[Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis

Venkatraghavan S agnimile at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 14:53:29 CDT 2015
Previous message: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
Next message: [Advaita-l] Attributes and upadhis
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Anil ji, Keshav ji,

This chapter on akhandArtha may provide some clarity.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ik9SLY9KrkcC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=akhandArtha&source=bl&ots=-_uGIMHXPU&sig=YogoyrjIq1cZ1a8zrBby-Sx_fAM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mBCgVe3fNLCQ7Abz5KHoCg&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=akhandArtha&f=false

Advaitins like chitsukhA, dharmarAja adhvarIndra and madhusUdana sarasvati
do admit the existence of akhandArtha vAkyas - in the context of
nirvikalpaka perception. Anand Hudli ji's first email had the reference
from tatvapradIpika and VedAnta paribhAshA.

If the definition of the akhandArtha vAkya (samsarga anavagAhi - VedAnta
paribhAsha; samsarga asangi - tatvapradIpika) is that different parts of
the sentence refer to one and only object without any relational
connection, the implication is that the different parts of the sentence
cannot have qualifier/qualified, part/whole, cause/effect, including for
the purposes of our discussion - an attribute/locus relationship.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan
On 10 Jul 2015 19:20, "akhanda via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> If I am not mistaken, Sri LalitAlAlitaH had relied on the Tarka Samgraha
> for his etymological explanations of the akhanDaakaara vRtti.  Does Advaita
> subscribe to the Tarka Samgraha, a Nyaaya-Vaisheshika text, in such
> matters? Sadaji, please correct me if I am wrong, but Advaita only borrows
> concepts regarding anumAna from the Nyaayikas.
>
> Therefore, unless Sri LalitAlAlitaH has any other pramAnas for his theory,
> I am unsure how much credence can be paid to the etymology of akhandaakaara
> as referring to the attributeless nature of any object.  In fact, is there
> any pramANa that says that the akhanDaakaara vRtti refers to objects at all?
>
> Over to you,  Sri LalitAlAlitaH!
>
> Anil Gidwani
>
> On 10-Jul-2015 9:50 PM, advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org via
> advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org 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
>>
>>
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>> 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