Shankaracharya merges Vyavaharika Satta into Pratibhasika Satta in the Gita bhashya

[V Subrahmanian]

In the commentary for BG 2.16 Shankara says:

 सर्वत्र बुद्धिद्वयोपलब्धेः, सद्बुद्धिरसद्बुद्धिरिति । यद्विषया बुद्धिर्न व्यभिचरति, तत् सत् ; यद्विषया व्यभिचरति, तदसत् ; इति सदसद्विभागे बुद्धितन्त्रे स्थिते, सर्वत्र द्वे बुद्धी सर्वैरुपलभ्येते समानाधिकरणे न नीलोत्पलवत् , सन् घटः, सन् पटः, सन् हस्ती इति ।

All perceptions have two aspects: one, the unchanging one and the other is the changing one, for example 'pot is', 'cloth is', 'elephant is'. Of these two the unchanging one is Sat, Brahman and the changing one is asat, mithya.

Having said this, he concludes the teaching by saying:

एकाधिकरणत्वं घटादिविशेष्याभावे न युक्तमिति चेत् , न ; ‘इदमुदकम्’ इति मरीच्यादौ अन्यतराभावेऽपि सामानाधिकरण्यदर्शनात् ॥

An objection: It is illogical to say that two aspects are there in a perception ...In reply to this Shankara cites the example of the perception of mirage water where even though there is no water, yet the perception is of the nature 'this is water' where the 'this' aspect is real and the 'water' aspect is unreal.

Shankara says this is the teaching for Arjuna from this verse 2.16:

त्वमपि तत्त्वदर्शिनां दृष्टिमाश्रित्य शोकं मोहं च हित्वा शीतोष्णादीनि नियतानियतरूपाणि द्वन्द्वानि ‘विकारोऽयमसन्नेव मरीचिजलवन्मिथ्यावभासते’ इति मनसि निश्चित्य तितिक्षस्व इत्यभिप्रायः ॥

/Therefore, you too, by adopting the vision of the men of realization and giving up sorrow and delusion, forbear the dualities, heat, cold, etc. -- some of which are definite in their nature, and others inconstant --, mentally being convinced that this (phenomenal world) is changeful, verily unreal and appears falsely like water in a mirage. This is the idea.//

Thus for the same verse, in the commentary Shankaracharya starts off with vyavaharikta Satya example of pot, cloth and elephant and concludes the commentary citing the Pratibhasika Satya analogy of mirage water.  Shankara has thereby dovetails the vayavaharika into the pratibhasika.

Thus for Shankara the world is of the nature of pratibhasika satya.

Om Tat Sat

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms
Hare Krishna

If you want to correct the mail, this sentence also needs correction 😊
//quote//
what was there in the past and what will be there in future is not there at present
//unquote//

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 11:33 PM Krishna Kashyap <kkashy...@gmail.com> wrote:

See in kannada foot note by HH Sacchidanandendra Swami:

It means, the "it is" or "this exists" can refer to both prathibhasika and vyavaharika objects. The only true sat is "it exists" not the different intended "karya" effects such as vyaharika (like pot, cloth and so on) or prathibhasika ( water in a mirage... and so on). So that "sat" vastu appears as both vyavaharika and prathibhasika objects.  

     This is what I understand. 

Yes, this is not denied.  In the Taittiriya Upanishad there is the passage: satyam cha anrutam cha satyam abhavat.  For this Shankara explains as: One Paramarthika (satyam) Brahman appears as both vyavaharika (satyam) and the pratibhasika (anrtam). This Taittiriya passage is the pramana for Advaitins for the three types of reality.  Sureshwaracharya too in the Taittiriya Bhashya Vartika said this.

What Sri SSS clarifies is also what I have stated in the post: the difference between vyavaharika and pratibhasika is obviated by Shankara while summing up his bhashya to the verse 2.16.

warm regards

subbu

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

[sunil bhattacharjya]

The same thing, Lord Krishna told, has been translated by another person in another place, is as follows:

That what was absent before, is absent afterwards, and is not there [independently] in between, is but a designation, a reference. Whatever that was created and is known by something else, is actually only [a reference to] that something else - that is how I see it.

