[Advaita-l] A note on ‘Avidya lesha’ 'अविद्यालेशः’ (Part 2)

[V Subrahmanian]

Namaste Sir,

Our revered Acharya Shankara Bhagavatpada chose to open His commentary to
the Brahmasutra by writing on 'adhyAsa', even before dwelling on the svaUpa
of Atma.  He pointed out that the cause of samsara is avidya and it would be
most benefiting the mumukshus to know the svarUpa of avidya.  This is
because since Atma / Brahma is a 'siddha vastu', all that  one needs to do
is to aim at removing the covering called avidya.  By doing that the Atma
will be experienced within oneself by oneself.

All that the Guru and ShAstra do is to help us remove this aavaraNa,
covering. Towards this end much deliberation is required on anAtma too.  Of
course, equally much exposition of the Atma svarUpa too is required.  When
one is able to see the contrast between anAtma and Atma, one can easily
recognize the anAtma and put all effort to disidentify from it.  Towards
this end the pUrvaachAryas have invested a lot of their time, effort and
intellect.

Sir, you have done well by showing those great statements to the members
here.  May I request you to start a series of posts elucidating the purport
of these vAkya-s to benefit all of us?  That would amount to true Vedanta
chintanam.

It appears to me that you have seen only the title of the post not read the
contents.  If only you had spent a little time reading through the entire
post, you would have noticed that all the quotations from Shruti, SmRti,
SUtra and Shankara there are about Atma Jnana, Atma Jnani and Atma Jnana
Sadhana.  Is that not 'drawing the attention of mumukshus'?

Thank you Sir, for drawing our attention to the topic of avidya vs vidya.

Best regards,
subrahmanian.v

2010/3/31 annasmurthy . <annasmurthy at sify.com>

> From: H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy
> Pranams to all.
> Respected Sir,
>
>       Won't you feel it is more beneficial to draw the attention of the
> mumukshu to vidya instead of dealing with avidya? Too much of information
> on
> all these  matters which have to be finally discarded, of what use it?
>       I would request you, a reputed scholar on advaita who studied Vedanta
> at the feet of a great teacher, help us to cognize the following statements
> of
>  Sri Shanakara within oneself by oneself :
>     (1) AtmA hi nAma svarUpam ||
>          [Brahmasutra : 1-1-4]
>     (2) paramAtmA hi sarvEShAm AtmA ||
>           [ bRuhAdAraNyaka; 2-4-6]
>    (3)  aSarIratA hi AtmanaH svarUpam ||
>             [Chandogya : 8-3-4]
>    (4) nAsya AtmanO antarbahirvA caitanyAdanyadrUpamasti , caitanyamEva tu
> nirantaramasya svarUpaM ||
>             [brahmasUtra : 3-2-16]
>
>       This will be the greatest help you will be rendering to mumukshus. I
> thank you in anticipation.
>
> With respectful regards,
>  Sreenivasa Murthy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Continued from Part 1
> >
> > 1.      In the commentary to the Bhagavadgita 2.16, towards the end, says
> > Bhagavat-pada :  // Therefore, you too, Arjuna, by adopting the vision of
> > the men of realization and giving up sorrow and delusion, forbear the
> > dualities, heat, cold, etc.- some of which are definite in their nature,
> > and
> > others inconstant-, mentally being convinced that this (phenomenal world)
> > is
> > changeful, verily unreal and appears falsely like water in a mirage. This
> > is
> > the idea. //
> >
> > It is to be noted that the Lord and Bhagavatpada know full well that
> Arjuna
> > is not an aparoksha Jnani and is only being taught to be a karma yogi.
> >  Yet,
> > the above advice to him is given to him.  This shows that even on the
> basis
> > of hearing the Tattva from the Acharya and the ShAstram it is quite
> > reasonable to come to the conviction that the world is not ultimately
> real;
> > it is mithyA.  This is the point ChitsukhAcharya is making.  Two more
> > instances are shown below:
> >
> > 2.         In the bhashya for verse 6.26 we find:  // In the beginning,
> the
> > yogi who is thus engaged in making the mind established in the Self, etat
> > vasam nayet, should bring this (mind) under the subjugation; atmani eva,
> of
> > the Self Itself; niyamya, by restraining; etat. it; tatah tatah, from all
> > those causes whatever, viz sound etc.; yatah yatah, due to which, doe to
> > whatever objects like sound etc.; the cancalam, restless, very restless;
> > and
> > therefore asthiram, unsteady; manah, mind; niscarati, wanders away, goes
> > out
> > due to its inherent defects. (It should be restrained) by ascertaining
> > through discrimination those causes *to be mere appearances,* and with an
> > attitude of detachment. Thus, through the power of practice of Yoga, the
> > mind of the yogi merges in the Self Itself.  //
> >
> > Here again we can see that for a practicing yogi, the means for vairagyam
> > includes considering the objects as ‘mere appearances’.  Even parokSha
> > jnAnam can result in getting a conviction as to the mithyaa nature of the
> > world.
> >
> > 3.      In the commentary to the Mandukya kArikA 3.42 we see the Acharya
> > advising:  // remembering the fact that everything, all duality that is
> > created by ignorance, is full of sorrow, one should withdraw the mind
> from
> > enjoyment…// Here again, this practice of mithyAtva darshanam is for the
> > paroksha jnAni.
> >
> >   - Now, the second ‘aakAra’ of avidyaa mentioned by Chitsukhaacharya is:
> >
> >           ‘The second gives rise to purposeful activity in the world.
>  This
> > is removed by direct realization of Brahman. ‘In support of this a couple
> > of
> > Scriptural and Bhashyam passages are worth noting:
> >
> > 1.      The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad teaches: आत्मानं चेद्विजानीयात्
> > अयमस्मीति पूरुषः । किमिच्छन् कस्य कामाय शरीरमनुसञ्ज्वरेत् ॥ (IV.iv.13)
> [‘If
> > a man knows the Self as ‘I am this’, then desiring what and for whose
> sake
> > will he suffer in the wake of the body?’]
> >
> > 2.      In the Bhagavadgita 3.17 and 18 the Lord says: //. 3.17 But that
> > man
> > who rejoices only in the Self and is satisfied with the Self, and is
> > contented only in the Self-for him there is no duty to perform. 3.18 For
> > him
> > there is no concern here at all with performing action; nor any (concern)
> > with nonperformance. Moreover, for him there is no dependence on any
> object
> > to serve any purpose.
> >
> > 3.      In the Brahmasutra bhashya ( 4.1.9.13  ) the Acharya says:
> > पूर्वसिद्धकर्तृत्व-भोक्तृत्व-विपरीतं
> > हि त्रिष्वपि कालेषु अकर्तृत्व-अभोक्तृत्व-स्वरूपं ब्रह्म अहमस्मि ।  न इतः
> > पूर्वं कर्ता भोक्ता वा अहमासम्, न इदानीं, नापि भविष्यत्काल इति
> > ब्रह्मविदवगच्छति ।  //Quite contrary to what had been previously regarded
> > as
> > agent and experiencer, I am verily that Brahman, which, by nature, is
> > neither agent nor experiencer at all in all the three periods of time.
> >  Even
> > earlier I was never an agent or experiencer, nor am I so at present; nor
> > shall I be so in future – such is the realization of the knower of
> > Brahman.//
> >
> >   - The third ‘AkAra’ of avidyaa is what is actually related to ‘avidyA
> >   lesha’ (the earlier two are NOT to be confused with ‘avidyA lesha’) -
> >  the
> >   third ‘aakAra’ that projects a semblance of objects capable of
> appearing
> > as
> >   directly perceivable is ‘avidyA-lesha’ or ‘mAyA-lesha.’  This is not
> >   eradicated in the case of a jivanmukta.
> >
> > The supporting BhAshya passages, apart from the one that was already
> quoted
> > from the Chandogya Upanishad 6.14.2 are:   From the Acharya’s own
> > experience, in the Brahmasutra bhashya 4.1.15 :
> >
> > *‘’The knowledge of the Self being essentially non-active destroys all
> > works
> > by sublating wrong knowledge; but wrong knowledge – comparable to the
> > appearance of a double moon – lasts for some time even after it has been
> > sublated, owing to the impression it has made.  Moreover, it is not a
> > matter
> > for dispute at all whether the body of the Knower of Brahman continues to
> > exist for sometime or not.* कथं ह्येकस्य  स्वहृदयप्रत्ययं ब्रह्मवेदनं
> > देहधारणं च अपरेण प्रतिक्षेप्तुं शक्येत ?* **For how can one contest the
> > fact
> > of another possessing the knowledge of Brahman – vouched for by his
> heart’s
> > conviction – and at the same time continuing with the body?’’*
> >
> > In the Taittiriya Upanishad Bhashyam (II.8), the Acharya says, referring
> to
> > Himself:
> >
> > //Objection: Because there are many opponents.  You are a monist, since
> you
> > follow the Vedic ideas, while the dualists are many who are outside the
> > Vedic pale and who are opposed to you.  Therefore I apprehend that you
> will
> > not be able to determine.
> >
> > Reply: This itself is a blessing for Me that you brand Me as sworn to
> > monism
> > and faced by many who are wedded to plurality.  Therefore I shall conquer
> > all! And so I begin the discussion.// His original words are even more
> > striking: *एतदेव मे स्वस्त्ययनम् । अतो जेष्यामि सर्वान्, आरभे च चिन्ताम्
> >  //
> > *
> >
> > To be Continued and concluded in Part 3
> > **
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>