[Advaita-l] Fwd: "time" as defined in Vedanta pariBAsha.

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Mon Dec 26 00:34:26 CST 2016

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Sri Chandramouliji ,
> As you are aware, there are several views of kAla within advaita darshana,
> and one of the views is kAla as avidyA's kArya. Sri DS Subbaramaiya in his
> work, Sri Dakshinamurtistotram volume 1, outlines the various views, both
> in advaita and other schools (Pages 324 to 340).
> Here is a summary:
> 1) kAla as an effect of avidyA - derived from the bhAshya sentence - एतेन
> दिक्कालमन: परमण्वादीनाम् कार्यत्वम् व्याख्यातम्  (BS 2.3.7)
> 2) kAla as avidyA - derived from the vAchArambhaNa shruti that the kArya is
> no different from the kAraNa. MadhusUdana sarasvati svAminah takes this
> view in siddhAnta bindu too  - कालस्तु अविद्यैव। तस्या एव सर्वाधारत्वादिति।
> 3) kAla as the relation between avidyA and Brahman - the one that Sri
> Subbu-ji referred to earlier.
> 4) kAla as the kriyAshakti of Ishvara
> 5) kAla as that taTastha lakshaNa of Brahman
> Its worth reading this portion of the book and the various quotes given by
> the author in this regard.
> Coming to your question of how the sUta samhita verse quoted should be
> interpreted. I believe in this case, the sUta samhita takes the view that
> kAla is indeed a relation between Brahman and avidyA. The entire 1.8
> chapter of the SS is worth studying for those interested in this topic.
> 1) Firstly, Ananthakrishna Sastrigal in his tamil translation of the Suta
> Samhita translates this phrase as the relationship between Atma and mAya.
> 2) Secondly SvAmi vidyAraNya in his commentary to the sUta samhita, the
> tAtparyadIpika, says in relation to another sloka, 1.8.22: द्विविधो हि काल:
> परम: अपरमश्चेति । शिवमायासम्बन्धरूप: परम इति ।
> 3) The sUta samhita itself (1.8.24 to be precise) distinguishes kAla, mAya
> and its products when it says:
> कालो माया च तत्कार्यम् शिवेनावृतम् ।
> शिव: कालानवच्छिन्न: कालतत्त्वम् यथा तथा ॥
> Time, mAya and its products are enveloped by Shiva (Atma). Just as
> everything is limited by time, except time itself, Shiva (Atma) is also not
> limited by time.  So here if the sUta samhita was taking the view that kAla
> is a product of mAya, there would be no need to list kAla, mAya and its
> products separately.

I think here kāla, like māyā, is implied to be anādi. Since such is the
case in this prakriyā, like māyā, kālā too, will remain free of undergoing
destruction in pralaya. It is one among the pravāha nityatva items.
However, it must be recognized that these belong to the avidyā avasthā
alone where the creation, sustenance, etc. go on.  In other words, it is
the vyāvahārika.

> However, here is a curiosity - SvAmi vidyAraNya makes a statement in the
> bhAshya for 1.8.24, which is worth considering. He says: मायाकार्यम् च माया
> च तत्सम्बन्धरूप: कालश्च त्रितयमपि शिवतत्त्वज्ञानेन विलीयत एव |

Here, the pāramārthika jnānam is meant by the 'śivatattva jnānam', which
sublates, bādhā-fies even māyā, kāla, etc. and only the Nirguṇa Brahman as
the advaita tattvam remains over.

> I could be mistaken, but here Swami VidyAraNya apparently seems to say that
> kAla is the sambandha between mAyakAryam and mAya, which is in apparent
> contradiction to what he said just two slokas previously शिवमायासम्बन्धरूप:
> परम इति. What does the तत् in तत्सम्बन्धरूप: काल: refer to? The most
> proximate nouns to which the sambandha can be attributed are mAyAkAryam and
> mAya, but that results in a contradiction with what he said in 1.8.22. It
> could be that here in 1.8.24 he is referring to apara kAla, whereas in
> 1.8.22 he was referring to para kAla.

In this sentence मायाकार्यम् च माया च तत्सम्बन्धरूप: कालश्च त्रितयमपि
शिवतत्त्वज्ञानेन विलीयत एव |

the 'tat' refers to māyā, recalling that kāla is also admitted as māyā-ātma
sambandha. The 'apara' kāla is the one that breaks down as kalpa, yuga,
samvatsara, māsa, etc. units of time, while the 'para' kāla is the one that
is the 'whole' when kāla is viewed as not these broken down units.
Vidyaranya explains in the commentary for 21 and 22 verses. That way, I
think there is no contradiction.

warm regards

> If anyone has any thoughts on why this is the case, I would be interested
> in knowing.
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
> On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:55 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,
> >
> >
> >
> > Reg  << The sUta samhita makes a reference to kAla as the sambandha
> > (relation)
> > between mAya and Atma (2-2-10) : कालो मायात्मसम्बन्धात् सर्वसाधारणात्मक:
> > >>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Would it be appropriate to understand from this quote kAla as the product
> > of mAya on its association (सम्बन्धात्) with Atman, mAya being inert and
> > upAdAna kArana ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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