Avaccheda and Pratibimba illustrations in the Yajnavalkya Smriti

[V Subrahmanian]

Avaccheda and Pratibimba illustrations in the Yajnavalkya Smriti

याज्ञवल्क्यस्मृतिः/प्रायश्चित्ताध्यायः/यतिधर्मप्रकरणम्

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/3ob

आकाशं एकं हि यथा घटादिषु पृथग्भवेत् ।

तथात्मा एको ह्यनेकश्च जलाधारेष्विवांशुमान् । । ३.१४४ । ।

Just as the impartite space owing to limiting adjuncts, upadhis, such as pot, appears to be many and just as the single moon appears many being reflected in many water bodies, one Atman alone appears to be many owing to the many body-adjuncts.

These two most famous illustrations are extensively used in Advaita. Here are just a few examples:

1.

ममैवांशो जीवलोके जीवभूतः सनातनः ।

मनःषष्ठानीन्द्रियाणि प्रकृतिस्थानि कर्षति ॥ ७ ॥ Bh.Gita.15.7

Bhashya: ममैव परमात्मनः नारायणस्य, अंशः भागः अवयवः एकदेशः इति अनर्थान्तरं जिवलोके जीवानां लोके संसारे जीवभूतः कर्ता भोक्ता इति प्रसिद्धः सनातनः चिरन्तनः ; यथा जलसूर्यकः सूर्यांशः जलनिमित्तापाये सूर्यमेव गत्वा न निवर्तते च तेनैव आत्मना गच्छति, एवमेव ; यथा घटाद्युपाधिपरिच्छिन्नो घटाद्याकाशः आकाशांशः सन् घटादिनिमित्तापाये आकाशं प्राप्य न निवर्तते ।

Both the examples can be seen in the above commentary.

2.

स च स्वात्मभूतानेव घटाकाशस्थानीयानविद्याप्रत्युपस्थापित- नामरूपकृतकार्यकरणसङ्घातानुरोधिनो जीवाख्यान्विज्ञानात्मनः Brahma Sutra Bhashya 2.1.14.

3.

रूपकार्यसमाख्याश्च भिद्यन्ते तत्र तत्र वै ।

आकाशस्य न भेदोऽस्ति तद्वज्जीवेषु निर्णयः ॥ ६ ॥ Mandukya Karika 3.6

Bhashya: कथं पुनरात्मभेदनिमित्त इव व्यवहार एकस्मिन्नात्मन्यविद्याकृत उपपद्यत इति, उच्यते । यथा इहाकाशे एकस्मिन्घटकरकापवर- काद्याकाशानामल्पत्वमहत्त्वादिरूपाणि भिद्यन्ते, तथा कार्यमुदकाहरणधारणशयनादि, समाख्याश्च घटाकाशः करकाकाश इत्याद्याः तत्कृताश्च भिन्ना दृश्यन्ते, तत्र तत्र वै व्यवहारविषये इत्यर्थः । सर्वोऽयमाकाशे रूपादिभेदकृतो व्यवहारः अपरमार्थ एव । परमार्थतस्त्वाकाशस्य न भेदोऽस्ति । न चाकाशभेदनिमित्तो व्यवहारोऽस्ति अन्तरेण परोपाधिकृतं द्वारम् । यथैतत् , तद्वद्देहोपाधिभेदकृतेषु जीवेषु घटाकाशस्थानीयेष्वात्मसु निरूपणात्कृतः बुद्धिमद्भिः निर्णयः निश्चय इत्यर्थः ॥

4.

