[Advaita-l] Partlessness of Brahman and Maya

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:27 PM H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste.
>
>
>
> Please see last sentence of Bhashya on Mandukya 3-3, copied here
>
>
>
> << यदा मन्दबुद्धिप्रतिपिपादयिषया श्रुत्या आत्मनो जातिरुच्यते जीवादीनाम् ,
> तदा जातावुपगम्यमानायाम् एतत् निदर्शनं दृष्टान्तः यथोदिताकाशवदित्यादिः ॥ >>
>
> << yadA mandabuddhipratipipAdayiShayA shrutyA Atmano jAtiruchyate jIvAdInAm
> , tadA jAtAvupagamyamAnAyAm etat nidarshanaM dRRiShTAntaH
> yathoditAkAshavadityAdiH || >>,
>
> Illustration of AkAsha is not to be taken literally as Sidhanta. It is
> meant to explain easily to mandabudhis. It applies to all other instances
> where the same technique is adopted in respect of AkAsha as representing
> Brahman. Otherwise AkAsha has to be taken as nitya which is also stated in
> the Mandukya Bhashya on 4-99 cited by you.
>

Actually, your last sentence above is the subject matter of discussion,
partly, though. nravayavatvaat nityam.  Just because it is an analogy, the
attribute/s common to drishtanta and daarshtaantika will not be obviated.
Only because of the commonality there can be room for analogy.

regards
subbu

>
> Regards
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:04 PM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > In the following sample, we see Shankara accepting niravayavatva for
> > akasha:
> >
> > तथा धर्मा इति आकाशमिव अचलमविक्रियं निरवयवं
> > नित्यमद्वितीयमसङ्गमदृश्यमग्राह्यमशनायाद्यतीतं ब्रह्मात्मतत्त्वम्
>  Mandukya
> > karika bhashyam 4.99
> >
> > आत्मा परः हि यस्मात् आकाशवत् सूक्ष्मो निरवयवः सर्वगत आकाशवदुक्तः जीवैः
> > क्षेत्रज्ञैः घटाकाशैरिव घटाकाशतुल्यैः उदितः उक्तः ; स एव आकाशसमः पर
> आत्मा ।
> >   Mand.karika bhashya 3.3
> >
> > There are many.
> >
> > regards
> > subbu
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 8:32 PM H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Namaste.
> > >
> > > Niravayavatva for AkAsha In BG 13-27 is  attributed to Objector and not
> > to
> > > Sidhantin in the Bhashya. Hence Sri Bhagavatpada does not affirm in BG
> > > 13-27 that AkAsha is niravayava.
> > >
> > > Am I reading it wrongly since many here seem to be of contrary view??
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>