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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Thanks Subbuji, that makes sense.
Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 26 Dec 2016 6:34 a.m., "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> I think here kāla, like māyā, is implied to be anādi. Since such is the
> case in this prakriyā, like māyā, kālā too, will remain free of undergoing
> destruction in pralaya. It is one among the pravāha nityatva items.
> However, it must be recognized that these belong to the avidyā avasthā
> alone where the creation, sustenance, etc. go on.  In other words, it is
> the vyāvahārika.
>
>>
>> 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 |
>>
>
> Here, the pāramārthika jnānam is meant by the 'śivatattva jnānam', which
> sublates, bādhā-fies even māyā, kāla, etc. and only the Nirguṇa Brahman as
> the advaita tattvam remains over.
>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> In this sentence मायाकार्यम् च माया च तत्सम्बन्धरूप: कालश्च त्रितयमपि
> शिवतत्त्वज्ञानेन विलीयत एव |
>
> the 'tat' refers to māyā, recalling that kāla is also admitted as
> māyā-ātma sambandha. The 'apara' kāla is the one that breaks down as kalpa,
> yuga, samvatsara, māsa, etc. units of time, while the 'para' kāla is the
> one that is the 'whole' when kāla is viewed as not these broken down units.
> Vidyaranya explains in the commentary for 21 and 22 verses. That way, I
> think there is no contradiction.
>
> warm regards
> subbu
>
>>
>> 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
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>