नाकाशस्य घटाकाशो विकारावयवौ यथा ।

नैवात्मनः सदा जीवो विकारावयवौ तथा ॥ ७ ॥

Mandukya Karika 3.7

Bhashya: ननु तत्र परमार्थकृत एव घटाकाशादिषु रूपकार्यादिभेदव्यवहार इति ; नैतदस्ति, यस्मात्परमार्थाकाशस्य घटाकाशो न विकारः, यथा सुवर्णस्य रुचकादिः, यथा वा अपां फेनबुद्बुदहिमादिः ; नाप्यवयवः, यथा वृक्षस्य शाखादिः । न तथा आकाशस्य घटाकाशो विकारावयवौ यथा, तथा नैवात्मनः परस्य परमार्थसतो महाकाशस्थानीयस्य घटाकाशस्थानीयो जीवः सदा सर्वदा यथोक्तदृष्टान्तवन्न विकारः, नाप्यवयवः । अत आत्मभेदकृतो व्यवहारो मृषैवेत्यर्थः ॥

This verse captures the purport of the Nrisimha Tapini Upanishad:

https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_upanishhat/nrisinha.html

सुविभातमविभातमद्वैतमचिन्त्यमलिङ्गं

स्वप्रकाशमानन्दघनं शून्यमभवदेवंवित्स्वप्रकाशं

परमेव ब्रह्म भवति

य एवं वेद सोऽकामो निष्काम आप्तकाम

आत्मकामो न तस्य प्राणा उत्क्रामन्त्यत्रैव

समवलीयन्ते ब्रह्मैव सन्ब्रह्माप्येत्यथैष

सर्वस्य सर्वत्र न ह्यस्ति द्वैतसिद्धिरात्मैव

सिद्धोऽद्वितीयो मायया ह्यन्यदिव स वा एष

आत्मा पर एषैव सर्वं

सर्वदा द्वैतरहित आनन्दरूपः सर्वाधिष्ठानः सन्मात्रो

निरस्ताविद्यातमोमोहोऽहमेवेति तस्मादेवमेवेममात्मानं

परं ब्रह्मानुसन्दध्यादेष वीरो नृसिंह एवेति ॥

All these passages deny duality, dvaita, and assert Advaita to be the supreme truth.

One who directly realizes this Supreme Advaitic Being attains Parabrahman himself. He becomes verily Brahman.

कोशांश्च सृष्ट्वा प्रविश्यामूढो मूढ इव व्यवहरन्नास्ते माययैव तस्मादद्वय एवायमात्मा सन्मात्रो नित्यः शुद्धो बुद्धः सत्यो मुक्तो निरञ्जनो विभुरद्वयानन्दः The Nr.Ta. Upanishad itself has elucidated the purport of this passage.

Thus the unreal jivas entertain infinite emotions in their mind and consequently attain births in accordance with their thinking.

So says the Yajnavalkya Smriti:

अनन्ताश्च यथा भावाः शरीरेषु शरीरिणाम् ।

रूपाण्यपि तथैवेह सर्वयोनिषु देहिनाम् । । ३.१३२ । ।

The meaning of the verse can be found in the Hindi translation of this verse in the image. [Since the jivas entertain countless thoughts/feelings they attain to various bodies in consonance with those thoughts.]

Thus this Smriti denies the absolute multiplicity of jivas as admitted in the non-Advaitic schools.

The words of this Smriti are proof for the Upanishadic idea that Brahman itself appears as the jiva:

यद्येवं स कथं ब्रह्मन्पापयोनिषु जायते ।

ईश्वरः स कथं भावैरनिष्टैः संप्रयुज्यते । । ३.१२९ । ।

The question is: how can Ishwara come to indulge in mentation and attain to various births as a result thereof?

अनादिरादिमांश्चैव स एव पुरुषः परः ।

लिङ्गेन्द्रियग्राह्यरूपः सविकार उदाहृतः । । ३.१८३ । ।

Here 'Purusha: Paraha', the Supreme God becomes perceptible to the senses due to his taking birth (as jiva).

