The Upanishad and Shankara hold 'tamas' darkness, to be a 'thing.'

95 views
Skip to first unread message

V Subrahmanian

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 1:02:52тАпAMAug 30
to A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta, Advaitin
In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.7 is the Antaryami Brahmanam where the Brahman is taught as the true nature of every being by portraying Brahman as the Antaryami, the inner controller, of every being. In the enumeration of several entities who are endowed with this Antaryami, the Upanishad says:

рдпрд╕реНрддрдорд╕рд┐ рддрд┐рд╖реНрдардВрд╕реНрддрдорд╕реЛрд╜рдиреНрддрд░реЛ┬ардпрдВ рддрдореЛ рди рд╡реЗрдж рдпрд╕реНрдп рддрдордГ рд╢рд░реАрд░рдВ рдпрд╕реНрддрдореЛрд╜рдиреНрддрд░реЛ рдпрдордпрддреНрдпреЗрд╖ рдд рдЖрддреНрдорд╛рдиреНрддрд░реНрдпрд╛рдореНрдпрдореГрддрдГ рее резрей рее
The one who stationed in tamas, the darkness principle, but whom the entity tamas does not know, for whom tamas is the body, who is the inner controller of tamas, this Immortal Antaryami is your Atman.
рдпрд╕реНрддреЗрдЬрд╕рд┐ рддрд┐рд╖реНрдардВрд╕реНрддреЗрдЬрд╕реЛрд╜рдиреНрддрд░реЛ рдпрдВ рддреЗрдЬреЛ рди рд╡реЗрдж рдпрд╕реНрдп рддреЗрдЬрдГ рд╢рд░реАрд░рдВ рдпрд╕реНрддреЗрдЬреЛрд╜рдиреНрддрд░реЛ рдпрдордпрддреНрдпреЗрд╖ рдд рдЖрддреНрдорд╛рдиреНрддрд░реНрдпрд╛рдореНрдпрдореГрдд рдЗрддреНрдпрдзрд┐рджреИрд╡рддрдордерд╛рдзрд┐рднреВрддрдореН рее резрек рее
This same is stated about Tejas, the light principle.┬а

рд╕рдорд╛рдирдордиреНрдпрддреН┬аред рдпреЛрд╜рдкреНрд╕реБ рддрд┐рд╖реНрдардиреН , рдЕрдЧреНрдиреМ, рдЕрдиреНрддрд░рд┐рдХреНрд╖реЗ, рд╡рд╛рдпреМ, рджрд┐рд╡рд┐, рдЖрджрд┐рддреНрдпреЗ, рджрд┐рдХреНрд╖реБ, рдЪрдиреНрджреНрд░рддрд╛рд░рдХреЗ, рдЖрдХрд╛рд╢реЗ, рдпрд╕реНрддрдорд╕реНрдпрд╛рд╡рд░рдгрд╛рддреНрдордХреЗ рдмрд╛рд╣реНрдпреЗ рддрдорд╕рд┐, рддреЗрдЬрд╕рд┐ рддрджреНрд╡рд┐рдкрд░реАрддреЗ рдкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд╢рд╕рд╛рдорд╛рдиреНрдпреЗ тАФ рдЗрддреНрдпреЗрд╡рдордзрд┐рджреИрд╡рддрдореН рдЕрдиреНрддрд░реНрдпрд╛рдорд┐рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдВ рджрд░реНрд╢рдирдВ рджреЗрд╡рддрд╛рд╕реБ┬аред рдЕрде рдЕрдзрд┐рднреВрддрдВ рднреВрддреЗрд╖реБ рдмреНрд░рд╣реНрдорд╛рджрд┐рд╕реНрддрдореНрдмрдкрд░реНрдпрдиреНрддреЗрд╖реБ рдЕрдиреНрддрд░реНрдпрд╛рдорд┐рджрд░реНрд╢рдирдордзрд┐рднреВрддрдореН рее
Shankara says in the commentary: tamas, the outside (physical) darkness, is of the nature of AvaraNa, enveloping.┬а He specifies Tejas as opposed to Tamas: tadviparIta.┬а┬а
Thus for the Upanishad and Shankara, tamas, the principle of darkness (not the inner tamas of ignorance, hence Shankara specifies it as baahya, outside the body) is a physical 'thing.'┬а It is not just abhAva of tejas.┬а┬а
Sureshwaracharya in the Vartika for the above clarifies:

рддреЗрдЬрдГ рд╕рд╛рдорд╛рдиреНрдпрдорд╛рддреНрд░рдВ рд╕реНрдпрд╛рддреНрддрджрд╛рдзрд┐рд╖реНрдард╛рддреГрджреЗрд╡рддрд╛ редред
рдПрд╡рдВ рддрдорд╕реНрдпрдкрд┐ рдЬреНрдЮреЗрдпрдВ рдХреНрд╖реЗрддреНрд░рдЬреНрдЮрд╢реНрдЪрд╛рд╜рд╜рддреНрдорд╕рдВрдЬреНрдЮрд┐рддрдГ редред рекрем редред┬а ┬а┬а

There is a presiding deity for Tejas as well as one for Tamas (darkness).
Thus it is settled beyond doubt that the Tamas, darkness, is a 'thing.'
It is well known that the inner darkness, ignorance, avidya, is also called tamas and that also is a 'thing' as per the Bh.Gita:

