[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** RE: Sattva, Rajas, Tamas - Maayaa/Prakriti and Avidya - Shankara

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 6:09 PM Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> MAyA and prakriti are unambiguously stated to be triguNAtmikA. There is no
> confusion here.
>
> > yes, and as per geeta both para and apara prakruti belongs to Lord.  The
> lord confirms crossing over this is mOksha and in its svarUpa it is
> non-different from brahman therefore it is somewhat co-existent in nature
> (shakti-shaktivant abedha).  There is no confusion here.
>
> In PTB, avidyA is not so directly stated to be triguNAtmikA.
>
> >  Yes, OTOH it is explained as it is weakness of jeeva, and its effect is
> adhyAsa and its pratiyOgi is vidyA, clearance of this (nishesha nirmUlanaM
> of avidyA) is mOksha  and till jeeva gets this vidyA/mOksha he suffers from
> rAgAdi klesha.
>
> However, there should not be any confusion here because the word 'Atmak'
> means 'mAtra'.
>
> >  Sorry to say and disappoint you this interpretation is ONLY in your
> books, however for us 'Atmika' means and implies only link or blend.
> avidyA coupled with avyakta  implies that mAya containing the fault of
> avidyA in it, avidyA lakshaNa prakruti means there is coupling (saMyukta)
> any concocted and convoluted interpretation of this with any permutation
> and combination would be mere stretch and a desparate attempt to equate
> mAya with avidyA.  According to us, mAya and avidyA are not synonyms at any
> stretch of imagination ( either you take this mAya concept as brahma shakti
> or take it as avidyA Kalpita / pratyupasthApita / avidyAtmaka nAma rUpa).




> In short mAya is in Ishwara as shakti and avidyA is in jeeva as his
> weakness (not in Ishwara to be precise).


Dear Bhaskar ji,

If such is the case, then Shankara is wrong when he says: प्रकृतिं स्वां मम
वैष्णवीं मायां त्रिगुणात्मिकाम् , यस्या वशे सर्वं जगत् वर्तते, यया मोहितं
सत्………Prakriti / maayaa which is triguNAtmikA, by which the jivas are
deluded.

How can Maayaa which is affectionately called by Bhagavan as 'My/Mine'
delude the jivas? It should not, according to you.  Only Avidya should and
can delude the jiva. Thus, Shankara is wrong according to your definition.
Shankara should not extend Maya / Prakriti to jiva also. But he is doing
that and Krishna is also doing that: Maayayaa apahruta chetaaH.

मम माया त्रिगुणात्मिका अविद्यालक्षणा - If avidyAlakshaNa is avidyA
samyukta, then Maayaa is getting contaminated by avidya element in it,
which Shankara is adding. After all, the Lord has never used avidyAlakshana
or avidyAtmika for Maya. So Shankara is faulting on multiple counts as per
your definition.

There are these usages by Shankara with the suffix 'aatmaka':

विषयिणि चिदात्मक (Adhyasa bhashya first sentence): Would you say it is chit
samyukta? On the other hand, it means: chitsvarupa here.

पञ्चभूतात्मकत्वं लोकानाम्   The Lokas are clearly not panchabhuta samyukta;
they are the very kaarya of panchabhutas.

कर्म अविद्यात्मकत्वादविद्योच्यते ।  Karma is avidyAtmaka and hence is
called avidya. Surely, there is no samyoga of avidya with karma.

मूर्तामूर्तात्मकं जगत्   Here by no stretch of imagination can one say: the
jagat is samyukta of murta and amurta: it is clearly the very svarupa of
jagat.

एतत्प्रभवः एतदात्मकः सर्वः ऋग्यजुःसामादिभेदभिन्नः एष ओङ्कारः The four vedas
are born of and are of and are of the very svarupa of OmkAra says Shankara.
Can one say that the vedas are Omkara samyukta?

अदर्शनात्मकं तमः  non-visiblility is not 'added' to tamas; rather it is the
very nature of tamas.

In common parlance too: mrdAtmakaH ghaTaH does not mean mrut samyukta
ghaTah. suvarNAtmakam kunDalam is not something to which gold is added; it
is rather gold itself.

It is in this sense Shankara uses the term: avidyAtmaka to qualify Maya.

You say //avidyA lakshaNa prakruti means there is coupling (saMyukta)//

If Prakruti, which according to you, is the Shakti of Brahman/Ishwara, why
should there be an element of avidyA, coupled with it? For whose benefit is
that avidya? To the Lord? According to you, avidya is a weakness of jiva.
How can Prakriti be 'coupled' with/by Avidya?

Sample usages by Shankara:

उपास्योपासकादिलक्षणः सर्वो व्यवहारः  All vyavahara (in this context) is of
the nature/trait of upasya-upasaka, etc.

कर्मानुष्ठानलक्षणः कर्मयोगः karmayoga is of the nature of karmAnuShThAna.
There is no element of samyoga here.

भूतग्रामः भूतसमुदायः स्थावरजङ्गमलक्षणः  The lot of beings, bhUtagraamaH =
bhUtasamudaaya that is constituted by sthAvara and jangama. There is no
samyukta/samyoga here.

So, by any stretch of imagination one cannot bring the samyukta idea here
to avidyAlakshaNA for prakriti/mAyA.

warm regards
subbu



> As explained by Lord mAya is divine (daivika) it is brahman's vishesha
> darshana hence Lord's special affection and assertion mama svarUpabhUta
> mAya.   And most importantly there is no substantial purpose served in
> Advaita vedAnta by illogically equating mAya with avidyA.  Hence sorry to
> say any further discussions on your justification with regard to
> mAya=avidyA is fruitless.  Hope you don’t mind I am saying this directly.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>