[Advaita-l] A question on PariNAma and vivarta

kuntimaddi sadananda kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 8 02:08:40 CST 2017

 I feel everyonemissed -  the relevance of question, in relation to the Ch. 13 of Panchadashi -entitled brahmanande aatmananda. 

The 13th chapter follows the 12th Chapter (!)-wherein Shree Vidyaranya discusses vishayaananda vs aatmananda,  in terms of loveoneself in relation to love for any thing else, quoting the maitreyee brahmana- aatmanastu sarvam priyam bhavati. In the 13th chapter Vidyaranya wants toprove aatmanada is same as brahmaananda - and to do that, he discusses thecreation from aatmaa - the pancha bhutas  to  shareeraas etc. 

 I am fullyaware of the parinmana and vivara  aspects - we are not discussing herethe general definitions but specifics in relation to the title of the chapterand its contents and in relation to Vedanta.  
I used the termfor parinaama as irreversible transformation which Vidyaranya  echoes later, and provides the example of milkbecoming curds. There he clearly separates milk-curd example from mud-pot or gold-ornament examples.  He does highlights  the irresponsibility aspect of thisparinaama in milk to curds. Ring form transforming to a chain form is parinama only but in thattransformation, gold does not really transform. Hence from gold point it isvivarta only. We are not concerned how one from of gold transforms to anotherform. The essence of gold-ear ring example (suverNamàkundalam) is as itrelates to vaachaarambhanam shruti, where - eka vijnaanaena sarva vijnaanambhaavti- applies.  We are nowhere interested in one form of goldtransforming into another form where parinaama applies. That discussion is irrelevantwith reference to this chapter also. Here we are only concerned with how aatma= Brahman. 

We can come up justifications why he lists gold-ring as parinaama  along with milk-curds in the beginning and later exhaustively analyzes differentiating them as vivarta and parinaama.  My word was 'I was puzzled by this'.  If you are happy with your explanations, that is fine. 
Here as Vidyaji  points out that we are onlydealing with upaadanana kaaraNa where sruti statement itself applies. Abhinna nimittaupaadana kaaraNam comes later with Ikshata statement. 

 Hari Om! Sadananda

      From: Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 To: kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
 Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 7:37 AM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] A question on PariNAma and vivarta
Namaste Sadaji,

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 3:50 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> I still have a problem in appreciating the parinaama vs vivarta in the
> examples provided.

First of all, let me state that I am surprised at your question, since you
are taking the parts of examples which are not meant. Second, having agreed
in toto to the first response by Nithinji, you have gone back to

Sada: Praveen ji - If you look carefully I did not really disagree. 


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list