Pratibhasika Satta in Advaita Vedanta
Sourin Dasgupta
V Subrahmanian
Dear Scholars,Please help me ascertain the source of the characterisation of pratibhasika objects in Advaita Vedanta as "pratitikalamatra satta".
Also oblige by kindly providing other definition(s) of the term pratibhasika (if available) along with the source.
Uddhavagītā published by Ramakrishna Maṭha, Chennai.
अविद्यमानोऽप्यवभासते यो, वैकारिको राजससर्ग एषः ।
ब्रह्म स्वयंज्योतिरतो विभाति, ब्रह्मेन्द्रियार्थात्मविकारचित्रम् ॥23.22॥
Here the teaching is: The creation (world), though not existing, appears to exist. The self-effulgent Brahman alone shines.
न यत् पुरस्तात् उत यत् न पश्चात् मध्ये च तत् न व्यपदेशमात्रम् .
भूतं प्रसिद्धं च परेण यद्यत् तत् एव तत् स्यात् इति मे मनीषा .. 22.22.
This is very reminiscent of the famous Gaudapada karika:
आदावन्ते च यन्नस्ति वर्तमानेऽपि तत्तथा [That which is not in the beginning and end - before creation and after destruction - is to be known as not there even during the time of its appearing as existing.]
गुणमय्याः जीवयोन्याः विमुक्तः ज्ञाननिष्ठया।
गुणेषु मायामात्रेषु दृश्यमानेषु अवस्तुतः।
वर्तमानः अपि न पुमान् युज्यते अवस्तुभिः गुणैः॥२॥
तैजसे निद्रया आपन्ने पिण्डस्थः नष्टचेतनः।
मायां प्राप्नोति मृत्युं वा तद्वत् नानार्थदृक् पुमान्॥३॥
किं भद्रं किमभद्रं वा, द्वैतस्यावस्तुनः कियत् ।
वाचोदितं तदनृतं, मनसा ध्यातमेव च ॥४॥
23.4: In duality, which is unreal, what is good or what is bad, and to what extent? Whatever is uttered by the tongue and conceived by the mind is unreal.
There are many other such verses too, bringing out the many facets/features of the prātītikamātrasattā phenomenon.
In the Adhyātmarāmāyaṇa Uttarakāṇḍa 5th sarga there are some verses describing the above phenomenon:
SRIRAM GITA
एवंविधे ज्ञानमये सुखात्मके
कथं भवो दुःखमयः प्रतीयते।
अज्ञानतोऽध्यासवशात्प्रकाशते
ज्ञाने विलीयेत विरोधतः क्षणात्।।36।।
यदन्यदन्यत्र विभाव्यते भ्रमा
दध्यासमित्याहुरमुं विपश्चितः।
असर्पभूतेऽहिविभावनं यथा
रज्ज्वादिके तद्वदपीश्वरे जगत्।।37।।
warm regards
subrahmanian.v
With sincere namaskaras,Sourin Dasgupta,Kolkata
--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Nagaraj Paturi
ण हि स्वप्नप्रबुद्धस्य पुनस्स्वप्ने स्थितिस्तयोः ॥३९॥
ete, these two (viz. jIva and jagat)
sthita-tatvAt, due to having existence
prAti-bhAsike, are prAtibhAsika
na hi, indeed not
svapna-pra-buddhasya, one who is awake from dream
punaH-svapne, again in dream
sthitiH-tayoH, those two exist
These two (the jagat and jIva) are called prAtibhAsika (subjective) when they exist only during their appearance in dream. The two definitely do not continue to exist in dream for one who wakes from dream.
Sourin Dasgupta
Sourin Dasgupta
Nagaraj Paturi
Ajit Gargeshwari
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।
In S'ankara's works, the concept that was repeatedly named praatibhaasika sattaa by Post-Sankara Advaita aachaaryas, repeatedly occurs, but I have yet to recollect/ re-search if he mentions it with that name or not.
