| |||
 Bhaskar ji's question on adhyasa - 12-27-2005, 10:30 PM bhaskar : Swamiji here interprets superimposition as *adhyAsa* instead of adhyArOpa...as far as my knowledge goes adhyAsa is *misunderstanding* & adhyArOpa is " because of this misunderstanding* I see one thing for another...in swamiji-s rope -snake analogy, misunderstanding of rope is *adhyAsa* (it is subjective defect pertains to mind) and due to this adhyAsa (ignorance) we *see* snake in place of rope...snake is adhyArOpita, which is objectively superimposed on rope...Here *feeling* the presence of snake is adhyArOpa and *seeing* the snake on rope is *adhyArOpita*...shankara uses adhyAsa & avidyA alternatively...but I dont think same thing he does with respect to *adhyAsa* & *adhyArOpa*...kindly clarify Dear Bhaskarji: In the Adhyasabhashya Shankara raises the question: Ko'yam Adhyaso naameti? What is this Adhyasa? Reply: Smriti rupaH paratra purvadrsta-avabhasaH = It is a cognition of the nature of recollection of something seen before. He further says: tathaa cha loke anubhavaH -shuktikaa hi rajatavat avabhasate, ekaschandra sa-dvitiiyavaditi.= there is this experience in the worldly parlance: the mother-of-pearl appears as silver, the moon that is really one, appears to be one with an other moon. From this we see that Shankara uses the word avabhasa to mean adhyasa and maintains it in the example too. In the example it can be said: a person 'sees' silver where there is shuktikaa. Shankara does not distinguish between adhyasa and adhyaropa. When something has to 'appear' to a person, he must be only 'seeing' it. In my understanding, there is no ground to distinguish between adhyasa and adhyaaropa. Adhyasa: BaalaaH aakaashe ……adhyasyanti = children 'posit'dirt etc. on pure sky.= conjecture, imagine, speculate, etc as per thesaurus. Adhyaaropa: Superimpose as per your meaning. See the commonality between superimposition and POSITing. Although the term 'adhyaropa' is not used in the adhyasa-bhashya, there are two clear indicators in this portion: Tametam Evam-lakshanam Adhyaasam panditaaH Avidyeti manyante. The Ratnaprabha clarifies: (In the light of our earlier determining 'avabhasa' cognition of one thing as another, as the meaning of adhyasa), adhyasa is termed as avidya because it is avidya kaarya, the effect of ignorance. First there is ignorance of the rope and then this ignorance gives rise to the error: this is a snake. Then, further down in the adhyasabhashya we have a clarification by Acharya himself: Adhyaso Naama Atasmin tad buddhiriti avochama. = We said earlier that Adhyasa is cognising one thing in another, ie. seeing the snake in what is not a snake actually. So from this clarification also we are able to conclude adhyasa is not different from the adhyaropa as defined by you. The Bhamati also uses the words 'aropa' in this section while explaining adhyasa and avabhasa. It is not that first one superimposes and then sees. Actually, in our experience, the cognition is itself the superimposition. What gives rise to the cognition/superimposition is the basic ignorance about the rope. Here is something that I find it difficult to express in English. As you seem to know kannada, I shall write out my understanding about the basic avidya thus: Vidye illaddu avidyeyalla. Vidyeyalladdu avidye. (In English it may be put as 'Non-vidya' or no-vidya is not avidya but it is 'not-vidya' which is avidya)If it is the former, there can be no explanation for the superimposition/projection, for there will be the defect of 'Abhaavaat bhaavotpattiH' which has been rejected by the Acharya in the Gita bhashya? in connection with the discussion on pratyavaaya arising out of non-performance of nityakarma. If the latter kannada definition of avidya is taken there is no difficulty in explaining the subsequent error, projection. Does the Acharya make the subjective – objective difference between adhyasaand adhyaropa as you have shown? In the first definition of adhyasa for koyam adhyaaso question, he said smritirupa…………avabhasaH. In the example he said shuktikaa hi rajatavad avabhasate. In the second time recalling of the definition he said: atasmin tad buddhiH is adhyasa. See the consistency in the Acharya's usage of the words. Pl come out with your views. After all we are here only to strengthen our understanding. subb --------------------------------- Yahoo! Shopping Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
| |||
| RE: Bhaskar ji's question on adhyasa - 12-28-2005, 02:35 PM Subb - for some reason my yahoo mail is not picking up your post - I am not sure why?. I have to go my hotmail address. statement (without knowing kannada) "Avidya is not non-apprehension - advidya is misapprehension." Actually non-apprehension leads to misapprehension when the mind is at work. with out the mind present there can be pure non-apprehension such as in deep sleep state. So avidya involves both aavaraNa and vikshepa. aavaraNa involves non-apprehension and vikshepa involves mis-apprehension. Please continue the discussion. Hari OM! Sadananda. From: V Subrahmanian .. Here is something that I find it difficult to express in English. As you seem to know kannada, I shall write out my understanding about the basic avidya thus: Vidye illaddu avidyeyalla. Vidyeyalladdu avidye. (In English it may be put as 'Non-vidya' or no-vidya is not avidya but it is 'not-vidya' which is avidya) __________________________________________________ _______________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/g...ave/direct/01/ |
| |||
| Re: Bhaskar ji's question on adhyasa - 12-29-2005, 01:23 AM Dear Bhaskarji: Humble praNAms Sri V. Subramamanian prabhuji Hare Krishna Kindly allow me to share my understanding. VS prabhuji: In the Adhyasabhashya Shankara raises the question: Ko'yam Adhyaso naameti? What is this Adhyasa? Reply: Smriti rupaH paratra purvadrsta-avabhasaH = It is a cognition of the nature of recollection of something seen before. He further says: tathaa cha loke anubhavaH -shuktikaa hi rajatavat avabhasate, ekaschandra sa-dvitiiyavaditi.= there is this experience in the worldly parlance: the mother-of-pearl appears as silver, the moon that is really one, appears to be one with an other moon. bhaskar : First, kindly accept my heartfelt praNAms to you prabhuji, for quoting shankara bhAshya..(nowadays it is indeed a very rare thing to see in this list!!!) Now, coming back to the point, yes, shankara says adhyAsa is nothing but paratra pUrvadrustA avabhAsaH...but question needs to be asked here is *at the first place why this cognition of *something else* taking place here?? If we have the right knowledge of shuktika, there is no question of *cognition* of rajata in place of shuktika right prabhuji!!....shankara trying to draw our attention here to that point..i.e. *misconception* of mother of pearl...this misconception (adhyAsa) is what shankara trying to clarify here...AND NOT the *cognition* of pearl per se.... In short, shankara's insistence here is adhyAsa/avidya about mother of pearl and not the *perception* of silver. Perception of silver taking place due to our ignorance regarding mother of pearl..Here misconception (adhyAsa/avidyA) about shuktikA comes first, subsequently resultant cognition of something else takes place..in the above case it is silver. Further, here misconception is subjective and cognition is objective. VS prabhuji: From this we see that Shankara uses the word avabhasa to mean adhyasa and maintains it in the example too. In the example it can be said: a person 'sees' silver where there is shuktikaa. bhaskar : yes, and it is coz. of adhyAsa about shuktikA. VS prabhuji: Shankara does not distinguish between adhyasa and adhyaropa. When something has to 'appear' to a person, he must be only 'seeing' it. bhaskar : Yes prabhuji, but as you know, in drAstrAntika it does not apply..since brahman is not an objective to cognize!! shAstra deliberately attribute certain features which will be rescinded and ultimately it leads us to the realization of the true nature of self. VS prabhuji: Although the term 'adhyaropa' is not used in the adhyasa-bhashya, there are two clear indicators in this portion: Tametam Evam-lakshanam Adhyaasam panditaaH Avidyeti manyante. The Ratnaprabha clarifies: (In the light of our earlier determining 'avabhasa' cognition of one thing as another, as the meaning of adhyasa), adhyasa is termed as avidya because it is avidya kaarya, the effect of ignorance. First there is ignorance of the rope and then this ignorance gives rise to the error: this is a snake. Then, further down in the adhyasabhashya we have a clarification by Acharya himself: Adhyaso Naama Atasmin tad buddhiriti avochama. = We said earlier that Adhyasa is cognising one thing in another, ie. seeing the snake in what is not a snake actually. So from this clarification also we are able to conclude adhyasa is not different from the adhyaropa as defined by you. bhaskar : I hope I've clarified this point above...adhyAsa means misunderstanding , this is the defect of the antaHkaraNa or mind ...due to adhyAsa one mistakes one thing for another that really which does not exist...that false appearance is called adhyArOpa or adhyArOpita..this is what I believe subtle mesg. conveyed by shankara in adhyAsa bhAshya..due to adhyAsa there is adhyArOpa..This can be illustrated as ..the non-dual brahman is misunderstood naturally by the mind such as world or univer etc. this misunderstanding which pertains to the mind/upAdhi is called adhyAsa. And due to this adhyAsa he assumes the brahman as the world this is adhyArOpa. So the world is called adhyArOpita (adhyastha or vikalpita)..(adhyArOpa apavAdAbhyAm nishprapaNchaM prapanchyate). This is ofcourse from the transactional view point. the same has been called as *parataNtra saMvrutti or loukika saMvrutti* in kArikA. While on the subject it is worth to be noted that there are two types of adhyArOpa. One is due to innate avidyA of the common man which we have discussed above and another one is deliberate device adopted by the scriptures to make us to realize the ultimate nondual nature of brahman. This scriptural adhyArOpa is called *kalpita saMvrutti* in kArika. VS prabhuji: As you seem to know kannada, I shall write out my understanding about the basic avidya thus: Vidye illaddu avidyeyalla. Vidyeyalladdu avidye. (In English it may be put as 'Non-vidya' or no-vidya is not avidya but it is 'not-vidya' which is avidya)If it is the former, there can be no explanation for the superimposition/projection, for there will be the defect of 'Abhaavaat bhaavotpattiH' which has been rejected by the Acharya in the Gita bhashya? bhaskar : Not exactly prabhuji...we cannot apply this same rule to every analogy...in the adhyAsa bhAshya itself shankara clarifies this by giving the example of *blueness of sky*...Though *sky* as such will not be there for superimposition..we do superimpose the *blueness* on sky...As you know, shankara takes this analogy to explain how on the *unobjectifiable atman* superimposition can take place!! Please read it in kannada * illi vidye illaddu (abhAva) yemba prashneye baruvudilla...vidye allada avidyeye mUla kAraNa adhyArOpakke*.... VS prabhuji: Does the Acharya make the subjective ? objective difference between adhyasa and adhyaropa as you have shown? In the first definition of adhyasa for koyam adhyaaso question, he said smritirupa????avabhasaH. In the example he said shuktikaa hi rajatavad avabhasate. In the second time recalling of the definition he said: atasmin tad buddhiH is adhyasa. See the consistency in the Acharya's usage of the words. bhaskar : I cannot precisely pinpoint where exactly shankara differentiate the adhyAsa & adhyArOpa..But my guruji while doing bhAshya shAnti has explained how the adhyAsa is different from adhyArOpa which I've explained above to the best of my ability...Anyway, for your ready reference you can check shankara's gItA bhAshya on kshEtra-kshEtrajna vibhAga yOga...wherein shankara puts these two words (adhyAsa/mithAjnAna and adhyArOpa)...he says * adhyArOpita sarparajatAdi saMyOgavat sOtmadhyAsarUpaH kshEtra-kshEtrajna saMyOgO mithyAjnAna lakshaNaH..(better see the original text..my transliteration not good)..Here shankara saying the false appearance of the snake and silver is called adhyArOpita and the misunderstanding is called adhyAsa. Finally, according to my understanding, avidyA is equal to adhyAsa and mAya is adhyArOpita. You can refer sUtra bhAshya AraMbhaNAdhikaraNa also wherein its been said mAya is *avidyAkalpita*. The difference between the adhyAsa and adhyArOpa is very subtle. The misunderstanding is there in the antaHkaraNa in the first place and then he feels a thing that which is not there..somewhere else in sUtra bhAshya (most probably in 4th adhyAya of sUtra...but not sure) shankara uses the words like *pratyEti atra* & *pratItilakshaNArthaH*.. the word *pratyEti atra* shows the adhyArOpa is due to adhyAsa and the word *pratItilakshaNArthaH* showsadhyArOpita, the false appearance. VS prabhuji: Pl come out with your views. After all we are here only to strengthen our understanding. bhaskar : prabhuji, I've dealt with this subject in much more detail earlier when adhyArOpa apavAda was the monthly topic for discussion...I dont know how to get you the link for that mail...I think it must be there in file section...if your time permits kindly go through it & pass on your comments. Humble praNAms onceagain Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar |
Sri Garga-Samhita | Oraciones Selectas al Señor Supremo | Devotees Vaishnavas | Dandavat pranams - All glories to Srila Prabhupada | Dandavat pranams | Santos Católicos | El Mundo del ANTIGUO EGIPTO II | El Antiguo Egipto I |Archivo Cervantes | Neale Donald Walsch | Sivananda Yoga | SWAMIS | Hari Katha | Hinduismo | Biografías
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario