[Advaita-l] Body is the disease

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:48 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:

> It is common knowledge that Shankara in the Brahmasutras, the ones like
> 'bhedavyapadeshAt cha anyaH' (1.1.21), has explicitly established the
> difference between the jiva and the Supreme.  The 'hetu' given is, as the
> Sutra itself gives: because the difference, bheda, between the jiva and the
> antaryAmi Ishwara, is clearly stated in the Br.up. 3.7.9 where the jiva,
> the knower, is spoken of as not knowing the antaryAmi Ishwara.
> (jiva-Ishwara bheda)
>
> This kind of explicit bheda is upheld by Shankara in such sutras as the
> above, the other instances being BSB 1.1.16 and 17:  'IdRsham cha
> vijnAnAtma-paramAtmabhedamAshritya 'netaro'nupapatteH' (1.1.16) and
> 'bhedavyapadeshAccha (1.1.17) ityuktam.
>
> There is another sutra where Shankara very clearly establishes, along with
> hetu-s, the difference between jiva-s (jiva-jiva bheda).
>
> Thus the pancha bheda-s: jiva-jiva, jiva-Ishwara, jiva-jaDa, jaDa-Ishwara
> and jaDa-jaDa bhedas which non-advaitins hold as pAramArthika, and
> advaitins hold as vyAvahArika only, are yet upheld wherever necessary
> across the bhAshyas of the prasthAnatraya by advancing the appropriate
> hetu-s.  None can fault such a method which, is the one followed by the
> Shruti/smRti.



Don't forget such all bhEda-s are only for upAsana purpose and not really
tAtvIka in nature. Under Shankara's reading, shAstra's such assertions are
aimed at performing anthakaraNa shuddhi of a sadahaka.

Some explicit quotes of Shankara in this regard are;

"nirguNamapi sadbrahma nAmarUpagataiH guNaiH saguNaM upasanArthaM tatra
tatra upadishyate" etc. (BSB 1.2.14)

"sarva-vyavahArANAmEva prAk brahmatma-avijnyAnAt satyatva upapattEhe
svapna-vyavahArasya prAk prabOdhat"  (BSB II.1.14)
(Before coming by realization it is but proper to regard all our worldly
activities as real, as our
activities in dream seem real to us till we wake up )

prAk prabOdhAt samsAritvabhigamaha
(Before the dawn of realization we have to concede the reality of samsAra )

na cha dvaitasya anritatva-buddhihi prathamamEva kasyachit syAt |
(Nobody thinks from the very outset that duality is false )

prAk brahmAtmatvadarshanAt vishayAdi-prapanchO vyavasthitaroopO bhavati |
(Prior to the realization of the identity of Atman with Brahman, the world
of senses and other things have their definite form.)

dEhAtma-pratyayO yadvat pramANatvEna kalpitaha loukikam tadvadEvEdam
pramANam
tvAtma nischayAt |
(As long as the idea of the Self is identified with the body consciousness
so long i.e, till the realization of the true nature of Atman, the world
perception, the reality of the world is
also equally valid.)

This last one is important for the context of our current debate. I am
pretty sure Madhusudhana's opponents are not denying the fact that in
Advaita siddhAnta provisional reality (and resulting provisional bhEda) is
accorded to this jagat. They are not saying such attribution is wrong in
itself either. What, if my reading of their text is correct, is being
contested is that summoning of such "provisionally valid" elements to
support Advaita's stand in the vAda. In reality, those "provisionally
valid" elements are meant only for upAsana purpose and definitely not for
tatva-niSchaya.

This aspect is especially significant when it comes to supporting pramEya-s
such as locus of avidya etc, where the very existence of avidya is in
question and it's locus (as either jIvAshrita or BrahmAshrita) cannot
possibly be  substantiated using elements (such jIva anAditva etc.), which
are allegedly effect of avidya in itself and also which are "provisionally"
and/or "admittedly" accepted for some other reason other than
tatva-niSchaya in the siddhAnta.

Opponents are arguing -- if pramANa-s are provisionally valid, so also
pramA jnAna (such as jIva is ashraya of avidya, or Brahman is ashraya for
avidya etc) which are generated by such pramANa-s are also "provisionally"
true and not necessarily "idamittam" type of truth. When pUrvapaxi-s are
arguing on the basis of (alleged) reality of their pramANa-s, siddhAntin
cannot argue on the basis of tatkAlika-pramANa-s.

In my opinion this is the crux of the issue.

/SV










> In several places Shankara advances 'nahi dRShTe anupapannam
> nAma' with regard to things which are common knowledge.  Yet such things
> are vyAvahArika in Advaita.
>
>
> regards
> subrahmanian.v
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > *Srinath Vedagarbha wrote:*
> >
> > >That anAditva argument is only from vyavahAra perspective, for per
> > >siddhAnta time itself is mithya. Your argument, supporting vAcaspati's
> > >stand, is sva-vachana virOdha if not apasiddhanta,  per your position
> here
> > >
> >
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2014-January/036275.html
> >
> > MadhusUdana's opponent, the dvaitin, considers the world, including
> > pramANas, to be real, whereas we know that advaitins grant a
> > provisional (vyavahAra) status to the world. The same holds for avidyA
> > too, which is considered provisionally real. The same holds for jIva
> > too. Without such provisional reality assigned, it would not be
> > possible for the advaitin to even enter into a debate with the
> > dvaitin. For example, the advaitin could trivially dismiss the
> > dvaitin's objection that there is anyonyAshraya between avidyA and
> > jIva in this way. avidyA does not exist at all and jIva is
> > Brahman/Atman (vAcaspati says: na khalu jIvashcidAtmano bhidyate), and
> > therefore, the charge of anyonyAshraya between jIva and avidyA is
> > meaningless. But the advaitin also has to be make sure he answers the
> > dvaitin's objection in the vyavahAra realm. Hence, he invokes the
> > anAditva argument, which is also supported by the texts.
> >
> >
> > Anand
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>