Difference between dharma-dharmi and guNa-guNii bhaavas?

[Sai Susarla]

Thanks to Prof. K.S. Kannan, Prof. Amba Kulkarni and Prof. Siva for your insightful responses.

I have another question on similar lines:

Is there any technical definition of dharma-dharmi bhaava and guNa-guNii bhaava?

Are they distinct or synonymous? Could you cite an example to illustrate?

My underlying question is, should we have both as possible inter-concept relations or one of them is enough?

Thanks,

- Sai.

[K S Kannan]

Apparently, dharma-dharmi-bhava is more comprehensive than guna-guni-bhava. However, if you can present the examples you have in mind, and the purposes that need to be served, it may be more clear and easier to discern

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

[Sai Susarla]

In the following lines from Ashtanga hrdaya,

स्निग्धः शीतो गुरुर् मन्दः श्लक्ष्णो मृत्स्नः स्थिरः कफः । (१२॰१)

तत्र रूक्षो लघुः शीतः खरः सूक्ष्मश् चलो ऽनिलः । (११॰१)

What is the relation between kapha and snigdha, shiita, guru, manda etc, and

between anila and rUkSha, laghu, shIta, khara, sUkShma, chala?

In

वायुः पित्तं कफश् चेति त्रयो दोषाः समासतः ॥ (६॰२)

what is the relation between dosha and vAyu, pitta, kapha? We tagged them as sAmAnya-visheSha (type, subtype)

Should above also be viewed as type-subtype?

If so, what is an example of dharma-dharmi and guNa-guNi?

- Sai.

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:25 PM K S Kannan <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

Apparently, dharma-dharmi-bhava is more comprehensive than guna-guni-bhava.

This is true. We can say guni is dharmi and guna is dharma. The 24 gunas accepted in nyaya shaastra may qualify for a guna-guni bhaava.  Otherwise, everywhere, by vikalpa one can use either dharma-dharmi or guna-guni bhaava. While kriyaa is dharma, kriyaavat/vaan is dharmi. घटवत्त्वं धर्मः, भूतलं तु तद्धर्मि | शौक्ल्यं धर्मः पटस्तु धर्मी | 

ब्रह्मसूत्रम् - अदृश्यत्वादिगुणको धर्मोक्तेः ॥ २१ ॥  अत्र गुणशब्दः तथा धर्मशब्दश्च उभौ प्रयुक्तौ | भाष्यपर्यालोचने इदमवगम्यते अनयोर्भेदो नास्तीति |

श्रीमद्भगवद्गीताभाष्यम्चतुर्दशोऽध्यायःश्लोक ६ - भाष्यम् -

 

 ज्ञानमिति सुखसाहचर्यात् क्षेत्रस्यैव विषयस्य अन्तःकरणस्य धर्मः, न आत्मनः ; आत्मधर्मत्वे सङ्गानुपपत्तेः, बन्धानुपपत्तेश्च ।    

श्रीमद्भगवद्गीताभाष्यम्त्रयोदशोऽध्यायःश्लोक ६

अथ इदानीम् आत्मगुणा इति यानाचक्षते वैशेषिकाः तेपि क्षेत्रधर्मा एव न तु क्षेत्रज्ञस्य………  

In the above two examples, the content of 'atma-dharma' and the content of 'atma-guna' is the same: 

https://www.ayurvitewellness.com/2547/the-concept-of-guna-in-ayurveda/

Atma Gunas are 6 in number. They are- Ichchha, Dwesh, Sukha, Dukha, Prayatna and Buddhi. In total 41 Gunas are considered.  

अथ इदानीम् आत्मगुणा इति यानाचक्षते वैशेषिकाः तेपि क्षेत्रधर्मा एव न तु क्षेत्रज्ञस्य इत्याह भगवान् -

इच्छा द्वेषः सुखं दुःखं सङ्घातश्चेतना धृतिः । 
एतत्क्षेत्रं समासेन सविकारमुदाहृतम् ॥ ६ ॥

Vaisheshikas accept icchaa, dwesha, sukha, etc. as attributes of atman itself. They call them atma-gunas. In 14.6 bhashya Shankara says sukha/jnana is not atmadharma (atma = vedantic atma) and they are essentially of the antahkarana, mind. 

