24. etattadityanirdeshyA (part 1/2)

[Laura Weygandt]

namaskaaraM Ravi,
  Thank you for changing my address and keeping me on the list.
I enjoy the List more now because most of the contributors are
quoting more scriptures in Sanskrit and the subject matter is better
contained within Advaita. Swami Dayananda is an acharya who
teaches mostly Shankara's works.
  With my new service and a modest upgrade of my computer,
I now have Internet Explorer with a graphical interface. Last night
was interesting searching the Web for the Jaguar site and others
that have much to say about Shankara. I'll compile a list for you
tomorrow -

dhanyavaadaH,
  Laura

----------
> 24. etattadityanirdeshyA
>
> SHE who cannot be defined as "this" or "that".
>
> "etat" is that which can be delimited as so much in space and time. "tat"
> is beyond the sense experience and hence, it cannot be defined.
>
> According to the pANini sUtra "itthaM bhAve tR^itiyA", ettaditi is
> described by the words "this" and "that". Hence the name means, SHE who
> cannot be described or defined by "this" or "that". In this world, it is
> possible to define only things which have qualities by the means of
> qualifications. For instance, parokShatva which means "being beyond
> senses" which is its qualification. But in HER case, attributes which are
> in the range of mind and speech, such as kind, quality, action, possession
> and so on, are unrelated to HER. brahman is without any attributes.
> shrutis say "ashabdam asparsham arUpam avvyayam" [kenopaniShad 3-15] which
> means "without sound, touch, form, and unexpendable".  "nirguNam
> nishkalam" [shvetashvataropaniShad 6-19] which means "without attributes
> or parts". In such a case, by what agency or words can such brahman be
> defined?
>
>
> "yadvAchAnabhyuditam" [kenopaniShad 1-4] which means "whose is not
> expressed by speech". SHE is beyond one's perception, knowledge, mind or
> speech.
>
> Or "etat" can mean the "jagat" which is the result and which can be
> verified by the senses. And it is subsequent to the cause. "tat" means the
> unseen cause of the "jagat", which is antecedent to it and near it. The
> word "iti" connects both these terms. Hence, the name can mean, SHE who is
> the pure consciousness which cannot be defined as cause or effect, as SHE
> has no limitation which can produce either cause or effect. SHE is beyond
> the causal law. Hence it is not possible for the words "cause" and
> "effect" to describe HER.
>
> to be continued
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> NOTE: Till now I was typing from the book as it is. The book I have has a
> lot of grammar mistakes. I thought it is a blessing in disguise - which
> will prompt the reader to think about the imperfect nature of translations
> and also contemplate more on the text to understand it , instead of just
> browsing through the text. But I got few complaints about the English.
> From this name, I will try to make the text little more readable. But you
> should realize that unlike HER, I have many limitations ;-)