[Advaita-l] Fwd: Article on Shankara in Vijayavani paper

[Venkatraghavan S]

 Reposting this to the forum as my previous response did not make it.

Thank you Subbuji for posting the bhAshya of this slokA - both of them
happen to be among my favourites.

Just a few additions that came to mind:
1. Firstly, Shankara clearly says that both shItoshNAdi (heat, cold etc)
and their causes (external objects that cause these) are असत्, which as you
correctly observe, means मिथ्या in this context.  His use of सकारणं in
शीतोष्णस्य सकारणस्य न विद्यते is very important as not only is Shankara
saying that the experiences of heat, cold, etc are mithyA, but the objects
that cause those experiences are mithyA too.
2) Secondly, Shankara doesn't say that the असद्बुद्धि is असत्, what he says
is that the objects they denote are असत्. यद्विषया बुद्धिर्न व्यभिचरति, तत्
सत्; यद्विषया व्यभिचरति, तदसत् - The object of the buddhi that deviates is
asat.
3) Thirdly, all the examples he uses to show the सद्बुद्धि and असद्बुद्धि
involve external objects, not just jIva created value judgments, ahamkAra
and mamakArA about those objects. सन् घटः, सन् पटः, सन् हस्ती इति ।
3) एवं सर्वत्र तयोर्बुद्ध्योः घटादिबुद्धिः व्यभिचरति । तथा च दर्शितम् । न
तु सद्बुद्धिः । Here the ghaTa, paTa all are asat because their knowledge
deviates - before the pot existed, there is no ghaTa buddhi, and after the
pot is destroyed there is no ghaTa buddhi. Only when the pot is existing,
the pot buddhi exists. Therefore the object of pot buddhi, the pot, is असत्.
4) On the other hand, the sann (is) in ghaTa: sann, paTa: sann, is sat,
because it's knowledge does not deviate. The sann is always there whether
the pot exists or not - it is there in the clay before the pot is created,
it is there in the pot, and it is there in the pot shards after the pot is
destroyed.

Therefore, in my view, this sloka is about the mithyAtva of all objects,
not just the mithyatva of arjuna's shOka and mOha.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