--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--Prof.Nagaraj PaturiHyderabad-500044
Nagaraj Paturi
न हि प्रबुद्धः प्रतिभासदेहे
देहोपयोगिन्यपि च प्रपञ्चे |
करोत्यहन्तां ममतानिदन्तां
किन्तु स्वयं तिष्ठति जागरेण ||४५५||
प्रतीतिर्जीवजगतोः स्वप्नवद्भाति यावता |
तावन्निरन्तरं विद्वन्स्वाध्यासापनयं कुरु ||२८५||
V Subrahmanian
'सत्यं च अनृतं च सत्यमभवत्' -
सत्यं च व्यवहारविषयम्, अधिकारात्, न परमार्थसत्यम्; एकमेव हि परमार्थसत्यं ब्रह्म । इह पुनः व्यवहारविषयमापेक्षिकं मृगतृष्णिकाद्यनृतापेक्षया उदकादि सत्यमित्युच्यते । अनृतं च तद्विपरीतम् । किं पुनरेतत् सर्वं सत्यमभवत् परमार्थसत्यम् ।
व्यावहारिकमेवात्र सत्यं स्यादधिकारतः । (सत्यं च व्यवहारविषयम्, अधिकारात्, Bhashya)
पारमार्थिकसत्यस्य वाक्यान्ते समुदीरणात् ॥ 407 (परमार्थसत्यम् bhashya)
[The word satyam which occurs at the beginning of the sentence means empirical truth because of the context and also because of the fact that the absolute truth is spoken of at the end of the sentence.]
Sāyanāchārya’s commentary
In his commentary to the Kṛṣṇayajurvediya taittiriya āraṁyakam wherein occurs the passage that we are now considering, Sayanacharya says:
सत्यम् – लोकव्यवहारे बाधरहितं शुक्तिरज्जुस्थाण्वादि । अनृतं तु व्यहारदशायामारोपितं रजतसर्पचोरादि । …उपरितनसत्यशब्देन ब्रह्म उच्यते ।
[satyam – that which does not undergo sublation in the common parlance namely shell, rope, pillar, etc. anRtam, however, refers to the cases of silver, snake, thief, etc. that undergo sublation in the empirical state itself. The other word ‘Satyam’ refers to Brahman.]
Even he does not use the word 'prātibhāsikam' to comment on the mantra-word 'anṛtam.'
Sri AchyutakrishNAnanda Tirtha, the author of the popular and lucid subcommentary named ‘VanamAlaa’ on the Bhashyam of Bhagavatpada says:
’सत्यं चानृतं च’ इत्यत्र सत्यशब्देन व्यवहारसत्यमेवोच्यते न तु परमार्थसत्यमित्यत्र हेतुः – अधिकारादिति । सच्च त्यच्च इत्यादीनां व्यवहारविषयाणामेव विकाराणां प्रकरणादित्यर्थः । किं च ’सत्यं च’ इत्यत्र परमार्थसत्यग्रहणे परमार्थद्वयं प्रसज्येत, ’सत्यमभवत्’ इत्यत्रापि परमार्थसत्यस्य गृहीतत्वात् ।…. किमपेक्षया उदकादिलक्षणस्य सत्यस्य आपेक्षिकत्वमित्याकाङ्क्षायामाह –मृगतृष्णिकादि इति । ‘सत्यं चानृतं च ’ इत्यत्र व्यावहारिकं वस्तु सत्यशब्दार्थः, प्रातिभासिकं वस्तु अनृतशब्दार्थ इति निष्कर्षः ।
The purport of the above passage is:
In the mantra under consideration the reason to hold the word ‘satyam’ as denoting the vyAvahArika reality alone and not the pAramArthika is the ‘context’ in which this word occurs in the Shruti. Any created entity has to be less real than the Absolutely Real Brahman. This word ‘satyam’ occurs in the context of the entities that undergo transformation – विकारः. Further, if the word ‘satyam’ is understood as the ParamArtha satyam (Brahman), then there will be the contingency of two Absolutely Real entities existing since the other word ‘Satyam’ has been taken to be the Absolutely Real. Related to what is the water and the like taken to be vyAvahaarika? It is relative to the water perceived, in a mirage, due to ignorance. In the passage ‘satyam cha anRtam’, the ‘vyaavaahrika satyam ‘ is what is specified by the word ‘satyam.’ The word ‘anRtam’ denotes anything that is just an appearance. This is the considered conclusion.