рдЬреНрдпреЛрддрд┐рд╖рд╛рдордкрд┐┬арддрдЬреНрдЬреНрдпреЛрддрд┐рд╕реНрддрдорд╕рдГ┬ардкрд░рдореБрдЪреНрдпрддреЗ┬аред
рдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирдВ┬ардЬреНрдЮреЗрдпрдВ┬ардЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирдЧрдореНрдпрдВ┬ард╣реГрджрд┐┬ард╕рд░реНрд╡рд╕реНрдп┬ард╡рд┐рд╖реНрдард┐рддрдореН┬арее резрен рее┬а ┬а13.17.┬а Brahman is beyond┬а darkness of ignorance.┬а Shankara says:
рддрдорд╕рдГ┬ардЕрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирд╛рддреН рдкрд░рдореН рдЕрд╕реНрдкреГрд╖реНрдЯрдореН рдЙрдЪреНрдпрддреЗ┬аред┬а darkness = ajnAnam.┬а
Thus the darkness that is ignorance is a thing because it produces effects.┬а This is yet another evidence for a bhAvarUpa ajnAna/avidya in the Upanishad, Gita, Shankara and Sureshwara.┬а
In the following Shankara says darkness of night produces aviveka, non-discrimination, since it is of the nature of tamas.┬а This is exactly what Shankara has said in the Adhyasa Bhashya:┬а itaretara avivekena.┬а Since according to Shankara this aviveka is an effect produced by tamas, ignorance, the cause is also to be stated and Shankara does that in the words mithyAjnana.┬а The nimitta kAranam, aviveka, is stated and the upAdana kAraNam for that is also stated: mithyA ajnAna which is the upAdaana (by the word nimitta).┬а As stated already, the word nimitta has the general connotation of a hetu, kAraNam.┬а ┬а

рд╢реНрд░реАрдорджреНрднрдЧрд╡рджреНрдЧреАрддрд╛рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореНрджреНрд╡рд┐рддреАрдпреЛрд╜рдзреНрдпрд╛рдпрдГрд╢реНрд▓реЛрдХ ремреп┬а- рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореН

тАжтАжтАжрдпрд╛ рдирд┐рд╢рд╛ рд░рд╛рддреНрд░рд┐рдГ рд╕рд░реНрд╡рдкрджрд╛рд░реНрдерд╛рдирд╛рдорд╡рд┐рд╡реЗрдХрдХрд░реА┬арддрдордГрд╕реНрд╡рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡рд╛рддреН рд╕рд░реНрд╡рднреВрддрд╛рдирд╛рдВ рд╕рд░реНрд╡реЗрд╖рд╛рдВ рднреВрддрд╛рдирд╛рдореН ред рдХрд┐рдВ рддрддреН рдкрд░рдорд╛рд░реНрдерддрддреНрддреНрд╡рдВ рд╕реНрдерд┐рддрдкреНрд░рдЬреНрдЮрд╕реНрдптАжтАжтАж


рдмреНрд░рд╣реНрдорд╕реВрддреНрд░рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореНрджреНрд╡рд┐рддреАрдпреЛрд╜рдзреНрдпрд╛рдпрдГрдкреНрд░рдердордГ рдкрд╛рджрдГ┬ард╕реВрддреНрд░рдореН реиреи┬а- рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореН

тАжтАжтАжред рддрддреНрд░ рдХреБрдд рдПрд╡ рд╕реГрд╖реНрдЯрд┐рдГ рдХреБрддреЛ рд╡рд╛ рд╣рд┐рддрд╛рдХрд░рдгрд╛рджрдпреЛ рджреЛрд╖рд╛рдГ ред рдЕрд╡рд┐рджреНрдпрд╛рдкреНрд░рддреНрдпреБрдкрд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрд┐рддрдирд╛рдорд░реВрдкрдХреГрддрдХрд╛рд░реНрдпрдХрд░рдгрд╕рдЩреНрдШрд╛рддреЛрдкрд╛рдзреНрдпрд╡рд┐рд╡реЗрдХрдХреГрддрд╛ рд╣рд┐ рднреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрд┐рд░реНрд╣рд┐рддрд╛рдХрд░рдгрд╛рджрд┐рд▓рдХреНрд╖рдгрдГ рд╕рдВрд╕рд╛рд░рдГ, рди рддреБ рдкрд░рдорд╛рд░реНрдерддреЛрд╜рд╕реНрддреАрддреНрдпрд╕рдХреГрджрд╡реЛрдЪрд╛рдо тАФ


рд╢реНрд░реАрдорджреНрднрдЧрд╡рджреНрдЧреАрддрд╛рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореНрдЪрддреБрд░реНрджрд╢реЛрд╜рдзреНрдпрд╛рдпрдГрд╢реНрд▓реЛрдХ рео┬а- рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореН

тАжтАжтАжрддрдордГ рддреГрддреАрдпрдГ рдЧреБрдгрдГ рдЕрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирдЬрдореН рдЕрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирд╛рддреН рдЬрд╛рддрдореН рдЕрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирдЬрдВ рд╡рд┐рджреНрдзрд┐ рдореЛрд╣рдирдВ рдореЛрд╣рдХрд░рдореН рдЕрд╡рд┐рд╡реЗрдХрдХрд░рдВ рд╕рд░реНрд╡рджреЗрд╣рд┐рдирд╛рдВ рд╕рд░реНрд╡реЗрд╖рд╛рдВ рджреЗрд╣рд╡рддрд╛рдореН ред┬а


рд╢реНрд░реАрдорджреНрднрдЧрд╡рджреНрдЧреАрддрд╛рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореНрддреНрд░рдпреЛрджрд╢реЛрд╜рдзреНрдпрд╛рдпрдГрд╢реНрд▓реЛрдХ реи┬а- рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрдореН

