[Advaita-l] Brihad Aranyaka 1.5.23

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,

Reg  << In this regard, please share your views on 1.5.23 >>,

The vArtika of Sri Swami Sureswaracharya covers the BU mantra 1-5-23. You
may like to refer to BUBV verses 1-5-376 to 390. The tIka of Sri Anandagiri
Acharya also, both on the Bhashya as well as on the relevant vArtika
portion, may be referred. In fact I think it directly addresses the
question raised by you.
Regards

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:41 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Hari Om,
>
> It is a well-known rule that if there is a prima facie contradiction
> between Shruti and pratyaksha, then it is to be inferred that Shruti
> intends to say something else.
>
> In this connection, I was struggling with the intended meaning of Brihad
> Aranyak Shruti 1.5.23. It states that sun goes to VAyu in evening during
> sunset. In Adhyatma, the chakShu (counterpart of sun) goes to PrAna
> (counterpart of VAyu).
>
> The topic is for upAsanA of PrAna.
>
> However, the merger of chakShu in PrAna is an empirical fact whereas merger
> of sun in VAyu is not an objective fact. Nothing happens to sun in evening.
> It remains where it is and where it was. Sunrise and sunset are said with
> respect to earth and are to be understood in a secondary sense.
>
> How to resolve this contradiction?
>
> If we were to say that it is an adhidaivata sun which is talked about, then
> is it true that Surya merges with Vayu devata in *evening *and during
> *sunset?
> *This should not be so for He is available for other people of same earth.
>
> If it is neither physical sun which merges in VAyu nor Surya devatA, then
> how exactly should we understand the reference of merger of sun in vAyu in
> evening during sunset.
>
> If we were to hold that the statement can make sense for the purposes of
> upAsana, then my question is whether we can do the upAsana with a factually
> wrong statement. Will we get requisite shraddhA. The upAsanA should also be
> logical. For e.g. in Brahma Sutra BhAShya, BhagvAn BhAShyakAra says that
> there is nothing illogical in worshipping omnipresent at a particular
> localized place but the vice versa cannot be proper.  अत्रोच्यते — नायंदोषः
> न तावत्परिच्छिन्नदेशस्य सर्वगतत्वव्यपदेशःकथमप्युपपद्यते सर्वगतस्य तु
> सर्वदेशेषुविद्यमानत्वात्परिच्छिन्नदेशव्यपदेशोऽपि कयाचिदपेक्षया सम्भवति.
> (1.2.7)
>
> Thus, it appears that upAsanA cannot be recommended by way of factually
> wrong statement. It can be, however, recommended through statements having
> figurative usage.
>
> In this regard, please share your views on 1.5.23.
>
> Regards,
> Sudhanshu.
>
> --
> 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
>