Tag Archives: shankara

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

*** 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 →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 4 (Isha)

Posted on by
Reply

[Part – 3 (Isha)]

The first step is to notice “the Universal” present in the diversity of the objects. Name, form and action are the particulars of Beingness-Knowingness. Noticing the Beingness-Knowingness is like seeing the all-pervading gold in the ornaments. By this process, we will know the substratum.

The second step is to realize that AtmA modulates Itself in the form of all the objects. That means one sees the diversity as the manifested forms of AtmA. In the first step, the intrinsic nature of all the objects is grasped. In the second step, different objects are perceived to be different appearances of the AtmA. This is akin to realizing that it is Gold itself which appears in different forms as ornaments. 

Such a process helps us understand the play of AtmA in this world. We recognize the world as AtmA. We realize that all that is seen is AtmA and it is AtmA which appears as all the things. The experiential understanding will be that everything in the world is “My form” and all forms are “Me.”   Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 1

Posted on by
6

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 →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 3 (Isha)

Posted on by
10

[Part – 2 (Isha)]

The Upanishad says:

अनेजदेकं मनसो जवीयो नैनद्देवा आप्नुवन्पूर्वमर्षत् । 
तद्धावतोऽन्यानत्येति तिष्ठत्तस्मिन्नपो मातरिश्वा दधाति ॥        —  mantra 4, IshAvAsya upa.

[Meaning: It is unmoving, One, and faster than the mind. The senses could not overtake It, since It ran ahead. Remaining stationary, It outruns all other runners. It being there, MAtarisvA allots (or supports) all activities. (Trans: Swami Gambhirananda).]

We need not look at the Lord and AtmA as mutually contradictory or conflicting. The verbal expression may seem superficially contradictory like an oxymoron, but if one probes deeper, the implied meaning will be clear. Therefore, one may say that AtmA is alone, absolutely steady and unmoving; but also say at the same time that It can move faster than even the mind. 

On one hand AtmA can be described to be formless; on the other hand, one may say that AtmA has manifested as the manifold (in a multiplicity of forms). When It is One with no second, It is the AtmA with no adjuncts and when It appears as the world, It is the Lord (Ishwara) having many forms.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 2 (Isha)

Posted on by
6

 [Part – 1 (Isha)]

असुर्या नाम ते लोका अन्धेन तमसा वृताः । 
तांस्ते प्रेत्याभिगच्छन्ति ये के चात्महनो जनाः ॥   —  mantra 3, IshAvAsya upa.

[Meaning:   Those worlds of devils are covered by blinding darkness. Those people that kill the Self go to them after giving up this body. (Translation: Swami Gambhirananda, 1957).]

The Upanishad counters the argument of the Mimamsakars saying that it is not a worthy stand to take, for it is tantamount to killing one’s Atma. AtmA is none other than what the Upanishad has been describing as the Lord. 

How can the Lord be the same as AtmA?

AtmA is the generic name. It denotes the intrinsic nature as explained by Shankara in his commentary on brahma sUtra-s.  Continue reading →

Quintessence of 10 Upanishads – 1 (Isha)

Posted on by
8

bhASyakAra bhagavatpAda Shri Shankara’s exhaustive commentaries on the 10 Major Upanishads constitute the first leg on the journey of imparting the Non-dual Wisdom to an eligible student seeking eternal Freedom (mokSa) from being reborn in the world. They form the Instructional core (upadesha prasthAna) of the Non-dual message. Late Shri Yellamraju Srinivasa Rao (YSR), a well-known Advaitin, gave extensive Talks in Telugu on each of these 10 Upanishads adhering strictly to Shankara’s bhASya (commentary). He also supplemented his discourses on each of the 10 Upanishads with a 90-min Talk summarizing the content of that specific Upanishad (thus a total of about 900 minutes on Summaries).

I rendered into English Shri YSR’s Talks on the Summaries and edited them slightly for brevity etc. I offer them here for the benefit of any interested seeker for his/her personal use only for study, reflection and deep contemplative meditation. They may not be used for any commercial purposes. Continue reading →

Akhaṇḍākāra Vṛtti

Posted on by
Reply

I wrote last week that I have set up a NotebookLM database of all my books and writing for the past 25 years+ and I invited readers to submit any (Advaita!) questions on which they would like to read my ‘considered’ views. I have not had many (any) requests, so hear is another one I made myself. There are a number of points with which I would now take issue and I refer to these after the answer.

Q2. What is the nature of the akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti and how does this affirm that there is nothing else to be done after gaining the intellectual conviction that ‘I am Brahman’? Are there any quotes from Śaṅkara to support this?

A (AI-Dennis): The concept of the akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti is pivotal in Advaita Vedānta as it defines the precise mental event through which Self-ignorance (avidyā) is destroyed, affirming the completeness of the liberation gained through knowledge.

Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Part 5)

Posted on by

*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 4 ***

Q: A few comments:

Given that Advaita tells us that sarvam khalvidam brahma, that means that you are also Consciousness. And the teaching of karma and reincarnation tells us that a plant and an animal are jīva-s just as much as is a human. The ability of a plant to respond to external stimuli is much less than is your own, while your effective intelligence is much greater than most humans.

A jīva needs to be ‘alive’ in order to function in a ‘self-aware’, intelligently responsive manner. But what does ‘alive’ mean here? And how does that differ from an AI LLM needing electricity and coolant in order to function. Is the organic, neurochemical operation more than functionally different from the inorganic, electronic operation of a microprocessor?

How would Advaita cope with these sort of questions? Are you sure you are not conscious?

Continue reading →

The jñānī after enlightenment

Posted on by

In my last post – The Barren World – Venkat and Michael made some comments about the status of the jñānī after enlightenment and I suggested that we make this the subject of another post so as not to confuse the issues.

Conicidentally, Sri V Subrahmanian has just made the following post to the Advaitin List. In it he lists numerous quotations from the scriptures and Shankara which clearly indicate the continuance of the world and the jñānī ‘s continued activity in it. I thought that this could form the basis of any further discussion on this aspect and Subbu-ji has kindly agreed for me to post it here.

Continue reading →

World disappearing and mithyā

Posted on by

Not a lot of discussion on the site recently. I thought maybe the time was ripe for a little controversy again. Recently I queried ChatGPT for Shankara references on this topic. I also encountered just a few days ago, a devastatingly logical argument against this idea, but I will save that for a later post. Here is the (single post) AI contribution. Of course, you may argue, AI is presenting its position so as to support my own view – a recognized problem with AI at present). Perhaps, then, Ramesam or Venkat could tackle AI with essentially the same query to elicit a response in keeping with their belief? That would be interesting!

Q: Where does Shankara define what he means by the word मिथ्या and what does he say?

A (ChatGPT): Adi Shankaracharya, the great Advaita Vedanta philosopher, defines the concept of mithyā in several of his works, particularly in his commentaries on key Vedantic texts. The term “mithyā” generally refers to the idea of falsity or illusoriness. It’s crucial in Advaita Vedanta because it relates to the nature of the phenomenal world and how it is perceived in relation to the ultimate reality, Brahman.

One of the most explicit definitions of mithyā is found in Shankaracharya’s commentary on the Brahma Sutra (Brahmasutra Bhashya) in the section known as the Adhyasa Bhashya. Here, he describes mithyā as something that is neither completely real (like Brahman) nor completely unreal (like the horns of a hare), but rather something that appears real under certain conditions but is revealed as unreal upon closer examination or when true knowledge is attained.

Continue reading →