> On 27 May 2016 5:33 a.m., "V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:The view that somehow this
> sloka only talks about the
>
> Only he who has not studied the Bhashyas of Shankara will come to the
> conclusion that 'Shankara has nowhere taught that the world is mithyā'. Of
> the innumerable instances, we have the BG 2.16 as a lucid example where
> Shankara holds the world of effects as 'asat', in other words, mithyā.  He
> uses the word 'asat' keeping in tune with the verse itself:
>
> नासतो विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सतः ।
> उभयोरपि दृष्टोऽन्तस्त्वनयोस्तत्त्वदर्शिभिः ॥ १६ ॥
> भाष्यम्
> न *असतः अविद्यमानस्य शीतोष्णादेः सकारणस्य न विद्यते नास्ति भावो भवनम्
> अस्तिता ॥*
> *There is no existence for the effects such as cold, heat, which have their
> causes too.*
> न हि शीतोष्णादि सकारणं प्रमाणैर्निरूप्यमाणं वस्तुसद्भवति ।
> That which is evidenced, perceived, by the pramāṇas, means of perception,
> does not have any existence.
> विकारो हि सः, विकारश्च व्यभिचरति । यथा घटादिसंस्थानं चक्षुषा निरूप्यमाणं
> मृद्व्यतिरेकेणानुपलब्धेरसत्, तथा सर्वो विकारः कारणव्यतिरेकेणानुपलब्धेरसन् ।
> जन्मप्रध्वंसाभ्यां प्रागूर्ध्वं च अनुपलब्धेः कार्यस्य घटादेः मृदादिकारणस्य
> च तत्कारणव्यतिरेकेणानुपलब्धेरसत्त्वम् ॥
> All that is evidenced by the eye, like the pot, are non-existent as they
> are non-different from their cause clay. Thus, all effects, vikāras, since
> they are not available apart from their cause, are asat, non-existent.
> Also, since they are not available before their origin and after their
> destruction, they are asat.  [here one can recall the GK: ādāvante cha
>  yannāsti vartamāne'pi tat tathā.' which has a similar verse in the
> Bhagavatam 11th skanda too.]
>
> In the next para, Shankara answers those who question: If jagat is only
> imagined, it is no different from the vijnanavada of bauddha:
> तदसत्त्वे सर्वाभावप्रसङ्ग इति चेत्, न ; सर्वत्र बुद्धिद्वयोपलब्धेः,
> सद्बुद्धिरसद्बुद्धिरिति ।
> If all kāryam is asat, abhāva, then there will be the situation of
> sarvābhāva.  No. Everywhere we encounter two buddhis: sat buddhi and asat
> buddhi. That which changes, transforms, is asat buddhi and that which does
> not transform is sat buddhi.  Pot buddhi, etc. keep changing  and hence are
> asat.
>  यद्विषया बुद्धिर्न व्यभिचरति, तत् सत् ; यद्विषया व्यभिचरति, तदसत् ; इति
> सदसद्विभागे बुद्धितन्त्रे स्थिते, सर्वत्र द्वे बुद्धी सर्वैरुपलभ्येते
> समानाधिकरणे न नीलोत्पलवत्, सन् घटः, सन् पटः, सन् हस्ती इति । एवं सर्वत्र
> तयोर्बुद्ध्योः घटादिबुद्धिः व्यभिचरति । तथा च दर्शितम् । न तु सद्बुद्धिः ।
> तस्मात् घटादिबुद्धिविषयः असन्, व्यभिचारात् ; न तु सद्बुद्धिविषयः,
> अव्यभिचारात् ॥
> घटे विनष्टे घटबुद्दौ व्यभिचरन्त्यां सद्बुद्धिरपि व्यभिचरतीति चेत्, न ;
> पटादावपि सद्बुद्धिदर्शनात् । विशेषणविषयैव सा सद्बुद्धिः ॥
> If pot is destroyed, the sat buddhi there too gets destroyed. No, it is
> seen in cloth buddhi.
> सद्बुद्धिवत् घटबुद्धिरपि घटान्तरे दृश्यत इति चेत्, न ; पटादौ अदर्शनात् ॥
> सद्बुद्धिरपि नष्टे घटे न दृश्यत इति चेत्, न ; विशेष्याभावात् सद्बुद्धिः
> विशेषणविषया सती विशेष्याभावे विशेषणानुपपत्तौ किंविषया स्यात् ? न तु पुनः
> सद्बुद्धेः विषयाभावात् ॥
> एकाधिकरणत्वं घटादिविशेष्याभावे न युक्तमिति चेत्, न ; ‘इदमुदकम्’ इति
> मरीच्यादौ अन्यतराभावेऽपि सामानाधिकरण्यदर्शनात् ॥
> तस्माद्देहादेः द्वन्द्वस्य च सकारणस्य असतो न विद्यते भाव इति । तथा सतश्च
> आत्मनः अभावः अविद्यमानता न विद्यते, सर्वत्र अव्यभिचारात् इति अवोचाम ॥
> Therefore for the body, etc. duals, which have causes, which are asat,
> there is no existence. Also, the Sat, Atman, being always available, is not
> abhāva.
> एवम् आत्मानात्मनोः सदसतोः उभयोरपि दृष्टः उपलब्धः अन्तो निर्णयः सत् सदेव
> असत् असदेवेति, तु अनयोः यथोक्तयोः तत्त्वदर्शिभिः । तदिति सर्वनाम, सर्वं च
> ब्रह्म, तस्य नाम तदिति, तद्भावः तत्त्वम्, ब्रह्मणो याथात्म्यम् । तत्