тАжтАжтАжрдЪреЗрддреН , рди ; рдЕрд╡рд┐рджреНрдпрд╛рдпрд╛рдГ рддрд╛рдорд╕рддреНрд╡рд╛рддреН ред рддрд╛рдорд╕реЛ рд╣рд┐ рдкреНрд░рддреНрдпрдпрдГ, рдЖрд╡рд░рдгрд╛рддреНрдордХрддреНрд╡рд╛рддреН рдЕрд╡рд┐рджреНрдпрд╛ рд╡рд┐рдкрд░реАрддрдЧреНрд░рд╛рд╣рдХрдГ, рд╕рдВрд╢рдпреЛрдкрд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдХреЛ рд╡рд╛, рдЕрдЧреНрд░рд╣рдгрд╛рддреНрдордХреЛ рд╡рд╛ ; рд╡рд┐рд╡реЗрдХрдкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд╢рднрд╛рд╡реЗ рддрджрднрд╛рд╡рд╛рддреН , рддрд╛рдорд╕реЗ рдЪ рдЖрд╡рд░рдгрд╛рддреНрдордХреЗ рддрд┐рдорд┐рд░рд╛рджрд┐рджреЛрд╖реЗ рд╕рддрд┐ рдЕрдЧреНрд░рд╣рдгрд╛рджреЗрдГ рдЕрд╡рд┐рджреНрдпрд╛рддреНрд░рдпрд╕реНрдп рдЙрдкрд▓рдмреНрдзреЗрдГ рее тАжтАжтАж

Om Tat Sat

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 1:30:26тАпAMAug 30
to Advaitin, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Namaste Subbu ji.

Indeed it is a settled principle of Advaita vedAnta that the physical darkness is not merely absence of light. It has been discussed in great detail in texts.

Here one important thing which can be mentioned is the following - the creation of darkness is not through panchabhUtAs but it is directly from mAyA, immediate and spontaneous. Chitsukhi mentions it following VivaraNa. (ChitsukhI - page 54 - https://archive.org/details/chitsukhiyogindrananda/page/n97/mode/2up)

Further, it does appear prima facie a bit hard to a modern educated person to accept that darkness is some material thing like table and chair. I also had struggled a lot with this concept.

However, due analysis resolves the issue.

Further, the drishTi-srishTi-vAda makes it crystal clear to understand that darkness is triguNAtmaka avidyA-kArya.

The darkness that we see in dream is not abhAva of dream-light. Dream-darkness is as much real/tangible/illusory as is dream-light. Both are same.┬а

Waking being same as dream, waking-darkness has to be on equal footing as waking-light, which inc turn has to be on equal footing with dream-light/darkness.

That is why one of the most useful feature used in VedAnta to decide the mithyAtva is that of drishyatva. BhAshyakAra proves in MK 1.2.

рдЬрд╛рдЧреНрд░рджреНрджреГрд╢реНрдпрд╛рдирд╛рдВ рднрд╛рд╡рд╛рдирд╛рдВ рд╡реИрддрдереНрдпрдорд┐рддрд┐ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдЬреНрдЮрд╛ ред┬а
рджреГрд╢реНрдпрддреНрд╡рд╛рджрд┐рддрд┐ рд╣реЗрддреБрдГ ред┬а
рд╕реНрд╡рдкреНрдирджреГрд╢реНрдпрднрд╛рд╡рд╡рджрд┐рддрд┐ рджреГрд╖реНрдЯрд╛рдиреНрддрдГ ред┬а

It is such a powerful anumAna presented by AchArya. It has the potential to transform our daily living completely into a meditative life.

Is it drishya? Yes? Then, it is mithyA. On the analogy of dream.

Darkness is seen, just as the darkness of dream is seen. And is hence mithyA and is hence avidyA-kArya.

In fact, correct me if I am wrong, it is only the naiyAyikAs who should be interested in this discussion of abhAvatva of darkness. For the vedAntI, even if darkness is absence of light, it does not make even one Paisa of difference. Because we hold all vishesha-abhAva to be triguNAtmaka. So, even if darkness is light-abhAva, it still is triguNAtmaka avidyA-kArya just as pot-abhAva is avidyA-kArya!!

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.

H S Chandramouli

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 3:37:04тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,

Reg // Further, it does appear prima facie a bit hard to a modern educated person to accept that darkness is some material thing like table and chair //.

There is a difference. Table and chair are pramAtru┬аbhasya while darkness is sAkshi bhAsya. A modern educated person is probably mostly unaware of the difference.

Regards

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBC3j0%2BXX_G63CE9FOAngzPNTO8apVwoYsQVMdEX4FGEiw%40mail.gmail.com.

Kalyan

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 3:41:25тАпAMAug 30
to advaitin
Respected Sudhanshuji, Namaste

I do not have any opinion on the mUlAvidyA debate. But this one caught my attention -

"Indeed it is a settled principle of Advaita vedAnta that the physical darkness is not merely absence of light. It has been discussed in great detail in texts."

How does this correlate with our common observation (and also Science) that darkness is just absence of light?

Just turn off the lights in a room at night, and the room is dark! Or, did I misunderstand your above statement?

Best Regards

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 3:54:44тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Namaste Chandramouli ji.

I cannot readily recollect if the sAkshi-bhAsyatva of tamas is mentioned anywhere explicitly. If you can give a citation, I will be grateful.

As such, tamas having rUpa is accepted. So, what objection┬аcan probably arise against its pramAtri-vedyatva?

