[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [advaitin] rope has some problem in rope snake analogy :-)

[V Subrahmanian]

Shankara accepts the prAtibhAsika object to be 'non-existent but appears to
be existing':


श्रीमद्भगवद्गीताभाष्यम्त्रयोदशोऽध्यायःश्लोक २६ - भाष्यम्

………इत्यनेन निरस्तसर्वोपाधिविशेषं ज्ञेयं ब्रह्मस्वरूपेण यः पश्यति, क्षेत्रं
च मायानिर्मितहस्तिस्वप्नदृष्टवस्तुगन्धर्वनगरादिवत् *‘असदेव सदिव अवभासते’*
इति एवं निश्चितविज्ञानः यः, तस्य यथोक्तसम्यग्दर्शनविरोधात् अपगच्छति
मिथ्याज्ञानम्………

Shankara uses the verb 'adhyasyati' / 'अध्यारोपयति' to show that what is
not there is superimposed:

अप्रत्यक्षेऽपि ह्याकाशे बालाः तलमलिनतादि अध्यस्यन्ति ।

बाह्यधर्मानात्मन्यध्यस्यति ।

 तथा आत्मनि सर्वो लोकः क्रियाकारकफलात्मकं विज्ञानं सर्पादिस्थानीयं विपरीतम
ध्यस्य

 तदर्थं सुखादिविक्रियावति सत्त्वे भोक्तृत्वमध्यारोपयति ।

नानात्वमध्यारोपयति अविद्यया ।

What is not there is superimposed.

regards





On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 1:46 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste.
>
> Reg  //  In the Vedanta Paribhasha, the adhyasta vastu is stated to be
> 'produced' at that time of the adhyasa:
>
> ननु विसंवादिप्रवृत्त्या भ्रान्तिज्ञानसिद्धावपि तस्य
> * प्रातिभासिकतत्कालोत्पन्नरजतादि*विषयकत्वे
>
> घटवति घटाभाव*भ्रमो* न *तत्कालोत्पन्न*घटाभावविषयकः
>
> अवगमेऽपरोक्षावभासस्य *तत्कालीनविषयसत्तानियतत्वाद् रजते
> पारमार्थिकत्वमप्यनिर्वचनीयं रजतवदेवोत्पन्नमिति* तदवच्छिन्नरजतसत्त्वे //,
>
> This is just what I have also stated. Rope-snake being **Imagined ** does
> not involve origination or production of a vastu namely **snake**. Its
> ontological status is certainly not the same as that of Creation by Iswara.
> But surely **production ** of a vastu in adhyAsa does involve vesting that
> vastu with a certain level of ontological status, by definition. Its
> ontological status is stated to be prAtibhAsika while Creation by Iswara
> has the ontological status of vyAvahArika.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:41 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> In the Vedanta Paribhasha, the adhyasta vastu is stated to be 'produced'
>> at that time of the adhyasa:
>>
>> ननु विसंवादिप्रवृत्त्या भ्रान्तिज्ञानसिद्धावपि तस्य*
>> प्रातिभासिकतत्कालोत्पन्नरजतादि*विषयकत्वे
>>
>> घटवति घटाभाव*भ्रमो* न *तत्कालोत्पन्न*घटाभावविषयकः
>>
>> अवगमेऽपरोक्षावभासस्य *तत्कालीनविषयसत्तानियतत्वाद् रजते
>> पारमार्थिकत्वमप्यनिर्वचनीयं रजतवदेवोत्पन्नमिति* तदवच्छिन्नरजतसत्त्वे
>>
>> This 'producing' 'at that time of adhyasa/bhrama/ajnana, is not the same
>> of creation by Ishwara in the manner of Atma > Akasha >  Vayu..etc.  Hence,
>> the kalpana/kalpita of sarpa in rajju is not being created in the
>> ontological sense. This sarpa creation is having ajnana as upAdaana and it
>> is anAd and anirvAchya.  Even when Brahman is said to be the kAraNam, the
>> upAdAna stated here is ajnAnam and this ajnAnam is not of Brahman but that
>> of the jiva-s.  That is a shakti of Brahman, also called mAyA, prakriti,
>> etc.
>>
>> warm regards
>> subbu
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 5:58 PM H S Chandramouli <
>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste.
>>>
>>> परिकल्पित or कल्पित etc also have the meaning *created*. Not
>>> necessarily *imagined*. It is in this sense Bhashya needs to be understood
>>> in the current context.
>>>
>>> Reg Swami Sureswaracharya vArtika cited //  तदुक्तं सुरेश्वराचार्यैः- "
>>> अक्षमा भवतः केयं साधकत्वप्रकल्पने । किं न पश्यसि संसारं
>>> तत्रैवाज्ञानकल्पितम् ॥ //,
>>>
>>> अज्ञानकल्पितम् should be understood as *created with ajnAna as upAdAna
>>> kAraNam*. This is clear by the following vArtika verse BUBV 1-4-371
>>>
>>> // अस्य द्वैतेन्द्रजालस्य यदुपादानकारणम् ।
>>>
>>> अज्ञानं  तदुपाश्रित्य ब्रह्म कारणमुच्यते ॥ //
>>>
>>> // asya dvaitendrajAlasya yadupAdAnakAraNam |
>>>
>>> aj~nAnaM  tadupAshritya brahma kAraNamuchyate || //
>>>
>>> There are any number of verses in the vArtika which reflect the same
>>> understanding.
>>>
>>> Same with Vedanta Paribhasha.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>>