[Advaita-l] A short explanation on 'adhanDAkAra vRtti' by Sri Mani Dravid Sastrinah

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear Sudhamshu ji,

Thanks for summarizing the message of Sastrinah. One more important point
that he has said, at 3.13 is:

'anya aviShayatvam', that is, that vritti has no other, anAtma, object for
its vishaya.  In effect, if the manas is devoid of any other object, then
it is AtmAkAra.

This is from the video.

I relate the Gita verse 6.25:

आत्मसंस्थं मनः कृत्वा *न किञ्चिदपि चिन्तयेत्* ॥ २५ ॥   where the Bhashya
says:

आत्मसंस्थम् आत्मनि संस्थितम् ‘आत्मैव सर्वं *न ततोऽन्यत् किञ्चिदस्ति*’
इत्येवमात्मसंस्थं मनः कृत्वा न किञ्चिदपि चिन्तयेत् ।

This part corresponds to what Sastrinah has said that I cited.

regards
subrahmanian.v



On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 11:22 AM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Hari Om Bhaskar ji,
>
> he has not elaborated. It is a very short video. I can share my tuppence
> though ☺
>
> (2) Yes. That is pratyagatma/kshetrajna who is the seer of that
> sAkShAtkAra-vrittI. This is the entity which witnesses the absence of
> ahamkAra in deep sleep.
>
> (5) It is basically Neti-Neti. Atman is not a viShaya. Therefore,
> AtmAkAra-vrittI will naturally not refer to *any* viShaya.
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu.
>
>
> On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 11:15 AM Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
>
> > (1) SAkShAtkAra is vritti-rUpa.Vritti is within manas. (actually a
> > specific shape of manas)
> >
> >
> >
> > (2) For sAkShAtkAra, a sAkShI is required which will be the sAkShi of
> that
> > sAkShAtkAra-vrittI. Hence, it is not possible in swarUpa.
> >
> >
> >
> > (3) SAkShAtkAra-vrittI, akhandAkAra-vrittI, AtmAkAra-vrittI are same. (He
> > did not say this explicitly. It is inferred).
> >
> >
> >
> > (4) In GItA bhAShya, while explaining the AtmAkAra-vrittI, BhAShyakAra
> > says - when manas is atyanta nirmala (actually two more conditions of
> > atyanta svachcha and atyanta sUkShma are there), then owing to the
> > commonness of the feature of atyanta-nirmalatva, AtmAkAra-vrittI is
> > possible (even if Atman is nirAkAra).
> >
> >
> >
> > (5) Since Atman is not a viShaya - sAkShAtkAra-vrittI refers to a vritti
> > which does refer to *any* viShaya.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > praNAms Sri Sudhanshu Shekhar prabhuji
> >
> > Hare Krishna
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for taking time to share.  With regard to No. 2, does it mean
> there
> > is sAkshi which is witnessing the manas which has acquired sAkshAtkAra ??
> > has he elaborated this point??  And No. 5, the last statement :
> > “sAkShAtkAra-vrittI refers to a vritti which does refer to *any* viShaya”
> > needs little more elaboration.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kindly  look into it in your leisure time.
> >
> >
> >
> > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> >
> > bhaskar
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Joint Commissioner of Income-tax,
> Pune
>
> sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>