[Advaita-l] About jnanadhyasa and arthadhyasa

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 4:25 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Subbu ji
> You said that the buddhi idea in atasmin tadbuddhi is indicative of
> jnAnAdhyAsa, can we say similarly that the other definition viz., paratra
> pUrvadRShta avabhAsaH as pointing to the dRShTa avabhAsaH or an apparent
> *object* seen, i.e.,  arthAdhyAsa?
>
> I remember such an idea being mentioned but kindly correct if mistaken.
>

Dear Raghav ji,  Namaste.

Yes, exactly, what you say is correct.  In fact I recollected the other
passage you cite and thought so.  The example Shankara gives there:
shuktikaa hi rajatavat avabhAsate... is again an example of arthAdhyasa.

warm regards
subbu


>
> On Sun, 31 Dec, 2023, 10:42 am V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 11:41 AM 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <
> > advaitin at googlegroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > > praNAms
> > >
> > > Hare Krishna
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > True. The idea that the snake is out there is in the mind alone and
> more
> > > importantly, the correction that - there is no snake but the rope alone
> > is
> > > - also has to happen in the mind alone. The locus of the error is the
> > mind
> > > and the correction has to happen there alone.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >    - Yes that is as simple as that, even at the bhrAnti time we don’t
> say
> > >    snake which we ‘are’ seeing is anirvachaneeya and after realizing
> the
> > >    ‘rope’ knowledge also we don’t say we ‘were’ seeing some
> > anirvachaneeya
> > >    snake but OTOH we conclude that we were seeing snake due to our
> > mistake of
> > >    rope or absence of rope knowledge.  Atasmin tadbuddhiH lakshaNa
> vAkya
> > of
> > >    adhyAsa too saying the same thing i.e. jnAnAdhyAsa but I don’t know
> > how
> > >    theories like anivachaneeya khyAti vAda, arthAdhyAsa, akhyAti vAdi,
> > khyAti
> > >    vAda etc. intruded in shankara’s adhyAsa bhAshya.  adhyAsa is not
> > pramANa
> > >    siddha but anubhava siddha that is the reason why bhAshyakAra has
> not
> > given
> > >    any pramANa vAkya to establish adhyAsa if the adhyAsa is
> pramANeekruta
> > >    prama only then it is not bhrama it is something really existing and
> > that
> > >    which really existing cannot be eradicated by amount of jnana.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Dear Bhaskar,
> >
> > After hearing about the 'arthaadhyasa' not having hinted or stated by
> > Bhagavatpada, I recalled these two passages from the Bhashya which, in my
> > opinion, is about arthAdyAsa.  The idea is: in atasmin tad buddhi
> > definition of adhyasa, we have the jnanadhyasa articulated well. In the
> > following passages, the bhashya says that 'what is  not there really, is
> > appearing to be there'.  This expression, I think, is about 'some
> *thing*'
> > (artha = object) that appears real to an uninformed person, but upon
> > exposure to the bhashya, will be realized as not really existing:
> >
> > What appears does not exist  - Shankara observes in the Gita Bhashya
> >
> > In the Bhagavadgita Bhashya, in two places, we come across this pithy
> > observation by Bhagavatpada:  That which appears does not really exist'.
> > The actual passages are given below.
> >
> > At the end of the commentary for 2.16, Shankara summarizes the Vedantic
> > teaching of Bhagavan to Arjuna:  You too, just as the Jnanis, look upon
> the
> > transformations, the dualities such as cold and heat, as mere appearances
> > analogous to the mirage water'.
> >
> > In the commentary to 13.26, he makes a similar observation: The kshetram,
> > world, like the elephant conjured up by a magician, an object seen in a
> > dream, a phantom city, etc, are actually non-existent but appear as
> though
> > they exist. The one with such a conviction, owing to his direct vision of
> > the Truth, transcends delusion.
> >
> > 1.    BGB 2.16    त्वमपि तत्त्वदर्शिनां दृष्टिमाश्रित्य शोकं मोहं च
> हित्वा
> > शीतोष्णादीनि  नियतानियतरूपाणि द्वन्द्वानि
> > *‘विकारोऽयमसन्नेव मरीचिजलवन्मिथ्यावभासते’*    इति मनसि निश्चित्य
> तितिक्षस्व
> > इत्यभिप्रायः ॥ १६ ॥
> > For him to say 'the transformations are mithya', the basis is the
> Chandogya
> > 6th ch. passage: वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम्  the
> > transformations (such as pot, saucer..) are mere names while the
> substance
> > in them, clay, alone is real.
> >
> > 2.  BGB 13.26      निरस्तसर्वोपाधिविशेषं ज्ञेयं ब्रह्मस्वरूपेण यः पश्यति,
> > क्षेत्रं च   मायानिर्मितहस्तिस्वप्नदृष्टवस्तुगन्धर्वनगरादिवत् *‘*
> > *असदेव सदिव अवभासते**’* इति एवं निश्चितविज्ञानः यः, तस्य
> > यथोक्तसम्यग्दर्शनविरोधात् अपगच्छति मिथ्याज्ञानम् ।
> >
> > regards
> > subbu
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >    -
> > >
> > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> > >
> > > bhaskar
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> > > "advaitin" group.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an
> > > email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> > > To view this discussion on the web visit
> > >
> >
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/VI1PR06MB659244A57C92444D67BFB969849CA%40VI1PR06MB6592.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
> > > <
> >
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/VI1PR06MB659244A57C92444D67BFB969849CA%40VI1PR06MB6592.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
> > >
> > > .
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> >
> > 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: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>