निमित्तं अक्षरः कर्ता बोद्धा ब्रह्म गुणी वशी ।

अजः शरीरग्रहणात्स जात इति कीर्त्यते । । ३.६९ । ।

सर्गादौ स यथाकाशं वायुं ज्योतिर्जलं महीम् ।

सृजत्येकोत्तरगुणांस्तथादत्ते भवन्नपि । । ३.७० । ।

An unborn Brahman is said to be born due to body association. The same Brahman in the first stanza is referred to by the word 'sah = he' as 'sa jata isti kirtayte' ('he is stated to be born') and n the second stanza, as 'in the beginning of creation he creates the elements, etc.'. Thus, the same Brahman is born as the embodied jiva.

From with illustrations of avaccheda, llimitation, and pratibimba, reflection and the many verses of this Smriti, one can see that the same Brahman appears to be a jiva and a world.

महाभूतानि सत्यानि यथात्मापि तथैव हि ।

कोऽन्यथैकेन नेत्रेण दृष्टं अन्येन पश्यति । । ३.१४९ । ।

In this verse, the five elements are said to be 'real' because they are perceptible to the senses. To indicate that the Atman is in and through the various states of the body-mind complex and thus it (the Atman) is different from them, the elements are stated to be real. This reality is only relative, vyavaharika and not absolute, paramarthika.

This Yajnavalkya Smriti has a lengthy and complete commentary called 'Mitakshara' by Vijnaneswara who is said to be later Vidyaranya.

https://archive.org/.../yajnavalkyasmrit.../page/n5/mode/2up

In this chapter of the Yajnavalkya Smriti, we find the concordance of the Nrisimha Tapini Upanishad.

Om Tat Sat

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Subbu-ji,

Thanks for sharing instances of pratibimba-vAda and avacCheda-vAda from various texts.  

I was recently listening to the vAkyArtha conducted last month on Sri Appayya Dikshitendra's works. One particular discussion, led by Brahmasri Kuppa Vishwanatha Sharma shows the difference between avacCheda vAda and pratibimba vAda as demonstrated in the Parimalam (https://youtu.be/1V4eQYKkOf0, 2:14:00 onwards). 

Sri Sharma-garu makes two interesting observations based on the Parimala:

1) pratibimba vAda accepts avacCheda vAda - ie there is a role of avacChinnatva in pratibimba vAda also - the consciousness delimited by / located in the antah-karaNa is admitted as the antaryAmi even when it is said that the jIva is antah-karaNa-pratibimbita-caitanya. 

2) However, avacCheda vAda does not accept pratibimba vAda. Through various arguments, the parimala-kAra establishes that pratibimba-vAda is not accepted in the bhAShya / sUtra. From this, it appears that Sri dIkshitendra shows a personal preference for avacCheda vAda over pratibimba vAda.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

On Thu, 9 Jun 2022, 09:23 V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

Read the full post here:  https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin/c/E0NW_5NlAB0

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 1:39 PM
Subject: Avaccheda and Pratibimba illustrations in the Yajnavalkya Smriti
To: Advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>


Avaccheda and Pratibimba illustrations in the Yajnavalkya Smriti
याज्ञवल्क्यस्मृतिः/प्रायश्चित्ताध्यायः/यतिधर्मप्रकरणम्
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/3ob

<https://sa.wikisource.org/s/3ob?fbclid=IwAR2us4MHAp33E7Ert3eQqZWXi0nDX-0ZskDBzx3zJqFXSPsnhMx-Jfc8NZk>

आकाशं एकं हि यथा घटादिषु पृथग्भवेत् ।
तथात्मा एको ह्यनेकश्च जलाधारेष्विवांशुमान् । । ३.१४४ । ।
Just as the impartite space owing to limiting adjuncts, upadhis, such as
pot, appears to be many and just as the single moon appears many being
reflected in many water bodies, one Atman alone appears to be many owing to
the many body-adjuncts.
These two most famous illustrations are extensively used in Advaita. Here
are just a few examples:

_______________________________________________
Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listm...@advaita-vedanta.org

[V Subrahmanian]

Thanks for this response.  Could it be a case of the Parimalakara upholding the preference of the Bhamatikara? 