Namaste Kalyani ji.

argument 1
the non-abhAvatva of darkness is proved by anumAna:┬арддрдордГ рд╢рдмреНрдж рд╡рд╛рдЪреНрдпреЛ рдирд╛рднрд╛рд╡рдГ, рд╕реНрд╡рдорд╛рддреНрд░рд╡реГрддреНрддрд┐рдзрд░реНрдордкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд░рдХрдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдпреЛрдЧрд┐рдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирд╛рдЬрдиреНрдпрдкреНрд░рддреНрдпрдХреНрд╖рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрддреНрд╡рд╛рджреН, рдШрдЯрд╡рддреНред┬а┬а

tamas is not abhAva, on account of being swa-mAtra-vritti-dharma-prakAraka, being pratiyogI-jnAna-ajanya, and being pratyaksha-vishaya, just like a pot.

argument 2
Also, if tamas is an abhava,then you will not be able to describe its pratiyogI.

argument-3

if one were to argue that darkness is not vishesha-abhAva but nirvishesha-abhAva, then it is contradicted by the presence of vishesha "black-ness".

I have merely outlined the arguments. For detailed explanation,┬аhttps://sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/what-is-darkness.pdf can be seen.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.┬а

H S Chandramouli

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 3:59:33тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,

Reg // So, what objection┬аcan probably arise against its pramAtri-vedyatva? //,

Because,┬аfor sense of sight to be functional, presence of light is compulsory.

Regards

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

Kalyan

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 4:01:13тАпAMAug 30
to advaitin
Sudhanshuji, Namaste

Your explanation is too complicated for me to understand.┬а

If this is fine, please consider the specific example of turning off lights in a room at night.┬а

Best Regards

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 4:01:41тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com
Namaste Chandramouli ji.
┬а
Reg // So, what objection┬аcan probably arise against its pramAtri-vedyatva? //,

Because,┬аfor sense of sight to be functional, presence of light is compulsory.

Nice point. I will check and get back on the issue after due application of mind.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.┬а

Raghav Kumar

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 6:55:23тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com
Most modern educated people don't know that even the vacuum of space is not "absence of matter" , it is a material entity like a chair or table - vacuum is a throbbing ocean of transient particles.

An introduction to that idea of vacuum of space is not an abhAva , what to speak of darkness seen on earth....

рд▓реЛрдХреЗрд╢

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 7:15:32тАпAMAug 30
to advaitin
рдирдорд╕реНрддреЗ рд╢реНрд░реАрдордиреН рд╕реБрдзрд╛рдВрд╢реБ┬а

> Further, it does appear prima facie a bit hard to a modern educated person to accept that darkness is some material thing like table and chair. I also had struggled a lot with this concept.

рдПрд╖ рдирд┐рд░реНрдгрдпрдГ рднрд╡рддрд╛ рдХреБрддрдГ рдХреГрддрдГ рдпрддреН рддрдо рдЗрддрд┐ рдЕрджреНрд╡реИрддрд╕рд┐рджреНрдзрд╛рдиреНрддреЗ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рдВ рд╡рд╕реНрддреБ (material thing) рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗ ?┬а┬а

рд╕реНрд╡рд╕реНрддрд┐рд░рд╕реНрддреБ

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 7:33:37тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
рд╣рд░рд┐ реР рд▓реЛрдХреЗрд╢рд╡рд░реНрдп,

рддрдорд╕реЛ рднрд╛рд╡рд░реВрдкрддреНрд╡рдорджреНрд╡реИрддрд╡реЗрджрд╛рдиреНрддреЗ рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрд╡рдЪрдиреИрдГ рдкреБрдирд╢реНрдЪ рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдгреИрд░рдкрд┐ рд╕реБрд╖реНрдареБ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рд╖реНрдард┐рддрдВ рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗред рднрд╛рд╖реНрдпрд╡рдЪрдирд╛рдирд┐ рддреБ рдЕрддреНрд░реИрд╡ рд╕реБрдмреНрд░рд╣реНрдордгреНрдпрдорд╡рд░реНрдпреИрдГ рдкреНрд░рдердорд╕рдВрджреЗрд╢реЗ рдкреНрд░рджрддреНрддрд╛рдирд┐ред рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдгрд╛рдирд╛рдВ рдЬрд┐рдЬреНрдЮрд╛рд╕рд╛ рдпрджрд┐ рднрд╡рддреНрд╕реБ рд╡рд┐рджреНрдпрддреЗ рддрд░реНрд╣рд┐ рд╡рд┐рд╡рд░рдгрд╛рджрдпреЛ рдЧреНрд░рдиреНрдерд╛ рднрд╡рджреНрднрд┐рд░рд╡рд▓реЛрдХрдиреАрдпрд╛рдГред ┬а ┬а

рдЕрддреНрд░реЗрджрдВ рдЙрд▓реНрд▓реЗрдЦрдиреАрдпрдВ рдпрддреН рди рдХреЗрд╡рд▓реЗ рдЕрджреНрд╡реИрддрд╡реЗрджрд╛рдиреНрддреЗ рдкрд░рдВ рддреБ рдорд╛рдзреНрд╡рд╛рдЪрд╛рд░реНрдпрд╛рдгрд╛рдВ рд░рд╛рдорд╛рдиреБрдЬрд╛рдЪрд╛рд░реНрдпрд╛рдгрд╛рдВ рдЪрд╛рдкрд┐ рдорддреЗ рддрдорд╕реЛ рднрд╛рд╡рд░реВрдкрддреНрд╡рдВ рд╕реНрд╡реАрдХреГрддрдореЗрд╡ рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗред ┬а

рд╕реБрдзрд╛рдВрд╢реБ┬а

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.


