[Advaita-l] vyavahAre bhaTTanayaH

[V Subrahmanian]

The role of Yogasutras in Advaita is undeniable.  Shankara has paraphrased
yoga sutras directly or indirectly across the bhāṣyas.  Sri Vidyasankar
Sundaresan has studied this topic.  Even Sri SSS in his short book
'Gitāśāstrārtha vivekaḥ' has shown correspondence between Patanjali Yoga
system with Advaita especially in the 6th Chapter of the BG.  It is only
their metaphysics of ultimate jīva nānātva and prapancha satyatvam that is
not admitted in Advaita.

Yesterday I had occasion to interact with a person doing his PhD in
Vyākaraṇa.  He told me that even that darshana has mokṣa as its goal.  He
said the 'vivarta' word is used by them only first and Advaita does not say
that explicitly. For them the whole creation is only a vivarta of shabda.
And the moksha they talk of is no different from Advaita. He, however,
presented a fine talk on moksha svarupa in Advaita which I have recorded
and will share soon.

regards
subrahmanian.v

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste
>
> In the Naishkarmya Siddhi Sri Sureshwara has given this beautiful sequence
> -
>
> Nitya Naimittika Karma Anushthaanaat DharmotpattiH - From doing the
> Nitya and Naimittika Karma there will be rise of Dharma
>
> Dharmotpattehe Paapahaanihi - From rise of Dharma there will be loss of sin
>
> Tatashchittashuddhihi - From that there will be purification of mind
>
> Tataha Samsaarayaathaatmyavabodhaha - From that the knowledge of true
> nature of Samsaara
>
> Tato Vairaagyam - From that Vairagya
>
> Tato Mumukshutvam - From that desire for Moksha
>
> Tatastadupaaya Paryeshanam - From that search for the means for Moksha
>
> Tatah Sarvakarma Tatsaadhana Sanyaasaha - From that giving up all
> Karma and its Saadhana
>
> Tato YOGABHYASAH - FROM THAT PRACTICE OF YOGA
>
> Tatah Chittasya Pratyak Pravanataa - From that YOGABHYASA there will
> be turning of mind to Atmaa
>
> Tatah Tattvamasi Adi Vaakyaartha Parijnaanam - From that the knowledge
> of Tattvamasi and other sentences. This is Atma Saakshaatkaara only.
>
> Tato AvidyoChedaha - From that removing of Avidyaa
>
> Tatasca Svaatmanyeva Avasthaanam - From that remaining in Atmaa only
>
> Brahamaaiva San Brahmaapyeti - Being Brahman only before Jnana he
> attains Brahman
>
> Vimuktasca Vimucyate - Being liberated before Jnana  he becomes liberated
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Namaste
> >
> > Atha SabdaanuSaasanam is not particularly different from Atha ataH
> > brahmajijñaasaa, because even Vedanta teaches Brahman, by using words,
> > notwithstanding the fact that Brahman is beyond words. This is the reason
> > both Saastras teach the Ultimate using the Adhyaaropa-apavaada method.
> > Vyaakarana which is called as PadaSaastra holds that in Paramaartha
> level,
> > only SphoTa is and that all the distinctions of varna, pada etc. are
> unreal.
> >
> > Is SphoTa = Sabdabrahman? Many say that SphoTa is madhyamAvAk and
> > Sabdabrahman is ParAvAk. In terms of the "world" emanating from Brahman,
> > Advaita's position is no different. After all Brahman is established as
> the
> > Nimitta and Upaadaana kaaraNa of the world. The reality of the world, and
> > therefore the reality of its creation, is also at the level of
> Vyavahaara.
> > It is exactly the same position in Sabdaadvaita. By the way, even Advaita
> > admits that the world has emanated from Sabda. (Ref. BSB 1.3.28).
> >
> > Sarvadarsanasangraha has been discussed at a significant level of detail
> and
> > it was shown that Sphotavaada is effectively un-refuted therein. Since a
> > refutation is not possible / desirable, maybe it was placed before
> Saamkhya?
> >
> > Some people hold that the vritti on Yogasutras is not written by
> > Bhagavatpaada. By the way, the original Yogasutras are attributed to
> > Patanjali whose Mahabhashyam is the basis for Sphotavaada. So does that
> mean
> > that Sankaracarya agrees with Patanjali? I think we should look at the
> > subject matter and not the names involved.
> >
> > Even after all the evidences if the dualistic Yoga is to be held nearer
> to
> > Advaita, so be it. There would be a point in taking this forward only if
> new
> > facts are cited.
> >
> > Regards
> > N. Siva Senani
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
> > To: Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for
> Advaita
> > Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2015 9:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] vyavahAre bhaTTanayaH
> >
> > Namaste
> >
> > The highest teaching is silence. That is why they say about Guru
> > Dakshina Murthy, 'Gurostu Maunam Vyakhanam Shishyastu Chinna
