The theory of two truths in India

[Kalyan K]

Here is a very informative article on the theory of two truths in India-


https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/twotruths-india/

[Kalyan K]

Also from wikipedia-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine

The best known interpretation is from the Madhyamaka school of Mahāyāna Buddhism, whose founder was Nagarjuna,[1] For Nagarjuna, the two truths are epistemological truths. The phenomenal world is accorded a provisional existence. The character of the phenomenal world is declared to be neither real nor unreal, but logically indeterminable. Ultimately, phenomena are empty (sunyata) of an inherent self or essence, but exist depending on other phenomena (Pratītyasamutpāda).[1]


The Jain philosopher Kundakunda was influenced by Nagarjuna to develop a Jain version of the theory of two truths.[54]

Advaita took over from the Madhyamika the idea of levels of reality.[57]

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste,

The idea of two truths is ultimately an idea that is as old as the upaniShads themselves. The idea that effects are simply names, i.e constructs of speech, and the only reality is the cause, is found in the sixth chapter of the ChAndogya (6.1.4 - 6.1.6) वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम्. Shankaracharya in his bhAShya explains - "कथं मृत्पिण्डे कारणे विज्ञाते कार्यमन्यद्विज्ञातं स्यात् ? नैष दोषः, कारणेनानन्यत्वात्कार्यस्य । यन्मन्यसे अन्यस्मिन्विज्ञातेऽन्यन्न ज्ञायत इति — सत्यमेवं स्यात् , यद्यन्यत्कारणात्कार्यं स्यात् , न त्वेवमन्यत्कारणात्कार्यम् । कथं तर्हीदं लोके — इदं कारणमयमस्य विकार इति ? शृणु । वाचारम्भणं वागारम्भणं वागालम्बनमित्येतत् । कोऽसौ ? विकारो नामधेयं नामैव नामधेयम् , स्वार्थे धेयप्रत्ययः, वागालम्बनमात्रं नामैव केवलं न विकारो नाम वस्त्वस्ति ; परमार्थतो मृत्तिकेत्येव मृत्तिकैव तु सत्यं वस्त्वस्ति ॥"  

As the topic being discussed is the knowledge of everything through the knowledge of one, and the example of the "clay and pot" is cited to illustrate this, the interpretation given is that all effects are nothing but the causes, and by knowing the causes all effects are known. In fact, there is no different object corresponding to the effect - it is merely the cause with a different name. This is later extended to say that every cause is only intermediary, it itself being an effect and thus nothing but its cause, with a different name. Thus if one were to seek the cause of everything, one is led to the ultimate reality is the Cause, सत्. ( Ch 6.8.4 तस्य क्व मूलꣳ स्यादन्यत्रान्नादेवमेव खलु सोम्यान्नेन शुङ्गेनापो मूलमन्विच्छद्भिः सोम्य शुङ्गेन तेजो मूलमन्विच्छ तेजसा सोम्य शुङ्गेन सन्मूलमन्विच्छ सन्मूलाः सोम्येमाः सर्वाः प्रजाः सदायतनाः सत्प्रतिष्ठाः) - Thus everything in creation is the one ultimate reality with a multiplicity of names and in order to know everything, one needs to know only that one thing, as there is only one thing in reality.

Thus the two truths, one a conventional reality corresponding to the manifold objects perceived conventionally and the ultimate reality that there is only that one, non-dual entity(ekamevAdvitIya) is an upadiShic concept, and not an idea that advaita borrows from Buddhism. 

However, we know that this charge has been made since at least Gaudapada's times, for this leads him to comment at the end of his kArikas, नैतद्बुद्धेन भाषितम्. As Shankara explains in his kArika bhAShya, ज्ञानज्ञेयज्ञातृभेदरहितं परमार्थतत्त्वमद्वयमेतन्न बुद्धेन भाषितम् । यद्यपि बाह्यार्थनिराकरणं ज्ञानमात्रकल्पना च अद्वयवस्तुसामीप्यमुक्तम् । इदं तु परमार्थतत्त्वमद्वैतं वेदान्तेष्वेव विज्ञेयमित्यर्थः ॥ The ultimate reality being devoid of the differences of knowledge, known and knower  has not been spoken of by the Buddha. Even though the refutation of external objects as superimpositions on consciousness has similarity to the non-dual reality, that this non-duality is the ultimate reality can be known only through the upaniShads. 

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

On Sat, 26 May 2018, 10:58 Kalyan K, <pk.k...@gmail.com> wrote:

Here is a very informative article on the theory of two truths in India-


https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/twotruths-india/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Kalyan K]

Dear Sri Venkatraghavan

The chhAndogya upanishad that you quoted, does not talk about two truths, which are samvriti or vyavaharika satya and paramArthika satya. It is also a passage that is open to interpretations. Where as you can observe that someone like Nagarjuna makes explicit mention of two truths in MMK.

Regards
Kalyan

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sri Kalyan,

Indeed it does. The words of the mantra - मृत्तिका इति एव सत्यं -  the pot is real only as the clay - is indicative of the two realities. There is one commonly accepted reality assigned to names and forms, and one reality as the cause which is ultimately real. The use of एव (only) in the shruti is the critical word to be noted. 

The word 'only' presupposes a multiplicity of real entities in the mind of the hearer, which the shruti wishes to negate and conclude that there is only one reality ultimately.

There may be other explanations offered to this mantra by different schools, but that does not preclude advaita deriving the idea of different levels of reality from shruti statements such as this. 

However, even if the idea of a gradation of reality was postulated by some other school, as long as it is consistent with shruti (ie no shrutahAni ashrutakalpanA), there is no harm accepting it. Shankara himself has said this when talking about yoga darshana. 

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

There is a book by G.M.C.Sprung titled The Problem of Two Truths in Buddhism and Vedānta published in 1973.  May be of interest to people reading about this discussion.

Madhav Deshpande

Campbell, California

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Kalyan K]

Dear Sri Venkatraghavan


//The words of the mantra - मृत्तिका इति एव सत्यं - the pot is real only as the clay - is indicative of the two realities. There is one commonly accepted reality assigned to names and forms, and one reality as the cause which is ultimately real. The use of एव (only) in the shruti is the critical word to be noted.//

The chhAndogya is reducing all objects to their essences. It is not talking of two truths. However if you think it is talking of 2 truths, let us respectfully agree to disagree, since I am looking for an explicit mention of 2 truths doctrine, like what Nagarjuna does and not a cryptic statement that has diverse interpretations.

Regards
Kalyan

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste,

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 1:08 AM Kalyan K <pk.k...@gmail.com> wrote:

​​

//The words of the mantra - मृत्तिका इति एव सत्यं -  the pot is real only as the clay - is indicative of the two realities. There is one commonly accepted reality assigned to names and forms, and one reality as the cause which is ultimately real. The use of एव (only) in the shruti is the critical word to be noted.//

The chhAndogya is reducing all objects to their essences. It is not talking of two truths. However if you think it is talking of 2 truths, let us respectfully agree to disagree, since I am looking for an explicit mention of 2 truths doctrine, like what Nagarjuna does and not a cryptic statement that has diverse interpretations.

Even just neti neti mantra is sufficient to explain two levels of realities, since prAptasyaiva niShedhaH. Since something else is taken as a reality and therefore the negation to land into what is really real. Even if Advaitins are said to have interpreted it in that manner, there is no denying that most philosophers consider the state of mokSha as a different reality than bondage, be it Vedantins, other Astikas or Jainas. Therefore, the accusation that it is borrowed from Buddhism is out of place as it doesn't take away the fact that the Upanishad itself talks of negation. Why indeed then isn't "negating everything" not borrowed by Buddhism from Vedas?

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] */

​

[Krishna Kashyap]

The prominent BrhadAranyaka upanishad which states "satyasya satyam". 

the full verse :

6. tasya haitasya puruṣasya rūpam yathā māhārajanaṁ vāsaḥ, yathā pāṇḍv-āvikam, yathendragopaḥ, yathāgnyarciḥ, yathā puṇḍarīkam, yathā sakṛd-vidyuttam; sakṛd-vidyutteva ha vā asya śrīr bhavati, ya evaṁ veda. athāta ādeśaḥ na iti na iti, na hy etasmād iti, na ity anyat param asti; atha nāma-dheyaṁ satyasya satyam iti. prāṇā vai satyam, teṣām eṣa satyam.

Is convincing enough to prove that there is this 2 level truth. you dont have to go into minor or later or whatever upanishads. here Prana is interpreted as Jiva in some bhashyas. Obviously the absolute truth is not a superimposition of anyone's views on Upanishads. it is there in the Upanishads itself.

this is objectively true.

Like how KSV my teacher says, how can there be uniform truth?

dont tell me you want to see the same old N.Korea USA tension up in Vaikunta? 

You dont want to see stinking garbage in Vaikunta! either.

Obviously even for any kind of buddhism, which accepts sarvam duhkha mayam , and at the same time accept " nibbAnam paramam sukham - Dhammapada", there has to be 2 level truth.

This is a need for any system.

I each system these 2 level truths may be dealth with in a different way as per their own principles and historical issues.

2 level truth has to be vaidika.

But the relation between these states and is one a precursor or cause of the other? etc. are viewed differently in different schools. The devil is in the details!

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Amit Asthana]

Hi, 

Can someone tell me about people who use Kashyap Title. 

Which caste, Varna or line or generation they belong to. 

--

Amit Asthana

7208787247 | am...@asthana.me | Skype: amitasthana11 

[Kalyan K]

Sri Praveenji


//Why indeed then isn't "negating everything" not borrowed by Buddhism from Vedas?//

There might have been some concepts borrowed from upanishads into Buddhism. However, we are talking of 2 truths doctrine here and this has been borrowed by advaita from buddhism.

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sri Kalyan ji,

Sure, we can stop the discussion here.

However, as you seem to view  reducing objects to their essences as being different to pAramArthika satya, it would be helpful if you can present your understanding of the terms vyAvahArika satya and pAramArthika satya as postulated by advaita.

It would also be helpful if you can interpret the words नैतद् बुद्धेन भाषितम् in the mANDUkya kArika - what was the teaching that GaudapAda referred to as not having been taught by the SAkyamuni?

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

[V Subrahmanian]

The two truths doctrine is well established in the Upanishads and smritis with and without the words 'paramarthika-vyavaharika' and it is clear that Buddhism has borrowed it along with several other concepts from the Upanishads. 

The above Karika of Nagarjuna contains the Mandukya Upanishad  7th mantra words: prapanchopashamam  and shivam.  Thus we can clearly see that it is a case of  'lifting from Vedanta.'.  Having lifting from Vedanta not only the final siddhanta of prapanchopashamam of the Vedanta, they have also borrowed the concept of vyavaharika and paramarthika that is well prevalent and deep rooted in the Upanishads, Mahabharata, Vishnu Purana, etc. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Kalyanji,

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:36 PM Kalyan K <pk.k...@gmail.com> wrote:

//Why indeed then isn't "negating everything" not borrowed by Buddhism from Vedas?//

There might have been some concepts borrowed from upanishads into Buddhism. However, we are talking of 2 truths doctrine here and this has been borrowed by advaita from buddhism.

Since foregone conclusions are what you like to have: no, it hasn't.​ And then, by your own preferred way: lets agree to disagree; as it is also a matter of preference!

[Kalyan K]

//The above Karika of Nagarjuna contains the Mandukya Upanishad 7th mantra words: prapanchopashamam and shivam. Thus we can clearly see that it is a case of 'lifting from Vedanta.'.//

To prove that Nagarjuna "lifted from vedanta", you have to prove that the Mandukya upanishad is pre-Nagarjuna, which is by no means accepted universally.

[Dr.C.S.R. Prabhu]

How can you say that Mandukya Upanishad is post Nagarjuna?

On Mon 28 May, 2018, 5:03 PM Kalyan K, <pk.k...@gmail.com> wrote:

//The above Karika of Nagarjuna contains the Mandukya Upanishad  7th mantra words: prapanchopashamam  and shivam.  Thus we can clearly see that it is a case of  'lifting from Vedanta.'.//

To prove that Nagarjuna "lifted from vedanta", you have to prove that the Mandukya upanishad is pre-Nagarjuna, which is by no means accepted universally.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.