--
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,
Pune

sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com

рд▓реЛрдХреЗрд╢

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 8:18:24тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta

рд╢реНрд░реАрдордиреН рд╕реБрдзрд╛рдВрд╢реБрд╡рд░реНрдп

рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡рдВ рддрдорд╕ рдЕрд╡рд╢реНрдпрдВ рд╕реНрд╡реАрдХреГрддрдВ рд╕реНрдпрд╛рддреН ред рди рддрддреНрд░ рдЖрдкрддреНрддрд┐рдВ рдХрд░реЛрдорд┐ ред рдХрд┐рдиреНрддреБ рднрд╡рддрд╛ рдЙрдХреНрддрдВ рдпрддреН рддрдордГ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рдВ рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗ ред рдПрддрд╕реНрдп рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдгрдВ рди рдкрд╢реНрдпрд╛рдорд┐ ред

рдпрд╛рд╡рддреН рдордо рдЕрд╡рдЧрдордирдВ рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗ рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡рдВ рдирд╛рдо рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рдВ рди ред рд╕реБрдЦрдордкрд┐ рдПрдХ рднрд╛рд╡рдГ ред рд░рд╛рдЧрджреНрд╡реЗрд╖реЛрддреНрд╕рд╛рд╣рдорд╛рдирд╣рд░реНрд╖рд╛рджрд┐ рдЕрдкрд┐ рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡реЗрди рд╕реНрд╡реАрдХреНрд░реАрдпрддреЗ рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐ рддрд╛рдирд┐ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рд╡рд╕реНрддреВрдирд┐ рди рд╕рдиреНрддрд┐ ред

реР


You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/advaitin/Nh5bN-hr8XA/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBBqxAWJDdjk3U3H5cx%2BjH7tyeA%3DrrBzM2Zc3ckr5g30-g%40mail.gmail.com.

Lokesh Sharma

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 8:18:40тАпAMAug 30
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta

рд╢реНрд░реАрдордиреН рд╕реБрдзрд╛рдВрд╢реБрд╡рд░реНрдп

рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡рдВ рддрдорд╕ рдЕрд╡рд╢реНрдпрдВ рд╕реНрд╡реАрдХреГрддрдВ рд╕реНрдпрд╛рддреН ред рди рддрддреНрд░ рдЖрдкрддреНрддрд┐рдВ рдХрд░реЛрдорд┐ ред рдХрд┐рдиреНрддреБ рднрд╡рддрд╛ рдЙрдХреНрддрдВ рдпрддреН рддрдордГ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рдВ рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗ ред рдПрддрд╕реНрдп рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдгрдВ рди рдкрд╢реНрдпрд╛рдорд┐ ред

рдпрд╛рд╡рддреН рдордо рдЕрд╡рдЧрдордирдВ рд╡рд░реНрддрддреЗ рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡рдВ рдирд╛рдо рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рдВ рди ред рд╕реБрдЦрдордкрд┐ рдПрдХ рднрд╛рд╡рдГ ред рд░рд╛рдЧрджреНрд╡реЗрд╖реЛрддреНрд╕рд╛рд╣рдорд╛рдирд╣рд░реНрд╖рд╛рджрд┐ рдЕрдкрд┐ рднрд╛рд╡рддреНрд╡реЗрди рд╕реНрд╡реАрдХреНрд░реАрдпрддреЗ рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐ рддрд╛рдирд┐ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдерд┐рд╡рд╡рд╕реНрддреВрдирд┐ рди рд╕рдиреНрддрд┐ ред

реР


V Subrahmanian

unread,
Aug 30, 2024, 8:47:02тАпAMAug 30
to A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta, Advaitin, Lokesh Sharma
There is a interesting observation by the┬а Bhashyakara in this Brihadaranyaka┬а upanishad section:┬а 1.4.2:


рд▓реЛрдХреЗ рд╣рд┐ рдиреИрдорд┐рддреНрддрд┐рдХрд╛рдирд╛рдВ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдпрд╛рдгрд╛рдВ рдирд┐рдорд┐рддреНрддрднреЗрджреЛрд╜рдиреЗрдХрдзрд╛ рд╡рд┐рдХрд▓реНрдкреНрдпрддреЗ┬аред рддрдерд╛ рдирд┐рдорд┐рддреНрддрд╕рдореБрдЪреНрдЪрдпрдГ┬аред рддреЗрд╖рд╛рдВ рдЪ рд╡рд┐рдХрд▓реНрдкрд┐рддрд╛рдирд╛рдВ рд╕рдореБрдЪреНрдЪрд┐рддрд╛рдирд╛рдВ рдЪ рдкреБрдирд░реНрдЧреБрдгрд╡рджрдЧреБрдгрд╡рддреНрддреНрд╡рдХреГрддреЛ рднреЗрджреЛ рднрд╡рддрд┐┬аред рддрджреНрдпрдерд╛ тАФ рд░реВрдкрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рди рдПрд╡ рддрд╛рд╡рдиреНрдиреИрдорд┐рддреНрддрд┐рдХреЗ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдпреЗ┬арддрдорд╕рд┐┬ард╡рд┐рдирд╛рд▓реЛрдХреЗрди рдЪрдХреНрд╖реВрд░реВрдкрд╕рдиреНрдирд┐рдХрд░реНрд╖реЛ рдирдХреНрддрдЮреНрдЪрд░рд╛рдгрд╛рдВ рд░реВрдкрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдиреЗ рдирд┐рдорд┐рддреНрддрдВ рднрд╡рддрд┐ ; рдорди рдПрд╡ рдХреЗрд╡рд▓рдВ рд░реВрдкрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирдирд┐рдорд┐рддреНрддрдВ рдпреЛрдЧрд┐рдирд╛рдореН ; рдЕрд╕реНрдорд╛рдХрдВ рддреБ рд╕рдиреНрдирд┐рдХрд░реНрд╖рд╛рд▓реЛрдХрд╛рднреНрдпрд╛рдВ рд╕рд╣ рддрдерд╛рджрд┐рддреНрдпрдЪрдиреНрджреНрд░рд╛рджреНрдпрд╛рд▓реЛрдХрднреЗрджреИрдГ рд╕рдореБрдЪреНрдЪрд┐рддрд╛ рдирд┐рдорд┐рддреНрддрднреЗрджрд╛ рднрд╡рдиреНрддрд┐ ; рддрдерд╛рд▓реЛрдХрд╡рд┐рд╢реЗрд╖рдЧреБрдгрд╡рджрдЧреБрдгрд╡рддреНрддреНрд╡реЗрди рднреЗрджрд╛рдГ рд╕реНрдпреБрдГ┬аред

He says for the perception of tamas, darkness, the nocturnal beings like the owl are able to contact darkness by their eyes. For Yogis┬аeven the eye┬а is not necessary; just the mind can apprehend a formed object. For others, normal people, the organ contact, light are all required.┬а (This is especially interesting in the wake of Sri Chandramouli ji's observation.)
┬а
(I have not checked the Madhavananda translation).

In Br.Up. Bhashyam 2.1.12 yet another interesting observation:

рдЫрд╛рдпрд╛рдпрд╛рдВ рдмрд╛рд╣реНрдпреЗ┬арддрдорд╕рд┐┬ардЕрдзреНрдпрд╛рддреНрдордВ рдЪ рдЖрд╡рд░рдгрд╛рддреНрдордХреЗрд╜рдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдиреЗ рд╣реГрджрд┐ рдЪ рдПрдХрд╛ рджреЗрд╡рддрд╛, рддрд╕реНрдпрд╛ рд╡рд┐рд╢реЗрд╖рдгрдореН тАФ рдореГрддреНрдпреБрдГ ; рдлрд▓рдВ рд╕рд░реНрд╡рдВ рдкреВрд░реНрд╡рд╡рддреН , рдореГрддреНрдпреЛрд░рдирд╛рдЧрдордиреЗрди рд░реЛрдЧрд╛рджрд┐рдкреАрдбрд╛рднрд╛рд╡реЛ рд╡рд┐рд╢реЗрд╖рдГ рее
Baahya tamas is darkness.┬а And in the Ajnana, that is deluding/enveloping, in the mind, there is one Devataa.┬а ┬аShankara is accepting Ajnana too to be a physical entity that has the mind for its locus.┬а The Bh.Gita 13th chapter holds iccha, dvesha, sukham, duhkham, etc. to be kshetram, prakriti.┬а Thus the contents of the mind, though not contactable by the organs, but admitted to be sakshi vedyam, are also treated as kshetram, product of prakriti.┬а The antahkaranam is admitted to be a product of the pancha bhutas, apanchikrita, sattvamsha samashthi.┬а There is the famous Br.Up. 1.5.3 mantra: рдХрд╛рдордГ рд╕рдЩреНрдХрд▓реНрдкреЛ┬ард╡рд┐рдЪрд┐рдХрд┐рддреНрд╕рд╛┬ард╢реНрд░рджреНрдзрд╛рд╢реНрд░рджреНрдзрд╛ рдзреГрддрд┐рд░рдзреГрддрд┐рд░реНрд╣реНрд░реАрд░реНрдзреАрд░реНрднреАрд░рд┐рддреНрдпреЗрддрддреНрд╕рд░реНрд╡рдВ рдорди рдПрд╡ - all contents of the mind are grouped as manas itself.┬а Vritti-Vrittimatorabhedah.┬а
In this Bhashya (that I had cited already in the first post of this thread) Br.Up. 3.7.12:


рд╕рдорд╛рдирдордиреНрдпрддреН┬аред рдпреЛрд╜рдкреНрд╕реБ рддрд┐рд╖реНрдардиреН , рдЕрдЧреНрдиреМ, рдЕрдиреНрддрд░рд┐рдХреНрд╖реЗ, рд╡рд╛рдпреМ, рджрд┐рд╡рд┐, рдЖрджрд┐рддреНрдпреЗ, рджрд┐рдХреНрд╖реБ, рдЪрдиреНрджреНрд░рддрд╛рд░рдХреЗ, рдЖрдХрд╛рд╢реЗ, рдпрд╕реНрддрдорд╕реНрдпрд╛рд╡рд░рдгрд╛рддреНрдордХреЗ рдмрд╛рд╣реНрдпреЗ┬арддрдорд╕рд┐,┬арддреЗрдЬрд╕рд┐ рддрджреНрд╡рд┐рдкрд░реАрддреЗ рдкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд╢рд╕рд╛рдорд╛рдиреНрдпреЗ тАФ рдЗрддреНрдпреЗрд╡рдордзрд┐рджреИрд╡рддрдореН рдЕрдиреНрддрд░реНрдпрд╛рдорд┐рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдВ рджрд░реНрд╢рдирдВ рджреЗрд╡рддрд╛рд╕реБ┬аред рдЕрде рдЕрдзрд┐рднреВрддрдВ рднреВрддреЗрд╖реБ рдмреНрд░рд╣реНрдорд╛рджрд┐рд╕реНрддрдореНрдмрдкрд░реНрдпрдиреНрддреЗрд╖реБ рдЕрдиреНрддрд░реНрдпрд╛рдорд┐рджрд░реНрд╢рдирдордзрд┐рднреВрддрдореН рее┬а┬а┬а
The Upanishad and the Bhashya group all the entities stated above - agni, antariksa, vaayu, .....tamas and its opposite, tejas - as Adhidaivam - Cosmos.┬а┬а

Monier Williams 1872┬а

рдЕрдзрд┐рджреИрд╡ рдЕрдзрд┐-рджреИрд╡ or рдЕрдзрд┐-рджреИрд╡рдд, рдЕрдореН, n,

a presiding or tutelary deity/the supreme deity/the divine agent operating in material objects.

┬аThus we see that tamas, darkness, is grouped under material objects.┬а

(Just to keep all interested in the thread, I am avoiding reply in Sanskrit).

warm regards
subbu┬а







>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,
>> Pune
>>
>> sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
>> Google Groups "advaitin" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/advaitin/Nh5bN-hr8XA/unsubscribe.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
>> advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBBqxAWJDdjk3U3H5cx%2BjH7tyeA%3DrrBzM2Zc3ckr5g30-g%40mail.gmail.com

putran M

unread,
Aug 31, 2024, 3:38:54тАпAMAug 31
to adva...@googlegroups.com
Namaskaram Kalyan-ji,


How does this correlate with our common observation (and also Science) that darkness is just absence of light?


Just a thought in connection with this example: The Light, the Self, is constant and unchanging, and is satya even when outward consciousness is not manifest (as in sleep). So no question of turning off the light. It is a matter of explaining the cognitions of variation, change and limits that appear┬аin the Light; and the explanation is that something else (i.e. darkness) is obstructing and causing the appearance of duality in that non-dual Light. This explanation is valid in the very standpoint in which the cognized effects are posited. However while the Light is affirmed as the adhishtanam Sat in all standpoints of knowledge, this darkness is asat in the standpoint of pure Light, hence the darkness and its projected effect, the differentiated world, are posited only as mithya, appearance, superimposition.

As another practical analogy:┬а imagine a tiger chasing and you running in fear. However, all you are seeing are vrittis in the mind. Here the mind is the causal substrate - the darkness or prism that obstructs and causes projection of unreal tiger. It must be affirmed as the intermediary linking you the pure Consciousness to the tiger duality.

Thus Self is divided into seer, the intermediate darkness or seeing-power, and seen; but this division is itself mithya imagination, negated in the absolute standpoint of You - and hence the components of this divided standpoint of knowledge are also mithya - not asat for they are present objects of knowledge and not sat either for they are absent in the standpoint of Sat.

thollmelukaalkizhu┬а

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 31, 2024, 3:42:55тАпAMAug 31
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Hari Om Chandramouli ji. Subbu ji.

//Because,┬аfor sense of sight to be functional, presence of light is compulsory.//

The issue as to whether darkness is pramAtri-gamya or sAkshi-bhAsya is dependent on whether the rUpa-jnAna of darkness is indriya-sannikarsha-janya or not. If it is indriya-sannikarsha-janya, then darkness should be accepted to be pramAtri-gamya.

I checked ChitsukhI and VivaraNa-upanyAsa.

ChitsukhI┬а

рд░реВрдкрддреНрд╡реЗ рд░реВрдкрд╡рддреНрддреНрд╡реЗ рд╡рд╛ рдЖрд▓реЛрдХрд╛рдирдкреЗрдХреНрд╖рдЪрдХреНрд╖реБрдЬрдиреНрдпрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрддреНрд╡рд╛рд╕рдВрднрд╡реЛ рд╡рд╛рдзрдХ рдЗрддрд┐ рдЪреЗрддреН, рдореИрд╡рдореН, рдЖрд▓реЛрдХрд╡рд┐рд░реЛрдзрд┐рдирд╕реНрддрдорд╕рд╢реНрдЪрд╛рд▓реЛрдХрд╛рднрд╛рд╡рд╡реНрдпрдЮреНрдЬрдиреАрдпрддрдпрд╛ рддрдиреНрдирд┐рд░рдкреЗрдХреНрд╖рдЪрдХреНрд╖реБрд░реНрд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрддреНрд╡реЛрдкрдкрддреНрддреЗрдГ


The opponent argues that rUpa or rUpa-vat-vastu cannot have chakshu-vishayavtva without┬аprakAsha. And hence darkness cannot be stated to have rUpa.

SiddhAnti answers that the abhivyakti of darkness, which is prakAsha-virodhI, is contingent on prakAsha-abhAva and hence the chakshu-vishayatva of darkness is not dependent on presence of prakAsha.

So, the rule that chakshu-vishayatva necessarily requires prakAsha is accepted to be violated in case of darkness.
┬а┬а
This clearly proves that darkness is chakshu-vishaya and consequently pramAtri-gamya and not sAkshi-bhAsya.

