'Upadhi-mandanam' and 'Drishya-mithyatvam' - Srimad Bhagavatam

11 views
Skip to first unread message

V Subrahmanian

unread,
Jan 18, 2023, 4:41:31 AM1/18/23
to Advaitin
In this chapter of the Bhagavatam, it is established by Anvaya-Vyatireka (concordance and discordance) Nyaya (logic) that there is dualistic vision only when there is the upadhi called mind, and when that upadhi is absent there is no dualistic vision.
श्रीमद्भागवतपुराणम्/स्कन्धः ४/अध्यायः २२

दग्धाशयो मुक्तसमस्ततद्‍गुणो
नैवात्मनो बहिरन्तर्विचष्टे ।
परात्मनोर्यद् व्यवधानं पुरस्तात्
स्वप्ने यथा पुरुषस्तद्विनाशे ॥ २७ ॥
Since there is mind in the dream, there is the experience of difference, bheda, in the form of self and not-self. But after the destruction of the dream, one realizes that the experience of difference is not true.
(अनुष्टुप्)
आत्मानमिन्द्रियार्थं च परं यदुभयोरपि ।
सत्याशय उपाधौ वै पुमान् पश्यति नान्यदा ॥ २८ ॥
In the waking state, because of the presence of the mind, there is a distinct experience of being different from others.
Only when there is an upadhi, there is the perception of difference in the form of self-not-self. When that upadhi is not there, there is no dual vision. Here in the illustration, when there are upadhis like water (mirror), one has the distinction of oneself and his reflection. Without those upadhi-s, there is no Bhedadarshan, perception of difference. Similarly, in deep sleep, when the adjunct (upadhi) of mind is absent, there is no dualistic vision.
Sridharaswamin's commentary on these verses is given below.
Thus Vedavyasa has upheld the upadhi mandanam (glorification of the upadhi) and drishya mithyatva (unreality of the perceived world) in the Bhagavatam. So we conclude that Vedavyasa has approved of the concept of upadhis (the same way Advaita holds) and the unreality of the drishya, perceptual duality by looking at what he has said here. It is well known that only Advaita Darshana has recognised these principles. In Advaita alone the pursuit of upadhi is not condemned, and the illusoriness of the drishya is not condemned either.

image.png

image.png

Om Tat Sat

suresh srinivasamurthy

unread,
Jan 18, 2023, 11:49:03 AM1/18/23
to adva...@googlegroups.com
Namaste Subbu-ji,

<
In Advaita alone the pursuit of upadhi is not condemned, and the illusoriness of the drishya is not condemned either.
>

Could you please explain the above little bit more? If the intention is to say that involvement in drishya/samsara is restricted
to bare minimum so as to perform dharma then it is in allignment with other systems also. 


Regards,
Suresh
From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2023 9:41 AM
To: Advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [advaitin] 'Upadhi-mandanam' and 'Drishya-mithyatvam' - Srimad Bhagavatam
 
--
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/CAKk0Te1E2AX5fwvThh5BbHjnhrk8aEwp%3D9t8qv0KtyJD157R7Q%40mail.gmail.com.

V Subrahmanian

unread,
Jan 18, 2023, 12:02:08 PM1/18/23
to adva...@googlegroups.com
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 10:19 PM suresh srinivasamurthy <sure...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Namaste Subbu-ji,

<
In Advaita alone the pursuit of upadhi is not condemned, and the illusoriness of the drishya is not condemned either.
>

Could you please explain the above little bit more? If the intention is to say that involvement in drishya/samsara is restricted
to bare minimum so as to perform dharma then it is in allignment with other systems also. 

It only means that the truth that these are unreal upadhis that constitute bondage is not denied in Advaita. This will mean: samsara is unreal, as asserted by the Bhagavatam and Gaudapada.  This is not allowed in other systems.   

regards
subbu


Regards,
Suresh

suresh srinivasamurthy

unread,
Jan 20, 2023, 4:26:48 PM1/20/23
to adva...@googlegroups.com
Namaste Subbu-ji,

Truth is revealed only when the upAdhi's (like mind, speech and body) are aligned.
The teaching that there is no bheda in the absence of upAdhi is also taught and known through the upAdhi only, isn't it?
So, upAdhi's have the ability to both cover and reveal the truth. 
If upAdhis are not there, then Truth may not get revealed at all.

So is it correct tp accept upAdhi as "real" untill the Advaitic truth is realized?

Appreciate if you could help to resolve the above doubt.

Regards,
Suresh
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2023 5:01 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [advaitin] 'Upadhi-mandanam' and 'Drishya-mithyatvam' - Srimad Bhagavatam
 
--
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.

V Subrahmanian

unread,
Jan 20, 2023, 10:47:33 PM1/20/23
to adva...@googlegroups.com
On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 2:56 AM suresh srinivasamurthy <sure...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Namaste Subbu-ji,

Truth is revealed only when the upAdhi's (like mind, speech and body) are aligned.
The teaching that there is no bheda in the absence of upAdhi is also taught and known through the upAdhi only, isn't it?
So, upAdhi's have the ability to both cover and reveal the truth. 
If upAdhis are not there, then Truth may not get revealed at all.

So is it correct tp accept upAdhi as "real" untill the Advaitic truth is realized?

Appreciate if you could help to resolve the above doubt.

Dear Suresh ji,

Yes, the mind, upadhi, is essential to reveal the Upanishadic truth:  मनसैवेदमाप्तव्यम्...  the mind is the only instrument through which the truth can be realized. The manas is neither real nor unreal (like hare's horn), so it is anirvachaniya. It has a purpose. When the purpose is over, it too ceases to be. 

regards
subbu 

putran M

unread,
Jan 21, 2023, 12:37:18 AM1/21/23
to adva...@googlegroups.com
Namaskaram Subbu-ji,

Isn’t hare’s horn (like son of barren woman) used as example for asat and not for mithya? If so, what would be an appropriate example (for mithya entity) in your sentence?

thollmelukaalkizhu 

V Subrahmanian

unread,
Jan 21, 2023, 1:57:55 AM1/21/23
to adva...@googlegroups.com
On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 11:07 AM putran M <putr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Namaskaram Subbu-ji,

Isn’t hare’s horn (like son of barren woman) used as example for asat and not for mithya? If so, what would be an appropriate example (for mithya entity) in your sentence?

Namaskaram Putran ji,

What you say is true. For mithya the rope-snake, shell-silver type analogy would be appropriate. Mind is one such.  It is not absolutely real like Brahman nor absolutely asat like hare's horn.  It is an appearance and does have some utility.  The rope-snake produces fear, etc. That is the prayojanam of it. The mind is useful to know the Truth. 

regards
subbu
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages