[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: The meaning of Sat in "सदेव सोम्य" Shruti

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,

Not well . Not able to participate in discussions.

Regardss

On Wed, 27 Sep 2023, 17:11 Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Bhaskar ji.
> // it has to be parabrahman only otherwise ekamevAdvitiyam does not suit to
> ajnAna vishishta brahman 😊 Before talking about anything srushti prakriya,
> shruti talks about parabrahman only at the start which is second to none.
> But however, shankara elsewhere clarifies whenever brahma-tattva associated
> with jagat srushti it is kArya brahman / upAsya / apara...it does not
> anyway mean brahman endowed with avidyA even before the creation and
> introduction of jeeva aspect 😊//
>
> If we see MANDUkya 1.2 bhAshya, there AchArya says - ननु, तत्र *‘सदेव
> सोम्य’ *(छा. उ. ६ । २ । १) इति प्रकृतं सद्ब्रह्म प्राणशब्दवाच्यम् ; *नैष
> दोषः, बीजात्मकत्वाभ्युपगमात्सतः* । यद्यपि सद्ब्रह्म प्राणशब्दवाच्यं तत्र,
> तथापि जीवप्रसवबीजात्मकत्वमपरित्यज्यैव *प्राणशब्दत्वं सतः सच्छब्दवाच्यता च*
> । यदि हि निर्बीजरूपं विवक्षितं ब्रह्माभविष्यत् , ‘नेति नेति’ (बृ. उ. ४ । ५
> । ३) ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ. २ । ९ । १) ‘अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथो
> अविदितादधि’ (के. उ. १ । ४) इत्यवक्ष्यत् ; ‘न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते’ (भ. गी. १३ ।
> १२) इति स्मृतेः । निर्बीजतयैव चेत् , सति प्रलीनानां सम्पन्नानां
> सुषुप्तिप्रलययोः पुनरुत्थानानुपपत्तिः स्यात् ; मुक्तानां च
> पुनरुत्पत्तिप्रसङ्गः, बीजाभावाविशेषात् , ज्ञानदाह्यबीजाभावे च
> ज्ञानानर्थक्यप्रसङ्गः ; *तस्मात्सबीजत्वाभ्युपगमेनैव सतः*
> प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः, *सर्वश्रुतिषु
> च कारणत्वव्यपदेशः* ।
>
> Sat has sat-shabda-vAchyatA without renouncing the bIjAtmakatA. It is not
> the nirbIja Brahman, which is stated by the word 'sat' in 'sadeva somya'
> Shruti as explained here.
>
> Also, if we see BrihadAraNyaka 1.4.17 - आत्मैवेदमग्र आसीदेक एव सोऽकामयत
> जाया मे स्यादथ - which is used as an example to illustrate the context,
> there AchArya says - स एवैक आसीत् — जायाद्येषणाबीजभूताविद्यावानेक एवासीत्.
> That he alone was there is explained as --- bIja-bhUtA-avidyA-vAn eka-eva
> AsIt. Thus, ajnAna-vishishTa-AtmA does not contradict its non-duality.
> Rather that alone is stated to be the meaning by AchArya here in 1.4.17.
>
> With these references, it appears quite clearly that the vAchya-artha of
> sat is sabIja-Brahman i.e. ajnAna-vishishTa-Brahman. The lakshya-artha can,
> however, be nirvishesha Brahman.
>
> V Subramanian ji, Chandramouli ji, Praveen Bhat ji, Venkataraghavan ji and
> other learned members. Please share your view in the matter.
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>