[Advaita-l] 'न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते' Gita 13.12

[sreenivasa murthy]

>From : H.N.Sreenivasa MurthyPranams to all.
Respected Sirs,Is it not better to refer to Sri Shankara,s commentary to that particular shloka containing that particular phrase  which appears in 13th chapater of Bhagavadgita? I think the questioner will get the answer to his satisfaction. This is a wise course.
With respectful namaskarams,Sreenivasa Murthy

      From: H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 To: Durga Prasad Janaswamy <janaswami at gmail.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
 Sent: Wednesday, 16 December 2015 5:33 PM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] 'न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते' Gita 13.12
   
An error has crept into my earlier post.


In place of


<< This leads to the understanding << That which is perceived as existing (
in the vyavaharic sense ) is NOT Brahman >> and << That which is perceived
as nonexisting ( again in the vyavaharic sense ) is NOT Brahman >> .


please read as follows.


<< That which is perceived as existing ( सत् in the vyavaharic sense ) ,
Brahman is NOT THIS ( नेति - न इति - न इदम् ) >> and << That which is
perceived as nonexisting ( असत् again in the vyavaharic sense ) , Brahman
is NOT THIS ( नेति - न इति - न इदम् ) >>.


I sincerely regret the error.


Regards



Chandramouli



On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Sri Durga Prasad Ji observed
>
>
> << Gita 13.12
>
> 'न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते'
>
> Question is whether
> a. 'न' goes with सत् and असत्
> or
> b. 'न' goes with 'तत् उच्यते'.
>
> That is
> a. तत् उच्यते - 'न सत् न असत्'
> or
> b. 'न सत् इति उच्यते and न असत् इति उच्यते'.
>
> In other words,
> a. It is said that Brahma neither exists nor doesnot exit.
> or
> b. It cannot be said whether Brahma is in the form of existence or
> non-existence. >> .
>
>
> Sri D V N Sarma Ji observed
>
>
> << The breakup of the statement is
>
> न सत् तत् न असत् उच्यते
>
> प्रथमं न सतः, द्वितीयं न असतः इति मे मतिः >> .
>
>
> In my understanding this is to be interpreted in accordance with the well
> known Bruhadaranyaka Upanishad statement << अथात आदेशो नेति नेति न
> ह्येतस्मादिति >> . Hence the anvaya in the present case would be << सत् न
> इति उच्यते >> and << असत् न इति उच्यते >> . This leads to the
> understanding << That which is perceived as existing ( in the vyavaharic
> sense ) is NOT Brahman >> and << That which is perceived as nonexisting (
> again in the vyavaharic sense ) is NOT Brahman >> .
>
>
> This also answers the doubt expressed by Sri Venkatraghavan Ji
>
>
> << The description of Brahman as neither existing nor non existing, (सदसद्
> विलक्शणम्?) appears to use terminology employed to describe avidyA/mAyA.
> In
> what sense is this meant? >> .
>
>
> In the lakshana vakya << सदसद्
> विलक्शणम् >> , सत् is used in the paramarthic sense while in the BG verse
> it is used in the vyavaharic sense as explained above.
>
>
> In my view the verse quoted by Sri Siva Senani Ji from Vakyapadiya
>
>
> << "न तदस्ति न तन्नास्ति न तदेकं न तत्पृथक्।
>
> न संसृष्टं विभक्तं वा विकृतं न च नान्यथा ॥१२॥
>
> It (Brahman)neither exists, nor does it not exist; It is neither One, nor
> is it different;It is neither co-mingled, nor in a separated state; neither
> is it modified, nor is it other than modified." >>
>
>
> should also be understood in the  manner as explained in the context of
> the BG verse only. I am not sure if Sri Siva Senani Ji agrees with this or
> not.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Chandramouli
>
> 2015-12-16 10:07 GMT+05:30 Durga Prasad Janaswamy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>:
>
>> Hari Om,
>> Namaste.
>>
>>
>> Gita 13.12
>> 'न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते'
>>
>> Question is whether
>> a. 'न' goes with सत् and असत्
>> or
>> b. 'न' goes with 'तत् उच्यते'.
>>
>> That is
>> a. तत् उच्यते - 'न सत् न असत्'
>> or
>> b. 'न सत् इति उच्यते and न असत् इति उच्यते'.
>>
>> In other words,
>> a. It is said that Brahma neither exists nor doesnot exit.
>> or
>> b. It cannot be said whether Brahma is in the form of existence or
>> non-existence.
>>
>> Regards
>> -- durga prasad
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-12-14 21:59 GMT-08:00 V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>:
>>
>> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
>> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Sri Siva SenAni,
>> > > Namaste.
>> > >
>> > > Thank you very much for the sterling work in sharing research with us.
>> > You
>> > > had translated from Dravyasamuddesa as follows:
>> > >
>> > > "न तदस्ति न तन्नास्ति न तदेकं न तत्पृथक्।
>> > >
>> > > न संसृष्टं विभक्तं वा विकृतं न च नान्यथा ॥१२॥
>> > >
>> > > It (Brahman)neither exists, nor does it not exist; It is neither One,
>> nor
>> > > is it different;It is neither co-mingled, nor in a separated state;
>> > neither
>> > > is it modified, nor is it other than modified."
>> > >
>> > > The description of Brahman as neither existing nor non existing,
>> (सदसद्
>> > > विलक्शणम्?) appears to use terminology employed to describe
>> avidyA/mAyA.
>> > In
>> > > what sense is this meant?
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > One can read the BG 13.12 bhāṣya:
>> >
>> > ज्ञेयं यत्तत्प्रवक्ष्यामि यज्ज्ञात्वामृतमश्नुते ।
>> > अनादिमत्परं ब्रह्म न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते ॥ १२ ॥
>> >
>> > ननु सर्वाः बुद्धयः अस्तिनास्तिबुद्ध्यनुगताः एव । तत्र एवं सति ज्ञेयमपि
>> > अस्तिबुद्ध्यनुगतप्रत्ययविषयं वा स्यात्, नास्तिबुद्ध्यनुगतप्रत्ययविषयं वा
>> > स्यात् । न, अतीन्द्रियत्वेन उभयबुद्ध्यनुगतप्रत्ययाविषयत्वात् । यद्धि
>> > इन्द्रियगम्यं वस्तु घटादिकम्, तत् अस्तिबुद्ध्यनुगतप्रत्ययविषयं वा
>> स्यात्,
>> > नास्तिबुद्ध्यनुगतप्रत्ययविषयं वा स्यात् । इदं तु ज्ञेयम् अतीन्द्रियत्वेन
>> > शब्दैकप्रमाणगम्यत्वात् न घटादिवत् उभयबुद्ध्यनुगतप्रत्ययविषयम् इत्यतः ‘न
>> > सत्तन्नासत्’ इति उच्यते ॥
>> >
>> > To put in simple terms: A pot, when encountered, is said to 'be': अस्ति
>> घटः
>> > । When the pot is destroyed, we say: नास्ति घटः ।  Brahman, not being
>> > something that comes into existence and goes out of existence like a
>> pot,
>> > is beyond the conceptions of asti and nāsti.  That is what is taught by
>> the
>> > BG 13.12 expression: न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते |
>> >
>> > regards
>> > vs
>> >
>> > As an aside what ख्यातिवाद does व्याकरण use?
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Venkatraghavan
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > 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
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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