> > Samshayaaha'. In this no words are needed. But Patanjali's commentary
> > is starting  Atha Shabdaanushaasanam . It is about words. Secondly in
> > Vedanta itself we have Yato Vaacho Nivartante Apraapya Manasaa Saha.
> > Words or Mind cannot reach Brahman. In Sravana, Manana and
> > Nididhyasana only Sravana is using words. Manana and Nididhyasana are
> > done without words. If Grammarians are saying Shabda is Brahman it
> > cannot be Nirguna Brahma of Vedanta but only Saguna Brahman.
> >
> > Bhartruhari has said in Brahma Kanda - Brahman is without beginning or
> > end is the indestructible essence of speech. Which is developed in the
> > form of things and whence springs the creation of the world.
> > Reference in Sarva Darshana Samgraha.
> >
> > This Brahman is the Sphota of the Grammarians. But in Advaita Vedanta
> > the Brahman is not even Creator of the World. The Whole Creation is an
> > illusion only. There is no Creation. How can the Shabda Brahman the
> > Cause of Creation be the  Brahman of Vedanta? It can be taken as
> > Saguna Brahma only.
> >
> > In the Sarva Darshana Samgraha the Yoga Darshana is placed last before
> > Vedanta. It is the closest neighbor of Vedanta in this text.
> >
> > Another point is Adi Sankara wrote one detailed Vrtti on Yoga Sutras
> > but he did not write anything on Vyakarana or Sphota.
> > You can find it on Amazon.
> >
> >
> http://www.amazon.in/gp/product/8120829891/ref=ox_sc_imb_mini_detail?ie=UTF8&psc=1
> ∣=A3RWP0QS4LMKI0
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Siva Senani Nori via Advaita-l
> > <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >> From: Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I heard some people say Yoga System is close to Advaita but not
> Vyakarana.
> >> Adi Sankara has said "Nahi Nahi Rakshati Dukrun Karane" in Bhaja
> Govindam
> >> seeing a old man memorizing Panini Sutras like a fool. Adi Sankara has
> also
> >> rejected Sphota Vada of Sanskrit Grammarians. Nirvikalpa Samadhi of
> Yoga is
> >> close to Advaita Brahma Jnana.
> >> ------------------------
> >> Namaste
> >> First about डुकृञ् करणे। The intention there is to promote Bhakti
> (amongst
> >> those Adhikaaris, for whom Bhakti is the best path), but we would be
> >> mistaken if we think that Bhagavatpada is against Vyakarana or Jnana in
> >> general. The meaning of the injunction स्वाध्यायो अध्येतव्यः is that
> Veda,
> >> along with all its angas including Vyakarana, should be studied.
> >> Bhagavatpada himself reserves the highest praise for Panini. In the
> Bhashya
> >> under 1.1.3 शास्त्रयोनित्वात् in order to portray Brahman as the source
> of
> >> Sastra, he gives the example of Panini: Just like Panini is known to
> know
> >> much more than Vyakarana, the author of a Sastra would know much more
> and
> >> only Brahman can know much more than all the Sastra that emanated from
> It.
> >> Here, if we ponder as to what is that Panini knew more than
> Ashtadhyayi, we
> >> realize that it refers to Philosophy.
> >> This brings to the question: is sphotavada not refuted by Acaryapada in
> >> 1.3.28 (Devatadhikaranam)? At least one scholar, Prof. M. Srimannarayana
> >> Murthy, believes that Sankaracarya is agreeable with both doctrines
> >> (Sphotavada and Varnavada), but it is the later commentators like
> Vacaspati
> >> Misra, who introduced a refutation of Sphota. Much as I would like that
> to
> >> be true, from a careful study of the Devatadhikaranam, that view has to
> be
> >> rejected. So, unless the text we currently have is corrupted, refutal of
> >> Sphotavada by Adisankara cannot be denied. Those in the sampradaya say
> that,
> >> in reality there is no element of the refutation which is essential to
> >> uphold the tenets of Advaita, and that the refutation is done with a
> desire
> >> to avoid confusion. If VaiyaakaraNas propose Sabdabrahman as the
> ultimate,
> >> Alaankaarikas would propose Rasabrahman, and somebody else,
> Gandhabrahman,
> >> Sparsabrahman etc. and the saadhaka might be confused. (Is the
> Naadabrahman
> >> of Tyaagaraaya Swami different from Parabrahman, for instance?) If we
> >> examine their argument that the refutation is not essential, we find
> that it
> >> is indeed so. The only reason offered in the entire Devatadhikaranam, is
> >> that there is gaurava in conceptualizing Sphota, whereas varNaanupuurvI
> is
> >> sufficient to explain (how meaning is expressed). If Sphota is
> admitted, a
> >> Vedantin has no baadhaa to any of his positions. There is no other
> >> refutation anywhere else by Bhagavatpada. Among later Advaitins,
> Vimuktatman
