Reply to Sri V.Subramanian prabhuji's post on three states & kAraNAvidyA - Part - II

[Guest guest]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

To the followers of this thread :

 

This is going to be extremely long mail...Kindly have enough patience to

go through it in detail. Ofcourse, if at all you are interested :-))

 

praNAms Sri V. Subramanian prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

avasthAtraya (three states) prakriya (methodology) is an important

prakriya wherein shruti mAta establishes the fact that Atman is

avasthAtIta & transcends all the apparent three states. So, before

embarking with our views, we should always keep in mind that avasthA

traya is *kalpita saMvrutti* in shAstra-s. As said earlier, there are

two types of superimpositions one is due to avidyA of the common man and

another is a deliberate device which has been employed by the

shAstra-s...paNcha kOsha prakriya, kArya-kAraNa prakriya, avasthAtraya

prakriya etc. etc. are all comes under the category of shAstra-s kalpita

saMvrutti to teach the highest reality of Atman.

 

As we have seen in the Part-I, the superimposition is seen in the common

man's day to day experience of life and is evident for all irrespective

of their cast & creed without any room for doubt. This attribution will

be deliberately extended by scriptures to teach the ultimate non-dual

nature of brahman. This is what is exactly called *kalpita saMvrutti* in

gaudapAda kArika..devices like these only meant for purpose of teaching

we should not hold it as eternal reality in brahman/Atman.

 

Further the question is why avasthAtraya prakriya (the methodology of

three states) to be considered as mere device despite the fact that it is

a main subject in one of the principal upanishads mAndUkya?? shruti

itself answers this question. Let us see how:

 

First of all what will be our normal course of procedural thinking?? we

all invariably think I am a man/woman born to such & such parents, born

in this world and grown in such and such a way and one fine day I am

going to die!! this is how our stream of thinking goes normally...these

are all common preconceived ideas which are as we have seen in part-I is

nothing but *man made* adhyArOpa or loukika saMvrutti or paratantra

saMvrutti. To remove this attribution to Atman, scripture first

attribute the vaishwAnara status in Atman (mAndUkya maNtra -3). This

attribution by scripture is aimed to remove the common idea that I am an

individual soul (jIva), I am a waker etc. etc. Likewise taijasa state

also has been explained in shruti to remove the man made adhyArOpa that

we are dreamer, we are seeing this dream world through our mind etc. This

is kalpita saMvrutti..Shastra graciously removes this adhyArOpa by saying

na antaH prajna, na bahisprajnaM ( see mAndUkya maNtra-7)then this

adhyArOpa is gone and the non-dual Atman remains. Atman is never ever

bound to any of the state to call him in one state he is

ignorance+misconception & in another state he is immersed in ONLY

ignorance etc. etc. He is untainted nitya, shuddha, buddha, mukta Atman

always in totality. That is the reaon why ItarEya shruti says Atman

apparently has three states but all the three states are dreams!! ( tasya

traya avasathA trayI svapnAH) Shankara while commenting on the

*tadabhAvAdhikaraNa* in third chapter of vEdAnta sUtra says " there is no

time when jIva has not become one with brahman for one's intrinsic nature

cannot be alienated. Only in view of the *seeming* foreign aspect which

he assumes in dream and waking owing to contact of conditioning adjuncts

(upAdhi-s), it is proposed to say that he attain his own form on the

dissolution of that foreign aspect" So, avasthAtraya is merely a device

& not a reality in itself to attribute differently in different

states....

 

With this backdrop in our mind, now, we shall see how your special

affiliation to kAraNAvidyA holds water in the below scheme entries :-))

Shall we proceed prabhuji??

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The Mandukya up. provides us a beautiful scheme, verily a template, for

understanding this:

 

1.Turiya 2. Praajna 3. Taijasa 4. Vishwa

 

For our present discussion we shall not consider the Turiya.

 

bhaskar :

 

Though in the present context turIya will not come into picture, I

reiterate that Atman is *always turIya* irrespective of his apparent

identification with vishwa, taijasa & prAjna. Actually strictly speaking

there is no need at all to bring prAjna here either...why?? we will see

that below.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The Kaarika uses the terms Nidra/kaaranam/beejam/Agrahanam for the

Praajna state.

 

bhaskar :

 

Please quote the numbers of those kArikA-s we shall study it together as

per its context.

 

You missed one important point here i.e. analysing the sushupti from

shAstra drushti & loukita drushti. From shAstra drushti its been said

in scriptures that jIva embraced with brahman in sushupti...that holds

the key here..again in sUtra bhAshya shankara says " since, in sushupti

jIva is merged in pure being is not conscious because of unity"

 

VS prabhuji:

 

And the terms Svapna/karyam/ankura (not popular)/Anyathaa-grahanam to

denote the Taijasa-Vishwa combine. The idea is that there is Ignorance

alone in the Praajna state and Ignorance+Error in the Taijasa-Vishwa

states. Ignorance, non-apprehension, agrahanam of the vastu leads to

Error, mis-apprehension, anyathaa-grahanam of that vastu as something

else.

 

bhaskar :

 

Again, here too two different view points to be considered before making

any sweeping statement against sushupti...From the vyAvahArik thought

position we regard sleep as a passing cloud of ignorance in which we are

daily entangled...pramAdAlasya nidrAbhiH tanni bhadhnAti says Lord in

gIta.

 

But when you started looking sleep from the position of witness (sAkshi),

this nidrA/kAraNam/bIjaM/agrahaNam whatever you say above will wear

entirely different look and throws us entirely different meaning which we

can ill afford to ignore...after all you know we are doing brahma jignAsa

here!! From that transcedental view point, the deep sleep state seen to

be an intuition of our true nature divested of its socalled individuality

and it is an *experience* unburdened with the complexities of upAdhi-s.

This is a state that which is not enmeshed with time & space..shruti-s

says in this state we have been lifted to our own true nature which is

bliss unconditional..since in this state there is no entrace for waking &

dream states, the state which is uniform to one and all...all shed their

respecitve limiting adjuncts before they embracing themselves with their

true nature of Atman. yatra suptO na kaNchana kAmaM kAmayatE...na

kaNchana svapnaM pashyati tat sushuptaM...see prabhuji, how beautifully

bruhadAraNyaka shruti explains this *pure ignorance* state!!???

 

Further, if the deep sleep state is purely an ignorance state, shankara

would not have taken this state as an example to show mOksha state...he

describes sleep state in bruhadAraNyaka shruti *saMprasAda sthAnaM mOksha

drushtAnta rUpaM.. & he continues *sushuptAvastamiva *nirvishEshaM*

*advaitaM* *alupta chidrUpa jyOtiswabhAvaM* AtmAnaM pashyate...if you

study this bhAshya vAkya in detail, you will come to know *the pure

ignorance state* has been used to describe paramArtha jnAnaM!! For

further details you can refer bruhadAraNyaka shruti maNtra-s in 4-3-21 to

32 and also chAndOgya shruti maNtra-s 8 - 3 to 6 & kindly let me know in

which context sushupti has been glorified in these maNtra-s.

 

so, prabhuji, your statement that sushupti is kAraNa, bIja, agrahaNa etc.

etc. are from vyAvahArika drushti and holds good only in relative phase,

where we can admit sleep state also a state of ignorance since we uphold

the unwarranted reality of waking state...but sushpti, when taken into

consideration from shAstra drushti, it is a reflect upon its intrinsic

worth *in its own realm*...mAndUkya shruti equates prAjna state with that

of Ishwara & asserts this is the Lord of all, he is omniscient, he is the

internal controller and he is the one source of all the origin and

dissolution of all beings!! the sruti-s set prAjna in total contrast with

jIva which you are saying suffering from kAraNAvidyA and our shankara

bhagavadpAda categorically asserts that *shruti invariably refer to

Ishwara when they use the term *prAjna*...

 

From the above, it is quite evident that there must be a need of taking

two different view points while objectively analysing the *prAjna state*

of ours...

 

Now, with this, we will look into *kAraNA vidyA* state of prAjnA.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

If, as you contend, adhyasa which is synonymous with avidya ( preceding

the adhyaropa), and involves a mental activity of misconception which you

had described in your first post as 'a feeling', which is the kaaranam of

the wrong cognition or the 'actual seeing' of the snake, where would you

place the adhyasa/avidya in the above template? Obviously it cannot be in

the Praajna state as you have not admitted a non-apprehension, agrahanam,

state at all in your scheme.

 

bhaskar :

 

Reason for not accepting agrahaNaM in prAjna state has been explained

above...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

You start from mis-conception , for which, right now click Tools and see

the thesaurus. It gives two words: 'misapprehension' and 'error' among

others, which we have used in the Taijasa-Vishwa state!!

 

bhaskar :

 

Yes ofcourse prabhuji, based on shankara's adhyAsa bhAshya which says

without any ambiguity...naisargikOdhyAsaha anAdi anantaH...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

There will be a question, what caused the misconception (your meaning:

adhyasa/avidya)?

 

bhaskar :

 

do you still need locus for adhyAsa prabhuji?? when shankara telling it

is anAdi & naisargika?? It is really funny to search for kAraNa for

adhyAsa when adhyAsa itself been described anAdi..

 

VS prabhuji:

 

Will you say Avidya? or Maya? In that case you will have to say what is

this avidya which resulted in the adhyasa/avidya.

 

bhaskar :

 

the problem does not arise at all since we are not searching kArNa for

adhyAsa here...by the way how do you explain the avidyA - adhyAsa - mAya

as per your understanding prabhuji??

 

VS prabhuji:

 

And you will not be able to put anything in the Prajna state legitimately

as you have 'exhausted' , ie. used up avidya by making it a synonym for

adhyasa.

 

bhaskar :

 

There is absolutely no need for preserving anything for sleep

state...adhyAsa is coz. of antaHkaraNa.(prabhuji, I think you know where

shankara says adhyAsa is antaHkaraNa dharma)...but in sushupti there is no

trace of this limited adjunct...Hence no question of avidyA...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

Instead, if the Mandukya scheme is adopted, there will be no difficulty

at all.

 

bhaskar :

 

it is really fascinating to notice your enthu in keeping avidyA in deep

sleep state...inspite of our Acharya's clear declaration.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The first non-apprehension, Agrahanam, 'I did not know' is placed in

Praajna and the mis-apprehension, anyathaagrahanam spoken of by the

various examples in the Adhyasa bhashyam, can be put in the

Taijasa-Vishwa state.

 

bhaskar :

 

OK prabhuji, let us take your version of avidyA and adhyAsa....you said

first there is non-apprehension (avidyA) and then its baby

(adhyAsa)...with this we will analyse the analogy of rope and

snake...After the dawn of knowledge, the mis conception of snake will go

and we will get the real nature of the rope...But, according to you, this

knowledge is not sufficient...coz. this knowledge has helped us only to

remove mis-conception (adhyAsa) and NOT non-apprehension (avidyA)...in

the analogy where did you show the annihilation of avidyA...inspite of

correct knowledge of rope, still non-apprehension (avidyA) staring at our

face which needs to be removed...at what stage and through which

knowledge can this non-apprehension (avidyA) be removed?? if the both

(non & mis apprehension) are going simultaneously there is no need to

identify it differently...if it is totally different from one

another...the father avidyA (non-apphrehesion) will ever be there despite

removal of misconception....that which is bhAva rUpa cannot be removed

from any amount of knowledge!! you know krishna explicitly says this in

gIta & shankara in sUtra bhAshya.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The question that remains to be answered is: How to explain the

bhaashyavaakyam: Tametam Evam-lakshanam Adhyasam Avidya iti panditaaH

manyante? Perhaps this sentence is what led you to conclude Adhyasa is

synonymous with Avidya.

 

bhaskar :

 

yes, context & shankara's declaration about adhyAsa is crystal clear in

adhyAsa bhAshya...it does not call for any convoluted interpretation just

to accommodate the avidyA before adhyAsa...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

In the complete Bhashyam literature, the Acharya uses terms like this:

1.Avidya-pratyupasthaapita-kaarya-karanopaadhi-nimitto'yam ?(Sutra

Bhashya 1.2.5.20).

2.Avidya-adhyasta?.

3.Avidya-adhyaaropita?

4.Avidya-kalpita? (Parameshwarastu Avidya-kalpitaat shaariiraat?.anyaH

(Su.Bh.1.1.6.17)

 

bhaskar :

 

Can you give me shankara bhAshya vAkya reference for (2) and (3) above

prabhuji?? (3) can be acceptable coz. adhyArOpa is there due to

avidyA-adhyAsa...(2) also acceptable for the reason that adhyastha

(adhyArOpita) is coz. of avidyA...and (1) & (4) used by shankara to

define *mAya* and not to distinguish between kAraNA or mUlAvidyA &

adhyAsa or toolAvidyA... shankara elsewhere uses terms like avdiyAkruta,

avdiyAkArya, avidyAtmaka etc. etc. too...but I dont think these quotes

donot going to help you to establish the differnce between avdiyA and

adhyAsa...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

It may be noted that in all such places, the term avidya is compounded

(samasta-pada) with the other words : adhyasta, adhyaaropita, etc.

Evidently, in the compound, the two terms cannot mean the same. The

translation for the first cited sentence is: ?.is based on the limiting

adjunct of body and senses, conjured up by ignorance?..

(conjured means pratyupasthapita and ignorance is avidya.)

For the sentence cited under 4. above, the translation is: Iswara is

different, to be sure, from the one, imagined through ignorance?. (

imagined means kalpita.)

 

bhaskar :

 

OK agreed prabhuji...but how can you conclude from this avidyA is

diffrent from adhyAsa?? here shankara saying nAma rUpa, katrutva

bhoktruva lakshaNa of jagat/mAya is due to avidyA/adhyAsa...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

And the samaasa, to the best of my limited knowledge of the language

cannot be explained in any other way in this context : Avidyayaa

pratyupasthaapita?Avidyayaa kalpita.. Avidyayaa adhyastha?Avidyayaa

adhyaaropita..etc.

 

bhaskar :

 

No, this is just to show mAya is not avidyA...but conjured up by

avidya/adhyAsa..

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The above sentences were taken up to show that : The Acharya

distinguishes Avidya, ignorance, non-apprehension, agrahanam, from

adhyasa, adhyaropa, kalpanam, pratyupasthaapanam, etc. which all mean

error, mis-apprehension, anyathaagrahanam. Here we are able to see the

cause is avidya and the effect is adhyasa, adhyaropa, etc. Herein is the

Kaarana-avidya mentioned by the Acharya.

 

bhaskar :

 

then prabhuji you have to tell us the difference between mAya & adhyAsa

also...mAya cannot be avidyA (even I dont agree with that) but since you

are using avidyA-adhyAsa-mAya differently you have to show us the

difference between adhyAsa & mAya & avidyA's role in it....would you mind

to explain it prabhuji.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

In the Adhyasabhashya vaakyam, cited above, Tametam Evam-lakshanam

Adhyasam Avidya iti panditaaH manyante, the Acharya is referring to

Avidyaa-karyam as what is adhyasa.

 

bhaskar :

 

I am sorry to say avidyA kAryaM to denote adhyAsa is mere fabricated,

convoluted interpretation as against plain meaning.

 

VS prabhuji :

 

This clarification is quite logical and has also been pointed out by the

Ratnaprabha vyakhyaanam for this portion.

 

bhaskar :

 

prabhuji shall we stick to prasthAna traya bhAshya in this discussion??

when bhagavadpAda's commentaries are there no need to bring ratnaprabha,

nyaya nirNaya grantha-s to prove a point...Hope you understand my

insistence.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

But why does the Acharya call adhyasa by this name, Avidya? Let us

consider this real-life example:

A teacher gives a test to the students. A boy gives all wrong answers.

The teacher reacts: This is sheer ignorance!! What have u been doing in

the class when the concept was being explained?

Thus to call avidya karyam as avidya is quite appropriate and this is

what the Ratnaprabha has also pointed out.

 

bhaskar :

 

My objection with regard to removal of non and mis apprehension holds

good here too...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

There is another difficulty, Bhaskar ji, in considering adhyasa and

avidya as synonymous. As we have seen above, adhyasa is vyakta avastha,

whereas as per your earlier explanation,'there is a feeling that it is a

snake..etc' there is already mind activity. Whereas, non-apprehension,

the Prajna avastha, is avyakta avastha, also called avaakrta avastha.,

the state prior to the manifestation of nama-rupa. So, for this reason

also the two are not the same.

 

bhaskar :

 

if that is the case kindly clarify...

 

(a) if kAraNAvidyA is uniform in all the three states can we not

conclude that this kAraNA vidyA too on par with ATman & it is also

paramArtha?? if the answer is no...why NO?? in which state do you find

the absence of kAraNAvidyA then??

 

(b) you are saying kAraNAvidyA invariably exists in all the three states

right prabhuji?? if so, are these avasthA-s not a pariNAma

(transformation) of kAraNAvidyA prabhuji?? or else, these states are

entirely different from kAraNAvidyA??

 

Please answer to these questions with the support of bhAshya vAkya then

we will resume our discussion further.

 

VS prabhuji:

 

To conclude, on the lines of the method shown by Sri Vidyaranya swami in

the Panchadasi 6th chapter, we can 'run' the concept of Adhyasa through a

certain process with a view to know about it comprehensively. He says, by

considering the hetu=cause, svaruupam=nature and kaaryam=effect of a

thing on hand, we can know about it clearly:

 

The hetu, cause of adhyasa is : Avidya , ignorance, avivekena? as the

Adhyasabhashyam itself says.

 

bhaskar :

 

Not so, already shown above....

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The svarupam, nature of adhyasa is: Atasmin tad buddhiH; anyathaa

grahanam, misapprehension.

 

bhaskar :

 

there is nothing precedes this...if anything precedes this there is no

tool to remove it ..since it is as strong as Atman in all the three

states :-))

 

VS prabhuji:

 

The karyam, effect of adhyasa: All the undesirable results it leads to

mentioned by the word: anartha by the adhyasabhashyam itself at the end:

anarthahetoH. Anartha is the effect and its hetu is adhyasa and its hetu

in turn is avidya.

 

bhaskar :

 

In that case main hEtu avidyA does not get sublated at any point of

time...all our efforts ends with removal of kArya i.e. adhyAsa...

 

VS prabhuji:

 

Bhaskarji, all through the discussion, I imagined as though both of us

were sitting in a class when the Acharya had gone out for a short break .

 

bhaskar :

 

I cannot imagine a split second of absence of our bhagavadpADa even in my

wildest dreams prabhuji...that too when discussing his siddhAnta...let us

both prostrate unto the lotus feet of that mahAjnAni & feel his presence

always with us...

 

Pranams.

subbu

 

Humble praNAms onceagain

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar