Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Re: A 'shivastuti' by Sri Goswami Tulasidas
V Subrahmanian
I agree with your observations Sir.
subrahmanian.v
...as no two words are exactly synonym with the other in any given language, specifically such a rich language like Sanskrit. At the best, grammarians remarked ---"सर्वे सर्वार्थवाचकाः"There are such authentic assumptions --धातूनामनेकार्थत्वात्, अव्ययानामनेकार्थत्वात् etc.On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 1:28 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Shrisha Rao <shrish...@gmail.com> wrote:
'Incognito' is another meaning in the Apte Sanskrit-English Dictionary. It also cites the Raghuvamsham: ’पलितछद्मना जरा’ (Old age comes in the guise of grey hair..)
I don't see how that is quite pertinent; these are meanings for छद्म, not for माया. It is well known that छद्म connotes various forms of deceit, including by dress and behavior, but this is not apropos in respect of ईश्वर, who does not control creatures while "dwelling in their hearts" by dressing deceptively.
What I think would be 'decisive' in determining the sense in which Shankara has used the word ' छद्मना’ to explain 'मायया’ as not anything other than what has been already stated (that is, in the sense of 'remaining unseen/hidden/incognito/not revealing His identity ) is the fact that in Advaita the jiva-s are already in delusion being made so by anAdyavidyA/mAyA: अनादिमायया सुप्तः यदा जीवः प्रबुध्यते...(माण्डूक्य), मिथ्याज्ञाननिमित्तः अहमिदं ममेदं इति नैसर्गिकोऽयं लोकव्यवहारः..(preamble to the Brahmasutra bhashya), the Bhagavadgita verses already cited on the instrumentality of mAyA in deluding the jiva-s and hiding Brahman from them, the verses of the 14th Chapter (मोहनं सर्वदेहिनाम्..etc. where rajas, tamas and sattvam are taught as bondage) In this background it would be improper to say or even propose that Ishwara, antaryAmin, would be deluding people or would take up the role of deceiving, etc. That leaves us with the only option of taking the explanation as pertaining to 'remaining hidden/in the background/unseen by the beings that are being controlled.'
Moreover, in Advaita the meaning of 'controlling, antaryamanam' is nothing more than Brahman/Ishwara being merely present, सन्निधिमात्त्रेण. It is a passive role that gives no scope for Ishwara/Brahman to do anything. That such is the case can be known from this comment of Sri Jayatirtha
एवं तर्हि प्रकृतिरेव सूयते, त्वयि तु तत्सन्निधानात्कर्तृत्वोपचारमात्रमित्यापन्नमिति तन्निवृत्त्यर्थमिदं वाक्यम्। (9.10 BG)
while the shAnkarabhAshya (9.10 ) is:
मया अध्यक्षेण सर्वतो दृशिमात्रस्वरुपेण अविक्रियात्मना अध्यक्षेण मया, मम माया त्रिगुणात्मिका अविद्यालक्षणा प्रकृतिः सूयते उत्पादयति सचराचरं जगत्। ..दृशिकर्मत्वापत्तिनिमित्ता हि जगतः सर्वा प्रवृत्तिः -- अहम् इदं भोक्ष्ये, पश्यामि इदम्, शृणोमि इदम्, सुखमनुभवामि, दुःखमनुभवामि, तदर्थमिदं करिष्ये, इदं ज्ञास्यामि, इत्याद्या अवगतिनिष्ठा अवगत्यवसानैव।
In another comment Sri Jayatirtha criticizes with the words 'ताटस्थ्यं वारयति’ the shAnkaran expression of Brahman's passive/unconnected-with-the-world role.
In the Br.Up. mantra 3.8.3 on the antaryaami brAhmaNam which is the basis for the BG verse under discussion, Shankaracharya says -
(पृथिवी)देवताकार्यकरणस्येश्वरसाक्षिमात्रसान्निध्येन हि नियमेन प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्ती स्याताम् । ...पृथिवीदेवतां यमयति नियमति स्वव्यापारेऽन्तरोऽभ्यन्तरस्तिष्ठन् ...
From this it is clear that the अन्तर्यामित्वम्/अन्तर्यमनत्वम् /भ्रामयन्..of Ishwara is nothing other than His merely being present (sannidhimAtra) a sAkshi (mAtra). And most importantly, the antaryAmin, the Upanishad says, controls from being, is 'located', 'inside', antaraH. And therefore the one that is controlled does not know It. All this is what is conveyed by the BG verse through the words 'bhrAmayan..mAyayA'. It is because it is located unseen/unknown the verse uses the word mAyayA which is explained as 'chadmanA'.
Considering the above we can conclude that the BG 18.61 description for the term 'मायया’ (भ्रामयन् तिष्ठति ईश्वरः सर्वभूतानां हृद्देशे) can be none other than His remaining unseen/unknown by/to that which He impels/antaryamayati. This portion that He is unknown by the bhUta-s is not explicitly specified in the BG verse but by looking at the mantra which other commentators have also cited we find that the antaryAmi brAhmana mantra is the basis for this verse, and that the mantra itself says that the antaryAmin remains unknown, being seated 'inside'. It is this remaining unknowm/unseen being inside is what is being stated by Shankara as 'chadmanaa' for the term 'mAyayA'. So, His antaryamanam is by remaining hidden (antaro yamayati).
And that is why Shankara takes the यन्त्रारूढानि as an analogy by supplying an 'iva' and goes on to give the puppet example where the puppeteer remains in the background unseen by others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppeteer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppetry#cite_ref-G-m-b-14-15_8-0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppet
Light Curtain Puppet
//The Light Curtain Puppet presentations use specifically focused light to highlight small areas of a performance, allowing the puppet to be seen while the manipulators remain invisible. The puppets stand on a stage divided into an unlit background and a well-lit foreground, meeting to form a "curtain" of light. The puppeteer dresses in black and remains hidden in the unlit background of the stage while the puppet is held across the light curtain in the lit foreground of the stage. "Light curtain puppet" is an umbrella term, and any puppet which is extended into a well-lit area where its handler remains separated from the puppet by a division of light may be called a light curtain puppet.[citation needed]//
> Maybe because of this that the word छद्म is used by Bhagavatpada.Interesting speculation, but hardly convincing -- a textual basis for correlating माया and छद्म is still wanting.
An amarakosha-like or Paninian source for the correlation may or may not be available. Widely read scholars can bring out specific meanings of the word 'maayaa' used by kavi-s, if any. But a direct source not being available does not take away the validity of the usage. There are many usages of the word 'chadmanA' conveying the meaning of 'remaining hidden/unknown by others, etc. barring the widely-thought-of meaning: kApaTyam.
http://m.spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=wile&script=HK&direction=ES&link=y
The words mAyA and cchadman are listed together in the above page to mean the English word 'wile'.
Here we have a usage of 'mAyA' in the sense of 'being unnoticed/unidentified':
अथ रामश्च तं हत्वा मारीचं माययाऽऽगतम् ।
निवृत्तो लक्ष्मणं दृष्ट्वा तेन गत्वा स्वमाश्रमम् ॥१११॥
The case of 'mAyAmRga' is pertinent. On the one hand it is a deception, but there is the other important element - of the real person (mArIcha) there not being revealed, or to be more specific, not identifiable. It is in this latter sense that the 'mAyA/cchadma' is used here. We have just seen an example of a BhAShyakAra taking the term 'bhrAmayan' to actually 'delude', contrary to the other explanations, that I have so far seen, of simply 'इतस्ततश्चालयन् (causing the jiva-s to move hither and thither).
http://www.oocities.org/goruratreya/laghu_aaraNya_maarIca_dn_1.htm
१८५. सौवर्णस्त्वं मृगो भूत्वा चित्रो रजतबिन्दुभिः ।
१८६. आश्रमे तस्य रामस्य सीतायाः प्रमुखे चर ॥
१८७. त्वां तु मायामृगं दृष्ट्वा काञ्चनं जातविस्मया ।
१८८. आनयैनमिति क्षिप्रं रामं वक्ष्यति मैथिली ॥
त्यक्त्वा सुदुस्त्यजसुरैप्सितराज्यलक्ष्मीम् धर्मिष्ठः आर्यवचसा यत् अगात् अरण्यम्।
मायामृगं दयितया ईप्सितम् अन्वधावत् वन्दे महापुरुष ते चरणारविन्दम्॥३४॥
इति श्रीमद्भागवते महापुराणे पारमहंस्यां संहितायामेकादशस्कन्धे वसुदेवनारदसंवादे
पञ्चमोऽध्यायः॥५॥
In fact if one sees the various meanings for the term 'माया’ given in the Apte Dictionary one would conclude that this term is very unfriendly to depict Ishwara's controlling (as is used in the instrumental in the BG 18.61). The only non-'negative' sense listed is 'compassion,pity' and this would hardly fit the meaning the verse is conveying. See also: Monier Williams:
for माया
art , wisdom , extraordinary or supernatural power (only in the earlier language)
[L=163082] illusion , unreality , deception , fraud , trick , sorcery , witchcraft magic RV. &c
[L=163083] an unreal or illusory image , phantom , apparition ib. (esp. ibc. = false , unreal , illusory ; cf. comp.)
[L=163084] duplicity (with Buddhists one of the 24 minor evil passions) Dharmas. 69 (in phil.) Illusion (identified in the सांख्य with प्रकृति or प्रधान and in that system , as well as in the वेदा*न्त , regarded as the source of the visible universe) IW. 83 ; 108
छद्मन् -
external covering , deceptive dress , disguise , pretext , pretence , deceit , fraud Mn. MBh. R. Pan5cat. iii , 15 , 1÷2 Ragh. xii , 2
[L=75505] (in dram.) deceitful intelligence or tidings Das3ar. i , 38
Here is a reference from the Mahabharatha where the narration is about the 'अज्ञातवासः’ (the very word conveys the meaning: 'not known by others') in the virATa Kingdom. आदिपर्वादिसर्वपर्वणां संक्षेपेण वृत्तान्तकथनम् -
अतः परं निबोधेदं वैराटं पर्व विस्तरम्।
विराटनगरे गत्वा श्मशाने विपुलां शमीम्।।1-2-207a
1-2-207bदृष्ट्वा संनिदधुस्तत्र पाण्डवा ह्यायुधान्युत।
यत्र प्रविश्य नगरं छद्मना न्यवसंस्तु ते।।1-2-208a
1-2-208b
Here is a usage of the word 'ChadmanA' to simply mean 'they lived there incognito; in hiding'. There was no kApaTyam, deceit, on the part of the Pandava-s. Their identities remaining unknown they did all the good to their hosts. Duryodhana (or his aides) instruct the Pandava-s:
अथापरं चाविदितं चरेथाः सर्वैःसह भ्रातृभिश्छद्मगूढः।। 3-34-9 MB
After the 12-year vanavAsa, live with your brothers
(addressing YudhiShThira) 'unknown' (incognito) with
your brothers hiding/without revealing your identities.
This instruction is not one to resort to kApaTyam. It is
simply to live incognito for one more year.
The antaryAmi brAhmaNa of the Br.Up. also says:
The antaryAmi, though present in the very locus of the
ones that are controlled, yet is unknown/unidentified
by them (since it is 'inside' अन्तरो यमयति. यं पृथिवी न वेद.)
It is exactly in this sense that
the word 'chadmanA' is used in the bhashyam.
http://vishnusarma.blogspot.in/2012/05/blog-post_7548.html (panchatantra)
अथांयॆद्युर् मंद-विषश् छद्मना मंदम्̣ मंदम्̣ विसर्पति। तच् च द्ड़्ष्ट्वा जलपादॊ ब्रवीत्-भद्र! मंदविष! यथा-पूर्वम्̣ किम् अद्य साधु नॊह्यतॆ? (the snake 'hides' its strength and moves in a low pace).मायया शत्रवॊ वध्या अवध्याः स्युर् बलॆन यॆ।यथा स्त्रीरूपम् आस्थाय हतॊ भीमॆन कीचकः॥पञ्च_३.३०॥
[One has to resort to 'mAyic' means to eliminate enemies if they cannot be killed by a straight fight. Just like Bhimasena..] .One can take the example of Rama killing Vaali by hiding behind a tree.]
Here is a usage of the terms mAyA and chadma as paryAya-s:
अच्छद्मना मायया च मृगाणां वध इष्यते। 1-117-13 (MB)
Not by conceit or by conceit....In other words it is अमायया
मायया च ...
ऋतुपर्णो࠽पि शुश्राव बाहुकच्छद्मिनं नलम्।। 3-77-8 (Nala without revealing his identity
served as the charioteer for RtuparNa with the name of Baahuka) Here also, there is
no kApaTyam but only not revealing the true identity.
Even otherwise, a puppeteer is characterized by complete control over his puppets (with his strings/wires) and the skill and dexterity with which he exercises said control to get the puppets to do as he wishes; he is not characterized by deception.
True. That is why Shankara is not taking the 'bhramA/delusion' sense for the term bhrAmayan' in the verse. And since there is no deception in the case of a puppeteer but only remaining unseen that 'mAyayA' is explained as 'chadmanA' as can be seen in the several references shown above where the word is used in the sense which is free of 'deception'. Nothing more need to be read into it. There is no deception but only remaining unseen by others. In fact, in can be said that the entire Vedanta has come to reveal this One who is not known to everyone the way other things are known. That the word 'mAyA' has this sense also is not difficult for scholars to appreciate.
शिक्ये निधायाद्य पयोदधीनि बहिर्गतायां व्रजनायिकायाम् ।
भुक्त्वा यथेष्टं कपटेन सुप्तं बालं मुकुन्दं मनसा स्मरामि ॥५॥ (बालमुकुन्दाष्टकम्)
Regards
subrahmanian.v> The puppeteer example is given by other commentators too like Madhusudana Saraswati. The word in the Gita verse that necessitates this is 'यन्त्रारूढानि’. 'मायया’ is applicable both to the analogy and the antaryAmin.There is nothing surprising there; the puppet analogy is there in the BG verse itself so all commentators have to go with it. The issue is not the propriety of characterizing the अन्तर्यामी as a puppeteer, but the basis for reading माया as छद्म in the verse. There are authorities for other things; e.g., Śankara cites the RV to read अर्जुन as referring to ईश्वर, rather than being a mere सम्बोधन as one would normally suppose, and others cite एको देवः सर्वभूतेषु गूढः, etc., but there is none for reading माया as छद्म, nor a clear explanation of the propriety of doing so.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> subrahmanian.v
--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com
--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com