This is from the Taittiriya Bhashya:  जलसूर्यकादिप्रतिबिम्बवत् प्रवेशः स्यादिति चेत् , न ; अपरिच्छिन्नत्वादमूर्तत्वाच्च । परिच्छिन्नस्य मूर्तस्यान्यस्य अन्यत्र प्रसादस्वभावके जलादौ सूर्यकादिप्रतिबिम्बोदयः स्यात् , न त्वात्मनः ; अमूर्तत्वात् , आकाशादिकारणस्य आत्मनः व्यापकत्वात् । तद्विप्रकृष्टदेशप्रतिबिम्बाधारवस्त्वन्तराभावाच्च प्रतिबिम्बवत्प्रवेशो न युक्तः ।   where the Bhashyakara is technically warding off the pratibima possibility of Atman.  In the Sutra bhashya too there is such a discussion where, at the end, he defends the Sutrakara's pratibimba analogy on the grounds that: it is only to show that the vikara, etc. found in the pratibimba (reflected Sun in the water subjected to movement, etc.) being wrongly attributed to the original.  To this extent alone the analogy is admissible/relevant. 

Maybe such is the argument/idea of the Parimalakara.

warm regards

subbu

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Subbu ji,

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 11:34 AM V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for this response.  Could it be a case of the Parimalakara upholding the preference of the Bhamatikara? 

Perhaps. However, there are instances in the parimala, where a view espoused by the Bhamatikara / Kalpatarukara which happens to be contrary to the Bhashyakara is refuted and the Bhashyakara's view is reinstated as the correct position.

This specific conclusion drawn by Sri Sharma in the vAkyArtha happens to be based on the grounds that certain defects are identified with the pratibimba paksha from the perspective of the avacCheda vAdin, whereas from the perspective of the pratibimba-vAdin, avacCheda is accepted. 

 

This is from the Taittiriya Bhashya:  जलसूर्यकादिप्रतिबिम्बवत् प्रवेशः स्यादिति चेत् , न ; अपरिच्छिन्नत्वादमूर्तत्वाच्च । परिच्छिन्नस्य मूर्तस्यान्यस्य अन्यत्र प्रसादस्वभावके जलादौ सूर्यकादिप्रतिबिम्बोदयः स्यात् , न त्वात्मनः ; अमूर्तत्वात् , आकाशादिकारणस्य आत्मनः व्यापकत्वात् । तद्विप्रकृष्टदेशप्रतिबिम्बाधारवस्त्वन्तराभावाच्च प्रतिबिम्बवत्प्रवेशो न युक्तः ।   where the Bhashyakara is technically warding off the pratibima possibility of Atman.  In the Sutra bhashya too there is such a discussion where, at the end, he defends the Sutrakara's pratibimba analogy on the grounds that: it is only to show that the vikara, etc. found in the pratibimba (reflected Sun in the water subjected to movement, etc.) being wrongly attributed to the original.  To this extent alone the analogy is admissible/relevant. 

Maybe such is the argument/idea of the Parimalakara.

Yes, the argument advanced by the Parimalakara is along the lines of what was said in the ubhaya-lingAdhikaraNam (3.2.5th adhikaraNam), specifically the sUtra-s  अम्बुवदग्रहणात्तु न तथात्वम् 3.2.19 and वृद्धिह्रासभाक्त्वमन्तर्भावादुभयसामञ्जस्यादेवम् 3.2.20.  The argument that the Parimalakara advances is that wherever a pratibimba is spoken of, it is only a similarity with a pratibimba, not the pratibimba itself. 

