sat, asat, mithyA and anirvachaneeya in Advaita Vedanta
Bhaskar YR
praNAms
Hare Krishna
There was a huge cry by some that Sri SSS has not understood the difference between sat, asat, mithyA, anrutam and anirvachaneeya etc. hence he is misrepresenting the traditional stand on avidyA 😊 IMO, this is certainly a pathetic excuse to hoot their own horn aloud and they think that in that cacophony they can cover-up their own problem and misunderstandings!! This is very old tactic : shout at others to cover-up your blunders😊 If any one see Sri SSS’s vedAnta pAribhAshika shabda kOsha, shankara Nighantu etc. even before the digitization of PTB, decades back, how Sri SSS collected all these terms and explained it contextually as per PTB of shankara. It is really painful to see, those who are not even know an iota of his works making these type of bold and blind claims and getting away with it comfortably under the shade of sampradaya!!
OK let us look at what shankara himself says sat, asat/anrutam, anirvachaneeya and mithya.
About sat, asat/anrutam & mithyA from Tai.up.bh. :
- sat is : yadrUpeNa nishchitaM tad rUpaM na vyabhicharati tat satyaM
- asatyaM/anrutaM : yadrUpeNa nishchitaM tad rUpaM vyabhicharati anrutam ityucchyate
- mithyA or avidyAkalpita: anyasya cha avidyA krutatve vidyayA avastudarshanOpapattiH , tat hi dviteeya chandrasya asatvaM yadataimirikeNa chakshushmatA sa gruhyate.
- anirvachaneeyaM or the definition of mAya : sarvajneshwarasya AtmabhUte ivAvidyAkalpite nAmarUpe tatvAnyatvAbhyAm anirvachaneeyO saMsAraprapancha beeja bhUte, sarvajnEshwarasya mAyA, shaktiH, prakrutiH,iti cha shrutismrutyOrabhilapyete (su.bh.2-1-14)
anirvachaneeya is attributed to mAyA and mAyA kalpita and when it is seen independently it is avidyAkalpita and from shAstra drushti for this mAyA nirmita jagat nAma rUpa Ishwara is abhinnanimittOpadAna kAraNa and from paramaartha drushti this nAma rUpa jagat is nothing but brahman since there exists nothing but brahman. So (b) as jagat changing its colour every now and then before srushti it is avyAkruta, during sthiti kAla it is vyAkruta and goes back in laya, so it does not maintain consistency when it has been perceived but it is not mithyA like dviteeya Chandra / snake / silver as this anruta jagat is from satya only and it has its reality in transactional reality. Hence it is called vyAvahArika satya. It is available for bhoga, available for doing karma, available for doing mOksha sAdhana as well. Hence kArya rUpa jagat is kAraNAnanya but kAraNa is not kArya ( ornaments are gold dependent on gold for the existence but gold as such does not have this obligation). Asatya jagat though anruta / changing colours not mithyA like snake on the rope, shankara categorically says this in chAndOgya. mithAjnAna can be annihilated completely like mithyAjnAna of the snake (ayataartha jnana) completely goes after the dawn of rope’s correct knowledge (yathArtha jnana) hence it is called mithyAjnAna / misconception. Whereas jagat as asatyam/anrutam would become bAdhita (sublated) with the dawn of jnana what is that bAdhitAnuvrutti?? For the jnAni this jagat which is abrahm, asarvaM before jnana would become sarvaM / brahmam / Atmaikatvam after paramArtha jnana. There is a valley of difference between nAsha of mithyAjnAna like snake on the rope and bAdhita jnana of asatya jagat which ends in samyak jnana or Atmaikatva jnana. And since this mithyA vastu darshana is due to mithyAjnAna, the mithyA vastu is kevala jeeva mAnasa pratyaya. Hence there was/is/never will be a thing called snake on the rope. The thing or jagat that is perceived when he is under the sway of mithyAjnAna is called mithyA jagat which is entirely different from kArya jagat for which kAraNa is brahman (brahma mAnasa pratyaya). It is because of this reason kArya too like kAraNa during all three periods of time brahmAnanya. Shankara says this explicitly in su.bhAshya.
