[Advaita-l] Omniscience ..........

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Fri Jan 3 04:11:31 CST 2014

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> In fact Sri Bhaskar ji has highlighted before the idea of
> 'sarvajnatva, etc. are avidyAkalpita' by citing the famous statements from
> the BSB 2.1.14.
> praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> I disparately need some time to clarify all these things from bhAshya
> perspective.  Anyway, here is the quick shot.  The bhAshya vAkya says
> something like : sarvajnatvAdi vyavahAraH upapadyate. Here the word
> vyavahAra is very important...In, upAdhi rahita Atman sarvajnatvAdi
> vyavahAra, which is avidyAkalpita is not admitted (neha nAnAsti kiMchana)
> but it does not anyway mean to say that brahman is devoid of jnAnaM and
> shakti without the help of upAdhi, because shruti declaring that the
> parabrahman is satyaM, jnAnam and anantaM brahma (vide tai.up.) !!

Dear Sri Bhaskar ji,

The above three are svarUpa lakShaNa where according to the bhashyam jnAnam
is not 'sarvajnatvam' but 'jnapti = avabodhaH', objectless pure
consciousness.  Pl. read the bhashyam for this word in the Taittiriya
upanishad. Even in the Br.up. 'vijnAnam Anandam brahma' Shankara
gives the meaning: vijnAnam = vijnaptiH.

In fact in the very first post in this thread I had cited the bhashyam for
the Chandogya upanishad 8.1.5-

संकल्पाः कामाश्च शुद्धसत्त्वोपाधिनिमित्ताः ईश्वरस्य, चित्रगुवत् । न स्वतः,
नेति नेतीत्युक्त्वात् ।

[sankalpAh kAmAshcha shuddhasattvopAdhinimittAH Ishvarasya, chitraguvat. na
svataH, neti neti ityuktatvAt']

The translation of the above is:

//Wills and desires of God are caused by the limiting adjunct (upAdhi) of
pure sattva, as a man is called 'Chitragu' when he is possessed of cows of
various colors. [A person having cows of various colors is called
'chitragu', and the phrase does not mean that the person himself has many
colors.  Similarly in the case of Brahman, true wills and desires are not
the qualities of Brahman Itself, but caused the quality of sattva which is
Its upAdhi.]  But they do not inhere in Him, since the UpaniShad declares,
'Not this, not this' (Br.2.3.6).//

In the BSB 2.1.4 Shankara says:

Br.sutra bhashyam 2.1.14:

तदेवमविद्यात्मकोपाधिपरिच्छेदापेक्षमेवेश्वरस्येश्वरत्वं सर्वज्ञत्वं
सर्वशक्तित्वं च न परमार्थतो विद्यायापास्तसर्वोपाधिस्वरूप
आत्मनीशित्रीशितव्यसर्वज्ञत्वादिव्यवहार उपपद्यते ।

//Thus, * only in the realm of the ignorance-created *upAdhis are Ishwara's
Lordship, Omniscience and Omnipotence, and not in the pAramArthika realm
which implies that the ignorance-created upAdhis have been
negated/dispelled by True knowledge.  In this post-negation scenario
the ignorance-realm
of Ishwara-Ishitavya (ruler-ruled) duality and omniscience, etc. do not
have a place.//

The above bhAshya vAkya  says only  that sOpAdhika Ishwara is vyavahArika
> satya and this vAkya in arambhaNAdhikaraNa is not there to propagate the
> idea that brahman without upAdhi is minus of his svabhAva i.e. sarvajnatva
> and sarvashaktitva.

In fact the above vAkyam says quite the opposite of what you claim:

// In this post-negation scenario the ignorance-realm of Ishwara-Ishitavya
(ruler-ruled) duality and omniscience, etc. do not have a place.//  The
bhashya is explicitly saying that Brahman minus those upAdhis does not give
room for the ruler-ruled, omniscience, etc.vyavahara.

In both the bhashya passages I have cited above, Shankara consistently
maintains that 1. with upAdhi alone Brahman as Ishwara is omniscient,
satyasankalpa, etc. and 2. these are not the inherent nature of Brahman.

Nowhere does Shankara say that the svabhAva of Brahman is sarvajnatva and
sarvashaktitva.  In fact these two are attributed to Brahman as Ishwara
only in relation to jiva-jagat sRShTi. Without jIva-jagat there can be no
omniscience, etc. to Ishwara for the simple reason that there is nothing
that Ishwara can do.

 If it is svabhAva, the jIva who is to realize his identity with Brahman
(aham brahmAsmi, tattvamasi) will have to know that he is the omniscient
Ishwara.  Such a contingency is not allowed in Advaita.  It is only a wrong
understanding on the part of the non-advaitins that results in their
criticism that Advaita equates the jiva with sarvajna Ishwara.  This
criticism cannot be escaped in the above proposition of yours.

In any case pl. provide the reference where Shankara says that sarvajnatva
etc. are the svabhAva of Brahman.


Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list