[Advaita-l] A question on PariNAma and vivarta

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

Praveenji - PraNAms
Thanks for your clarifications. I have to  think about more.
Hari Om!Sada

      From: Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
 To: kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> 
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 4:17 PM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] A question on PariNAma and vivarta
   
Namaste Sadaji,


On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:38 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

  I feel everyonemissed -  the relevance of question, in relation to the Ch. 13 of Panchadashi -entitled brahmanande aatmananda. 

Perhaps a typo, you meant advaitAnanda.

I think now I missing the point you're trying to make. Its surprising to see that you are pointing out everyone is missing your question after 40 odd mails on the thread! Let me restate the problems raised by you, at least that is what I understood and replied earlier. Panchadashikara quotes:

1)  "मृत्कुम्भ and सुवर्णकुण्डल as examples for परिणाम्युपादान instead of विवर्तोपादान.
2) रज्जुसर्प as विवर्तोपादान which is प्रातिभासिक। 

On the 2nd point, you wondered if there is any Upanishad that covers it and I named a few. On the 1st point, I will try to see it in the context of the chapter that you are specifically showing it to be out of place perhaps...

 ...
 I am fullyaware of the parinmana and vivara  aspects - we are not discussing herethe general definitions but specifics in relation to the title of the chapter
The example is very much in the context of the chapter, but I understood that you made a very generic statement yourself that "he provides the next two example from Ch. Up which actually (in my understanding) should belong to vivarta. The next examples provided in the above sloka is - just as clay becoming pot and gold becoming ornament." 
Even in the context of the chapter, Maya is introduced later after establishing आनन्द itself as the उपादानकारण of the world. And as I said earlier, the definition we have for परिणाम and विवर्त may not be exactly so in that context. 13.8 defines परिणाम as अवस्थान्तरतापत्तिरेकस्य परिणामिता and 13.9 defines विवर्त as अवस्थान्तरभानं तु विवर्तः which restricts the example only to that, which व्याख्या also explains that deviation from earlier state so for परिणाम-- यथा क्षीरमृत्सुवर्णादीनां क्षीरादिव्यवहारयोग्यतां परित्यज्य दध्यादिव्यवहारयोग्यतापत्तिः। Just as curd does not remain in the same state as to make milk-like transactions with anymore, so too pot and bangle cannot be treated exactly like clay and gold in transactions, respectively. That much is the example for categorisation. 


and its contents and in relation to Vedanta. 
I would say that I was connecting it to Vedanta alone, while you seem to be connecting it to science also. Considering that, I'll skip a para...
 
...

 

We can come up justifications why he lists gold-ring as parinaama  along with milk-curds in the beginning and later exhaustively analyzes differentiating them as vivarta and parinaama.  My word was 'I was puzzled by this'.  
We don't need to come up with justifications, Vidyaranya Muni himself expected this getting puzzled. Please refer to shloka 13.51. which says:
क्षीरादौ परिणामोऽस्तु पनस्तद्भाववर्जनात्। एतावता मृदादीनां दृष्टान्तत्वं न हीयते। The व्याख्या explains this further as: एतावता क्षीरादेः परिणामित्वेन मृदादीनां सुवर्णादीनां दृष्टान्तत्वं विवर्तदृष्टान्तभावो न हीयते न नश्यति। अयमभिप्रायः -- क्षीरस्य पूर्वरूपपरित्यागपुरःसरमवस्थान्तरप्राप्तिसद्भावात्परिणामित्वमेव, मृत्स्य्वर्णयोस्तु अवस्थान्तरोत्पत्तिसद्भावेऽपि पूर्वरूपपरित्यागाभावाद्विवर्ततापीति।Please note the specific words एवकार with milk-curd example and usage of अपि with clay-pot and ornament-goldthat makes it clear that while the milk-curd example is only for परिणाम, the latter two fit with both, bringing me back to my earlier response as to going with only the commonality between the example and exemplified.

If you are happy with your explanations, that is fine. 

Sadaji, the explanation given was not for my happiness although आत्मनस्तु कामाय सर्वं प्रियं भवति :) 

 
 Here as Vidyaji  points out that we are onlydealing with upaadanana kaaraNa where sruti statement itself applies. Abhinna nimittaupaadana kaaraNam comes later with Ikshata statement. 



By the starting verses of the 13th chapter, it appears that Vidyaranya Muni is indicating अभिन्ननिमित्तोपादानकारण because he starts with आनन्द as उपादान itself.
gurupAdukAbhyam,--praveen