[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Eka-sattA-vAda vis-a-vis sattA-traividhya-vAda

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Chandramouli ji.

Whether it is bhAshya, or texts by later AchAryAs or PurANAs or any other
VedAntic text, we will have statements which are valid only in specific
models such as SDV, DSV, Eka-sattA-vAda, sattA-traividhya-vAda, ajAtivAda
etc.

BhAshya statements are not in a singular model.

Take for example:
1. वैधर्म्याच्च न स्वप्नादिवत् ॥ २९ ॥   अत्रोच्यते — न
स्वप्नादिप्रत्ययवज्जाग्रत्प्रत्यया भवितुमर्हन्ति । कस्मात् ? वैधर्म्यात् —
वैधर्म्यं हि भवति स्वप्नजागरितयोः ।
2. त्रयः स्वप्ना जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्त्याख्याः । ननु जागरितं
प्रबोधरूपत्वान्न स्वप्नः । नैवम् ; स्वप्न एव ।

Now, BhAshyakAra will not explicitly say that the former statement is valid
in SDV while the latter in DSV. We are required to understand that these
statements are valid in different model. Each model relevant for different
adhikArI.

As BhAshyakAra Himself clarifies -यापि बुद्धैः अद्वैतवादिभिः जातिः देशिता
उपदिष्टा, उपलम्भनमुपलम्भः, तस्मात् उपलब्धेरित्यर्थः । समाचारात्
वर्णाश्रमादिधर्मसमाचरणाच्च ताभ्यां हेतुभ्याम् अस्तिवस्तुत्ववादिनाम् अस्ति
वस्तुभाव इत्येवंवदनशीलानां *दृढाग्रहवतां श्रद्दधानां*
*मन्दविवेकिनामर्थोपायत्वेन* सा देशिता जातिः तां गृह्णन्तु तावत् ।
वेदान्ताभ्यासिनां तु स्वयमेव अजाद्वयात्मविषयो विवेको भविष्यतीति ;* न तु
परमार्थबुद्ध्या* ।

So, you will find that MANDUkya Upanishad will hardly talk about SDV.
Rather it will focus on DSV and ajAtivAda.

Similarly, you will find BhAshyakAra somewhere stressing upon the absolute
need of the fixed order in the sequence of creation (first space, then air,
then fire etc.) and accordingly reconciling different Upanishads, and
elsewhere throwing this entire argument out of window by equating them to
an arthavAda or story - अस्तु तर्हि सर्वमेवेदमनुपपन्नम् । न,
अत्रात्माववोधमात्रस्य विवक्षितत्वात्सर्वोऽय*मर्थवाद *इत्यदोषः । मायाविवद्वा
; महामायावी देवः सर्वज्ञः सर्वशक्तिः सर्वमेतच्चकार सुखावबोधप्रतिपत्त्यर्थं
*लोकवदाख्यायिकादिप्रपञ्च* इति युक्ततरः पक्षः ।

In fact, the truth is ajAtivAda. Even this vivarta-vAda, which encompasses
DSV, SDV, eka-sattA-vAda, sattA-traividhya-vAda, is meant for children. The
truth is ajAti and not viavrta. The Yoga-vAsisTha says, as is quoted by
VedAnta SiddhAnta MuktAvalI - बालान् प्रति विवर्तो ऽयं ब्रह्मणः सकलं जगत्।

So, bhAshya itself segregates its teachings by stating some of them to be
story/arthavAda/intended for manda-adhikArI etc.

That is where later AchAryAs help us to understand what fits where. They
would clearly say - look, this is valid in SDV, this in DSV, this in
Eka-sattA-vAda, this in sattA-traividhya-vAda etc.

That there is eka-sattA is the heart and soul of advaita vedAnta. We need
not search for it anywhere in bhAshya. It is the very meaning of advaita
vedAnta. For sattA-traividhya, we nee to look. Not for eka-sattA.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.


On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 3:40 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,
>
> On a cursory glance at the article, I did not see any reference to whether
> eka-sattA-vAda is consistent with Bhashya while there is at least one
> reference to the same in respect of sattA-traividhya-vAda.
>
> You can see the irony of it here. Bhashya is relegated to acceptance under
> tushyatu-durjana-nyAya while eka-sattA-vAda is under the ** preferred
> model** category. Whichever text might have made such a statement. Does it
> deserve any comment?
>
> Reg // It is for uttama-adhikArI.(*Sanskrit VichAra SAgara, page 150*:
> दृष्टिदृष्टिवादैकसत्तावादैकजीववादेषु दृढतरसंस्कारवानुत्तमाधिकारी) //,
>
> Vichara SAgara, page 220, last foot note states ** अयमेव सर्वोत्तमः पक्षो
> दुर्लभाधरिकारिकः **. There are hardly any suitable adhikArIs for the best
> prakriyA !! What is the use ??
>
> There is emphasis only on establishing mithyAtva. But that is not the
> final aim of Advaita SiddhAnta which is jIva-Brahma Ekatva. Establishing
> mithyAtva is only part of the  sAdhana for Realization.
>
> Normally any statement attributed to Advaita SiddhAnta is, by default,
> understood here in these Forums as in consonance with the Bhashya. If there
> is any deviation from this, it would be appropriate to mention that the
> view presented is in accordance with some other prakriyA. Unfortunately in
> my understanding in many of the recent posts the views presented are
> certainly not in accordance with the Bhashya. But no reference is made to
> the same. It could lead to avoidable confusion with many of the readers.
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 10:21 AM Sudhanshu Shekhar <
> sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Subbu ji, Venkatraghavan ji, Chandramouli ji, Raghav ji and other
>> learned members of the group.
>>
>> It is critical to understand the different models in which the statements
>> in VedAnta are made. One such distinction in models is that of
>> eka-sattA-vAda and sattA-traividhya-vAda. I have made a study in this
>> regard and have written it in systematic format. I would request you to
>> kindly go through the article and share your views about the same. The
>> article can be accessed from
>>
>>
>> https://sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/eka-satta-vada-vis-a-vis-satta-traividhya-vada.pdf
>>
>> I would request your kind indulgence in this regard as it will help me
>> improve my understanding of advaita.
>>
>> A snapshot of differences between eka-sattA-vAda and
>> sattA-traividhya-vAda, taken from the article, is pasted here for ready
>> reference. The required references from Advaita SIddhi, LaghuchandrikA,
>> VedAnta ParibhAshA, Advaita Parishuddhi, Shat BhUshanI are mentioned in the
>> PDF which I am not reproducing here.
>>
>> Head
>>
>> Eka-satta-vAda
>>
>> SattA-traividhya-vAda
>>
>> 1
>>
>> There is sattA of only one entity namely Brahman. Superimposed entities
>> have no sattA.
>>
>> There is sattA of Brahman, vyAvahArika vastu and prAtibhAsika vastu.
>> Despite being superimposed entities, they have sattA, although they are
>> progressively lower.
>>
>> 2
>>
>> In the pratyaksha “ghaTah san”, there is perception of existence
>> belonging to Aropya-tAdAtmya-Apanna-sat.
>>
>> In the pratyaksha “ghaTah san”, there is perception of vyAvahArika-sattva
>> belonging to pot.
>>
>> 3
>>
>> The nishedha of mithyA vastu is by swarUpa.
>>
>> The nishedha of mithyA vastu is by vyadhikaraNa-dharma, pAramArthikatva.
>>
>> 4
>>
>> san-mAtra-grAhI-pratyaksha is accepted. adhishThAna-jnAna is pramA,
>> vikalpa-jnAna (pot-jnAna) is bhrama.
>>
>> san-mAtra-grAhI-pratyaksha is not admitted. vikalpa-jnAna (pot-jnAna) is
>> accepted as pramA.
>>
>> 5
>>
>> Though there is vyapadesha of pratibhAsikatva and vyAvahArikatva, no
>> vyAvahArika or prAtibhAsika sattA is admitted.
>>
>> VyAvahArika and PrAtibhAsika sattA are admitted.
>>
>> 6
>>
>> It is the preferred model.
>>
>> It is by tushyatu-durjana-nyAya.
>>
>> 7
>>
>> It is for uttama-adhikArI.
>>
>> (Sanskrit VichAra SAgara, page 150: दृष्टिदृष्टिवादैकसत्तावादैकजीववादेषु
>> दृढतरसंस्कारवानुत्तमाधिकारी)
>>
>> It is for manda-adhikArI.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>>
>> --
>> 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/CAH9%3D%2BBCUFW3Q%3Dox5VkLjfktoU%3D_dW1B-_rB0ZjvsCYczcypWYA%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBCUFW3Q%3Dox5VkLjfktoU%3D_dW1B-_rB0ZjvsCYczcypWYA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> 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/CAEs%2B%2BdOKCEPKJ6%2BGmmLKzmaB2wTpq%2BLT36gWWxwukosPcW3a1w%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAEs%2B%2BdOKCEPKJ6%2BGmmLKzmaB2wTpq%2BLT36gWWxwukosPcW3a1w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>


-- 
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,
Pune

sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com