Thanks

Sunil KB

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends

The compound word 'Jaganmithya' (Jagat-Mithya) was used in Upanishad, and it means anitya. Lord Krishna told clearly in a verse, which says: what was there in the past and what will be there in future is not there at present and that shows what is there today is as good as not there. This is Vyavaharika Satya and is not called Vyavaharika Mithya. In Mahabharata, Yudhisthira tried to fool Drona (albeit reluctantly) by saying "Ashvatthama hata iti gaja" and that was a vyavaharika asatya and for that he was given appropriate punishment in course of time.

That is the great vedic culture we inherited, where Truth is Dharma.  The historical truths also must be equally respected. For example, towards the end of the 18th century AD, there was a war between the armies led by Hyder Ali and Tipu against the British led army near Kanchipuram, and within a decade, the Kanchipuram Math authorities left the disturbed area of Kanchipuram and moved to the temple city of Kumbhakonam towards the south and the math was shifted back  to Kanchipuram in the 19th century, when the situation in Kanchipuram returned to normalcy. But there are many ignorant advaitins, who distrust this truth.

Similarly, when Malik Kafur, the general of Alauddin Khilji attacked Karnataka the beginning of the 14th century AD, the attackers  did not spare the original Shringeri math at the confluence of the holy rivers Bhadra and Tunga in Kudali in the Shimoga district. The attackers  devastated the establishment and broke the original wooden idol of mother Sharada Devi and the Mathadhipati Swami Vidyashankara Tirtha had to save his life by running away to Kanchipuram, and the broad-minded authorities of the Kanchipuaram Math welcomed him and gave him the status of a mathadhipati. To my knowledge, that is why the Guru-parampara of the Kanchipuram Math mentions two mathadhipatis (including the name of Swani Vidyashankara Tirtha) in the 14th century AD. In my humble opinion, all advaitins following Adi Shankara, should be proud of this rare fellow-feeling showed by the Kanchi Kamakoti math, where Adi Shankara too spen this last days. Swami Vidyatirtha and Swami Vidyaranya, during their younger days, had to go to Swami Vidyashankara tirtha in Kanchipuram for their training, and thereafter Swami Vidyatirtha returned to Kudali-Shringeri Math as the mathadhipati.  He was followed by Swami Vidyaranya, as the mathadhipati.  As regards Swami Vidyashankra Tirtha, he continued to stay in Kanchipuram (the Dakshina-kashi) and in his old age he left for Varanasi(Kashi) for good.

Later on, with the initiative from swami Vidyatirtha and Swami Vidyaranya and the liberal grants from the Vijayanagara king, a new math was established in New Shringeri at the bank of the river Tunga in the Chikkamagaluru district, which is at a distance of about 100 KM from the original Kudali Shringeri math in the Shimoga district of Karnataka.  A temple dedicated to Swami Vidyashankara tirtha was erected in the New shringeri math  in the Chikkamagaluru district. At a much later date a temple dedicated to  Swami Vidyashankara tirtha was erected in the original Kudali Shringeri math also. This is the truth about the great history of the Shringeri  math and all Advaitin truth - lovers should be proud of the great historical link between the Kanchi Kamakoti math and the two Shringeri maths.

If any advaitin friend has any question on the above, please don't hesitate to question me, either publicly or personally.

'TRUTH IS DHARMA'

My 2 cents

Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya

--
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/CAKk0Te1yiKh%3DLv58ULq4MdG6ahy-wsQoVTWZZde%3D77jVy3hBTA%40mail.gmail.com.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

There were two slips in the last mail on this subject. Kindly do the correct reading as follows:

Please read

(i)

'Vidyatirtha'

corrected as:

'Bharati Krishna Tirtha',

(ii)

'As regards Swami Vidyashankra Tirtha, he continued to stay in Kanchipuram (the Dakshina-kashi) and in his old age he left for Varanasi(Kashi) for good.'

corrected as: 

'As regards Swami Vidyashankra Tirtha, he continued to stay in Kanchipuram (the Dakshina-kashi) and in his old age he left for the Himalayas and took his samadh in the Dattatreya Guha (cave).'

Thanking you

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya