[Advaita-l] What is Krishna's 'tattva'?
Durga Prasad Janaswamy
janaswami at gmail.com
Wed Nov 22 15:08:38 EST 2017
Thank you Venkatraghavanji for clear explanation.
-- durga prasad
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> Yes, the effect is non different from the cause. However it does not mean
> the cause is same as the effect.
> Please read the full bhAShya of 2.1.14.
> Especially: सर्वज्ञस्येश्वरस्यात्मभूते इवाविद्याकल्पिते ना
> मरूपेतत्त्वान्यत्वाभ्यामनिर्वचनीये संसारप्रपञ्चबीजभूतेसर्
> वज्ञस्येश्वरस्य मायाशक्तिः प्रकृतिरिति चश्रुतिस्मृत्योरभि
> लप्येते ; ताभ्यामन्यः सर्वज्ञ ईश्वरः,
> Why does Shankara say that names and forms are sarvajnasya Ishvarasya
> AtmabhUta (ie they are part of him), and later say sarvajna: Ishvara:
> tAbhyAm anya: (ie he is different from them)?
> *Thus, the effect is non different from the cause, but the cause is
> different from the effect.*
> एवमविद्याकृतनामरूपोपाध्यनुरोधीश्वरो भवति, व्योमेवघटकरकाद्
> युपाध्यनुरोधि ; स च स्वात्मभूतानेवघटाकाशस्थानीयानविद्याप्
> रत्युपस्थापितनामरूपकृतकार्यकरणसङ्घातानुरोधिनो जीवाख्यान्
> विज्ञानात्मनः प्रतीष्टेव्यवहारविषये ;
> *तदेवमविद्यात्मकोपाधिपरिच्छेदापेक्षमेवेश्वरस्येश्वरत्वं सर्वज्ञत्वंसर्वशक्तित्वं च, न परमार्थतो विद्यया अपास्तसर्वोपाधिस्वरूपेआत्मनि ईशित्रीशितव्यसर्वज्ञत्वादिव्यवहार उपपद्यते ; *
> He is saying that Ishvara's omniscience, etc are contingent upon the
> avidyAtmaka upAdhi, and without such an upAdhi there is no rulership,
> omniscience etc.
> To summarise, the same bhAShya passage says
> 1) the world is non different from Brahman
> 2) names and forms, which are as though conjured by ignorance, are the
> seeds of the world, and are part of Ishvara.
> 3) However Ishvara is different from them.
> 4) His omniscience depends on the upAdhi conjured up ignorance.
> 5) Free of upAdhi, there is neither ruler, nor ruled, nor omniscience etc.
> The only way these multiple statements can simultaneously hold true is if
> they are being said from two frames of reference. In vyavahAra, you have
> names and forms from ignorance, out of which this world appears. Such a
> world is non different from Brahman. However Ishvara, whose omniscience
> stems from an upAdhi conjured up by ignorance, is different from them.
> In paramArtha, there is no ignorance, thus no upAdhi, nor names and forms
> and no world. Talk of non difference with Brahman is absurd here, because
> there is only one entity, so there is neither difference nor non difference.
> It is knowledge of such a upAdhi rahita Brahman that is moksha, thus there
> is no point holding on to ananyatvam of kArya, look at the kArya kAraNa
> atIta vastu.
> On 22 Nov 2017 4:26 a.m., "Durga Prasad Janaswamy via Advaita-l" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> Hari Om,
>> Everything not Brahman is asat.
>> mithyA is non-difference from, i.e.non-existence in isolation from,
>> Brahma Sutra: 2.1.14
>> अभ्युपगम्य चेमं व्यावहारिकं भोक्तृभोग्यलक्षणं विभागम् ‘ स्याल्लोकवत्’ इति
>> परिहारोऽभिहितः ; न त्वयं विभागः परमार्थतोऽस्ति, यस्मात्तयोः
>> कार्यकारणयोरनन्यत्वमवगम्यते । कार्यमाकाशादिकं बहुप्रपञ्चं जगत् ; कारणं परं
>> ब्रह्म ; तस्मात्कारणात्परमार्थतोऽनन्यत्वं व्यतिरेकेणाभावः
>> कार्यस्यावगम्यते ।
>> Swami Gambhirananda's translation:
>> Assuming, for the sake of argument, an empirical difference between the
>> experiencer and the things experienced, the refutation (under the previous
>> aphorism) was advance by holding that "the distinction can well exist as
>> observed in common experience". But in reality, this difference does not
>> exist, since a non-difference between those cause and effect is
>> The effect is the universe, diversified as space etc. and the cause is the
>> supreme Brahman. In reality it is known that the effect has non-difference
>> from, i.e.non-existence in isolation from, that cause.
>> -- durga prasad
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> > Namaste Sri Sreenivasa Murthy,
>> > To clarify, all my email is saying that there is nothing beyond you -
>> > nothing outside, nothing inside. The methodology given in shruti - neti
>> > neti is also saying that. There is nothing to memorize, nothing to
>> > interiorize, only stuff to be given up. Every conception of Brahman is
>> > Brahman. Everything not Brahman is mithyA. Everything mithyA is to be
>> > up.
>> > Kind regards,
>> > Venkatraghavan
>> 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