[Advaita-l] Do not bring Sankhya into Suddha Sankara Advaita

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Tue May 21 11:32:02 CDT 2013

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Namaste
> Very Important Sankara Bhashya 4 -1 - 3 is saying Kasya Punarayam
> Aprabodhaha ? Iti Cet Yastvam Prucchasi Tasya Te Iti Vadaamaha. Nanu Aham
> Ishwara Evoktaha Shrutyaa. Yadyevam prati Buddho'si Naasti Kasyacid
> Aprabodhaha.
> 'Objection - To Whom does this non-waking belong?
> Answer - We reply 'To You who ask this question!'
> Objection -  But Sruti teaches that I am Ishwara Himself.
> Answer - If you are thus awakened Then non-waking belongs to none!' SSS
> Swamijis book Sankara Vedanta Meemamsa Bhashya Page 73.
> This above Bhashya is showing Adi Sankara thinks the Avidyaa that is
> Adhyaasa is SUBJECTIVE. The Teekaakaaras have not understood his teaching
> and they are teaching some OBJECTIVE Avidyaa attached to Brahma. That is
> wrong.

I understand and appreciate that the above sutra bhAShya is extremely
important for it covers in a nutshell the entire Vedanta prakriyA.
However, it is to be noted that in the above dialogue what is implied is
that when an aspirant attains to true knowledge of the self, there comes
about the realization that 'there are no others' in the pAramArthika.  In
that respect alone the avidyA of that aspirant is admitted to be
'subjective'.  But consider this other dialogue from Shankara in the Bh.G.B

//।अत्र आह -- सा अविद्या कस्य इति। यस्य दृश्यते तस्य एव। कस्य दृश्यते इति।
अत्र उच्यते -- 'अविद्या कस्य दृश्यते? इति प्रश्नः निरर्थकः। कथम्? दृश्यते
चेत् अविद्या' तद्वन्तमपि पश्यसि। न च तद्वति उपलभ्यमाने 'सा कस्य?' इति
प्रश्नो युक्तः। न हि गोमति उपलभ्यमाने 'गावः कस्य?' इति प्रश्नः अर्थवान्
भवति। ननु विषमो दृष्टान्तः। गवां तद्वतश्च प्रत्यक्षत्वात् तत्संबन्धोऽपि
प्रत्यक्ष प्रश्नो निरर्थकः। न तथा अविद्या तद्वांश्च प्रत्यक्षौ, यतः प्रश्नः
निरर्थकः स्यात्। अप्रत्यक्षेण अविद्यावता अविद्यासंबन्धे ज्ञाते, किं तव
स्यात्? अविद्यायाः अनर्थहेतुत्वात् परिहर्तव्या स्यात्। यस्य अविद्या, सः तां
परिहरिष्यति। ननु ममैव अविद्या। जानासि तर्हि अविद्यां तद्वन्तं च
आत्मानम्। जानामि,
न तु प्रत्यक्षेण। अनुमानेन चेत् जानासि, कथं संबन्धग्रहणम्? न हि तव ज्ञातुः
ज्ञेयभूतया अविद्यया तत्काले संबन्धः ग्रहीतुं शक्यते, अविद्याया विषयत्वेनैव
ज्ञातुः उपयुक्तत्वात्। न च ज्ञातुः अविद्यायाश्च संबन्धस्य यः ग्रहीता,
ज्ञानं च अन्यत् तद्विषयं संभवति; अनवस्थाप्राप्तेः। यदि ज्ञात्रापि
ज्ञेयसंबन्धो ज्ञायते, अन्यः ज्ञाता कल्प्यः स्यात्, तस्यापि अन्यः, तस्यापि
अन्यः इति अनवस्था अपरिहार्या। *यदि पुनः अविद्या ज्ञेया, अन्यद्वा ज्ञेयं
ज्ञेयमेव। तथा ज्ञातापि ज्ञातैव, न ज्ञेयं भवति।* यदा च एवम्,
अविद्यादुःखित्वाद्यैः न ज्ञातुः क्षेत्रज्ञस्य किञ्चित् दुष्यति।।

One can read the entire dialogue in the Alladi Mahadeva Sastry's
translation with great clarity on pages 332 onwards.  In the bhashyam we
see, in the highlighted portion, that Shankara is establishing that avidyA
is a viShaya, object, to the viShayI, the sAkShin, the knower.  It is in
this sense that I had said that avidyA is an object, a dharma of the
kShetra, the mind, and not an attribute of the subject, the viShayI, the

> If Sri SSS had studied the vivarana positions and understood them correctly
> > (as shown above) he would not have mistaken it to be taking a sAnkhyan
> line
> > and the 'bhAvarUpa' adjective really means: it does not have an
> independent
> > reality/existence.
> >
> > Clarification Statement - Swamiji SSS is not saying Vivarana is taking a
> Sankhyan line but I am saying that. I did not find his statement like this.

Then pl. change the header of the thread since it misleads the readers.

> But he is saying Adi Sankara never teaches Objective Avidyaa and He never
> teaches the Avidyaa is same as Ishwara's Maayaa also. He is against Bhaava
> Roopa Avidyaa.
> It has been shown on several occasions, including in the latest meet, that
Sri SSS has not understood what is meant by those who talk about 'bhAvarupa


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list