[Advaita-l] avidyA and mind in samAdhi

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

The reference I had in mind was Br.B 1.4.10 where only the carama vRtti is
called the GYAna pratyaya. But this is incidental to the discussion
"य एव अविद्यादिदोषनिवृत्तिफलकृत्प्रत्ययः आद्यः अन्त्यः सन्ततः असन्ततो वा, स
एव विद्येत्यभ्युपगमात् न चोद्यस्यावतारगन्धोऽप्यस्ति"

On Mon, 16 Oct, 2023, 3:01 pm Raghav Kumar Dwivedula, <
raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 16 Oct, 2023, 2:25 pm Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Raghav ji.
>>
>> //During that AvRtti process, prior to the arising of anubhava-GYAnam, it
>> stands to reason that the avidyA bIja has not yet been destroyed
>> completely, although the akhaNDAkAra vRtti does arise (or at the very least
>> a 'conditional' version of it does arise in case we wish to preserve the
>> word "akhaNDAkAra vRtti" and define it as the last straw upon whose arising
>> the avidyA bIja becomes completely burnt).//
>>
>> There are several mentions of samAdhi in bhAshya wherein it is used as a
>> drishTAnta for dvaita-adarshan. We can even leave akhanDAkAra-vritti for
>> the moment and concerntrate on those samAdhi where there is
>> dvaita-adarshana. It will be nirvikalpaka samAdhi. My question is about
>> that only.
>>
>
> In the case of samadhi which is not connected with or arrived at through
> vedAnta pramANa vAkyArtha vRttis, that type of samadhi is no doubt within
> the ambit of dvaita darshanam and so mUla avidyA is certainly not
> destroyed. So I guess your question in the above para itself has the answer
> viz., mUlavidyA co-exist with samadhi when it is unconnected with vedAnta
> shravaNam etc. Even when the tattvamasi type of vAkyArtha vRttis arise it's
> only the carama vRtti which does not co-exist with mUla avidyA. Till then
> the vAkyArtha-janita samAdhi is still only final leg of the GYAna sAdhana,
> nididhyAsanam etc., so it can co-exist with mUla avidyA which is only
> destroyed by the carama vRttis corresponding to vAkyArtha GYAnam.
>
>
> Om
>
>
>
>
>
>> There is recollection after samAdhi that I was in samAdhi. There is no
>> recollection that "I did not know". This implies non-perception of avidyA
>> during samAdhi leading to absence of avidyAkArA-avidyA-vritti. Recollection
>> has to happen through destruction of vritti resulting into samskAra. So,
>> mano-vritti can be accepted.
>>
>> So, mind and mano-vritti have to be accepted in nirvikalpaka samAdhi.
>> avidyA-vritti has been accepted to be absent in samAdhi by MS in
>> avidyA-pratIti-vichArah.
>>
>> Question boils down to present of avidyA in samAdhi.
>>
>> LeshAvidyA in any case has to be accepted to be present because it
>> withstands even akhanDAkArA-vritti.
>>
>> MUlAvidyA other than leshAvidyA cannot vanish into thin air during
>> samAdhi and spring back again.
>>
>> So, only logical position which appears to me is continuance of mUlAvidyA
>> in nirvikalpaka samAdhi till the destruction thereof by charama-vritti.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 2:07 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Subbu ji
>>> यस्य तु न एषोऽनुभवो द्रागिव जायते, तं प्रति अनुभवार्थ एव
>>> आवृत्त्यभ्युपगमः ।
>>> तत्रापि न तत्त्वमसिवाक्यार्थात् प्रच्याव्य आवृत्तौ प्रवर्तयेत् ।  BSB
>>> 4.1.2
>>> is an excellent reference you gave where the svarUpa of nididhyAsanam is
>>> explained by bhAShyakAra.
>>>
>>> (aspirants for whom such an anubhava has not occurred instantaneously,
>>> the
>>> need for reiteration is required for generating that anubhava.)
>>>
>>> My understanding -
>>> During that AvRtti process, prior to the arising of anubhava-GYAnam, it
>>> stands to reason that the avidyA bIja has not yet been destroyed
>>> completely, although the akhaNDAkAra vRtti does arise (or at the very
>>> least
>>> a 'conditional' version of it does arise in case we wish to preserve the
>>> word "akhaNDAkAra vRtti" and define it as the last straw upon whose
>>> arising
>>> the avidyA bIja becomes completely burnt).
>>>
>>>   All this is very subtle and nuanced territory and the idea of "न
>>> तत्त्वमसिवाक्यार्थात् प्रच्याव्य" (without deviating from the tattvamasi
>>> vAkyArtha) is noteworthy as the characteristic of nididhyAsanam (and
>>> samAdhi which in vedAnta, denotes uninterrupted continuity in the
>>> akhaNDAkAra vRtti born of vAkyArtha alone) as per vedAnta.
>>>
>>> Thank you Sudhanshu Ji for raising this topic
>>>
>>> Om
>>>
>>> Raghav
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Oct, 2023, 12:24 pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 11:33 AM Sudhanshu Shekhar <
>>> > sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Namaste V Subramanian ji.
>>> > >
>>> > > 1. Is there a difference between kAraNa sharIra and mUlAvidyA?
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Namaste.
>>> >
>>> > They are the same.
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > 2. If many sessions of nirvikalpaka samAdhi are needed for
>>> destruction of
>>> > > mUlAvidyA, let us talk about the initial few sessions. If
>>> > > tattva-agrahaNa-rUpA avidyA is not there, then how does it come back
>>> > after
>>> > > samAdhi? It is the basic seed. It cannot merge into something and
>>> come
>>> > > back, like mind merges in avidyA in sushupti and comes back during
>>> waking
>>> > > and dream.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Tattva agrahana rupa avidya is not there since the akhandAkAra vritti
>>> is
>>> > accepted. This is AtmA/BrahmakAra vritti.In its presence 'I do not
>>> know the
>>> > Self' kind of ignorance can't coexist. That is the purport of the
>>> > Panchadashi verse and the commentary.
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > 3. LeshAvidyA remains post jnAna is completely accepted. I was
>>> trying to
>>> > > understand about other AkArAs of mUlAvidyA. If the causal seed is not
>>> > there
>>> > > in samAdhi, how will it come back!
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > The causal seed is not completely destroyed in the case of the need for
>>> > more akhandAkAra vritti sessions. Such a situation is admitted by
>>> Shankara
>>> > in the BSB 4.1.2:
>>> >
>>> > यस्य तु न एषोऽनुभवो द्रागिव जायते, तं प्रति अनुभवार्थ एव
>>> आवृत्त्यभ्युपगमः ।
>>> > तत्रापि न तत्त्वमसिवाक्यार्थात् प्रच्याव्य आवृत्तौ प्रवर्तयेत् ।  For
>>> such
>>> > of those aspirants such an experience has not occurred
>>> instantaneously, the
>>> > need for reiteration is required for generating that experience...
>>> >
>>> > regards
>>> > subbu
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > Regards.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 10:05 AM V Subrahmanian <
>>> > v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Dear Sudhanshu ji,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On this //Actually, it is saying, there is no "appearance" of
>>> sushupti
>>> > >> (avidyA) in samAdhi and NOT "there is no sushupti (avidyA) in
>>> > samAdhi".//
>>> > >>
>>> > >> We can see that the commentary, following the verses, is
>>> delineating on
>>> > >> the vyaavrtti - anuvritti logic. It says: तेषु परस्परं
>>> > >> व्यावर्त्यमानेष्वपि... this effectively is the 'absence' of the two
>>> of
>>> > the
>>> > >> three bodies in a given state. Therefore in Samadhi the kAraNa
>>> shrira,
>>> > >> sleep, is not there.  But the Atman is there in all states.  As
>>> pointed
>>> > out
>>> > >> earlier, the tattva agrahana rUpa avidyA is not there in
>>> > akhandakaravritti.
>>> > >> That one will have to have many more such sessions in order to
>>> become a
>>> > >> sthita prajna is not denied. That is another matter. By definition
>>> the
>>> > >> samadhi as spoken of by Swami Vidyaranya in the cited verse is a
>>> > situation
>>> > >> where that basic avidya is not there.  That the lesha avidya that is
>>> > >> required to bring him out of samadhi and continue in vyavahara, till
>>> > death,
>>> > >> is admitted and you have acknowledged that as well.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> regards
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 3:02 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <
>>> > >> sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >>> Namaste V Subramanian ji,
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Thanks for the reply.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> I went through the Panchadashi shloka and the tIkA thereupon.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> //Here he says 'In Samadhi there is no Sushupti but Atman is
>>> present.
>>> > >>> This is anvaya. The vyatireka is: when Atman is shining, sushupti
>>> is
>>> > not
>>> > >>> present. //
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Actually, it is saying, there is no "appearance" of sushupti
>>> (avidyA)
>>> > in
>>> > >>> samAdhi and NOT "there is no sushupti (avidyA) in samAdhi".
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> The non-appearance of avidyA in samAdhi is well accepted. However,
>>> that
>>> > >>> is explained not due to absence of avidyA, but due to absence of
>>> > >>> avidyAkArA-avidyA-vritti. In avidyA-pratIti-vichAra of
>>> advaita-siddhi,
>>> > MS
>>> > >>> says:-
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> न चैवं कदाचिदविद्याया अप्रतीत्यापत्तिः; इष्टापत्तेः, समाधौ
>>> > तथाभ्युपगमात्
>>> > >>> ।
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Is there any clear articulation anywhere that avidyA is not present
>>> > >>> during samAdhi. Because if avidyA is not present during samAdhi,
>>> then
>>> > one
>>> > >>> will not be able to wake up from samAdhi.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> //Since it is admitted that the Tattva agrahana rupa avidya is
>>> present
>>> > >>> in all three states, in Samadhi when Akhandakara vritti is there,
>>> that
>>> > >>> avidya is not present. The Ramakrishna Teeka for the above verse
>>> where
>>> > he
>>> > >>> says 'ajnana is not there in samadhi', can be seen here:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> https://archive.org/details/panchadashi-ramkrishna/page/n57/mode/2up//
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Does attaining nirvikalpaka-samAdhi once leads to destruction of
>>> > avidyA?
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> //Of course, the mind, which is the instrument for even attaining
>>> > >>> Samadhi, has to be admitted to be present. Also, the nascent form
>>> of
>>> > >>> avidya/mind are admitted to be present even during samadhi, since
>>> they
>>> > have
>>> > >>> not destroyed so that the post-samadhi life of the Jnani requires
>>> this
>>> > >>> non-binding form (lesha/vasana) of avidya is the one that sustains
>>> the
>>> > >>> body-mind of the Jnani till the fall of the body.//
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> This is well understood.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,
>>> > > Pune
>>> > >
>>> > > sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com
>>> > >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,
>> Pune
>>
>> sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com
>>
>