[Advaita-l] Fwd: Advaita Siddhi series 020 - panchama mithyAtva vichAra:
ravikiranm108 at gmail.com
Fri Dec 22 22:22:13 EST 2017
Thanks Venkatraghavan ji,
>> The aikya jnAna generates an akhaNDAkAra
>> vritti that not only removes avidyA, but avidyA kArya (including the
>> itself, which is also an avidyA kArya). What remains after the vritti
>> itself is destroyed is the anupahita, shuddha Brahman.
> Can we say,
> the aikya jnAna referenced above (bhAmati) is maha vAkya janya alone?
> But, the generation of akhaNDAkAra vritti is based on bhAmati prakriya ?
> Actually my sentence was worded poorly. aikya jnAna generated by mahAvAkya
> *is* the akhaNDAkAra vritti. Therefore the sentence should have read -
> mahAvAkya shabda generates the akhaNDAkAra vritti. The object of the vritti
> is upahita Brahman, not shuddha brahman. After the vritti does its job, all
> that remains is shuddha Brahman.
> With the rise and destruction of such a vrtti, the dehAdi upAdi falls
> away, soon after?
> (or such a one is still subjected to prArabda karma fala upabhoga, as per
> where the upAdhi is functional based on samskAra ?)
> As far as I understand, the idea of jivanmukti exists within bhAmati
> prakriyA also. Thus the akhaNDAkAra vritti leads not to the destruction of
> the body, but to its bAdha, ie the certainty that it does not exist in any
> period of time. As the bhAmati kAra observes, न खल्वयं सर्वथा
> मनुष्याभिमानरहित:, किन्तु अविद्यासंस्कारानुवृत्त्या अस्य मात्रया
> तदभिमानोऽनुवर्तते - this one (jIvanmukta) is not wholly lacking the notion
> that he is human, rather that notion continues in slight traces through the
> continuance of the impressions of avidyA.
Ah..this clarifies, the usage of the expression: all that remains is
shuddha Brahman. It is the firm conviction in the identity with shuddha
Brahman as a result of aikya jnAna that gives rise to such expression. It
is not that, such an akhaNDAkAra vritti would result in the continuous
permanent state of identity (unity) with Supreme Self, with the exclusion
of any or all vrttis arising, from there after (non-arising of all vrttis
henceforth). But, such a one is still subjected to the arising of vrtti's (
aikya jnAna or any vishaya) based on samskAra and has to verily attend to
the maintenance of the shareera, kshut-pipAsa, until the body drops of its
own accord, but one clearly knows with certainty, the mithyAtva of all such
How would any difference be attributed in the nirvikalpaka aikya jnAna
itself (arising from mahAvAkya shabda) or such an aikya jnAna phala
(jivanmukti), as per bhAmati or vivaraNa or bhAshya(samyak jnAna)? Any
difference, if any, would be in the terminology used and the way or manner
in which it is explained (prakriya bheda alone). For, one who has studied
bhAshya or bhAshya/vivaraNa exclusively would also confirm/claim with
absolute conviction, shuddha Brahman alone is (exists), after the arise of
aikya jnAna vrtti and the certainty that avidyA / avidyA kArya does not
exist in any period of time, and all it requires is for the rise of such a
unitary aikya jnAna vrtti from mahAvAkya shabda.
It would be interesting to hear the viewpoints from those who endorse
> Understand this is a deviation from the main topic. Shall search the
> If you have any recommendation or pointers to any refs where this is
> dealt in some detail, pl share ?
> would be interested in, how the bhAmati school of thought is reconciled
> with bhAshya wrt atmAikyatva jnAna and (prArabda) samskAra/avidya lesha?
> To be honest, I have not studied the bhAmati in detail, so I am unable to
> answer. Hopefully the opportunity to study the bhAmati presents itself at
> some point.
> Perhaps you can read the english translation of Bhamati chatussutri by
> Suryanarayana Sastri, or alternatively, siddhAnta lesha sangraha of appayya
> dIkshitar, for a survey of different views on jivanmukti.
> It was in this post itself. sat, as far as this definition of mithyAtva is
> concerned, is pramANa siddham, and pramANa is doSha asahakrita jnAna
> karaNatvam. That is, sat is that which is established by a means of
> knowledge that is unaccompanied / unafflicted by a defect.
> Coming to what sat means withing advaita - later in the siddhi itself,
> there is a chapter titled "pratyaksha bAdhoddhAre sattva nirvachanam",
> which explores the meaning of sat in the context of whether the world's
> mithyAtva is contradicted by the satyatva known through pratyaksha (the
> answer: it is not). In describing pAramArthika sat, the siddhikAra says at
> one point - तथाहि - स्वप्रकाशाद्वितीयचैतन्यरूपत्वमेव ब्रह्मण: सत्त्वम्. Therefore,
> Brahman's sat is the self-revealing, non-dual consciousness. That is, sat =
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list