[Advaita-l] Fwd: Fwd: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} ’ सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म ’ - वैयाकरणमतम्

[V Subrahmanian]

The following post elucidates the points Prof. Subrahmanyam Korada has
made.  Sri Sivasenani ji has given his time in making the points
understandable to us.

regards
subbu
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} ’ सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं
ब्रह्म ’ - वैयाकरणमतम्
To: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>


Subrahmanian hi

Namaste. In the below mail, the reference is to what Sabda (let us take the
limited sense of Sabda = word) denotes. It could denote jaati or vyakti.
When it refers to jaati, sentences like gaur na hantavyaH make sense, as
the meaning would be that no cow ought to be killed. If gauH refers to a
particular individual (vyakti), the problem would be that it would refer to
only a particular cow, meaning that other cows could be killed. However if
we take that Sabda denotes jaati, in a sentence like gaamaanaya, it would
not be possible to bring gotva jaati alone; one can only bring a cow, not
cowness. Different Saastras accept different denotation theories. Mimaamsaa
and following it, Advaita also within vyavahaara, accept that Sabda denoted
jaati; Navyanyaaya accept jaati-viSishTa-vyakti. Praaceena nyaaya has a
sutra which says jaatyaakRtivyaktayastu padaarthaH (I am in Singapore
without access to books - so please excuse the lack of references) meaning
that in addition to jaati and vyakti, aakRti (shape) is also a denotation
of meaning. (pishTamayI gauH is sometimes the intended meaning in
gaamaanaya). Bauddhas do not accept jaati as their view is sarvaM
svalakshaNaM svalakshaNam.

In this context, the question is: what is the view of vaiyaakaraNas. They
accept Sabda denoted jaati (=aakRti as used in Mahaabhaashya in this
discusssion in some places; Patanjali also uses aakRti in the sense of
shape) in some places and dravya in others. The ultimate view however is
that it is dravya only.

With this introduction, please see my comments inline below.

Regards
N Siva Senani

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Subrahmanyam Korada <korada11 at gmail.com>
Date: 2017-01-09 20:17 GMT+05:30
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} ’ सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म ’ - वैयाकरणमतम्
To: "bvparishat at googlegroups.com" <bvparishat at googlegroups.com>








नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

सत्यं ज्ञानम् अनन्तं ब्रह्म - इति उपनिषद्वाक्यं तावत् वैयकरणैरपि
स्वीक्रियते --

तत्र महाभाष्ये कात्यायनस्य प्रथमं वार्तिकं स्वीकृत्य पतञ्जलिना अभाषि
भाष्यम् --

’ सिद्धे शब्दार्थसम्बन्धे लोकतः लोकतः अर्थप्रयुक्ते शाब्दप्रयोगे शास्त्रेण
धर्मनियमः क्रियते ’(वा)
*** This is the prateeka on which a lot of discussion ensues. It means
"Given a set of eternal Sabdas, eternal arthas and an eternal relationship
between Sabda and artha, and given the usage of Sabda to denote a
particular artha, the Saastra ordains correct usage which gives puNyam".
VyaakaraNa gives the correct forms of words. Usage of correct forms gives
puNyam. Incorrect forms cannot give the desired result in Yajna etc.

.... अथवा द्रव्य एव पदार्थे एष विग्रहो न्याय्यः - सिद्धे शब्दे अर्थे
सम्बन्धे चेति ।
*** This is one interpretation of the prateeka ( reference sentence) as
explained above.
 द्रव्यं हि नित्यम्, आकृतिः अनित्या । .... आकृतिरन्या चान्या
च भवति , द्रव्यं पुनस्तदेव । आकृत्युपमर्देन द्रव्यमेव अवशिष्यते ।
*** Here if arthas are to be eternal (siddhe arthe), should they be jaati
or dravya? In this view Patanjali presents the siddhaanta view that dravya
is the artha and that Dravya (Brahman) is nitya.
Dravya alone is eternal, shape is not eternal. ... Shape changes, but the
substance remains the same. When the shape is removed, the substance alone
remains.
अत्र कैयटः --

*** KaiyaTa is a 10th or 11th century Kashimirian scholar who wrote the
super commentary Pradeepa on the Mahaabhaashya. He explains the above
sentence:


द्रव्यं हि नित्यमिति । असत्योपाध्यवच्छिन्नं ब्रह्मतत्त्वं
द्रव्यशब्दवाच्यमित्यर्थः । आकृतिरिति । संस्थानम् ।ब्रह्मदर्शने च
गोत्वादिजातेरपि असत्यत्वादनित्यत्वम् , ’ आत्मैवेदं सर्वम् ’ इति
श्रुतिवचनात् ।
*** In the sentence "dravyaM hi nityam"  Brahmatattva, delimited by the
unreal adjunct is the sense of Dravya. aakRti is assembly [of limbs etc.],
i.e. shape. In the philosophy of Brahman, jaatis like cowness are also
unreal and hence anitya, on the strength of Vedic sentence "Atman alone is
all this seen world".


वेदान्तिमते जातिरपि अनित्या - ’ अग्नेः अग्नित्वम् अपागात् ’
छान्दोग्यश्रुतेः । बौद्धानां तु अपोहवादः - जातिर्नास्ति ।

Prof. Korada: In the view of Vedaantins, jaati also is anityaa, on account
of the Chandogya sentence "agnitva of agni has been removed". Bauddhas
prefer apohavaada and do not admit jaati. (In apoha, a tree is everything
that is not a non-tree. This definition allows them to treat entities love
me tree without actually admitting their existence).


वैयकरणैः तावत् अद्वैतमतमेव स्वीक्रियते ---
*** स्पष्टम्.

वाक्यपदीये पदकाण्डे द्रव्यसमुद्देशे भर्तृहरिणा  उक्तोपनिषदर्थ एव स्वीकृत्य
वैयाकरणमतमुपस्थापितम् ---
*** In the DravyasamuddeSa, in padakaaNDa of Vaakyapadeeya the said sense
of Upanishad (that jaati is also removed from entities at some stage -
refer to the vaacaarambhaNa Sruti in Chaandogya) is accepted by BhartRhari,
who establishes the view of grammarians.


सत्यं वस्तु तदाकारैः असत्यैरवधार्यते ।
असत्योपाधिभिः शब्दैः सत्यमेवाभिधीयते ॥ २
*** The Real entity is understood by its unreal shapes. The Real ( dravya =
Brahman) alone is denoted by Sabdas through unreal adjuncts.


द्रव्यं द्विधा -- पारमार्थिकं व्यावहारिकं चेति । अत्र व्याकरणे द्वितीयं
स्वीकृत्य व्याकरणकार्याणि प्रवर्त्यन्ते ।
*** Prof. Korada: dravya is two-fold - paaramaarthiks and vyaavahaarika.
Grammar operates using the latter.


सुवर्णादि यथा भिन्नं स्वैराकारैरपायिभिः ।
रुचकाद्यभिधानानां शुद्धमेवैति वाच्यताम् ॥ ४
*** Just like gold etc. is different due to different shapes and gold alone
is referred to by different names such as rucaka (a certain ornament),

विकल्परूपं भजते तत्त्वमेवाविकल्पितम् ।
न चात्र कालभेदो’स्ति , कालभेदश्च गम्यते ॥ ५
*** Tattva (Brahman) which is One and without modifications assumes
[apparent] modifications. Here neither is there difference in time, nor is
it attained.


सत्यमाक्रुतिसंहारे यदन्ते व्यवतिष्ठते ।
तन्नित्यं शाब्दवाच्यं तच्छद्बतत्त्वं न भिद्यते ॥ ११
*** That Satyam (Brahman) which remains at the end when all shapes (or
jaati, from this view both are of a similar nature) are withdrawn, is
Nitya, is the meaning of Sabda (all words - whether we say gauH or aSvaH,
we refer to Brahman with different adjuncts) and That does not differ from
Sabdatattva.


तन्नास्ति विद्यते तच्च , तदेकं तत् पृथक् पृथक् ।
संसृष्टं च विभक्तं च विक्रुतं तत्तदन्यथा ॥ १२
*** That (Brahman) is not there (i.e. it is not perceived), but it is seen
(i.e. what is being seen is nothing but That). That is One (paaramaarthika
view) and that is manifold (vyaavahaarika view). It is undifferentiated and
differentiated. It is without modification and with many modifications.


तस्य शब्दार्थसम्बन्धरूपमेकस्य दृश्यते ।
तद् दृश्यं दर्शनं द्रष्टा दर्शने च प्रयोजनम् ॥१४
*** The forms of what is One are seen as Sabda, Artha and Sambandha; That
is the entity to be seen, the act of seeing, the one who sees and the the
purpose of seeing.


वाच्या सा सर्वशब्दानां आब्दाश्च न प्रुथक् ततः ।
अपृथक्त्वे च सम्बन्धः तयोः नानात्मनोरिव ॥ १६

*** That (Brahman) is the denotation of all Sabdas; Arthas are not
different from It. Even though Sabdas and Arthas are non-different, they
have a relationship as it they are different.

आत्मा परः प्रियः द्वेष्यो वक्ता वाच्यं प्रयोजनम् ।
विरुद्धानि यथैकस्य स्वप्ने रूपाणि चेतनः । १७
*** Atman alone is para ( the other), dear, enemy, the speaker, meaning and
purpose, just like Caitanya alone takes different forms in a dream.

अजन्मनि तथा नित्ये पौर्वापर्यविवर्जिते ।
तत्त्वे जन्मादिरूपत्वं विरुद्धमुपलभ्यते ॥ १८
*** Thus, contradictory forms like birth are obtained in the Noumenon
(That, Brahman) which is without origin, which is eternal and devoid of
anterior or posterior.


धन्यो’स्मि









Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)
*Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada*
*Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in <http://Koradeeyam.blogspot.in> *




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to bvparishat+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvparishat at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
_______________________________________________
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