[Advaita-l] Fwd: "time" as defined in Vedanta pariBAsha.

[Venkatraghavan S]

Dear sir,
I think you have already made your point, several times in several posts. I
suggest you follow your own advice. If you consider these posts are
speculative, why waste time commenting? Please spend it contemplating on
Atma.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 26 Dec 2016 4:28 a.m., "sreenivasa murthy" <narayana145 at yahoo.co.in>
wrote:

> Dear Sri Venkataraghavan,
>
>  You write : "As you are aware, there are several views of kAla within
> advaita darshana".
> The views are opinions of the writers /teachers and it is pure
> spectulation. Then What is the final truth about kAla? It is the TRUTH /
> FACT that matters to a *tattvajijnAsu*.
>
> With respectful namaskarams,
> Sreenivasa Murthy
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
> *To:* H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, 26 December 2016 1:17 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: "time" as defined in Vedanta pariBAsha.
>
> Namaste Sri Chandramouliji ,
>
> As you are aware, there are several views of kAla within advaita darshana,
> and one of the views is kAla as avidyA's kArya. Sri DS Subbaramaiya in his
> work, Sri Dakshinamurtistotram volume 1, outlines the various views, both
> in advaita and other schools (Pages 324 to 340).
>
> Here is a summary:
> 1) kAla as an effect of avidyA - derived from the bhAshya sentence - एतेन
> दिक्कालमन: परमण्वादीनाम् कार्यत्वम् व्याख्यातम्  (BS 2.3.7)
> 2) kAla as avidyA - derived from the vAchArambhaNa shruti that the kArya is
> no different from the kAraNa. MadhusUdana sarasvati svAminah takes this
> view in siddhAnta bindu too  - कालस्तु अविद्यैव। तस्या एव सर्वाधारत्वादिति।
> 3) kAla as the relation between avidyA and Brahman - the one that Sri
> Subbu-ji referred to earlier.
> 4) kAla as the kriyAshakti of Ishvara
> 5) kAla as that taTastha lakshaNa of Brahman
>
> Its worth reading this portion of the book and the various quotes given by
> the author in this regard.
>
> Coming to your question of how the sUta samhita verse quoted should be
> interpreted. I believe in this case, the sUta samhita takes the view that
> kAla is indeed a relation between Brahman and avidyA. The entire 1.8
> chapter of the SS is worth studying for those interested in this topic.
>
> 1) Firstly, Ananthakrishna Sastrigal in his tamil translation of the Suta
> Samhita translates this phrase as the relationship between Atma and mAya.
>
> 2) Secondly SvAmi vidyAraNya in his commentary to the sUta samhita, the
> tAtparyadIpika, says in relation to another sloka, 1.8.22: द्विविधो हि काल:
> परम: अपरमश्चेति । शिवमायासम्बन्धरूप: परम इति ।
>
> 3) The sUta samhita itself (1.8.24 to be precise) distinguishes kAla, mAya
> and its products when it says:
>
> कालो माया च तत्कार्यम् शिवेनावृतम् ।
> शिव: कालानवच्छिन्न: कालतत्त्वम् यथा तथा ॥
>
> Time, mAya and its products are enveloped by Shiva (Atma). Just as
> everything is limited by time, except time itself, Shiva (Atma) is also not
> limited by time.  So here if the sUta samhita was taking the view that kAla
> is a product of mAya, there would be no need to list kAla, mAya and its
> products separately.
>
> However, here is a curiosity - SvAmi vidyAraNya makes a statement in the
> bhAshya for 1.8.24, which is worth considering. He says: मायाकार्यम् च माया
> च तत्सम्बन्धरूप: कालश्च त्रितयमपि शिवतत्त्वज्ञानेन विलीयत एव |
>
> I could be mistaken, but here Swami VidyAraNya apparently seems to say that
> kAla is the sambandha between mAyakAryam and mAya, which is in apparent
> contradiction to what he said just two slokas previously शिवमायासम्बन्धरूप:
> परम इति. What does the तत् in तत्सम्बन्धरूप: काल: refer to? The most
> proximate nouns to which the sambandha can be attributed are mAyAkAryam and
> mAya, but that results in a contradiction with what he said in 1.8.22. It
> could be that here in 1.8.24 he is referring to apara kAla, whereas in
> 1.8.22 he was referring to para kAla.
>
> If anyone has any thoughts on why this is the case, I would be interested
> in knowing.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 3:55 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,
> >
> >
> >
> > Reg  << The sUta samhita makes a reference to kAla as the sambandha
> > (relation)
> > between mAya and Atma (2-2-10) : कालो मायात्मसम्बन्धात् सर्वसाधारणात्मक:
> > >>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Would it be appropriate to understand from this quote kAla as the product
> > of mAya on its association (सम्बन्धात्) with Atman, mAya being inert and
> > upAdAna kArana ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
>