He quotes the bhAShya to the Sutra 3.2.19 and says that to form a reflection, a distance between the original and the reflecting medium is needed, which is not possible in the case of the Atma which happens to be all pervading (from the bhAShya - न तु आत्मा मूर्तः, न चास्मात्पृथग्भूता विप्रकृष्टदेशाश्चोपाधयः, सर्वगतत्वात् सर्वानन्यत्वाच्च ।), which is the same argument as that taittirIya bhAShya above. The grounds for similarity to a reflection is established in Sutra 3.2.20's bhaShya, where it is said that like a reflection, the Atma appears to take on the properties of the upAdhi, when in reality it undergoes no change: 

किं पुनरत्र विवक्षितं सारूप्यमिति, तदुच्यते — वृद्धिह्रासभाक्त्वमिति । जलगतं हि सूर्यप्रतिबिम्बं जलवृद्धौ वर्धते, जलह्रासे ह्रसति, जलचलने चलति, जलभेदे भिद्यते — इत्येवं जलधर्मानुविधायि भवति, न तु परमार्थतः सूर्यस्य तथात्वमस्ति ; एवं परमार्थतोऽविकृतमेकरूपमपि सत् ब्रह्म देहाद्युपाध्यन्तर्भावात् भजत इवोपाधिधर्मान्वृद्धिह्रासादीन् । एवमुभयोर्दृष्टान्तदार्ष्टान्तिकयोः सामञ्जस्यादविरोधः ॥

The interesting thing is how the Parimalakara refutes the view that the Bhashyakara supports pratibimbavada in the bhashya to the sutra आभास एव च 2.3.50.

Kind regards,

Venkatraghavan

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

Venkatraghavan:

He quotes the bhAShya to the Sutra 3.2.19 and says that to form a
reflection, a distance between the original and the reflecting medium is
needed, which is not possible in the case of the Atma which happens to be
all pervading (from the bhAShya - न तु आत्मा मूर्तः, न चास्मात्पृथग्भूता
विप्रकृष्टदेशाश्चोपाधयः, सर्वगतत्वात् सर्वानन्यत्वाच्च ।), which is the
same argument as that taittirIya bhAShya above. The grounds for similarity
to a reflection is established in Sutra 3.2.20's bhaShya, where it is said
that like a reflection, the Atma appears to take on the properties of the
upAdhi, when in reality it undergoes no change:

----------------------------------

Venkatraghavanji - PraNAms

 

When the scriptures talks about - bahu shyaam, prajaayeyeti - Let me become many and he became many - involves apparent division and also implies individual separation. All at vyaavahaarika level.

The pratibimba aspect is needed to indicate the differences in response of the  gross (inert) and subtle material  (conscious). 

Hence both avacheda - becoming many and exhibiting jeeva jeeva bhinnatvam and accumulation of vaasanas etc., with differing local conscious entities required pratibimba aspect. 

As I see - issue of the so-called distance issue between all pervading consciousness and local conscious entities that is being raised  is only trying to mix the paaramaarthika and vaavahaarika aspects. The distance ceases cogntively when the jeeva realizes his paaramaarthika nature. 

I do not see why there should be issue at all.

My 2c.

Hari Om!

Sadananda 

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sada ji,

Just wanted to caveat that this is not my argument - it is a presentation occurring in the parimala. The absence of distance that is being referred to is not between consciousness and the jIva - it is the absence of difference between the all-pervading consciousness and the reflecting medium, the mind. That is true even in vyavahAra.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

[Venkatraghavan S]

"difference" should read "distance".

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

PraNAms to everyone.

Just read on the Facebook - that Shree Madathil Rajendra Nair has passed away. 

Nair was a member of this group and also served as moderator and also Chief moderator of this group for some time before he retired to devote more time to his personal spiritual pursuits. 

He was an inspiration to many of us and used to respond to the post with clarity and logic. 

With Solutions to this departed Soul.

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[V Subrahmanian]

Sad to hear this. Sri Madathil ji had visited me some years back. After staying away from the discussions in the List, he was active in Boloji.com with frequent poems in English and Malayalam too. 

subbu 

--
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/1357558351.901702.1654792183952%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Ravindra Shivde]

Shri Nair was an active member of the group. Remember him fondly. May he attain Eternal Salvation.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te30AEdEO2DyN00U5s9oOjsa0BnHzas39ErWV92-AWerag%40mail.gmail.com.

