[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Deep Sleep is Nondual Self with objections refuted, SSSS

[Michael Chandra Cohen]

Namaste Subbu and Raghav,
Here is Prasanth Neti's response to your quotes on Sankara's bhasya to
Mandukya Karika 1.2:

//// (A) In any case, as you (V. Subramanian/Subbu) importantly quoted a
bhāṣya passage (a meta-analysis)
of all other bhāṣya passages) which *trumps all other bhāṣya passages*
viz.,
(सतः प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः, सर्वश्रुतिषु च कारणत्वव्यपदेशः
Wherever in the Upanishads the state of sleep and dissolution (pralaya,
prior to creation) are referred to, it is always, by default, with the
implicit idea that it is the causal state (the potency in seed form) and
not the PURE Brahman.” (Karika bhasya 1.2)
It clinches the fact that - the sacchabda-vācyaṁ brahma called prāṇa is
doubtless sabījam brahma and not shuddha brahma.
Om
Raghav ////
It appears to me that Karika bhāshya 1.2 is always purposefully overlooked
by Post Sankara Vedānta followers.
When it is said “सतः प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः, सर्वश्रुतिषु च कारणत्वव्यपदेशः” in
karika 1.2 bhāshya, the relevant bhāshya portion actually says:
निर्बीजतयैव चेत् , सति प्रलीनानां सम्पन्नानां सुषुप्तिप्रलययोः
पुनरुत्थानानुपपत्तिः स्यात् ; मुक्तानां च पुनरुत्पत्तिप्रसङ्गः,
बीजाभावाविशेषात् , ज्ञानदाह्यबीजाभावे च ज्ञानानर्थक्यप्रसङ्गः ;
तस्मात्सबीजत्वाभ्युपगमेनैव सतः प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः, सर्वश्रुतिषु च
कारणत्वव्यपदेशः । अत एव ‘अक्षरात्परतः परः’ (मु. उ. २ । १ । २)
‘सबाह्याभ्यन्तरो ह्यजः’ (मु. उ. २ । १ । २) ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ. २
। ९ । १) ‘नेति नेति’ (बृ. उ. २ । ३ । ६) इत्यादिना बीजत्वापनयनेन व्यपदेशः ।
तामबीजावस्थां तस्यैव प्राज्ञशब्दवाच्यस्य तुरीयत्वेन
देहादिसम्बन्धजाग्रदादिरहितां पारमार्थिकीं पृथग्वक्ष्यति । बीजावस्थापि ‘न
किञ्चिदवेदिषम्’ इत्युत्थितस्य प्रत्ययदर्शनाद्देहेऽनुभूयत एवेति त्रिधा देहे
व्यवस्थित इत्युच्यते ॥
[Trans. Sw.G:] If Brahman in Its seedless (non-causal) state be meant
there, then the individuals that merge in It in deep sleep and dissolution
cannot reasonably re-emerge, and there will be the possibility of the freed
souls returning to take birth again, for in either case, the absence of
cause is a common factor. Besides, in the absence of any seed (of worldly
state) to be burnt by the knowledge (of Brahman), knowledge itself becomes
useless. Hence Existence is referred to as Prana (in the Chandogya
Upanishad) and It is spoken of as the cause in all the Upanishads by
assuming It (for the time being) to be the seed of others. And it is
because of this that It is referred to by eliminating Its causal state in
such Vedic texts as: "Superior to the superior Unmanifested" (Mu. II. i.2),
"From which speech turns back" (Tai. II. 9), "Not this, not this" (Br. IV.
iv. 22), etc. The supremely real state, free from causality, relation with
body etc., and modes of waking etc., of that very entity that is called
Prajna, will be spoken separately in its aspect as the Turlya (Fourth). The
causal state, too, is verily experienced in the body, inasmuch as an
awakened man is seen to have such a recollection as, "I did not know
anything (in my deep sleep )." Hence it is said, "Tridha dehe vyavasthitah
- existing in three ways in the body".
Therefore the key here is, Sushupti is called Prana and Prajna (bijāvastha)
from standpoint of ignorance (from waking stand point), whereas from the
standpoint of truth, same sushupti (bijāvastha) is nothing but Turiya.
Calling sushupti as causal state is owing to “enquiry into cause” (i.e.
owing to kAraNAnvEShaNa, which is exactly what ignorance is all about!).
Therefore śruti and bhāshya calling Sushupti as Prāna / Prājña /
bījāvastha) is vaidika adhyaropa which makes sense to person conjured up by
adhyasa/Avidyā (who seeks for a cause). However, the Vedānta enquiry as it
proceeds, culminates into apavada of that adhyāropa. Bhagavan BhAShyakara
clearly explained this in the same portion of bhāshya. However, that
apavada dRShTi is always put aside by Post Sankara Vedānta followers.
Morever, the objection as below is also meaningless:
//// If sleep has no difference with moksha why even call it a state of
experience and talk about atmasvarUpa as turIya. Instead mAndukya
Upandishad should have named Atma as tritIya. ////
It is meaningless because, when AtmasvarUpa is mentioned as turIya, the
siddhanta is clear that it is after all “Māyā sankhyā turīyam” as bhagavan
bhashyakara puts it in the mangalācharaNa shloka of kārika bhāshya.
Therefore this worry about ātmasvarUpa running into danger of becoming
trItiya (the third) but not turIya (the fourth) is unnecessary - the
sankhyā is māyā sankhyā after all!
Bhashyakara as I pointed in same portion of karika 1.2 bhāshya clearly says:
तामबीजावस्थां तस्यैव प्राज्ञशब्दवाच्यस्य तुरीयत्वेन
देहादिसम्बन्धजाग्रदादिरहितां पारमार्थिकीं पृथग्वक्ष्यति।
Prājña is tritIya from waking standpoint. However, from standpoint of truth
(i.e. from its own standpoint) that itself is said to be the truth (again
“the fourth!” from waking standpoint).
I think this is sufficient enough reply for all objections together.
प्रज्ञानांशुप्रतानैः स्थिरचरनिकरव्यापिभिर्व्याप्य लोका -
न्भुक्त्वा भोगान्स्थविष्ठान्पुनरपि धिषणोद्भासितान्कामजन्यान् ।
पीत्वा सर्वान्विशेषान्स्वपिति मधुरभुङ्मायया भोजयन्नो
***मायासङ्ख्यातुरीयं*** परममृतमजं ब्रह्म यत्तन्नतोऽस्मि ॥ १ ॥
That which pervades the worlds through its rays of consciousness spread out
and diffused in animate and inanimate beings, and thus experiences the
gross pleasures and pains in waking, and once more in dreams the subtle
ones fancied by mind and born of desire! That which absorbs within itself
all distinctions and sleeps enjoying bliss, thus causing us through its
Maya to taste all these states-to That which is *** 'the Fourth' relatively
to this illusory number three***, but is absolutely the Highest, Immortal,
Unborn, Brahman, I make obeisance.


On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 6:23 AM 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <
advaitin at googlegroups.com> wrote:

> praNAms
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> //*Thus, in suṣupti, there is no perception not because of the presence
> of ignorance but because of the absence of duality. //*
>
>
>
>    - If someone is wondering that the above statement is just Sri SSS’s
>    misguided announcement, it is better to bring to their notice that it is
>    said by none other than bhAshyakAra himself.  Those who studied the
>    shankara’s stand with regard to this would understand that ‘no perception’
>    is because of ‘ekatvaM’ and this ekatvaM, though there not known not
>    because of existence/presence of ignorance (bhAvarUpa / kAraNA vidyA /
>    beeja rUpa avidyA shakti etc. grand contribution of later vyAkhyAnakAra-s)
>    but abhAva of that knowledge (jnAnAbhAva).  bhAshyakAra further clarifies :
>    when one is alone (ekaM without second) when one is free from all qualified
>    knowledge,  there cannot be the transaction of knowing himself. The eye
>    does not see itself; one cannot sit on one’s own shoulder, fire does not
>    burn itself. Now the question is if he (prAjna) is merged in brahman (para
>    brahman) in sushupti, why he is not aware of it??  For this bhAshyakAra
>    answers in chAndOgya shruti : the process of merging is NOT that the jeeva
>    entering a house as an outsider in other words, the jeeva  has not entered
>    into brahman like water in cloth.  Here the water and cloth are different
>    though wet cloth is there duality is quite obvious.  But it is not like
>    that, jeeva’s merging with brahman is like merging into it dissolving his
>    individual identity like the juice of a flower (pushpa rasa) merging into
>    the honey losing its identity. Therefore he is not aware of even that!!
>
>
>
>    - And this is the jeeva’s true svarUpa asserts bruhadAraNyaka.  The
>    nature  of the Jīva in the state of sushupti when he is free from all the
>    upAdhi-s and therefore he the jeeva is  griefless, desireless, and all
>    alone without a second (ekamevAdviteeyaM, ekAtma pratyaya sAra ekibhUta
>    etc.) and this is his svarUpa / real nature. Here the father is not father,
>    the mother is not mother, the devata is not devata, the thief is not thief,
>    the killer of bhrUna (foetus) is not killer, the chandAla is not chandAla,
>    the sanyasi is not saNyAsi, the veda is not veda and the tapasvi is not
>    tapasvi. Here he is connected neither with puNyA nor pApa etc.  Same thing
>    repeated in other words by bhAshyakAra in sUtra bhAshya : sati
>    saMpannasthAvattadekatvAnna vijAnAteeti yuktaM, it is but reasonable that
>    jeeva merged in pure being  is not conscious because of absolute unity.
>
>
>
>    - And with regard the ruling statement of shankara that merging only
>    with kAraNa brahman not pure brahman in sushupti, shankara nowhere states
>    that kAraNa brahman is a ‘separate’ brahman resides in sushupti and Shuddha
>    brahman is something aloof from it and that needs to be ‘seen / realized’
>    in some other peculiar state (according to some in samAdhi, according to
>    some other after the physical death).  But the fact remains that there is
>    no time when jeeva has not become one with brahman, it is because it is his
>    (one’s) intrinsic nature which cannot be alienated.  ONLY in the view of
>    the seeming foreign aspect (qualified knowledge) which he assumes in Svapna
>    and jAgrat due to contact with upAdhi-s it is proposed to say that he
>    attains his own form on the dissolution of that foreign aspect.  Again this
>    is not the declaration of Sri SSS but bhAshyakAra himself clarifies this in
>    sUtra bhAshya.
>
>
>
>    - Having said all this Sri SSS in detail explains what is the
>    difference between prAjnA and tureeya etc. with the detailed references
>    from maNdUkya, kArikA, bruhadAraNyaka, chAdOgya etc.  paramArtha chitAmaNi
>    a Kannada book is very relevant here to understand Sri SSS’s stand point on
>    avasthA traya.
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>
> --
> 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 visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6625417F6AC1F9A8082AB7D78470A%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6625417F6AC1F9A8082AB7D78470A%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>