[Advaita-l] Whether darkness is bhava - Vivarana Prameya Samgraha of Shri Vidyaranya

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hari Om V Subramanian ji,

1. //Shankara clearly says that tamas, included in the list and tejas as
well...constitute the adhidaivatam and that they are all devatas // You
mean tamas i.e. the outside darkness itself is the adhidaivata? When
Prithivi does not refer to the astronomical prithivi, then how can tamas
refer to the outside darkness? Tamas represents Mritya devata. That is
quite clear.

2. The question is whether a devata must necessarily refer to a positive
objective entity. There is no such rule. For example direction. For example
Aditya adhidaivata refers to rupa such as shukla and krishna. Now krishna
is absence of shukla as admitted even by Chitsukhi. So no claim can be made
that adhidaivata must necessarily refer to a positive entity. रूपाण्येव
यस्यायतनम् । रूपाणि शुक्लकृष्णादीनि । य एवासावादित्ये पुरुषः — सर्वेषां हि
रूपाणां विशिष्टं कार्यमादित्ये पुरुषः, तस्य का देवतेति — सत्यमिति होवाच ;
सत्यमिति चक्षुरुच्यते ; चक्षुषो हि अध्यात्मत आदित्यस्याधिदैवतस्य
निष्पत्तिः. (Brihad Aranyak 3.9.12) न च अयम् औपचारिक आलोकाभावे,
शौक्ल्याभावे पटादौ नीलव्यवहारे इव इति युक्तम्, मुख्ये बाधभावात्.(चित्सुखी)


3. Mrityu is the adhidaivata for tamas does not mean that Mrityu-devata
lives 'in' tamas as mentioned in //*तम एव यस्यायतनम् । तम इति
शार्वराद्यन्धकारः परिगृह्यते ; *अध्यात्मं
छायामयः अज्ञानमयः पुरुषः ; *तस्य का देवतेति — मृत्युरिति होवाच
*;मृत्युरधिदैवतं तस्य निष्पत्तिकारणम् ॥ Surely, if 'tamah' is being
described as the abode of a deity, surely the
abode has to be an existent entity?"

Tamas is *not* the abode of Mrityu-devata. There are three entities here.
(i) tamas (ii) the ajnana-maya purusha (iii) the devata of
ajnana-maya-purusha. Tamas is the ayatana or ashraya of ajnana-maya-purusha
and NOT that of Mrityu-devata. Discussion of abode of devata is *not* mentioned
here. Further, if one were to say that the ajnana-maya-purusha lives in
tamas then that obviously is not the case here because that purusha is
within this karya-karana-samghata and not in outside tamas. So, no claim of
positive-ness can be made on account of abode because that is not mentioned
here at all.

4. Ayatana is not in the sense of abode. Otherwise we will need to infer
Aditya-stha-puruSha to live in krishna-rupa which is admittedly an abhava.
Or kAma-maya-puruSha to live 'in' kAma. Point 3 is also supported here
because women, who are kama-uddipaka and who are devata of
kama-maya-purusha, don't live 'in' kama but they live in house of
kama-maya-purusha. काम एव यस्यायतनम् । स्त्रीव्यतिकराभिलाषः कामः कामशरीर
इत्यर्थः । हृदयं लोकः, हृदयेन बुद्ध्या पश्यति । य एवायं काममयः पुरुषः
अध्यात्ममपि काममय एव, तस्य का देवतेति — स्त्रिय इति होवाच ; स्त्रीतो हि
कामस्य दीप्तिर्जायते

5. Even in 6.2.11 //रात्रिः अर्चिः, समित्सम्बन्धप्रभवसामान्यात् ; अग्नेः
समित्सम्बन्धेन हि अर्चिः सम्भवति, तथा पृथिवीसमित्सम्बन्धेन शर्वरी ;
*पृथिवीछायां हि शार्वरं तम आचक्षते *// I fail to appreciate as to how this
supports the view of darkness as some positive entity. On the contrary,
Acharya is quite clearly saying that darkness is nothing but shadow of
earth. Discussion will arise on the meaning of shadow. One will say it to
be absence of light and the other as some positive entity. Similarly the
other quotes from Anandagiri reference does not add anything new and need
understanding the concept of shadow itself.

(Continue to next email....)


