[Advaita-l] avidvan / vidwan definition from Shankaracharya's works:

[jaldhar at braincells.com]

On Fri, 7 Jul 2023, Krishna Kashyap via Advaita-l wrote:

> Namaste everyone,
>
> I was checking the first to two verses of Isavasya.
>
> Shankaracharya says the first verse is for Vidwan
> 2nd is for avidvan.
>
> if you are a vidwan, or atma vit, you go to the forest and don't return
> back. do not do any shastra vihita nitya karmas.


Previously he believed in "me", "mine" "not me" "not mine".  But then he 
realised that iShAvAsyamidaM sarvaM "all this is pervaded by the Lord" so 
tyaktena, by renunciation, he gives up those ideas  because kascha 
sviddhanaM. "Whose indeed is wealth?"


>
> if you are an avidwan, desire to live for 100 years Only by doing nitya
> karmas.
>

But what about the one who still thinks of "me:, "mine" etc.?

He can stumble through life as best as he can seeking pleasure here and 
avoiding sorrow there but there is a better way.

One pecularity of Ishopanishad is that whereas most upanishads are part of 
the Brahmana portion of their respective Vedic shakhas, this one is the 
40th adhyaya of the vAjasaneyi saMhitA of the shuklayajurveda.  In the 
previous 39 adhyayas various vidhis from simple agnihotra up to elaborate 
multi-day yagnas such as ashvamedha.  Through these karmas one can 
acquires all ones desires from material wealth upto heaven.  This ideal, 
perfect life is euphemized as "a hundred years".  This is supposed to be 
the full lifespan.  A rk says shataM jivemashardaH "may you see a hundred 
sharadas" (the sacrificial year ends in sharada ritu)


> evem tvayi nanyathesti - of upanishad says there is NO OTHER WAY.

These are the two and only two Vedic paths, Nivrtti and Pravrtti.

>
> *Many new age gurus think that karmas are for the dumb beginners and most
> people end up being in the vidwan category. *they even translate as
> intelligent and intelligent for these two words.

Because Vedanta talks about the self and so on, the great danger on this 
path is narcissism.  I feel these neovedantic gurus appeal to the kind of 
person who thinks they are beyond mere mortals.  So they miss the point of 
what the shastras are trying to say.  The person following pravrtti marga 
is avidvan in comparison to one on nivrtti marga because the effects of 
all karmas are finite.  Even after enjoying heaven for a million years 
once the effects of the karma that brought you there are exhausted, you 
will again be reborn in samsara.

But one becomes a vidvan not by talking about it or listening to a lecture 
once a week or a youtube video but by actually renouncing karma.
One doesn't renounce and one doesn't follow their vedic duties is worse 
than avidvan he is nothing more than a beast.

Another mistake they make is because the shastras talk about agnihotra 
etc. renouncing means giving up "religous" rituals while keeping the fancy 
car, house etc.  In a traditional society there is no distinction between 
"spiritual" and "secular"  The shastras are talking about the 
renunciation of _all_ intentional actions.  Just giving up agnihotra (how 
many agnihotris are there nowadays?) doesn't make you a vidvan merely an 
atheist.


>
> should vidwan be understood as stitha prajna? or has perfect realization of
> advaya brahman? or who has firm mental conviction that there is only one
> brahman and universe is only apparent.
>

How does one get from here (avidvan) to there? (vidvan)  An intermediate 
step taught in the Gita is the karmayogi.  This is a person who still 
performs their karma but not out of desire but purely out of a sense of 
duty and as bhakti to  Bhagavan.  A karmayogi must be a stithaprajna also.


-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>