[Advaita-l] Do not bring Sankhya into Suddha Sankara Advaita

[rajaramvenk at gmail.com]

I disagree with Sri Venkatesh because he does not substantiate his charge against post sankara advaitins with proper evidence. 

However, is it valid assertion that in advaita Ishwara is never a creation of jIvA? In Eka jIva vAdA, the jIvA ascribes jagat kAranatvam to an anAdi Ishwara using an anAdi shruti as pramana but they exist due avidya, which has jIvA as the locus and its drshti (sankalpa) as the basis.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
Sender: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 11:56:31 
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Do not bring Sankhya into Suddha Sankara Advaita

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Namaste
>
> Sankara Vedanta is saying Avidya is natural for men. Naisargika.


In the Br.Up. 1.4.10 bhashya Shankara establishes avidyA for Brahman (not
jIva).



> The Avidya is nothing but Adhyaasa. This is Superimposition of Self and
> not Self. The Avidyaa is making us to imagine a Ishwara and His Maayaa
> Shakti. The Maayaa Shakti is the cause of the World. This means the whole
> World is imagined through Adhyaasa.
>

That one is kartA/bhoktA, sukhI, duHkhI, is what is imagined due to
avidyA.  That there is Ishwara as the jagatkAraNam and it is His shakti
that creates the world, that Ishwara is the karmaphaladAtA, etc. are never
the imagination of the jIva.  It is shruti that gives / informs one on
these concepts.

That the entire samsaAra, bandha-mokSha vyavasthA, etc, is within mAyA is
not disputed.  But to say that Ishwara, shruti, etc. are all jIvakalpanA
has no basis in Advaita shAstra.  Shankara has, in more than one place,
demonstrated that avidya is a viShaya for the jiva/aspirant, through
dialogues, in the B G B and vehemently denies that avidyA is  subjective.
It is on the reasoning that it is objective, vishaya, for the sAkshI that
Shankara establishes that it (avidyA) is dRshya, mithya.   If it is
subjective, it would never go.

In the sUtasamhitA chapter 2 TIkA, Swami Vidyaranya says:

//sA (Ishwarasya shaktiH) cha sattvarajastamoguNAtmikA api na
sAnkhyAbhimata pradhAnavat  svatantrA, kintu Ishvarasya paratantrA
ityaashayena shaktirityuktam. 'shaktiriti paratantratAmAha' iti
vivaraNAchAryAH'.  //

[She (Ishvara's shakti) is of the nature of sattva rajas and tamo guNa-s
and NOT an independent entity as admitted by the sAnkhya shAstra but is a
dependent entity under Ishwara.  With this in mind Veda Vyasa says in the
sUtasamhitA...shakti.. The vivaraNAchAryAs have said 'shakti is said to be
dependent entity'.]

Further says Vidyaranya here:

//ittham bhogya bhoktR bhoga vibhAga kalpikAyAH mAyAyaaH kalpitatvAt
mAyAtItaparashivavyatirekeNa paramArthato na bhaava iti//

[Thus, the projectrix, mAyA,  of the divisions of enjoyment, enjoyer and
enjoyed is Herself an unreal entity, and she has no existence apart from
that of Supreme Shiva who is beyond mAyA.]

In the recent meet at Bangalore it was clarified that the above is the
shAstrakRta kalpanA for adhyAropa-apavAda purpose and not jIvakRta
kalpanaa.

Thus, Vidyaranya is making clear that the VivaraNAchAryas hold:

1. the VedAntic mAyA  to be different from the sAnkhya-s' and as a
dependent entity functioning under Shiva   (....kinkarI yasya sA mAyA
shankaraachAryam Ashraye..)

2.  mAyA, being herself unreal, has no reality/existence  apart from
Ishawra.

By saying this Vidyaranya is clarifying the obvious Vivarana and ShAnkaran
position that mAyA in vedanta is not like the sAnkhyan prakRti/pradhAna and
that mAyA has no reality.

If Sri SSS had studied the vivarana positions and understood them correctly
(as shown above) he would not have mistaken it to be taking a sAnkhyan line
and the 'bhAvarUpa' adjective really means: it does not have an independent
reality/existence.

What is paratantra satya is no different from the rope-snake.  The
superimposed snake is said to 'exist' only on the basis of the
existence/reality of the rope.  No one can give a non rope-snake example
for the concept of  paratantra satya.  For, just like the rope is the
sattAprada for the superimposed snake, Brahman is the sattAprada for the
mAyA (and through it, to the entire world/jivas) which is a dependent
tattva.  Any paratantrasatya entity is devoid of its own
reality/existence:  'sva sattA shUnyatve sati anyasattA-adhInasattAkatvam
paratantra satyatvam' is the comprehensive, crisp definition for the
paratantra satyatvam.

All systems admit only a dependent reality for the world/jivas.  It is only
advaita that explicitly says they are mithyA.  The others do not say this
for fear of becoming non-different from Advaita.

regards
subrahmanian.v



>
> Summary - Adi Sankara is saying Adhyaasa is responsible for Maayaa. Maaya
> is Avidyaa Kalpitaa. Imagined through Ignorance. But Post Sankara
> sub-commentators are saying Avidyaa and Maayaa are both same.
>
> Good and Bad parts of Maayaa are both imagined only. They are False.
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:28 AM, <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Sri Venkatesh,
> >
> > Please compile the references to the use of avidya and maya in the works
> > of Gaudapada, Sankara and post Sankarite advaitins. It will help see
> > objectively if there has been any change. IMO, Sankara uses maya in two
> > connotations - a. positive -  the aisvara or daiva shakthi (e.g.
> mayarupam,
> > this divine maya) and b. negative - the crooked cause of illusion (e.g.
> > kutastha). He uses avidya as synonymous with the latter use of maya.
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Rajaram Venkataramani
> > Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
> > Sender: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> > Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 10:03:39
> > To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> > Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> >         <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Do not bring Sankhya into Suddha Sankara Advaita
> >
> > Namaste
> >
> > Page 42 Essays on Vedanta -
> >
> > 'In the face of the above unmistakable definitions of both Avidya and
> Maya
> > the sub- commentaries on Sankara Bhashya have started a procession of the
> > blind led by the blind in emphatically affirming the identity of both
> > Avidya and Maya and defining Avidya not as subjective ignorance but as
> > something objective clinging to Atman and thus distorting his nature by
> > converting the all-pure Brahman into a transmigratory soul by enveloping
> > his essential nature'.
> >
> > Page 45 -
> > 'Ramanujacharya for instance confounds Sankara's teaching of Avidya and
> > Maya with the Post Sankara theory of Avidya and with the Maya doctrine of
> > the Buddhists. He has considerably exercised himself in undertaking an
> > elaborate refutation of the Avidya Theory and in calling Advaitins
> > opprobriously 'Pracchanna Mayavadins' (Crypto Buddhists).And Dr. Murti
> has
> > these remarks with regard to Sankara and Gaudapada -
> > 'Gaudapada and Sankara merely bring out the implications of this
> standpoint
> > (of the older Vedantins) when they declare change, difference and
> plurality
> > as illusory; they formulate the complementary doctrine of Avidya to
> explain
> > the appearance of difference'. C.P.B. Page 122
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > -Venkatesh
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> -Venkatesh
> _______________________________________________
> 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