[Advaita-l] Pramana for adhyaropa apavada

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Fri May 10 05:12:14 CDT 2013

On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:54 PM, <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

> **
> I understand that the injunctions to perform karma are required for citta
> suddhi of an aspirant in advaita. I'm only talking about descriptive
> statements. The statements that describe brahman as having form, performing
> action etc. are negated by statements that describe brahman as not having
> form, not performing action. Does it not make the former untrue though
> required for upasana?

By saying 'untrue' what is meant is 'not absolutely real'.  For that
matter, even the latter, the jnAnakANDa, is not absolutely real.  This is
because there is no real bondage and therefore no real effort to come out
of bondage and attain liberation. The entire Veda belongs to vyAvahArika
satya where alone the endeavor to attain any puruShArtha takes place.  The
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.22, while discussing the Moksha state, gives
the analogy of the deep sleep state, so that one can see the similarities
like absence of dvaita, duHkha, presence of uncreated sukha, freedom from
all upAdhis, etc:

अत्र पिता अपिता भवति, माता अमाता, लोका अलोका, देवा अदेवा, वेदा अवेदा । अत्र
स्तेनोऽस्तेनो भवति, भ्रूणहाऽअभ्रूणहा, चाण्डालोऽचाण्डालः, पौल्कसोऽपौल्कसः,
श्रमणोऽश्रमणः, तापसोऽतापसः, अनन्वागतं पुण्येन अनन्वागतं पापेन, तीर्णो हि
तदा सर्वाञ्छोकान्हृदयस्य भवति ।

[In this state a father is no father, a mother no mother, ……gods no gods, the
Vedas no Vedas.  In this state a thief is no thief, the killer of a noble
brahmaNa no killer, …a monk no monk, a hermit no hermit..This form of his
is untouched by good work and untouched by evil work, for he is then beyond
all the woes of his intellect.]

That shows that according to the Upanishad, the Veda is not absolutely
true, that is, it does not obtain in the Moksha state.

Also, the Taittiriya upanishad, 'satyam cha anRtam cha satyam abhavat' is
the pramANam for the three levels of satyam: pAramArthika satyam (Brahman),
vyAvahArika satyam (our daily world of experience) and prAtibhAsika satyam
(called anRtam in this mantra which refers to the rope-snake kind of
experiences in the day-to-day life.  Thus, this mantra takes into account
the entire gamut of human experience.



> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> ------------------------------
> *From: * V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Fri, 10 May 2013 12:38:38 +0530
> *To: *<rajaramvenk at gmail.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Advaita-l] Pramana for adhyaropa apavada
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:19 PM, <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>> **
>> Thanks for clarification. Does it not make those vedic statements that
>> describe attributes untrue? Why not interpret attribute denying statements
>> in such a way that the truth of attribute describing statements is not
>> compromised?
> Generally, this arguments holds against those who 'compromise' the
> 'abheda' vAkyas by giving convoluted interpretations/derivations to those
> sentences.  But in Advaita there is no compromise as such; all sentences
> have their place and are important there.  Nor are they untrue.  Shankara
> will be the last person to call vedic sentences untrue, being the champion
> of Vaidika sampradAya.That is why in the Brahma sutras we have a
> 'sarvApEkShA nyAya' based on the sutra: 3.4.26  where it is stated that
> 'all the karma practices detailed/enjoined in the karma portion of the veda
> are required for the jIva gaining samskAras that help him arrive at the
> Jnana sAdhana. '  In this light one can see that all the shAstrakRta
> adhyAropa is definitely needed for the benefit of the aspirant/jiva.  Thus
> there is no true compromise; in fact Shankara has said in the Isha
> bhashya:  'There is nothing in the Veda that is not worthy of practicing.'
> So, saguNa Ishwara has an indispensable role in the run up to moksha prApti.
> regards
> vs
>> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>> ------------------------------
>> *From: * V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> *Date: *Fri, 10 May 2013 11:30:33 +0530
>> *To: *<rajaramvenk at gmail.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Advaita-l] Pramana for adhyaropa apavada
>> In the Veda we find two sets of adhyAropa and apavAda.  The Veda
>> describes who or what a jIva is: someone with a body-mind complex,
>> kartRtva bhoktRtva, aspiring for puruShArtha, going to various lokas and
>> returning, remaining in samsAra, etc.  This is the adhyAropa.  We say so
>> because the Veda itself also says 'tat tvam asi, (chandogya upanishad which
>> is what kShetrajnam chApi mAm viddhi (13th chapter BG) is,  Brahmavid
>> brahmaiva, vimuktashcha vimuchyate...etc. These sentences show the entity
>> who was described in the above red highlighted lines as removed of the
>> jIvatva  totally and declare it as none other than Brahman.  So, by
>> arthApatti, it is held that the jivatva-describing parts are adhyAropa for
>> there is a jIvatva-denying, apavAda, sentences that are encountered later.
>> With respect to Ishwara too, the corresponding adhyaropa is the
>> description of an entity as related to the jIva-jagat, endowed with
>> attributes such a the cause of the world, jIva-jkagadantaryAmitvam,
>> karmaophala dAtRtvam etc.  Without exception, all the attributes of Brahman
>> are either dependent on jiva or the jagat.  That shows that Brahman cannot
>> afford to have any attribute as legitimately its own.  Such dependence on
>> something else to be called Iswara is not the ultimate reality the Shruti
>> presents . The Veda also describes the entity as bereft of all these
>> attributes as nirguNam niShkriyam, asangam, etc. where it is shown as
>> totally unrelated to anything.  If such denial sentences, apavAda, are
>> taken into account, it would have to be understood that the shruti wants to
>> present the Reality as One entity that is pure consciousness, existence,
>> infinite with nothing as a second.
>> It is based on the study of the Upanishads on such lines did the rule
>> 'adhyAropa apavAdAbhyAm niShprapancham prapanchyate' emerge in the
>> sampradAya, that Shankara cites in the Bh.Gita bhashyam, in addition to the
>> direct shruti vAkyams and yukti.  SampradAya is an additional strengthening
>> factor to present the system. The Bh.Gita and other texts too have the same
>> pattern described above.  Thus, the shruti is the pramANa for the
>> adhyAropa-apavAda nyAya.  That nyAya can be seen employed in worldly
>> affairs too in various forms.
>> regards
>> subrahmanian.v
>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:11 AM, <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hare Krishna. If we take as absolutely true the statements that describe
>>> qualities of ishwara, then we will have to interpret statements that negate
>>> those qualities as referring to material qualities as dualists do. On the
>>> other hand if we take as absolutely true the statements that describe
>>> brahman as without attributes of any kind, then we have to treat all
>>> descriptions of qualities as true only in the relative realm as advaita
>>> does. I would like to know if there is a basis for advaita approach other
>>> than this being an unbroken and ancient lineage.
>>> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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