[Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis

Keshava PRASAD Halemane k_prasad_h at yahoo.co.in
Fri Jul 10 13:09:26 CDT 2015
Previous message: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
Next message: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
namastE. praNaams to all learned-seniors. praNaams to Sri Anand-ji  &  Sri Sadananda ji. 
Oh! i am blessed to have received a response from our beloved Sri Anand-ji Hudli. I feel the subtle encouragement to continue to think on the lines as advised . . . . . . and hope that it will some time flash in my antahkaraNa as crystal clear as expected in and through that advice. 
praNaams again.  
Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa jaayatE jantuḥ |  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra |  brahma jnaanaat hi braahmaNah || 


     On Friday, 10 July 2015 11:14 PM, Anand Hudli <ahudli at gmail.com> wrote:
   

 Dear Keshavaji and others,


Let me give a simple example. Suppose you have a pot painted in blue with your favorite figure to distinguish it from other pots. Suppose further that you somehow lose the pot, and after a few days you see it in your friend's house (did he really steal it? :-)). Suppose also that the paint color is now red, not blue, but your favorite figure on it is intact.The knowledge that comes to your mind then is "this is that pot", i.e. what you see now is the same pot that you saw in your home. But the knowledge, "this is that pot" does not involve any attribute of the pot, such as color or even the special figure on it, although the recognition may have been based on attributes. It is a simple case of recognition, "this is that object", without focusing on any attribute of the object. This knowledge or recognition is a case of "akhaNDAkAra vRtti", where the object is "ghaTa", a pot, with attributes. The attributes do not enter the knowledge "this is that pot", although they may enter the (determinate) knowledge "this pot is blue", etc. 

Anand

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Keshava PRASAD Halemane <k_prasad_h at yahoo.co.in> wrote:

namastE. praNaams to all learned-seniors. praNaams to Sri Anand-ji  &  Sri Sadananda-ji. 
Let me continue along the same line of thinking as presented in my previous emails/posts: 
Earlier, i had mentioned that the etymological derivations in the term "akhanDa-AkAra-vRtti" must necessarily be similar to that in the terms "ghaTa-AkAra-vRtti" and "paTa-AkAra-vRtti" . . . 
Naturally, any special etymological derivation for one that is quite different from the rest would require some specific explanation & justification. 
That is, just as the prefixes "ghaTa-" and "paTa-" refer to the corresponding ghaTa-object and paTa-object being revealed by the vRtti, the prefix "akhanDa-" must also refer to the akhanDa-object/vastu being revealed by the corresponding -vRtti. 
Further, the qualifier -AkAra- qualifies the -vRtti with the very same qualities/attributes of the object that gets reflected in the antahkaraNa as that -vRtti; that is, in other words, this -vRtti is a true-reflection in the antahkaraNa of that whatever object-with-its-attributes that is being objectified. 
Then a question may arise as to what qualities/attributes correspond to the case of akhanDa-AkAra. 
Yes, the one-and-only-one-singularly-unique-quality/attribute of that akhanDa-vastu is that it is amenable to being revealed by the corresponding antahkaraNa-vRtti by forming a true-reflection of itSelf in the nirmala-antahkaraNa as the akhanDa-AkAra-vRtti. 
Now, i remember that Sri LalitAlAlitaH had expressed a different viewpoint, however. According to what he mentioned in his emails/posts, although the prefixes ghaTa- and paTa- refer to the corresponding object-with-attributes; the prefix akhanDa- has a different meaning - it refers to the attributeless nature of whatever object is being revealed by the akhanDa-AkAra-vRtti.  So if ghaTa object is being revealed by the akhanDa-AkAra-vRtti then the prefix akhanDa- there refers to the attributeless ghaTa-object that gets revealed thereby; similarly an attributeless paTa-object or attributeless dEvadattaH etc.  Also, he defines the qualifier -AkAra- as meaning the yOgyatA or capacity or ability of the vRtti to dispel the ajnAna of the object being revealed . . . 
Anyway, i do not know how convincing can these explanations be.  
Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa jaayatE jantuḥ |  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra |  brahma jnaanaat hi braahmaNah || 


     On Friday, 10 July 2015 7:09 PM, Keshava PRASAD Halemane <k_prasad_h at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
   

 namastE. praNaams to all learned-seniors. praNaams to Sri Anand-ji  &  Sri Sadananda ji. 
Let me share my understanding: 
I tried but i am unable to copy-paste [from that page-50 of that pdf ebook that Sri Anand-ji shared recently] so let me rewrite it here in roman alphabets -  . . . 2. kim akhanDArtham | aparyAyaSabdAnAm padavRttismArita atirikta agOcara pramAjanakatvam | (664)  . . . The English translation say -  . . . 2. Impartite cognition is the character of generating valid cognition produced by words which are not synonymous and are not indicative of anything other than the onesuggested by the vritti of the word. . . . Note that there is no mention as to whether it is with the attributes or without the attributes. [if it is somewhere else, i might have missed it] The issue being taken up there is not of whether 'with' or 'without' the attributes. The qualifier "akhanDa-" is qualifying the "-artha", that it is the "clear-&-unambiguous" nature of the meaning that is conveyed by the word/sentence. There is no mention of the nature of the -vRtti, like the -AkAra- of -vRtti [which may refer to a reflection of the -AkAra- of the object being objectified in the antahkaraNa as a -vRtti] etc.  as for example in the terms ghaTa-AkAra-vRtti, paTa-AkAra-vRtti, . . . akhanDa-AkAra-vRtti.  
Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa jaayatE jantuḥ |  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra |  brahma jnaanaat hi braahmaNah || 


     On Friday, 10 July 2015 6:19 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
   

 Keshava Prasad - PraNams.

