Tag Archives: self

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 3

Posted on by

Explicit rejection of the notion that the world disappears in deep-sleep,

*** Read Part 1 *** *** Read Part 2 ***

Q: So the statement by A. J. Alston is missing the point?

The real point that Śaṅkara is making is that, despite the fact that the mind, and apparently the world, are both absent in deep sleep, awareness (ātman) is always present. Hence, the real substrate of both mind and world is ātman/Brahman. Is this correct and, if so, what does Śaṅkara actually say here (including Sanskrit)?

A: Yes — that is exactly right, and stated that way it becomes clear that Alston’s objection (though sensible at the empirical level) is largely missing Śaṅkara’s point.

Śaṅkara is not arguing from absence of the world to non-existence of the world.
He is arguing from the invariance of awareness across all states to its status as the sole independent reality, with mind and world reduced to dependent manifestations.

Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 2

Posted on by

*** Read Part 1 ***

I decided that, by only making short posts (up to 1500 words) at the rate of one per week, readers might lose the thread (or lose interest) so I will now post longer ones that cover complete questions and answers. So this one is quite long, at over 1800 words.

The Bomb under the Bed

Here is the statement from Śaṅkara (translated by Alston in his book ‘Śaṅkara on the Creation’) that might raise doubts:

“The proposition to be proved is, ‘This whole duality seen by the imagined mind is itself nothing but mind’. The reason advanced is that when the mind is present, duality is also present (agreement, anvaya), and when the mind is not present, duality is not present (difference, vyatireka).” (Gauḍapāda kārikā 3.28-31)

Q: Using the Nyāya logic of anvaya-vyatireka to prove that the waking world is unreal because it disappears in deep-sleep does not seem remotely convincing. Yet Śaṅkara seems to go along with this, despite apparently being a master logician and philosopher. Are you able to explain this? If so, can you break down the argument into simple steps to show how it is possible to justify?

Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 1

Posted on by

Explanation of key terms in Advaita – No. 4

I was not intending to generate a ‘definition’ of the term, since I thought it would be too short. However, a supposed translation from A. J. Alston’s excellent ‘Śaṅkara on Creation’ caused me to question ChatGPT on the subject and the response was very enlightening. Further clarification, and a correction of ChatGPT’s continuing tendency to fabrication, provided some valuable insights into our perennial discussions on the supposed disappearance of the world on enlightenment and on the supposed Brahman-equivalence of the deep-sleep state. Any readers who still try to maintain those beliefs should perhaps skip these posts. (The thought that the topic would be too short has been proved wrong – there will now be up to 6 parts to the discussion! But I promise that it is an interesting one!)

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 6)

Posted on by

Part 5

Chapter 8 Merging of the mind
The chapter is meant for a seeker who has completed sravan and manan and is engaged in nidhidhyasana. He is convinced that his true nature is consciousness which is complete. Though he has contentment and peace, due to habits formed over many births, there is contrary thinking off and on. It is viprit bhavana. There is a tendency to make efforts to get over this because people are attached to the idea of cause and effect (8.5). The author says that he has composed a dialogue (chapter 8) between Self and mind to convince the seeker that viprit bhavana does not affect at all the true nature (consciousness) of the seeker. Let viprit bhavana which is due to prarabdha take its own course. The author has earlier (4.3) clarified that prarabdha has the capacity to overpower knowledge and it comes to end with death. In Naiskrama-Siddhi, Suresvaracharaya says that jnana removes avidya but not avidya vasana. However, when avidya vasana raises its head, jnana vasana also operates to neutralize it.

Continue reading →

Adhyāsa

Posted on by

Explanation of key terms in Advaita – No. 2

If adhyāropa-apavāda is the most important term regarding the teaching method of Advata, adhyāsa is the most important term describing the essence of the teaching.

Adhyāsa: The Fundamental Error of Mistaken Identity

In the study of Advaita Vedānta, the term adhyāsa is arguably the most critical concept to grasp if one is to understand the human condition and the path to liberation. Often translated as “superimposition,” adhyāsa refers to the fundamental mistake of apprehending one thing as something else. It is the cognitive error of mixing up what is real (sat) with what is only apparently real (mithyā), thereby creating a sense of confusion that defines our everyday experience. This concept is so pivotal that Ādi Śaṅkara devoted the entire introduction of his commentary on the Brahmasūtras—known as the Adhyāsa Bhāṣya—to explaining its mechanics and implications.

