[Advaita-l] 'न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते' Gita 13.12

[Durga Prasad Janaswamy]

Hari Om,
Namaste.

There is a typo in my email.
b should be read as
 ' सत् इति न उच्यते and असत् इति न उच्यते'.

regards
-- durga prasad


2015-12-15 20:37 GMT-08:00 Durga Prasad Janaswamy <janaswami at gmail.com>:

> 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
>>
>
>