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

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Venkat Ji,

Reg  // buddhyA parikalpitena rather than buddhau parikalpitena //,

They need not be understood as being mutually exclusive. buddhyA
parikalpitena can be understood as the manifestation of deep rooted
conviction *in* the mind, buddhau parikalpitena. In fact, deep rooted
conviction *in* the mind, buddhau parikalpitena,  would be more appropriate
in the current context, it being svAbhAvika, naisargika.

Reg  // That is why Shankaracharya mentions the mRtghaTa and the rajjusarpa
examples in the same sentence (because there is something additional he
wishes to convey with the second example) //,

Notice the use of the word आदि(Adi)(etcetera) in  रज्ज्वादि सर्पाद्याकारेण
in respect of vivarta vikAra as against मृद्घटाद्याकारेण in respect of
pariNAma vikAra. It is used in respect of both रज्जु (rajju) and सर्प(sarpa)
in one while it is used only in respect of घट(ghata) but not in respect of
मृत् (mRRit) in the other.  Multiplicity is seen simultaneously in the case
of  mRtghaTAdi (such as pot, lump etc), and hence difference between them
can be  perceived by the mind. But multiplicity is not seen simulataneously
if only the standard rajjusarpa illustration is considered for vivarta
vikAra even if आदि(Adi)(etcetera) word is used in respect of sarpa. Rope is
perceived either as snake or as garland or as stick or as crack in the
wall, only one at a time. Difference cannot be perceived. Hence रज्ज्वादि  in
रज्ज्वादि सर्पाद्याकारेण  is intended to be the equivalent for घटादि of
मृद्घटाद्याकारेण. रज्ज्वादि represents all objects simultaneously perceived
at any given time, all of which are vivarta vikAra. सर्पाद्याकारेण is to
convey vivarta vikAra. They are all conceived as different from each other
by the mind though in reality they are all सत्(sat) only. That in my
understanding is what Sri Bhagavatpada intends to convey by mentioning  the
mRtghaTa and the rajjusarpa examples in the same sentence.

Regards

On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 10:33 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouli ji,
>
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2023, 01:46 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> In my understanding, the phrase buddhiparikalpitena does not apply to
>> snake per se. It refers to bheda buddhi amongst different forms the
>> appearance could take place instead of the rope (vivarta as in
>> सर्पाद्याकारेण illustration), namely snake, stick, garland, crack on the
>> ground etc. In case of clay (pariNAma as in मृद्घटाद्याकारेण
>> illustration), the forms could be pot, lump of clay etc. While all of them
>> are rope (or clay) only, buddhi distinguishes them as different entities.
>> This bheda buddhi amongst the forms instead of unity is addressed by the
>> phrase buddhiparikalpitena.
>>
> I think the above explanation is also possible. Even so, in the above
> explanation, the focus of the meaning of the phrase lies in the bheda
> buddhi being buddhyA parikalpitena rather than buddhau parikalpitena -
> Shankaracharya wishes to convey that they are viewed as different *by*
> the mind - there is no reason to take away from that phrase that these are
> viewed differently *in* the mind.
>
> In my explanation, the meaning of the phrase buddhiparikalpitena, is
> slightly different when there is anvaya with mRtghaTa than when there is
> anvaya with rajjusarpa, because they represent two types of bheda buddhi
> with respect to multiplicity. That is why Shankaracharya mentions the
> mRtghaTa and the rajjusarpa examples in the same sentence (because there is
> something additional he wishes to convey with the second example).
>
> To explain, the former represents the bheda buddhi between the kArya and
> kAraNa and the latter represents the bheda buddhi of the adhyasta with
> respect to the adhiShThAna. In the former, the anvaya of the mRt happens
> during the perception of the ghaTa (ie one continues to see the clay when
> seeing the pot, leading to the buddhi mRt-ghaTa) and in the latter, one
> only sees the sarpa and not the rajju during the time of the adhyAsa (ie no
> one sees it as rajju-sarpa, one sees it only as sarpa). In both cases,  the
> bahutva is buddhyA parikalpitena - the multiplicity is seen by the mind and
> not a truth in reality.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>