[Advaita-l] Samvadi Brama

[V Subrahmanian]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:48 PM Aditya Kumar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste,
> Sometimes we may confuse a rope for a snake but sometimes we may encounter
> an actual snake. Prior to both the outcomes, the person who is seeing the
> snake is in a state of uncertainty. Regardless of the both the outcomes,
> the person clearly sees either the rope or the snake. So the true svarupa
> of an object is necessary for an outcome. So once the person sees the
> actual lamp or jewel or rope or snake, it is not a brama anymore even in
> the illustration. Brama is applicable only as long as the person is not
> certain. So I wonder why this illustration or a redundant concept is
> brought up to explain nothing. We see samsara due to erroneous view and it
> is ought to be sublated by the correct knowledge, samyag darshana. So how
> is it that the Upanishads are declared as brama? Is brahma-jnana a brama?
> Doesn't erroneous knowledge lead to wrong perception? The
> example/illustration given in panchadashi is not at all satisfactory
> because unlike the confused person in pursuit of the jewel, the Upanishads
> are certain about Brahman.
> The objects of meditation cannot be brama because everyone knows it is
> kalpita. Is there no difference between a kalpana or a mental object or
> even a physical object or a symbol and a brama which is erroneous notion?
> How can anyone meditate on an erroneous notion? The erroneous view of a
> snake could be sublated by another erroneous notion and we may see a tail
> of a monkey. But eventually, we have to see its true svarupa. How can
> erroneous notion show us the true svarupa of Brahman or anything for that
> matter? There seems to be no such concept in Shankara's commentaries or
> prakarana texts. If there is any mention of the word samvadi brama or an
> explanation of the concept with an illustration is available, I request the
> members to kindly share the reference.
>

All scripture-taught upasanas are no more than kalpana-s, imagining a
particular devatA form or a concept as taught in the scripture.  The phalam
of such kalpana is also specified therein.


> The upasaka uses the mind's kalpanashakti to 'realize' something the
>> shastra enjoins.  That vishnu resides in the sAligrama stone is only an
>> adhyAropa approved by the shAstra. All consecration of idols/temples is on
>> this principle.
>>
>

> RV: The worship of saligrama shila is not kalpana. It is shrauddha vidhi.
>

If you read Shankaracharya's bhashya you will come across this idea:

व्याप्तेश्च समञ्जसम्  । ब्रह्मसूत्र ३,३.९  । [BSB 3.3.9 beginning part]

तत्राध्यासो नाम
द्वयोर्वस्तुनोरनिवर्तितायामेवान्यतरबुद्धावन्यतरबुद्धिरध्यस्यते   ।

यस्मिन्नितरबुद्धिरध्यस्यतेऽनुवर्तत एव
तस्मिंस्तद्बुद्धिरध्यस्तेतरबुद्धावपि   ।

यथा नाम्नि ब्रह्मबुद्धावध्यस्यमानायामप्यनुवर्तत एव नामबुद्धिर्न
ब्रह्मबुद्ध्या निवर्तते   । यथावा प्रतिमादिषु विष्ण्वादिबुद्ध्यध्यासः ।


[pl. read the English translation of the first three or four sentences, if
necessary.]


http://talkandcomment.com/p/ed300be165eade21a1f830f0 (voice note)

regards
subbu


> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>