[Advaita-l] Two Advaitic verses with a profound combined purport

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Raghav ji,

On Sat, 6 Apr 2019, 11:12 Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Venkatraghavan ji
> Thanks for stating the key issue in clear terms viz.,
> "When the world and Brahman are treated as separate (as is intended in the
> context it appears in the advaita siddhi), we talk of adhiShThAna and
> Aropitam and do a svarUpeNa niShedha of Aropitam.
>
> However, when Brahman is taken as part of the object svarUpa, every aspect
> of the object different from Brahman is negated and only the unchanging
> Brahman remains. Thus all that remains of every object in the world is
> Brahman." End of quote
>
> The word 'jagat' can refer to just nAmarUpAtmaka jagat which is the
> changeable aspect. Then I can't see what the fuss is all about with Sri
> Madhusudana's phrase svarUpeNaiva niShedha.


Agreed.

When the word rajata is used to
> refer to 'a precious metal', then, most certainly svarUpeNaiva niShedhah of
> rajata is *necessary* for correct knowledge of shukti which is it's
> adhiSThAnam


It is the other way around in fact.  According to siddhAnta, it is
knowledge of the substratum which leads to the sublation of the
superimposed object. So it is the iyam shukti jnAna which is the cause of
the bAdha (svarUpeNa niShedha) of rajata. But yes, it is the svarUpa
niShedha of rajata that occurs.

So coming to the topic in question, if the cause of the svarUpa niShedha is
adhiShThAna sAkshAtkAra, svarUpa niShedha cannot lead to bAdha of the
adhiShThAna itself - that would be upajIvya virodha.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan

Again such niShedhah is also seen in a *lucid* dream. We do svarUpeNaiva
> niShedhah that we are just dreaming and what we are dreaming of is unreal.
> That does not negate the sAxI chaitanyam which is the adhiSThAnam for the
> dream.
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
> On Sat 6 Apr, 2019, 9:03 AM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste,
> >
> > >
> > > I am sorry, I don’t think so.
> > >
> >
> > Even if we assume he meant so (that svarUpa=adhisTAna), I am fair in my
> own
> > > stand that since MS distinguishes between those two terms (svarUpa vs
> > > adhisTAna)(otherwise why he is doing niShEda?)  I took Sri.Bhaskara-ji
> > also
> > > meant the same.
> > >
> >
> > It is for him to mention what he means, but whatever he meant, the only
> way
> > in advaita for pAramArthika satya to be associated with jagat is as the
> > adhiShThAna, the substantial reality behind the changing nAmarUpa. The
> > nAmarUpa is mithyA,‌‌‌ and the unchanging existence behind the world is
> > Brahman.
> >
> > As shankarAchArya states in the gItAbhAShya
> > यद्विषया बुद्धिर्न व्यभिचरति, तत् सत् ; यद्विषयाव्यभिचरति, तदसत् ; इति
> > सदसद्विभागे बुद्धितन्त्रे स्थिते, सर्वत्र द्वे बुद्धीसर्वैरुपलभ्येते
> > समानाधिकरणे न नीलोत्पलवत् , सन् घटः, सन् पटः, सन् हस्ती इति । एवं
> > सर्वत्र तयोर्बुद्ध्योः घटादिबुद्धिः व्यभिचरति । तथाच दर्शितम् । न तु
> > सद्बुद्धिः । तस्मात् घटादिबुद्धिविषयः असन् , व्यभिचारात् ; न तु
> > सद्बुद्धिविषयः, अव्यभिचारात् ॥
> >
> > Thus by referring to svarUpa as real, if Bhaskar ji meant the changing
> > nAmarUpa as nAmarUpa is real, then that is not advaita siddhAnta.
> >
> > However, if he is talking of the unchanging reality behind all the
> changing
> > names and forms, as the only thing real, then he would be consistent with
> > siddhAnta.
> >
> >
> > > On the philosophical note -- why svarUpa is equated with adhisTAna in
> the
> > > school?  To the question what is the svarUpa of silver in the illusion?
> > If
> > > you deny reality to it, then you are denying reality to adhisTAna
> shell.
> > On
> > > the other hand, if you assert  reality for the svarUpa of silver (just
> > > because you want to preserve reality to adhisTAna shell), you are
> > asserting
> > > reality to silver as it is presented.
> > >
> >
> > svarUpa is not being equated with adhiShThAna. I'm saying that the only
> > aspect of the vastu svarUpa that is preserved after the niShedha is the
> > adhiShThAna.
> >
> > The reason for this is because the niShedha itself is vyAvahArika, having
> > Brahman as its adhiShThAna and it cannot negate it's own adhiShThAna.
> >
> > A question may arise here - if some aspect of the object is preserved
> after
> > negation, how can it be svarUpeNa niShedha - a total negation of the
> > object?
> >
> > We have to see the context of where svarUpeNa niShedha occurs in the
> > advaita siddhi. It is in the context of the second definition of
> mithyAtva
> > - pratipannopAdhau traikAlika niShedha pratiyogitvam.
> >
> > Thus, there are two entities here - the upAdhi, and the vastu which is
> seen
> > in the upAdhi. The niShedha here is the negation of the object, not the
> > upAdhi itself.
> >
> > When the world and Brahman are treated as separate (as is intended in the
> > context it appears in the advaita siddhi), we talk of adhiShThAna and
> > Aropitam and do a svarUpeNa niShedha of Aropitam.
> >
> > However, when Brahman is taken as part of the object svarUpa, every
> aspect
> > of the object different from Brahman is negated and only the unchanging
> > Brahman remains. Thus all that remains of every object in the world is
> > Brahman.
> >
> > This is the sarvAtmabhAva spoken of in Shruti.
> >
> > In the bhAShya of the muNdaka mantra ब्रह्मैवेदममृतं पुरस्ताद्ब्रह्म
> > पश्चाद्ब्रह्म दक्षिणतश्चोत्तरेण ।
> > अधश्चोर्ध्वं च प्रसृतं ब्रह्मैवेदं विश्वमिदं वरिष्ठम्, shankarAchArya
> > says: *यत्तज्ज्योतिषां
> > ज्योतिर्ब्रह्म, तदेव सत्यम् ; सर्वं तद्विकारः वाचारम्भणं विकारो
> > नामधेयमात्रमनृतमितरदित्येतमर्थं* विस्तरेण हेतुतः प्रतिपादितं
> निगमनस्थानीयेन
> > मन्त्रेण पुनरुपसंहरति — ब्रह्मैव उक्तलक्षणम् , इदं
> > यत् पुरस्तात् अग्रेऽब्रह्मेवाविद्यादृष्टीनां प्रत्यवभासमानं तथा
> > पश्चाद्ब्रह्म तथा दक्षिणतश्च तथा उत्तरेण तथैवाधस्तात् ऊर्ध्वं च
> > सर्वतोऽन्यदिव कार्याकारेण प्रसृतं प्रगतं नामरूपवदवभासमानम् । किं बहुना,
> > ब्रह्मैवेदं विश्वं समस्तमिदं जगत् वरिष्ठं वरतमम् । अब्रह्मप्रत्ययः
> > सर्वोऽविद्यामात्रो रज्ज्वामिव सर्पप्रत्ययः । ब्रह्मैवैकं परमार्थसत्यमिति
> > वेदानुशासनम् ॥
> >
> > Every a-brahma pratyaya is only born out of ignorance, like the snake
> > appearance in a rope. The one Brahman alone is the ultimate reality -
> this
> > is the ultimate teaching of the Veda.
> >
> > Thus everything other than Brahman has  svarUpeNa niShedha, and all that
> > remains is  Brahman.
> >
> > This is what I was trying to convey earlier in my response.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Venkatraghavan
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>