If I understand correctly akhaarthataa or akhandaartatva - in the in context of soyam devadatta involves samanaadhikaraNa - where in the present case it is badhaayam samaanadhikaraNa, where one unitary meaning for Devadatta is arrived after dropping contradictory qualifications while retaining the common ones. 

Akhandaakaara vRititi involves from your description the oneness that pervades the jiiva brahman ikyam vRitti jnaanam as Swami Paramarthanandaji explained. Originally I thought it signifies the result while Swamiji clarified the jnaana vRitti prakriaya itself. 

I am just stating the words the way I understand. 

Hari Om!
Sadananda

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 7/10/15, Keshava PRASAD Halemane via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
 To: "Srirudra" <srirudra at gmail.com>, "Anand Hudli" <ahudli at gmail.com>, "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>, "A. Discussion Group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Date: Friday, July 10, 2015, 8:03 AM
 
 namastE. praNaams to all
 learned-seniors. praNaams to Sri Anand-ji; SriRudra (Sri R.
 Krishnamoorthy) ji  &  Sri Sadananda ji.
 To repeat, the question that i posed earlier was - Q: How
 is it that the example - "this is that dEvadattaH" - an
 example for akhanDAkAra-vRtti [niShprakAraka-vRtti] ? 
 
 Now, after quite a bit of searching around, and following
 the advice of Sri Anand ji (to read page-50 of the ebook
 that he shared earlier) i found that the term used there is
 indeed not akhanDAkAra-vRtti [niShprakAraka-vRtti] but
 rather the  "akhanDArthatva"/"akhanDArthataa"  of that
 statement  "this is that dEvadattaH".  Of course, the two
 must be quite different! One is "akhanDArthatva" associated
 with a word/sentence intending to convey some knowledge;
 while the other is "akhanDAkAratva" associated with a vRtti
 revealing whatever it reveals. 
 As per my understanding [i have always been maintaining the
 same stance] that example - "this is that dEvadattaH" -
 cannot be an example for akhanDAkAra-vRtti
 [niShprakAraka-vRtti] - but  now i have also learnt that
  it is indeed an example for "akhanDArthatva" associated
 with that sentence [as i discover now from reading page-50
 of that ebook, following the advice of Sri Anand-ji] ! 
 Many other points raised in the prolonged discussions
 associated with this and many other threads having the term
 "akhanDAkara-vRtti" etc in the subject-line, are all
 centered around and arising from this example, to a great
 extent, as far as i understood them.  This i feel is the
 one major difference in the viewpoints held by me and that
 expressed by Sri LalitAlAlitaH [of course, it is a different
 matter that he never addressed my questions directly nor
 clarified any details with appropriate references /
 citations to original texts of our SAstras - which i
 sincerely expect from the learned-seniors]!  
 Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa
 jaayatE jantuḥ |  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||
  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra |  brahma jnaanaat hi
 braahmaNah || 
 
 
      On Friday, 10 July 2015 3:59 PM,
 Srirudra <srirudra at gmail.com>
 wrote:
    
 
  DearI am not able to understand your requirement.Upadhi is
 a Samskrit word.Attribute is its English equivalent.It is
 the nearest English word to make a non Samskrit student to
 understand its usage.My explanation stops with that.If you
 want to know how Brahman is thought of as with upadhis etc I
 myself do not know.I am also trying to know how Brahman with
 upadhis becomes Easwara etc.Every individual has to find for
 himself only.This is a subjective matter.R.Krishnamoorthy.
 
 Sent from my iPad
 On 10-Jul-2015, at 1:21 pm, Keshava PRASAD Halemane <k_prasad_h at yahoo.co.in>
 wrote:
 
 
 namastE. My Dear Sri R. Krishnamoorthy ji: 
 Thanks. Sri Sada ji mentioned (if i have understood him
 correctly) that upAdhi is the locus of attributes, but then
 that they are inseparable.  Anyway, irrespective of
 whatever fine distinctions in the technical terms associated
 with the issue at hand, the questions that i posed earlier
 still require to be addressed. 
  Keshava PRASAD HalemanemOkShakaamaarthadharmahjanmanaa
 jaayatE jantuḥ |  samskaaraat hi bhavEt dvijaḥ ||
  vEda-paaThaat bhavEt vipra |  brahma jnaanaat hi
 braahmaNah || 
 
 
      On Friday, 10 July 2015 12:54 PM,
 Srirudra via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 wrote:
    
 
  Dear
 Upadhi is the Samskrit term for the attribute.Upa Adhi means
 which are characteristics of the object as seen or
 perceived.R.Krishnamoorthy.
 
 Sent from my iPad
 
 > On 09-Jul-2015, at 2:21 pm, akhanda via Advaita-l
 <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 wrote:
 > 
 > Can anyone explain the difference between attributes
 and upaadhis? In the mahaavaakyas, are the attributes to be
 negated through jahaajahallakshaNa, or the upaadhis?
 > 
 > Thanks,
 > Anil Gidwani
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > 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
Previous message: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
Next message: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list