Thus we see that 'dharma' and 'guna' being used in the same sense, vikalpena. 

warm regards

subrahmanian.v

 

However, if you can present the examples you have in mind, and the purposes that need to be served, it may be more clear and easier to discern.

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:54 PM Sai Susarla <sai.s...@gmail.com> wrote:

In the following lines from Ashtanga hrdaya,

स्निग्धः शीतो गुरुर् मन्दः श्लक्ष्णो मृत्स्नः स्थिरः कफः । (१२॰१)

तत्र रूक्षो लघुः शीतः खरः सूक्ष्मश् चलो ऽनिलः । (११॰१)

What is the relation between kapha and snigdha, shiita, guru, manda etc, and

between anila and rUkSha, laghu, shIta, khara, sUkShma, chala?

In

वायुः पित्तं कफश् चेति त्रयो दोषाः समासतः ॥ (६॰२)

what is the relation between dosha and vAyu, pitta, kapha? We tagged them as sAmAnya-visheSha (type, subtype)

Should above also be viewed as type-subtype?

Yes.  स्निग्धः शीतो गुरुर् मन्दः श्लक्ष्णो मृत्स्नः स्थिरः  are कफविशेषाः |

रूक्षो लघुः शीतः खरः सूक्ष्मश् चलः  are अनिलविशेषाः |       वायुपित्तकफाः दोषविशेषाः | 

If so, what is an example of dharma-dharmi and guNa-guNi?

In antahkarana which is dharmi, raga, dvesha, etc. are dharma-s.   A sincere spriritual saadhaka will possess daivi guna-s. So, he is the guNi.  Like he who has dhanam will be dhanI.   

Please see my earlier mail.

regards

subrahmanian.v 

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 12:14 AM V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:54 PM Sai Susarla <sai.s...@gmail.com> wrote:

In the following lines from Ashtanga hrdaya,

स्निग्धः शीतो गुरुर् मन्दः श्लक्ष्णो मृत्स्नः स्थिरः कफः । (१२॰१)

तत्र रूक्षो लघुः शीतः खरः सूक्ष्मश् चलो ऽनिलः । (११॰१)

What is the relation between kapha and snigdha, shiita, guru, manda etc, and

between anila and rUkSha, laghu, shIta, khara, sUkShma, chala?

In

वायुः पित्तं कफश् चेति त्रयो दोषाः समासतः ॥ (६॰२)

what is the relation between dosha and vAyu, pitta, kapha? We tagged them as sAmAnya-visheSha (type, subtype)

Should above also be viewed as type-subtype?

You can have this relationship: jaati-vyakti.  वायुपित्तकफाः दोषजातेः (तौ) व्यक्तयः |  स्निग्ध......कफजातेः व्यक्तयः | रूक्षादयः अनिलजातेः व्यक्तयः | 

regards

subrahmanian.v 

- Sai.

[K S Kannan]

The issue needs to be resolved taking into account more factors

- of how these "features" fare broadly, 

in terms of actions (and reactions/interactions) they involve in.

To foresee issues is to forestall problems.

Issues of coplanarity/hierarchy (for handling inheritance properties)/

one is to one (or -many) mappings/set theoretical concepts of subsets/supersets/intersections etc. 

may all arise sooner or later. The more the actual issues we come face to face with by and by, 

the greater the clarity to label them in one way or the other arises.

Simple approaches that prove sufficient in early stages 

betray their inadequacy as complexities and intricacies surface and burgeon;

retractions and reformulations perhaps become inevitable

in any budding scientific/mathematical treatment.

Seeing things may be easy, 

but perceiving relationships among them requires insight.

Well was it asserted, in a different context, though, viz.

yoginAm tu vis'es"o'yam

sambandhe sAvadhAnatA.

Search for/coinage of, terms for the possible varied relationships should also help.

Sorry for being somewhat theoretical. But the conceptual treatment has perforce to evolve

via practical difficulties that one comes across or passes through. 

Theory and practice have thus to go hand in hand. 

In a way, you cannot cross the bridge till you actually have arrived at.

--
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.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Apropos Prof. Kannan's caution, since the examples mentioned by Dr Sai come from Ayurveda, a different way of using terminology for relationships may be required.

While we were discussing the issue of lakshya and lakshaNa in the thread

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/bvparishat/query$20lakshana$20grantha$20and$20lakshya$20grantha%7Csort:date/bvparishat/c9qAloF2mvc/njwF6lwLBAAJ

Dr Savita Sajjan , in the post

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/c9qAloF2mvc/vBXT7ss5AwAJ

said:

||चरकसंहिता|| इन्द्रियस्थानम् - १. वर्णस्वरीयमिन्द्रियम्

 

विकृतिः पुनर्लक्षणनिमित्ता च, लक्ष्यनिमित्ता च, निमित्तानुरूपा च||६||

रिष्टाधिकाराधिकृतां विकृतिं विवेचयितुं सर्वानेव विकृतिभेदानाह- विकृतिरित्यादि||६||

 

तत्र लक्षणनिमित्ता नाम सा यस्याः शरीरे लक्षणान्येव हेतुभूतानि भवन्ति दैवात्; लक्षणानि हि कानिचिच्छरीरोपनिबद्धानि भवन्ति, यानि हि तस्मिंस्तस्मिन् कालेतत्राधिष्ठानमासाद्य तां तां विकृतिमुत्पादयन्ति|७|

    Cakrapani Opinion-हेतुभूतानीति हेतुसदृशानि| तेन दैवमेव नखरेखापद्मादिसामुद्रिकोक्तलक्षणयुक्ते शरीरे राज्यधनगमनवधबन्धनादिरूपविकृतिप्राप्तौ हेतुः, लक्षणानि तु दैवनिमित्तानिबोधकमात्राणि, अत एव दैवादित्युक्तं; दैवं च प्राक्तनं [१४] कर्मोच्यते| विकृतिमुत्पादयन्तीत्यत्रापि दैवादिति योजनीयं; तेन, दैवबलादेव लक्षणानां राज्यधनवधबन्धनादिरूपविकृतिकर्तृत्वम्| तस्मिंस्तस्मिन् कालेइत्यनेन लक्षणसूचितादृष्टपरिपाककाले नियतत्वं विकृतेर्दर्शयति| लक्षणासूचिताश्च [१५] राज्यादय इह पुरुषस्य कदाचिद्भवन्तोऽस्वाभाविका एवेति कृत्वा विकृतिशब्देनोच्यन्ते||७(१)||

 

लक्ष्यनिमित्ता तु सा यस्या उपलभ्यते निमित्तं यथोक्तं [१६] निदानेषु|७|

 

Cakrapani Opinion- यथोक्तं निदानेष्विति यथा- रूक्षादिसेवया वातादिप्रकोपरूपा विकृतिर्निदानोक्तेत्यर्थः||७(२)||

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

Here, the pair of terms lakshya -lakshaNa are used in a different sense than lakshaNa =generalisation from cases, lakshya = one of the cases forming the basis for that lakshaNa

Here, it is being used in the sense of symptoms or bodily /psychological features that constitute a collective of such features such as a disease or a systemic imbalance , dOSha, or a systemic major component such as vAta, pitta and kapha

लक्ष्यनिमित्ता तु सा यस्या उपलभ्यते निमित्तं यथोक्तं [१६] निदानेषु|७|

 

Cakrapani Opinion- यथोक्तं निदानेष्विति यथा- रूक्षादिसेवया वातादिप्रकोपरूपा विकृतिर्निदानोक्तेत्यर्थः||७(२)||

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )