShAtkAraH)
'tam vai etamAtmAnam viditvA .... for which the bhashyam here is:
nivRttamithyAjnAnAH santaH brAhmaNA...

>From the above expression  it would give one the impression that he is an
aparoksha jnani for we consider such a one alone who has shed his
mithyAjnAnam.  Anandagiri, quite consistently, for this particular
mantra/sentence says: siddham chet Atmavedanam anarthakam tarhi
vyutthAnaadi ityAshankya ApAtikavijnAnaphalamAha - nivRtteti.

So, Anandagiri is certain that this Br.up. mantra and the word
nivRttamithyAjnAnAH of the bhashyam  is decidedly about vividiShA sannyAsa,
taken by an aspirant who is possessed with parokSha jnanam.

> This is my understanding that arises by the study of the Acharya's
> bhashyas, the JMV of Vidyaranya, the sayings and writings of contemporary
> VedantaAcharyas who have been known to be adepts in samAdhi and are
> acclaimed as Jnanins.

Quite good.
> I see it like this :
> mahAvAkya with shrvaNa, etc. is sAdhana of GYAna and it results in lack of
> future bodies, i.e called videha-mukti(remember such is possible while
> having
> body and it is immediate to GYAna) by vidyAraNya. Here vAsanAxaya and
> manonAsha are needed but only to the extent which enables one to do
> shravaNa,
> etc. It doesn't expect ripen state of manonAsha and vAsanA-xaya.
> While anyone who practices mano-nAsha and vAsanA-xaya till they ripe, will
> get
> shAnti, etc.(which is called jIvanmukti by vidyAraNya).
> Here videha-mukti occurs just after GYAna without any other practice while
> jIvan-mukti needs extra practice of mano-nAsha and vAsanA-xaya.
> Now, if someone says that GYAnI needs samAdhi for jIvan-mukti, I will never
> oppose. I once hinted this in my previous post, I think. So, GYAna is
> enough to generate videha-mukti in this light. I was talking of this moxa.
> According to the previous definition, jIvanmukti is not direct result of
> a-GYAna-nAsha and hence is not same as kaivalya-mukti supported by bhAShya,
> etc.
> In sha~Nkara's view, if one does mahAvAkya-artha-vichAra, then he gets
> GYAna and that destroys a-GYAna. This lack of a-GYAna and karma-s(other
> than prArabdha) is termed as jIvanmukti. And his state after death, which
> is marked by end of  prArabdha-karma, avidyA-lesha and both bodies is
> termed as videha-mukti(same as kaivalya). Here jIvanmukti occurs with GYAna
> and videha-mukti is after death. No practices needed for any of them.
> This is the difference of definitions.

I see there is nothing to disagree with all that is said above.  But as I
suggested in my previous reply the kind of jivanmukti that follows
aparoksha jnanam in Shankara's bhashyam is to be seen as referring to that
jnani who has done all the necessary chittaigrAtAsampAdaka dhyAnam, of
course with the clear understanding of the mahAvaakyArtha, before aparoksha
jnanam.  One would agree with this in the light of the
'gItaashArstrAthavivekaH' portions I had cited before from Sri SSS's work.
And that is quite agreeable too when we see the various instances in the
gitAbhAShya itself.  What Vidyaranya is highlighting is that for someone
who has not done the requisite upAsana before aparoksha jnanam, the level
of jivanmukti is not going to be very desirable.  Shankara has not felt the
need to stress this point since for Him the adhikAri itself is the already
paripakkva one.  I think this way we can see that there is not any real
difference between the bhashyam and the JMV renderings.


> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list