[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'Dvaita accepts body-adhyasa'
v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sat Oct 30 03:36:12 EDT 2021
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 7:35 PM Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 7:18 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> The BG 13th ch. verse 'purushah prakriti- stho hi bhunkte prajritijaan
>> gunaan. Kaaranam gunasangosya sadasad yonijanmasu' teaches that Atma,
>> identified with the prakriti (as body mind senses prana complex - dharmi
>> adhyasa) considers the prakriti dharmas as its own (dharma adhyasa). This
>> results in samsara, birth repeatedly.
> It also teaches prakriti and purusha are anadi. Thus, this adhyasa and
>> samsara are also anaadi. So there is no anyonyashraya defect in all schools
>> which accept adhyasa and samsara as anadi.
> Gita of course teaches purusha is anadi, but it does not mean adhyAsa is
> The idea of 'anAdi' is valid if kAla is accepted as real. But in Advaita
> kAla (along with all others) are avidya kalpita by jIva. Thus unless you
> have dehAtma adhyasa you cannot have a notion of time. Hence, the anAdi
> vaad is not applicable in defending charge of anyonyashraya defect.
Advaita accepts Time also to be anAdi. DehAtma adhyasa is anadi and
hence the basis for repeated creation by Brahman.
In each creation all aspects are manifested, space, time, Veda, etc.
The sUta samhita makes a reference to kAla as the sambandha (relation)
between mAya and Atma (2-2-10) : कालो मायात्मसम्बन्धात् सर्वसाधारणात्मक:
There is also a sloka that is quoted often, but I am not able to find
the source (Sri Appayya DIkshitar says this occurs in the ChitradIpa
Panchadashi, but I cannot seem to find it there):
जीव ईशो विशुद्धा चित् तथा जीवेशयोर्भिदा ।
अविद्या तच्चितोर्योगः षडस्माकमनादयः ॥
In this sloka, the term अविद्या तच्चितोर्योगः is said to refer to kAla
by Sri VAsudeva Brahmendra Sarasvati svAminah in his Sanskrit
translation of vichAra sAgara.
(An old post by Sri S.Venkataraghavan
> Btw, Dvaita does not accept samsAra is anAdi (even though the existence of
> jIva is anAdi). You must have confused with Vististadvita, who accepts
> anadi samsara.
Srimad Bhagavatam 5.14.1 (prose) https://sa.wikisource.org/s/pdz
स एष देहात्ममानिनां
The Bhagavatam says the samsara is anadi. For this Vijayadhwaja Tirtha's
commentary is there, accepting the anadi samsara.
Madhva says in mandukya:
anAdimAyayA viShNorichchayA svApito yadA
tayA prabodhamAyAti tadA viShNum prapashyati.
[Due to anAdimAyA which means ViShNu's Will, the jIva has been made to/put
into the slumber of samsara. When the jIva, owing to ViShNu's Will wakes
up, then he gets the vision/realization of ViShNu.]
This also accepts samsara is anadi. All schools accept samsara as anadi
but sa-anta, that is, there is an end to it though.
Vishnudasa Nagendracharya says:
ಎಲ್ಲ ಚೇತನರು, ಎಲ್ಲ ಅಚೇತನಕ್ಕೆ ಮೂಲಭೂತವಾದ ಪ್ರಕೃತಿ, ಕಾಲ, (ಅವ್ಯಾಕೃತಾಕಾಶ ಮತ್ತು
ವೇದಗಳು) ಈ ಎಲ್ಲವನ್ನೂ ನಿಯಮಿಸುವ ಚೇತನೋತ್ತಮನಾದ ಶ್ರೀಹರಿ ಇವರೆಲ್ಲರನ್ನೂ ಅನಾದಿ ಎಂದು
ಒಪ್ಪಲೇಬೇಕು. ಒಪ್ಪುವ ಅನಿವಾರ್ಯತೆಯಿದೆ.
All these are accepted only because the samsara is anadi. Without
samsara/prapancha the above have no relevance at all.
>> As to when and how the adhyasa took place is not the responsibility of
>> the shaastra to explain. It is committed to only show the remedy. And that
>> is the viveka between atma and anatma and claiming oneself to be the Atma.
>> The 13th chapter is a mirror of the adhyasa bhashya.
> No it is not.
> The same Geetha also says in II.12 :
> na tvevAhaM jAtu nAsaM na tvaM neme janAdhipAH |
> na chaiva na bhavishhyAmaH sarve vayamataH param.h || 12 ||
> (But certainly (it is) not (a fact) that I did not exist at any time; nor
> you, nor these rulers of men. And surely it is not that we all shall cease
> to exist after this.) (Swami Gambhirananda's translation).
> What is that Sri Krishna is talking about the existence of many beings
> here as implied in the form of 'I('SriKrishna)', 'you (Arjuna)' and 'rulers
> of men'?
> As we can see, only two options exist;
> 1. Either He meant many "instances" of dhEhAtma bhAva (of Him,Arjuna &
> others) due to adhyAsa.
> 2. Pure chaitanya tattvas in them.
> First option is unacceptable, for how can anyone say physical BMIs are
> eternal? Then that leads to accepting the second option, i.e. chaitanya
> or consciousness beings in those plural subjects are eternal.
That there is no bheda, nAnAtva, in chaitanya is stated by the Gita itself:
तज्ज्ञानं विद्धि सात्त्विकम् ॥ २० ॥ 18.20
That is Sattvic Jnanam which perceives that in all distinct bodies the
inhering Chaitanya is One only, undivided.
And bheda drishTi is censured in the next verse:
पृथक्त्वेन तु यज्ज्ञानं
वेत्ति सर्वेषु भूतेषु
तज्ज्ञानं विद्धि राजसम् ॥ २१ ॥
To hold that the Chaitanyam is different in different bodies is raajasa
Tamasic jnanam is to hold that there is no higher principle than the body:
यत्तु कृत्स्नवदेकस्मिन्कार्ये सक्तमहैतुकम् ।
अतत्त्वार्थवदल्पं च तत्तामसमुदाहृतम् ॥ २२ ॥
Therefore, the BG 2.11 statement by Bhagavan is from the laukika drishti
where the bodies are seen as different. It is an anuvada of this laukika
drishti by Bhagavan, just as the Dvaa suparnaa mantra specifies a jivatma
as bhokta distinct from the abhokta paramatma in the body, as an anuvada of
the adhyasta chaitanya jiva.
> Therefore, the idea of anAdi adhyAsa stands refuted by Gita.
The very statement of the Gita 13th ch. 'purushah prakriti- stho hi
bhunkte prajritijaan gunaan. Kaaranam gunasangosya sadasad yonijanmasu' is
an endorsement of adhyasa, accepted by Madhva too in Bhagavata Tatparya
nirnaya: 'आत्मभावः शरीरे तु द्रव्यभ्रम उदाहृतः - 4.31.16
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list