VivaraNa-upanyAsa

The anumAna presented there is: рддрдордГ рд╢рдмреНрдж рд╡рд╛рдЪреНрдпреЛ рдирд╛рднрд╛рд╡рдГ, рд╕реНрд╡рдорд╛рддреНрд░рд╡реГрддреНрддрд┐рдзрд░реНрдордкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд░рдХрдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдпреЛрдЧрд┐рдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирд╛рдЬрдиреНрдпрдкреНрд░рддреНрдпрдХреНрд╖рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрддреНрд╡рд╛рджреН, рдШрдЯрд╡рддреНред

If you see here, tamas is presented as an object of pratyaksha like a ghaTa. Since ghaTa is pramAtri-vedya and not sAkshi-bhAsya, we need to accept darkness as pramAtri-vedya as well because only then it can be stated to be pratyaksha ghaTa-vat.

Please present your views in this regard.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.

H S Chandramouli

unread,
Aug 31, 2024, 6:05:01тАпAMAug 31
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta

Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,

Reg┬а // If you see here, tamas is presented as an object of pratyaksha like a ghaTa //,

All it means is that cognizance of tamas comes under the category of pratyaksha, just like with ghaTa. But nothing more need be read into the similarity cited.

Reg┬а // This clearly proves that darkness is chakshu-vishaya and consequently pramAtri-gamya and not sAkshi-bhAsya// ,

No no. In the case of rope-snake illustration, both chakshu-vishayatva (pramAtri-gamyatva) ┬аAND sAkshi-bhAsya are relevant. Location is pramAtri-gamya and *object* is sAkshi-bhAsya. Same is the case with cognition of darkness. Darkness needs chakshu sannikarsha.That is not denied.

In all cases, what is produced by avidyA directly is sAkshi bhAsya. Be it the object *rope-snake* or *darkness* which is produced directly by avidyA and not through pancha bhUtAs.

Regards

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 31, 2024, 6:39:01тАпAMAug 31
to Advaitin, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta

Namaste Chandramouli ji.

No no. In the case of rope-snake illustration, both chakshu-vishayatva (pramAtri-gamyatva) ┬аAND sAkshi-bhAsya are relevant. Location is pramAtri-gamya and *object* is sAkshi-bhAsya. Same is the case with cognition of darkness. Darkness needs chakshu sannikarsha.That is not denied.

Darkness needs chakshu-saanikarsha with what? Which is the entity which is chakshu-vishaya? ChitsukhI is clearly saying that darkness is chakshu-vishaya.

The case of illusory snake is tUlAvidyA-kAtya. Darkness is mUlAvidyA-kArya.


In all cases, what is produced by avidyA directly is sAkshi bhAsya. Be it the object *rope-snake* or *darkness* which is produced directly by avidyA and not through pancha bhUtAs.


It not the blue-rUpa of darkness a product of avidyA directly? Is not the blue-rUpa chakshu-vishaya?

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.

H S Chandramouli

unread,
Aug 31, 2024, 9:46:48тАпAMAug 31
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta

Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,

Reg┬а // Darkness needs chakshu-saanikarsha with what? //,

I meant cognition of darkness needs chakshu-saanikarsha of location of darkness. When it is said **there is darkness**, chakshu-saanikarsha is needed for the cognition **there is**. This part is pramAtri-gamya. However *darkness* itself is sAkshi-bhAsya.

Reg┬а // The case of illusory snake is tUlAvidyA-kAtya. Darkness is mUlAvidyA-kArya //,

Both views are prevalent depending upon commentators. PanchapAdikA holds illusory snake also to be mUlAvidyA-kArya┬а while others hold it to be tUlAvidyA-kArya.

Reg┬а // Is not the blue-rUpa chakshu-vishaya? //,

If it is cognized as *blue-rUpa*, as for example in respect of a flower having blue-rUpa, then it is pramAtri-gamya. But in respect of *darkness* as an object, the cognition is of a different nature. Well, cognition is of *darkness*, not * blue-rUpa*.

Regards┬а


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

Sudhanshu Shekhar

unread,
Aug 31, 2024, 11:49:14тАпPMAug 31
to adva...@googlegroups.com, A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Namaste Chandramouli ji.


> I meant cognition of darkness needs chakshu-saanikarsha of location of darkness. When it is said **there is darkness**, chakshu-saanikarsha is needed for the cognition **there is**. This part is pramAtri-gamya. However *darkness* itself is sAkshi-bhAsya.

In case of rope-snake adhyAsa, there is chakshu-sannikarsha with the avachchhedaka of substratum of the illusory snake, which is idam. The substaraum is idam-avachchhinna-chaitanya. In case of darkness, which is mUlAvidyA-kArya, the substratum is shuddha chaitanya. There cannot be chakshu-sannikarsha with shuddha chaitanya.

>PanchapAdikA holds illusory snake also to be mUlAvidyA-kArya ┬аwhile others hold it to be tUlAvidyA-kArya.

That is not damaging to the fact that darkness has shuddha chaitanya as substratum whereas illusory snake has idam-avachchhinna-chaitanya as the substratum. While chakshu-sannikarsha with avachhcedaka-of-substratum is possible in case of the illusory snake, it is not possible in case of darkness.


> If it is cognized as *blue-rUpa*, as for example in respect of a flower having blue-rUpa, then it is pramAtri-gamya. But in respect of *darkness* as an object, the cognition is of a different nature. Well, cognition is of *darkness*, not * blue-rUpa*.

Cognition is of blue(black)-rUpa-vat-tamas "рдЕрд╕реНрддрд┐ рд╣рд┐ рддрдорд╕реНрддрдорд╛рд▓рд╢реНрдпрд╛рдорд▓рдорд┐рддрд┐ рдкреНрд░рддреАрддрд┐рдГ". Thus, tamas is accepted as rUpa-vat-dravya.

I would request the views of other learned members on this issue.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages