[Advaita-l] AN UNREAL CAUSE CAN BRING ABOUT A REAL EFFECT

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear Karthik,

As an after thought, I am presenting some more inputs with regard to the
conversation that you have appended in your post below.

In a recent thread we had occasion to read this:

For, we have in the 'VivekachUDamaNi' of
Shankaracharya ample evidence to say 'anubhava' is a
pramaaNa:
स्वस्याविद्या-बन्ध-सम्बन्धमोक्षात्
सत्यज्ञानानन्दरूपात्मलब्धौ ।
शास्त्रं युक्तिर्देशिकोक्तिः प्रमाणं
चानतःसिद्धा स्वानुभूतिः प्रमाणम् ॥ 475

//In the realisation of the Atman, the Existence-Knowledge-Bliss Absolute,
through the breaking of one’s connection with the bondage of Avidya or
ignorance, the Scriptures, reasoning and the words of the Guru are the
proofs, while one’s own experience earned by concentrating the mind is
another proof.//

The Jivanmukta Acharya HH Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati SwaminaH comments:

अन्तः सिद्धा शास्त्रयुक्तिगुरूक्त्यनुरूपा स्वानुभूतिश्च प्रमाणम् ।  [The
experience that has arisen in accordance with the scripture, logic and the
teaching of the Guru (all other pramANams) is also pramANam.]

[In fact only this 'anubhava' alone confirms to the jijnAsu that his jijnAsA
has ended.]

The Acharya introduces the next set of a few verses with the words:

उक्तार्थे दृष्टान्तार्थं अनुभवप्रमाणकानन्यानप्याह् [ In testimony of the
above some more 'proofs' that are non-different from anubhava pramANa are
being stated]

476.Bondage, liberation, satisfaction, anxiety, recovery from illness,
hunger and other such things are known only to the man concerned, and
knowledge of these to others is a mere inference.

 477. The Gurus as well as the Shrutis instruct the disciple, standing
aloof; while the man of realisation crosses (Avidya) through Illumination
alone, backed by the grace of God.

478. Himself knowing his indivisible Self through his own realisation and
thus becoming perfect, a man should stand face to face with the Atman, with
his mind free from dualistic ideas.

My recalling the above is with a purpose to show that this has a close
connection
with what the Sringeri Acharya has said in the excerpt you have
reproduced.  There
the Acharya says:

// No effort is necessary for perceiving the Self but effort is
necessary to get over the non-perception of it.//

In the VivekachUDamaNi commentary He says:

अन्तः सिद्धा शास्त्रयुक्तिगुरूक्त्यनुरूपा स्वानुभूतिश्च प्रमाणम् ।  [The
experience that has arisen in accordance with the scripture, logic and the
teaching of the Guru (all other pramANams) is also pramANam.]


There might arise a doubt about a contradiction. The experience that He is
talking about as a 'pramANam' is the one that has 'arisen' in accordance
with the Veda and Acharya upadesha.  While the Atman is ever shining and
does not need to be realized, what is the role of this pramANa, the anubhava?
It is required to dispel avidya and forms the last step in the jijnAsA
process.  It is this anubhava that is spoken of in the Bhashya to the Mandukya
Upanishad:

ज्ञानस्य द्वैतनिवृत्तिक्षणव्यतिरेकेण क्षणान्तर-अनवस्थानात् ।  अवस्थाने च

अनवस्थाप्रसङ्गात् द्वैत-अनिवृत्तेः ।

[Knowledge, as a mental state, vRtti, does not continue for a second moment
following that of the cessation of duality.  Should it, however,
continue, it will lead to
infinite regress resulting in non-cessation of duality. ]

In this bashya, the Acharya uses a word 'jnAnasya'.  And says that it
does  not continue
for even a second after it has arisen and has effected the cessation
of duality.  Why should a
jnAna arise for the cessation of duality and why should it cease to
continue after it has done its
job? Why does the Acharya call this a 'jnAnam' when Brahman/Atman is
Itself Jnanam that will
never cease to be?  The Acharya is limiting the experience to a
'kShaNa' after which it ceases to
be, thereby specifying a 'kAlaparimiti' to the avidyA-nivAraka vRtti.

The 'anubhava' spoken of by the Sringeri Acharya is what is depicted
by the word 'jnAnasya' above.  Thus, although
Atman is ever shining, a specific jnAnam is required to make the
paroksha jnAna aparoksha.  Although the Nitya Atma SvarUpa Jnanam
need not and cannot be produced, yet in order to eradicate avidya an
AtmAkAra VRtti is required which arises, dispels avidya
and remains no longer as a vRtti.  This is said in the Mandukya
bhAshya by the words:  ज्ञानस्य द्वैतनिवृत्तिक्षणव्यतिरेकेण
क्षणान्तर-अनवस्थानात् .

This vRtti is also called in the above bhashyam as 'jnAnam' only by
courtesy, aupachArika, because it is this
jnAnAkAra vRtti that destroys avidya.

The Bhashya for the sutra `lingAccha' (IV.i.2):
bhaved…..brahmAtmatvam anubhavitum shaknuyAt. (an experience of
Brahman-Atman is possible). Yadyapi pratipattavya Atmaa niramshaH (
even though the Atman that has to be `realized' is without parts….)

tattu pUrvarUpameva AtmapratipatteH (that, however, is before the
realization of Atman).   yeShAm punaH nipuNamatInAm….tattvamasi
vaakyArtham anubhavitum (those endowed with a sharp intellect… it is
possible for experiencing the meaning of the sentence tat tvam asi

even when once taught).  Sakrit utpannaiva hi AtmapratipattiH
avidyAm nivartayati (when this Atman-experience arises even just
once, it destroys ignorance).

यस्य तु नैषोऽनुभवः द्रागिव जायते तं प्रति अनुभवार्थ एव आवृत्त्यभ्युपगमः ।

[But to whom this experience does not arise promptly, this very
repetition is for bringing about this experience.]

All the effort that the Sringeri Acharya has spoken about is only to
'cause' this Atman-experience to happen, just once.

Returning to the city-guide analogy: The guide is required to provide me
all information about my destination. Unless I reach the destination
the journey is not over.  The city-guide is just sufficient to enable me
proceed further.  But my reaching the destination, with the guidance received,
is what is necessary to terminate my journey.

The Veda is sufficient to put me on the journey.  But my attaining the
anubhava, in accordance with the Veda, is necessary to terminate,
culminate, my Brahma jijnAsaa.

Best regards,
subrahmanian.v





On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:16 AM, S Jayanarayanan <sjayana at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> It cannot. H.H. Chandrasekhara Bharati Mahaswamigal of Sringeri says quite
> emphatically that the Absolute cannot "become realized" - because IT is
> ALWAYS KNOWN. The Self is always shining with true Wisdom, so only Avidya
> can be removed.
>
> (Extract of a Talk from "The Saint of Sringeri", page 236)
> ---
> Disciple: If the Self is this ever existing and ever shining, where is the
> need for any effort to realise it?
>
> H.H.: Certainly there is no need at all.
>
> Disciple: But we do not perceive the Self now. How can it be said that no
> effort is required?
>
> H.H.: If it is not perceived, effort is required to get rid of that
> non-perception. No effort is necessary for perceiving the Self but effort is
> necessary to get over the non-perception of it.
>
> Disciple: Does this not mean virtually that effort is necessary for
> perceiving the Self?
>
> H.H.: No. The destruction of Avidya is alone the result of effort. ALL
> KINDS OF SPIRITUAL EFFORT DETAILED IN THE VEDAS ARE AIMED ONLY AT DESTROYING
> AVIDYA AND NOT AS MEANS OF REALISING THE SELF.
> ---
>
> Note that H.H. firmly takes the stand that the Self is ***EVER-SHINING AND
> ALWAYS KNOWN***.
>
>
>