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Sad news indeed. I recall Nairji's many a descriptive post. May he have attained paramagatI.

Kind rgds,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know That, owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 9:57 PM 'Kuntimaddi Sadananda' via advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

[Madathil Nair]

Namaste.

I am hale and hearty, advaitin friends.

It was my eldest brother who passed away.

Pranams.

Madathil Nair

--

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/CACT7j-H%3DsqABZJUbVurD3wr_0c6wHFsmmGhL4Oc2_EH%2B%2B2WbNw%40mail.gmail.com

.

[Sundar Rajan]

Dear Mr Nair, 

Glad to note that you are hale and healthy, Not a time for jokes but you may have something in common  with Mark Twain :-)

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated 

Namaste 

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/306243629.3456109.1655347169409%40mail.yahoo.com

.

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

Nairji - PraNAms

Sorry, I posted it without knowing it that it was your elder brother based on my Facebook info. 

The only way to make sure that Nairji is active it is Lord's wish that you have to post your wisdom thoughts on the Advaita group.

Hari Om!

Sada

Sadananda

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/306243629.3456109.1655347169409%40mail.yahoo.com

.

[Madathil Rajendran Nair]

Namaste Sunder Rajan-ji,

I am a far cry from Mark Twain.  It is a rare experience to read one's own obituaries.  I enjoyed it very much here and elsewhere.

As an Advaitin, I am at a stage now where I am almost totally convinced that death is a non-event as illusory as one's transit from the so-called dreaming to the so-called waking.  So, what appears before one's eyes as the world is a matter of blissful excitement to me though the contents of which might be tolerable or intolerable in line with one's karma.  This was the issue I wanted to elaborate to my recently-deceased eldest brother.  But, I didn't get an opportunity.  He, an agnostic, outdid me in the deft manner in which he meticulously arranged details of his so-called final exit.

My brother's story is here which created the confusion that it was I who had gone.  Hope the Group can tolerate this aside.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=5519217181444267&id=100000681182684

Thanks for your mail.

Pranams.

Madathil Nair

[Madathil Rajendran Nair]

Acharya Sada-ji.

Nothing to be sorry about. Mistakes happen.  This one was hilarious indeed.

God bless.

Pranams.

Nair

[putran M]

Namaskaram Nair-ji,

I read your tribute to your brother. The ending on his giving up dialysis reminded me of a writing on the last days of Sri Sivayasubramaniya Swami (founder of Hinduism Today): 

https://www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/january-february-march-2002/2002-01-maha-samadhi-at-74/

"devotees “in their last days avoid heroic, artificial perpetuation of life and prefer not to die in a hospital but at home with loved ones, who keep prayerful vigil;” and “in cases of terminal illness, under strict community regulation, tradition does allow fasting as a means of mors voluntaria religiosa””self-willed religious death,” prayopavesha in Sanskrit. On October 12, Gurudeva decided to stop taking nourishment. A few days later he declined medication as well, except to relieve pain."

thollmelukaalkizhu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/3957653e-6b31-4665-9c02-15cc2404883dn%40googlegroups.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

https://www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/january-february-march-2002/2002-01-maha-samadhi-at-74/

"devotees “in their last days avoid heroic, artificial perpetuation of life and prefer not to die in a hospital but at home with loved ones, who keep prayerful vigil;” and “in cases of terminal illness, under strict community regulation, tradition does allow fasting as a means of mors voluntaria religiosa””self-willed religious death,” prayopavesha in Sanskrit. 