That word 'prātibhāsika' is used by the Vedānta Paribhāṣā:
यद्वा त्रिविधं सत्त्वम् पारमार्थिकं व्यावहारिकं प्रातिभासिकं चेति । पारमार्थिकं सत्त्वं ब्रह्मणः व्यावहारिकं सत्त्वमाकाशादेः प्रातिभासिकं सत्त्वं शुक्तिरजतादेः ।
However Shankara has made unambiguous references to the concept of prātibhāsika satya, one example is already shown above in the Taittiriya bhāṣya. The other, for example is:
BSB 3.2.4:
पारमार्थिकस्तु नायं सन्ध्याश्रयः सर्गः वियदादिसर्गवत् — इत्येतावत्प्रतिपाद्यते | न च वियदादिसर्गस्याप्यात्यन्तिकं सत्यत्वमस्ति ; प्रतिपादितं हि ‘तदनन्यत्वमारम्भणशब्दादिभ्यः’ (ब्र. सू. २-१-१४) इत्यत्र समस्तस्य प्रपञ्चस्य मायामात्रत्वम् । प्राक् तु ब्रह्मात्मत्वदर्शनात् वियदादिप्रपञ्चो व्यवस्थितरूपो भवति ; सन्ध्याश्रयस्तु प्रपञ्चः प्रतिदिनं बाध्यते — इत्यतो वैशेषिकमिदं सन्ध्यस्य मायामात्रत्वमुदितम् ॥ ४ ॥
He says: In reality the this dream-creation is not on par with the created world of ether etc. Nor is the created world of ether etc. is absolutely real. This has been established in the BSB 2.1.14. The entire world is māyic alone. Prior to Brahmajnānam the created world of ether, etc. is not annulled (vyavaharika). However, the world perceived in a dream gets sublated everyday. Therefore the status of the dream-world is of a different order (vaiśeṣikam), even though māyā alone (just as the vyavaharika).
Here he makes a clear distinction in the status between the vyāvahārik world and the dream-world (prātibhāsika), though both belong to the category of māyā. The lakṣaṇa of the prātibhāsika satyam is: it is annulled even within the vyāvahārika reality. The lakṣaṇa of the vyāvahārika is: it is annulled only by brahmajnānam.
Thus, as already pointed out from the Gita bhāṣya 2.16, etc. the lakṣaṇa is very clear. Several terms used to indicate the prātibhāsika too have been shown.
In the Panchapādikā of Padmapāda too the term is used to give the same meaning:
प्रतिभासमानस्य रजतस्य एव अवलम्बनत्वात् । अतः मायामयं रजतम् । And the lakṣaṇam is also stated: ...अरजतस्वरूपस्य मिथ्यारजतसम्भेद एव अवभासमानमङ्गीकृत्य । मिथ्यात्वमपि रजतस्य आगन्तुकदोषनिमित्तत्वात् अनन्तरबाधदर्शनात् च कथ्यते, न पुनः परमार्थाभिमतात् रजतात् अन्यत्वमाश्रित्य ।
The term 'pratibhāsa' is alternated by 'avabhāsa'. In the Bhāsyam too we have: अन्यत्रान्यधर्मावभासः to define adhyāsa.
regards
subrahmanian.v
Nagaraj Paturi
V Subrahmanian
http://www.sringeri.net/2014/05/16/news/first-release-of-advaita-sharada-project.htm
Subrahmanyam Korada
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)
Nagaraj Paturi
Sri Sureshwaracharya concurs with the Acharya’s Bhashya!!
In his Taittiriya Upanishad Bhashya Vartika, while commenting, in verse form, the Bhashya of Bhagavatpada, for the mantra: ‘सत्यं च अनृतं च सत्यमभवत्’, the VArtikakAra says:
व्यावहारिकमेवात्र सत्यं स्यादधिकारतः । (सत्यं च व्यवहारविषयम्, अधिकारात्, Bhashya)
पारमार्थिकसत्यस्य वाक्यान्ते समुदीरणात् ॥ 407 (परमार्थसत्यम् bhashya)
[The word satyam which occurs at the beginning of the sentence means empirical truth because of the context and also because of the fact that the absolute truth is spoken of at the end of the sentence.]
It can be seen beyond doubt that Sri Sureshwaracharya unambiguously uses the words ‘pAramArthika satyam’ and ‘vyAvahArika satyam’ to comment upon Bhagavatpada’s words: ‘paramArthasatyam’ and ‘vyavahAra-vishayam’.
It becomes certain that Sri Sureshwaracharya has initiated the use of the two terms: ‘pAramArthika satyam’ and ‘vyAvahArika satyam’ that have been popularly used by the Advaita Acharyas of the Sampradaya initiated by Shankara Bhagavatpada.
This brings us upto the the two terms : vyaavahaarika and paaramaarthika.
Extracting of praatibhaaasika from Shankara's works, adding it to these two and forming the set of three seems to have happened later to Sureshwaracharya.
SUDIPTA MUNSI
Dear Scholars,
Can it be inferred on the basis of the foregoing discussion that the seeds of the concept of pratibhasika satta in early Vedanta is to be found in the concept of the dream-state and that it was only much later that the limited reality of the dream and kindred states were encapsulated in the technical term "pratibhasika"?
Sudipta Munsi,
West Bengal.
--
Nagaraj Paturi
SUDIPTA MUNSI
Ajit Gargeshwari
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।
Ajit Gargeshwari
http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/definitions/paramartha.htm
pAramArthika: My existence is not dependent upon the mind in any way.
prAtibhAsika: The dream-tiger has absolutely no existence apart from the dreamer's mind, the dream-tiger is mental activity alone. Wherever the mind sees the dream-tiger, if it saw a dream-goat instead, the perception would be just as valid.
vyAvahArika: A pot does not exist unless there is mental activity superimposing it upon its material cause (i.e. clay). However, the pot's existence is not dependent upon any one mind and the same pot could be superimposed on the same clay by any mind. This means that it is possible to superimpose the pot on the clay because it has been designed that way for all minds, and not just for any one mind. It is only because the pot exists as a potential in awareness for all beings that it can be superimposed on clay by any being. Unlike prAtibhAsika satya, this superimposition is not arbitrary (i.e. you cannot superimpose a wallet on the clay instead of the pot, and if you do, it is no longer vyAvahArika, it is prAtibhAsika).
The History of the terms as to when they were first used in Advaita vedanta and how did the concept develop has not been answered
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।
SUDIPTA MUNSI
Nagaraj Paturi
The History of the terms as to when they were first used in Advaita vedanta and how did the concept develop has not been answered.
Dr. Ajit, in my post on 21st April I quoted the well substantiated analysis that the terms Vyaavahaarika Sattaa and Paaramaarthika sattaa were first used by Sureshwaracharya. The words quoted by me from
https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/paramarthika-vyavaharika-satyam
were :
" It can be seen beyond doubt that Sri Sureshwaracharya unambiguously uses the words ‘pAramArthika satyam’ and ‘vyAvahArika satyam’ to comment upon Bhagavatpada’s words: ‘paramArthasatyam’ and ‘vyavahAra-vishayam’."
I quoted the substantiation too.
But true, such a tracing of first use could not be completed, as of now, for the word 'praatibhaasika sattaa'.
Now , coming to Vidwan Sudipta Munsiji's post on 24th April, he asked "
"Can it be inferred on the basis of the foregoing discussion that the seeds of the concept of pratibhasika satta in early Vedanta is to be found in the concept of the dream-state?"
My response was :
Broadly yes. But with a caution: 'dream-state' here has two aspects : 1. the real dream-state of a human being 2. 'dream-state' as a metaphor, as an analogy to the perception of the jagattva of Brahman as real.
Let me elaborate : Upanishads repeatedly define Brahman through expressions such as "sarvam khalvidam bramha" that Jagat is Brahman. Paramaarthatah (on ultimate analysis), Bramhatva of Jagat is the truth. That is why that bramhatva of Jagat is 'paramaartha satyam' (S'ankara) or 'Paaramaarthika Satyam' (Sureshwara).
But day to day vyavahaara is not possible with viewing Jagat as Bramhan. Day to day vyavahaara is possible through viewing Brahman as Jagat only. This Jagattva of Brahman is vyavahaara vishayam (S'anankara) or vyaavahaarika satyam (Sureshwara).
That this Jagattva of Bramhan is for a day to day vyavahaara purpose only but that paramaarthatah (ultimately) Brahmatva of Jagat only stands is not realized by the viewer all the time. This is due to a dream-state-like disposition of the viewer. Just as in a dream, the viewed (Jagat or Jagattva of Brahman) is taken as true all through the vyavahaara time. This kind of viewing is called pratibhaasa and the truth of Jagat during this disposition is called praatibhaasika sattaa. Here, it may be seen that the word dream-state is brought as an analogy to the situation of viewer's taking Jagattva of Brahman as real.
But apart from this, different Upanishads including Mandukyopanishad discuss four different sates of a Jiva including dream-state (svapnaavasthaa) itself of an individual directly.
Nagaraj Paturi
Nelson, Lance E. 1996. “Living Liberation in Sankara and Classical
Advaita: Sharing the Holy Waiting of God.” In Living Liberation in Hindu
Thought, edited by Andrew O. Fort and Patricia Y. Mumme, 17–62.
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
in which he quotes a verse :
अद्वैतमपि अनुभवामि करस्थबिल्वतुल्यम्
शरीरम् अहि निर्वलयानीव वीक्षे
एवं च जीवनमिव प्रतिभासमानम्
निःश्रेयसाधिगमनं च मम प्रसिद्धं
he mentions the reference as SS' 4.55, he expands SS' as
SankshepaSaririka of Sarvajiiafman. Edited and translated
by N. Veezhinathan. Madras: University of Madras, 1985.
I could not locate the verse in SankshepaSaririka of Sarvajiiafman. Can anyone help?
Thanks in advance.