On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 4:16 AM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 3:36 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Sudhanshu ji
> > The earlier mantras from antaryAmi brAhmaNam suffice as pramANam, i
> > understand, viz.,
> > B.U.3.7.13
> >
> > यस्तमसि तिष्ठंस्तमसोऽन्तरो यं तमो न वेद यस्य तमः शरीरं यस्तमोऽन्तरो
> > यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृतः ॥ १३ ॥
> >
> > Notice the very next mantra is about tejas (luminosity/radiance) which is
> > the counterpart of tamas (darkness).
> >
> > यस्तेजसि तिष्ठंस्तेजसोऽन्तरो यं तेजो न वेद यस्य तेजः शरीरं यस्तेजोऽन्तरो
> > यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृत इत्यधिदैवतमथाधिभूतम् ॥ १४ ॥
> >
> > There seems to be no BhAshya parsing the word tamas.
> >
> > Does the varttika or Teekaa say anything different about tamas other than
> > that it's the counterpart of Tejas which is referenced in the very next
> > mantra? I have not seen them.
> >
>
> Here is Shankara's commentary summing up the adhidaivam part:
>
> अग्नौ, अन्तरिक्षे, वायौ, दिवि, आदित्ये, दिक्षु, चन्द्रतारके, आकाशे,
> यस्तमस्यावरणात्मके बाह्ये तमसि, तेजसि तद्विपरीते प्रकाशसामान्ये —
> इत्येवमधिदैवतम् अन्तर्यामिविषयं दर्शनं देवतासु ।………   Shankara clearly says
> that tamas, included in the list and tejas as well...constitute the
> adhidaivatam and that they are all devatas.
>
> In the scheme of Vedanta, a devata is assigned to a physical, cosmic
> being.  Even in the case of adhyaatmam, that exists in the body, like sense
> organs, a devataa is assigned as well. Bhagavatpada in the bhashya for the
> first instance of prithvii devataa has made it clear that the antaryaami
> impels the 'kaaryakarana sanghata', the inert organs, etc. of the devataa.
> I think the Bhashya and the Upanishadic passages are enough pramana for the
> bhaavarupatva of tamas, etc.
>
> regards
> subbu
>
> >
> > You suggested tamas here is not the devatA of darkness but the devatA of
> > mRtyu. Can you please quote the reference for that?
> > Om
> > Raghav
> >
> > On Wed 8 May, 2019, 1:41 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hari Om Raghava ji,
> > >
> > > as far as vacuum is concerned, I think its depiction as 16-component
> > tensor
> > > is being discussed in Science also. However, darkness is different.
> > > Thinking of vacuum or space as fluctuations of quantum field is not
> > > challenged here. On darkness, I am not sure at all if science is even
> > > discussing it. Emergence of quark and electrons from quantum field
> > > fluctuations is indeed the dominant theory today.
> > >
> > > //we can still reasonably hold that an adhidevatA is revealed
> > > by the upaniSad only for some existent entity, energy or law etc. //
> Any
> > > pramana for this statement. That will be wonderful. If we can prove
> this,
> > > then I think the discussion will end and I will be greatly benefited.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Sudhanshu.
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 7:32 AM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
> > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > We are so accustomed to the photon (particle) model that we assume
> > there
> > > is
> > > > nothing but emptiness or absence of matter and energy in the darkness
> > and
> > > > vacuum in space. These older scientific models are themselves
> > challenged
> > > > and contradicted by the observation of 'quantum fluctuations' -
> > > > "A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic
> > particles
> > > > out of empty space, as allowed by the uncertainty principle
> > > > <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle>."
> > > > Even the vacuum of outer space is inherently an existent entity which
> > can
> > > > spontaneously create particles literally out of 'thin vacuum.'
> > > >
> > > > Even vacuum is thus not the mere 'absence' of matter and energy.
> > > >
> > > > So far it's just science. Now taking care not to arbitrarily mix
> > science
> > > > with Vedanta, we can still reasonably hold that an adhidevatA is
> > revealed
> > > > by the upaniSad only for some existent entity, energy or law etc.
> While
> > > the
> > > > different indriyas etc have devatAs who govern them there is no
> devatA
> > > for
> > > > an atyanta-abhAva entity like a shasha-shRnga.
> > > >
> > > > The above idea may have some relevance to the verse in brihadAraNyaka
> > > where
> > > > there is mention of the tama abhimAnI devatA.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue 7 May, 2019, 10:07 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, <
> > > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > But here tamas refers to Mrityu devata just as prithivi does not
> > refer
> > > to
> > > > > astronomical body prithivi but to prithivi devata. Moreover, this
> is
> > > > > adhidaivata-prakarana, then how can by the word tamas is taken the
> > > > > darkness? If you take here literal meaning then you will have to
> take
> > > > even
> > > > > direction as some bhava padarth like chair and table because even
> > that
> > > is
> > > > > enlisted. By the word dik, Ashvini Kumaras are meant and so on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Sudhanshu.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue 7 May, 2019, 21:06 V Subrahmanian, <
> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 9:03 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
> > > > > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> In the above, especially the 'outside' tamas, we have the shruti
> > > > pramana
> > > > > >> for 'tamas' being a bhaava padaartha like sun, moon, etc.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Hari Om V Subrahmanian ji,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Which one exactly is Shruti Pramana for 'tamas' being a bhava
> > > padarth
> > > > > like
> > > > > >> sun, moon?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This passage of the Upanishad:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > …यस्तमसि तिष्ठंस्तमसोऽन्तरो यं तमो न वेद यस्य तमः शरीरं
> > यस्तमोऽन्तरो
> > > > > > > यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृतः ॥ १३ ॥ ………
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > This passage occurs amidst so many other cosmic entities in that
> > > > > > braahmaNam.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>


-- 
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax,
Pune

sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com