[Advaita-l] Partlessness of Brahman and Maya

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sun Jun 16 02:04:36 EDT 2019

On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 11:20 AM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>

> V Subramanian ji,
> Then how does it reconcile with the logic of BhashyakAra in Gita Bhashya
> 13.32? That is the question. He says, if it is anAdi then it has got to be
> niravayava and HENCE avyaya. The statement that avidyA is anAdi but sAnta
> is against the logic of BhAshya 13.32.

We can also look at the situation thus: Maya, though anaadi, is nitya. How,
it is pariNAmi nitya as opposed to Brahman which is anAdi and kUTastha
nitya. The logic of Bhagavatpada should be taken with the rider as
explained in respect of Maya.

> Also, you did not say about akAsha vis-a-vis 13.32.

The statement in BGB 13.26 (not 13.32 as specified by you above) is:

कः पुनः अयं क्षेत्रक्षेत्रज्ञयोः संयोगः अभिप्रेतः ? न तावत् रज्ज्वेव घटस्य
अवयवसंश्लेषद्वारकः सम्बन्धविशेषः संयोगः क्षेत्रेण क्षेत्रज्ञस्य सम्भवति,
*आकाशवत् **निरवयवत्वात्* ।

Here the comparison is only limited to the possibility/impossibility of
samyoga sambandha, physical contact between two objects. Since Akasha is
niravayava, there cannot be a contact with akasha by any object that is
saavayava. The same with atman. That is the intended meaning of the bhashya.


> Regards.
> On Sun 16 Jun, 2019, 11:16 V Subrahmanian, <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 8:57 AM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>> Hari Om,
>>> Brahman is held as anAdi and niravayava. In Gita 13.32, BhashhakAra
>>> says -- यद्धि
>>> आदिमत् तत् स्वेन आत्मना व्येति अयं तु अनादित्वात् निरवयव इति कृत्वा न
>>> व्येति।
>>> So the logic for being avyaya is being niravayava which in turn is by
>>> virtue of being anAdi. So anAditva => niravayavatva => avyayatva.
>>> Now question arises regarding MAyA or avidyA. What are they? They are
>>> also
>>> held to be anAdi. (AnAdi avidyA trigunAtmikA parA). So they should also
>>> be
>>> niravayava and hence avyaya. But is that so? They certainly are
>>> destroyed.
>>> Aren't they?
>> Even though Maya/Prakriti/Avidya are anadi, yet they are sAnta, that is,
>> they are destroyed upon Brahman Knowledge.  Also, while Brahman is anaadi,
>> existing in its own right,  Maya is anadi only existing on the sattA,
>> existence, of Brahman, having no existence of its own. So, till Brahman
>> knowledge, Maya appears to exist, produce effects of samsara, bandha and
>> moksha.
>>> Or take for instance GitA BhAshya 13.26 आकाशवत् निरवयवत्वात् . Should
>>> this
>>> imply that AkAsha is also avyaya?
>> AkAsha, though niravayava, is an effect of prakriti and hence gets
>> resolved during every pralaya.  And its nityatva is only aapekshika,
>> relative and not absolute for Vedantins.
>> regards
>> subbu
>>> Regards.
>>> Sudhanshu.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list