> द्रष्टुं शीलं येषां ते तत्त्वदर्शिनः, तैः तत्त्वदर्शिभिः । त्वमपि
> तत्त्वदर्शिनां दृष्टिमाश्रित्य शोकं मोहं च हित्वा शीतोष्णादीनि
> नियतानियतरूपाणि द्वन्द्वानि ‘विकारोऽयमसन्नेव मरीचिजलवन्मिथ्यावभासते’ इति
> मनसि निश्चित्य तितिक्षस्व इत्यभिप्रायः ॥
> Sri SSS translates this with the key words: illadiddarū husiyāgi toruttide.
> In BSB 4.1.19 and 4.1.15 Sri SSS has used the words 'ibbaru chandraru
> toruva hāge'...
> Thus, Sri SSS has translated the jagat mithyātva sentences of Shankara in
> the above words.
> The Kannada article in Vijayavani says:
> ಶ್ರೀ ಶಂಕರರು ತಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷ್ಯಗ್ರಂಥಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಎಲ್ಲಿಯೂ ಜಗತ್ತು ಮಿಥ್ಯೆಯೆಂದು ಕರೆದಿಲ್ಲ.
> ಬದಲಿಗೆ ಅದನ್ನು ಸತ್ಯವೆಂದೇ ಹೇಳುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಆದರೆ, ‘ಬ್ರಹ್ಮ ಸತ್ಯಂ ಜಗನ್ಮಿಥ್ಯಾ ಜೀವೋ
> ಬ್ರಹ್ಮೈವ ನಾಪರಃ’ ಎಂಬ ಅದ್ವೈತದ ಸಾರವನ್ನು ಅರ್ಧಶ್ಲೋಕದಲ್ಲಿ ಹೇಳುವೆನೆಂದು ಹೊರಟ
> ವೇದಾಂತಡಿಂಡಿಮದಲ್ಲಿನ ಈ ಮಾತು ಶಂಕರೋಕ್ತಿಯೆಂದೇ ತಿಳಿಯಲಾಗಿದೆ. ‘ಮಿಥ್ಯೆ’ಯೆಂಬುದನ್ನು
> ‘ಸುಳ್ಳು’ ಎಂಬ ಅರ್ಥದಲ್ಲಿ ಬಳಸಿಲ್ಲ; ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಸದಸದ್ವಿಲಕ್ಷಣ - ಸತ್ ಮತ್ತು ಅಸತ್ಗಳಿಂದ
> ಬೇರೆಯಾದುದು ಎಂಬ ಅರ್ಥದಲ್ಲಿ ಪಾರಿಭಾಷಿಕವಾಗಿ ಬಳಸಿದ್ದರೂ ಅದನ್ನು ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯಾರ್ಥದಲ್ಲಿ
> ಸ್ವೀಕರಿಸಿ ಶಂಕರಾಚಾರ್ಯರು ಜಗತ್ತನ್ನು ನಿರಾಕರಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆಂದು ಪ್ರಚಾರ ಮಾಡಲಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.
> ಪ್ರಪಂಚವು ಅಸತ್ಯವೂ ಅಲ್ಲ; ಮಿಥ್ಯೆ(ಸುಳ್ಳು)ಯೂ ಅಲ್ಲ. ಅದು ಬ್ರಹ್ಮವೇ ಆಗಿದೆ ಎಂಬುದು
> ತಾತ್ಪರ್ಯ.
> The word mithyā is used in the GK 2.7 where Shankara concludes that just
> like the dream objects, the waking objects too are undoubtedly 'asat'. It
> is the same meaning 'asat'Shankara adduces to the word 'asat' in the BG
> 2.16 as mithyā. This alone Sri SSS has translated as 'husiyāgi toruvudu' in
> the BG 2.16 translation. In the Kannada-English online translator:
>
> https://translate.google.co.in/?ion=1&espv=2&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.&bvm=bv.121658157,d.dGo&biw=780&bih=367&dpr=1.75&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&client=tw-ob#kn/en/husi
> we get for the Kannada word 'husi', the English translation as 'false.'
> In the Sanskrit-Kannada online dictionary:
> https://www.google.co.in/#q=sanskrit+to+kannada+translation+online
> we get the same result: For Sanskrit 'mithyā', the Kannada word is 'husi'.
> Anyone can check this on the above URL.
> I had also posted the complete translations of Sri SSS for the BG 2.16, BSB
> 4.1.19,15 too.  One can also see what Sri SSS has translated for GK 2.7
> above.
>
>
>
>    - माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम् । वैतथ्यप्रकरणम् । कारिका ७
>    सप्रयोजनता तेषां स्वप्ने विप्रतिपद्यते ।
>    तस्मादाद्यन्तवत्त्वेन मिथ्यैव खलु ते स्मृताः ॥ ७ ॥
>
>    अग्रे पठन्तु...
>    <
> http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=Mandukya&page=02#MK_C02_K07#मिथ्यैव
> >
>    - माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम् । वैतथ्यप्रकरणम् । कारिका ७ - भाष्यम्
>    स्वप्नदृश्यवज्जागरितदृश्यानामप्यसत्त्वमिति यदुक्तम् तदयुक्तम् ;
>    यस्माज्जाग्रद्दृश्या अन्नपानवाहनादयः क्षुत्पिपासादिनिवृत्तिं कुर्वन्तो
>    गमनागमनादि कार्यं च सप्रयोजना दृष्टाः । न तु स्वप्नदृश्यानां तदस्ति ।
>    तस्मात्स्वप्नदृश्यवज्जाग्रद्दृश्यानामसत्त्वं मनोरथमात्रमिति । तन्न ।
>    कस्मात् ? यस्माद्या सप्रयोजनता दृष्टा अन्नपानादीनाम्, सा स्वप्ने
>    विप्रतिपद्यते । जागरिते हि भुक्त्वा पीत्वा च तृप्तो विनिवर्तिततृट्
>    सुप्तमात्र एव क्षुत्पिपासाद्यार्तमहोरात्रोपोषितमभुक्तवन्तमात्मानं
> मन्यते,
>    यथा स्वप्ने भुक्त्वा पीत्वा च अतृप्तोत्थितः, तथा ।
> तस्माज्जाग्रद्दृश्यानां
>    स्वप्ने विप्रतिपत्तिर्दृष्टा । अतो मन्यामहे तेषामप्यसत्त्वं
>    स्वप्नदृश्यवदनाशङ्कनीयमिति । तस्मादाद्यन्तवत्त्वमुभयत्र समानमिति
> मिथ्यैव खलु
>    ते स्मृताः ॥
>
>