Here is another article on the topic of prayopavesha from the same magazine: https://www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/september-1997/1997-09-a-saint-s-self-willed-death/

They give more examples inside. Curiously it is stated:

"Prayopavesha, ending one's life by fasting, is mentioned in ancient scriptures including the Gautama (verse 14.7.12) and Manu Dharma Shastras (verse 6.30). It has been cautiously allowed for ascetics, brahmins and kings. The practice was subject to debate even within the Hindu tradition–Sri Adi Shankara (788-820 ce), for example, opposed it–but it was outlawed only upon the institution of the British Penal Code in India in the 19th century."

Does anyone know where (and in what context) Shankaracharya opposed this?

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

[V Subrahmanian]

I have not seen any statement by Shankara in the Prasthana traya bhashyas that could perhaps be related to this topic, remotely. In the Brahma Sutra Bhashya there is a discussion on the consumption of any kind of food. tThere Shankaracharya says, upon the authority of the Chandogya Upanishad, that a person can eat even prohibited food in order to sustain life. In another place, Shankara says: by not eating one would only die implying that upavasa does not mean denial of food to the body.   

regards

subbu

 

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

--
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/CAKqm3-owPM%3Dy-03SXQQmmBkjDESFZMnEzmu%2Bdm7_ryzVBps0Yg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Putran ji,

Changing subject line hoping to avoid more confusion on Nairji!

 

They give more examples inside. Curiously it is stated:

"Prayopavesha, ending one's life by fasting, is mentioned in ancient scriptures including the Gautama (verse 14.7.12) and Manu Dharma Shastras (verse 6.30). It has been cautiously allowed for ascetics, brahmins and kings. The practice was subject to debate even within the Hindu tradition–Sri Adi Shankara (788-820 ce), for example, opposed it–but it was outlawed only upon the institution of the British Penal Code in India in the 19th century."

Does anyone know where (and in what context) Shankaracharya opposed this?

I'd be surprised if Bhagavatpadacharya opposed prAyopaveshana! It is also followed in Jain traditions more. Further, as I understand, it is not outlawed any more since the Indian court upheld the right of Jains to follow prAyopaveshana as part of their religion when they approached the court many years back, challenging the same.

[Madathil Nair]

Namastre Praveen-ji.

But  this fasting and all that become a requirement only as long as the body and its existence is a botheration.  Do a true spiritual worry about these things as he/she has already placed the body on the shelf and sort of forgotten about it?

Pranams.

Madathil Nair

--

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/CACT7j-GmsSRy4W3h2r%3DVesiYRJh3bV56T%2B-GkSs6zK54NNWiAw%40mail.gmail.com

.

[Madathil Nair]

Namaste Putran-ji.

Thanks for the info on prayopavesha.

Great indeed are our spiritual masters.

Pranams.

Madathil Nair

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te1KNXkQj%2BAXfy_byiG%2Bpt9jUR99EGtDKLLkuBVHCWOVMQ%40mail.gmail.com

.

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Nairji,

On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:35 AM 'Madathil Nair' via advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

But  this fasting and all that become a requirement only as long as the body and its existence is a botheration. 

True. Unless the jnAnI is of a Bhagavan Ramana kind, and even the cancer pain doesn't "get to him" or the surgery following without anesthesia, IMHO, most of the jnAnIs can experience a good amount of bodily pain, even if not emotional pain.

 

Do a true spiritual worry about these things as he/she has already placed the body on the shelf and sort of forgotten about it?

That is a fact as well. However, this logic works both ways. Then, why should he feed the body at all? There is an effort needed to eat! If it be said that a jnAnI should treat the diseases of the body entrusted unto him, hunger being a disease, it is the same jnAnI who is allowed to give up eating unto the fall of the body, if his prArabdha doesn't allow the body to be taken care of or taking care of him is troubles others (at least from some perspective). 

On a related note, even with the Bhagavatpadavachana *prArabdhAya samarpitaM svavapuH*, those who have ajagara-vRtti for bhikShA let the food come to them instead of madhukara-vRtti of going around for bhikShA.

gurupAdukAbhyAm,

[Praveen R. Bhat]

pls read "is troubles others" as "troubles others"