And now that which is already proven as mithyA vastu cannot be an anirvachaneeya. anirvachaneeyatvaM can be labelled only to the ‘existing thing’ like water!! When the water appears as foam, bubble, wave, ice etc. it cannot be said whether it is same or different from its adhishtAna. Whereas anirvachaneeyatva occurs only when both the kAraNa and the kAya or shakti and shakta are simultaneously perceived either by direct perception or through the shAstra. On the other hand mithyA is related to the wrong perception of an object which has the existence only in the mithyAjnAna in the ajnAni. So a kArya that appears to be independent of the kAraNa is an illusion / kevala avidyA kalpita nAma rUpa/bhrama. There is no room at all for anirvachaneeya in this because, it is clear that the perceived snake is different from the cause and appearing only in the mind of ajnAni. For some ajnAni-s it is snake, another ajnAni it is crack on the ground for some others it may be garland!! In this ayatArtha jnana jneya vastu (perceived object) depends on the samskAra of that ajnAni. But the kArya in the shAstra drushti is not different from its kAraNa. The effect relation with the cause is one of identity karya-kAraNa saMbandhaH brahmavAdinaH kathaM iti chet?? Na tasya tAdAtmyalakshaNasaMbandhOpapatteH (Su.Bh.2.2.38). and this what geetaachaarya also clarifies in geeta 2nd chapter 28th verse. Therefore, the asatya jagat though changing colours it is objectively existing and available for doing transactions. One who knows its svarUpa, knows it only as the kAraNa. Though it appears in a special form, it is known to be the cause in the light of the shAstra janita paramArtha jnAna. This is what is called anirvachaneeya. So contextually we have to understand these terms without out of context mixing it in a ridiculous way.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
V Subrahmanian
Jaishankar Narayanan
Bhaskar YR
praNAms
Hare Krishna
Ayyo rAma!!! It is quite amusing MVV-s talking about the logic!! On the one hand, they say we will give the objective existence for avidyA by citing the mundane reason that it is experienced by an ajnAni and on the other hand, they don’t hesitate to say that the world which has been experienced by the jnAni on the basis of pratyaksha, anumAna, and shruti and which (jagat as effect/kArya) has been explained as trikAla abAdhita like its kAraNa, which has been explained in the terms of brahman as abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa, as mere illusory/bhrAnti and non-existent!!?? And at the same time they also continue to say brahmajnAni even after realization has the prArabdha, avidyAlesha, bhrAnta (sometimes) etc. And now, blatantly expecting logical consistency from those who are saying avidyAkalpita jagat is keval jeeva mAnasa pratyaya!! I just wonder they themselves confused? Or they are deliberately trying to confuse others with their own misguided logic? God only knows!!
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
|
Bhaskar YR
|
From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com>
On Behalf Of Jaishankar Narayanan
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2022 10:30 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] sat, asat, mithyA and anirvachaneeya in Advaita Vedanta
|
Warning |
|
This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you
verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments.
|
--
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/CAOkLS-EuZdJVasUFe7o6v%2Bhk8TZ%3DXCDRbJEpNAfWtZ91%2B_0UhA%40mail.gmail.com.
Bhaskar YR
praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
Hare Krishna
- Hopefully some meeting points, happy to note that. But request couple of clarification.
From this statement, which means Mulavidya is annulled by Brahma sakshatkara alone, we come to know that the Mulavidya people have never left the fate of this mulavidya to anybody's guess. It is explicitly stated that this MV will cease to be once knowledge arises.
Ø What is this brahma sAkshAtkAra is it shAstra vAkya janita paramArtha jnana / svarUpa jnAna or something subsequent to this jnana. Where exactly the tUlAvidyA and mUlAvidyA can be fitted in this scenario of annihilation of MV by brahma sAkshAtkAra??
To the objection of Swamiji that if MVidya or whatever causes samsara is not admitted to be something that is superimposed (अथाऽनध्यस्तः, तदा परमार्थ एव स्यान्न विद्यानिवर्त्य इत्यनिष्टमापद्यते ।) (then it will have to be deemed to exist forever and it will be something that is not negated/sublated by Vidya) the reply is the above cited passage.
Thus it is very clear that the MulaVidya people also admit that such Mulaavidya is only a superimposition.
- Happy that you have admitted that everything in AV is just a superimposition on brahman to drive home the point that brahman ultimately nirvishesha/nirAkAra/nirguNa. And the mUla prakriya adopted by shruti is adhyArOpa and apavAda.
That is evident from the above usage: jnana nivartya = that which is unsettled by knowlege. There is nothing wrong in holding so as the alternative explanation to the term मिथ्याज्ञाननिमित्तः (mithyaajnaana nimittaH) of the adhyasa bhashya, which is given as: mithya ca tadajnaanam ca = this ajnana that is itself mithya) the causal ignorance is itself an anAdi superimposition which gives rise to further superimposition...
Ø Here where exactly Sri SSS sees problem in MV, when bhAshyakAra himself explicitly said avidyA is of three types like agrahaNa, anyathAgrahaNa and saMshaya what is the need of introducing one more avidyA which is NOT these three type of avidyA and why to drag this mere antaHkaraNa dOsha avidyA to brahman itself. As per Sri SSS’s reading of vivaraNa avidyA is NOT antaHkaraNa dharma but it has the locus in brahman and for this avidyA brahman is the vishaya. I shall provide you the original vivaraNa reference he is quoting tomorrow. You can check that and let us know why vivaraNa school saying about brahmAshrita avidyA and insisting it is neither agrahaNa etc. nor antaHkaraNa dOsha, nor even saMskAra rUpa etc.
This is in perfect agreement with the famous vartika of Sureshwaracharya:
तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्योत्थसंयग्धीजन्ममात्रतः ।
अविद्या सह कार्येण नासीदस्ति भविष्यति ॥
The Tattvamasi, etc. passages give rise to that knowledge which dispels the avidya, along with its effects, which is non-existent in all the three periods of time.
Ø What exactly the meaning of gaUNa mukti and mukhya mukti according to vivaraNa?? What exactly the implication when this school says vAkya jnana is kevala jnAnamAtra and dvaita darshana due to avidyA lesha and mukhya mukti can happen only after deha-tyAga?? And finally as per your quoted vArtika avidyA saha kAryeNa nAsidasti bhavishyati, ( avidyA and its effects which are NON-EXISTENT IN ALL THE THREE PERIODS OF TIME) is it not clear after the dawn of jnana the jnAni would realize that there was / is / never be an avidyA in him!!?? Thinking about himself as ajnAni prior to realization is itself a misconception due to jnAnAbhAva ( the absence of his svarUpa jnana) ??