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part14)

Posted on by

Part 13

Part 15

Chapter 4 Section 3 4.3.1 to 4.3.5                                                                                  In a series of questions Janaka asks YVK about the lights which a person uses for worldly transactions. Most obvious is the sunlight. When sun has set, it is the moonlight. When both sun and moon have set (Amavasya), it is the light of fire. When sun, moon, fire are unavailable, speech serves as the light to transact. Speech (sound) includes odour.

Continue reading →

Chandogya Upanishad (Chapters 6 to 8) Part 13

Posted on by

Part 12

Part 14

Chapter 8 Sections 10 (8.10.1 to 8.10.4), 11 (8.11.1 to 8.11.3), and 12 (8.12.1 to 8.12.6)
Impressions are formed on the mind during waking state. These impressions are projected by the mind during dream. The dreamer jiva is different from the waking jiva. For the dreamer, the dream is as real as the world in the waking state is for the waking jiva. Brahmaji says that the one who moves around in the dream is Atma. He is fearless, immortal. He is Brahman. He is referring to consciousness blessed by which the mind functions. However, Indra wrongly takes the dreamer as Atma because he thinks that the dreamer is not affected by the afflictions of the waking state. He leaves satisfied. On his way back, he doubts his understanding. The dreamer too changes and suffers in the dream. It cannot be immortal and fearless Atma. He returns to Brahmaji and expresses his doubt. Brahmaji confirms his doubt and agrees to teach further on the condition that Indra lives in the gurukul for another 32 years. Indra lives for another 32 years.

Continue reading →

Upadesa Sahasri (Part 5)

Posted on by

Part 4

Chapter 6 Negation of attributes                                                                                     6.1 to 6.3 The author has earlier explained the method of negation (of objects) whereby Self is revealed. In this chapter, it is explained that negation of objects also means negation of attributes. Attribute is distinct from nature. That fire is hot is its nature and does not change. There is no cold fire. Smokiness is the attribute of a smoky fire. Attribute is a qualification and a limitation. The whiteness of a white cow is a limitation because it excludes all other colours. Since infiniteness is the very nature of Self, It is attribute- free. It is the ultimate subject and is the only entity having no attributes.   

Continue reading →

Upadesa SAhasrI (Part 3)

Posted on by

Part 2

Part 4

Chapter 2 Negation
2.1 to 2.4                                                                                                                        Sruti (Br Up 2.3.6) says: Not this, not this. Self is the left over after negation of everything, i.e., objects of experience. As they are mithyA and changing, they are negated to realize the unchanging remainder. This remainder, the negator cannot be negated. It is the Self and is of the nature of consciousness. It is the true nature of the negator. Self cannot be negated because it is based on pramAna (evidence). Self is the ultimate subject and is the reality. It has an independent existence. Objects are non-Self and are mithyA.

Continue reading →

BrihadAranyaka Upanishad (Part 8)

Posted on by

Part 7

Part 9

Chapter 2 Section 5.                                                                                                    Introduction                                                                                                                     The section is called Madhu Brahman because the word Madhu which means honey or helpful occurs repeatedly in it. The madhu vidya of ChAndogya Upaniṣad is Surya upAsanA. In Br Up it refers to Atma vidya or Brahma vidya. There are different techniques by which the Upanishads teach the knowledge of the Self. One method is creator and creation. Brahman is the creator. and world is the creation. This has been talked about earlier. Madhu Brahman uses the method of inter-dependence among worldly objects. They are mutually dependent and are mithyA. Therefore, there must be some entity outside the world which lends existence to the worldly objects. This entity is Brahman or the Self. The Upanishad also says that Brahman only appears as the world like gold appearing as ornaments. The ornaments are names and forms. Similarly, the world of multiplicity are names and forms. Brahman is all pervading and is present in a jIva as also in all other worldly objects. If a person understands this, he knows all and becomes immortal.

Continue reading →