[Advaita-l] Fwd: "time" as defined in Vedanta pariBAsha.
agnimile at gmail.com
Mon Dec 26 03:14:07 CST 2016
Thanks Subbuji, that makes sense.
On 26 Dec 2016 6:34 a.m., "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>> no different from the kAraNa. MadhusUdana sarasvati svAminah takes this
>> view in siddhAnta bindu too - कालस्तु अविद्यैव। तस्या एव
>> 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
>> 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
>> limited by time. So here if the sUta samhita was taking the view that
>> 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
>> 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
>> kAla is the sambandha between mAyakAryam and mAya, which is in apparent
>> contradiction to what he said just two slokas previously
>> परम इति. What does the तत् in तत्सम्बन्धरूप: काल: refer to? The most
>> proximate nouns to which the sambandha can be attributed are mAyAkAryam
>> 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.
>> On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:55 PM, H S Chandramouli <
>> hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> > 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
>> > of mAya on its association (सम्बन्धात्) with Atman, mAya being inert and
>> > upAdAna kArana ?
>> > Regards
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list