> >> does criticize Sphota in his Ishtasiddhi [1], but apart from that I
> could
> >> not find refutation of Sphotavada at other places. (I request learned
> >> members to let me know if they came across Sphotakhandana by Advaita
> >> scholars before twentieth century anywhere else).For instance, in
> >> Sarvadarsanasangraha, every preceding Darsana is criticized and refuted
> by
> >> the next Darsana presented, but this is done very curiously with
> respect to
> >> Sphota - Vyakarana's Vivartavaada stands refuted by the Parinamavada of
> >> Sankhya. Now, ultimately Parinamavada does not stand and once it stands
> >> refuted by Advaita (the last Darsana), it obtains that Sphotavada is not
> >> effectively refuted in Sarvadarsanasangraha.
> >> In comparison, there is disagreement with respect to the ultimate
> between
> >> Yoga and Advaita. The ISvara of Yoga is an emasculated one, who does not
> >> create, sustain or dissolve the world unto himself, who is a कश्चन
> >> पुरुषविशेषः. In fact, Pradhaana remains the highest principle of Yoga as
> >> well, that is why in Sarvadarsanasangraha refutation of
> Paata~njaladarSana
> >> consists of refutation of pariNAmavAda and refutation of PradhAna. This
> of
> >> course, follows the Brahmasutras and Saankarabhaashya. Under 2.1.3 (एतेन
> >> योगः प्रत्युक्तः), PradhAna as the highest principle, and the fact that
> they
> >> (Sankhya and Yoga) are dualist systems is cited as the reason for their
> >> rejection.
> >> In summary, those who say that "Yoga System is close to Advaita but not
> >> Vyakarana", are not evaluating the available textual evidence
> appropriately.
> >> Yoga is a dualist school, avaidika (not my words, but that of Vidyaranya
> >> muni in his Vaiyaasikanyaayamaalaa), refuted clearly by the Sutrakara
> >> himself, and differs from Advaita in most important aspects. On the
> other
> >> hand, VyaakaraNa is an Advaitic school, is an anga of the Veda, not
> refuted
> >> by the Sutrakara, and does not differ from Advaita in any manner. Even
> the
> >> bhashyakara refutes Sphota not in the section (2nd Adhyaya) devoted to
> >> Khandana, but elsewhere.
> >> The only reason for the perceived closeness of Yoga is that Yoga is
> >> definitely most useful in Saadhanaa. Its practical utility must not be
> >> confused as doctrinal similarity. On the other hand, Sphotavada is so
> close
> >> to Advaita, that it could plausibly be said that it differs no more
> from the
> >> teachings of Sankaracarya than Bhamatiprasthana or Vivaranaprasthana
> do. If
> >> we treat Sphotasiddhi+Brahmasiddhi-minus-jnanakarmasamuccaya (as
> >> jnanakarmasamuccaya weakens Advaita and is incorporated by Mandana
> Misra to
> >> accommodate Purvamimamsa) as a third prasthana within Advaita tradition,
> >> this claim can be examined and found plausible.
> >> RegardsN. Siva Senani
> >> [1] Ishtasiddhi is an early prakaranagrantha, from which Ramanujacarya
> >> took the summary of Advaita. This summary in Sribhashyam is called
> >> Mahapurvapaksha and is sometimes cited as the best summary of Advaita!
> (by
> >> those not familiar with Ishtasiddhi). The refutation of Sphotavada by
> >> Vimuktatman follows the path of Jayanta Bhatta (of Nyayamanjari fame),
> which
> >> deliberately understands the word Sabda differently. If the same
> >> understanding is applied to 1.3.28, then the sentence of Bhashyakara -
> अतः
> >> प्रभवात् । अत एव हि वैदिकात् शब्दात् देवादिकं जगत् प्रभवति। - would
> stand
> >> negated. Let me demonstrate. One ridicule, opponents of Sphota
> (including
> >> Vimuktatman, but Jayanta Bhatta is the one who has done it first, if
> not the
> >> author of SivadRshTi) throw at VaiyaakaraNas is: since you do not
> >> differentiate the Sabda "annam" and the corresponding external entity,
> i.e.
> >> food which is eaten, when you are hungry, simply eat the Sabda "annam".
> In
> >> 1.3.28, Sankaracarya is saying the world emanated from Sabda because
> Sabda
> >> primarily denotes Jati, Jati is nitya, and the origination is of only
> the
> >> individuals (that is cowness is always there, and it is only the
> individual
> >> cows which are born). If origin of Vyaktis from the nitya Jatis is not
> >> accepted, the words "अतः प्रभवात्" cannot be explained. It follows that
> the
> >> Sabda and the external entity represented by it are not different and
> the
> >> result is that either Acarya Vimuktatman's refutation is wrong, or he
> does
> >> not agree with Sutrakara and Bhashyakara.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Venkatesh
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> -Venkatesh
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>