[Advaita-l] Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

> 
> Reading your messages I have some doubts. According to Advaita Vedanta
> of Adi Sankara -
> 
> Sankhya = Vedanta
> 
> OR
> 
> Sankhya = Sravana + Manana + Nididhyasana

In all the posts from Yoga and Advaita Vedanta - 0 to 10, where have I said anything
that could may make you think that sAMkhya = SravaNa-manana-nididhyAsana?
 
What I have said is this. The bRhadAraNyaka sentence, "AtmA vA are drashTavyaS
Srotavyo mantavyo nididhyAsitavyaH" has been quoted in two significant places in
sUtrabhAshya in the context of yoga - once as "yogo vede vihitaH" (2.1.3) and once
as "samAdhir upadishTo vedAnteshu" (2.3.39). From where does a confusion arise
about whether this is sAMkhya?
 
Again, where have I given any room for thinking that as per Sankara bhagavatpAda, 
sAMkhya = vedAnta in a completely unreserved manner, with no qualifications or
caveats whatsoever?

What I have said, quoting sUtrabhAshya and other bhAshyas, is this. If sAMkhya
were to give up the contention that prakRti/pradhAna is an independent, purely
material reality, and instead say that it is a conscious entity, then it would have
to become equivalent to vedAnta. Or if it were to say that prakRti is a Sakti that
operates under the control of one conscious reality, then too it would become a
kind of vedAnta. This is because, under such changed scenarios in thinking about
prakRti, sAMkhya will have to investigate what consciousness really means and
 will be forced to give up its theory of multiple independent purusha-s as well,
accepting instead that there is only one ultimate reality. Under such changes,
they might as well simply accept the upanishadic teaching of brahman and
become vedAnta instead.
 
That said, within advaita vedAnta, once we start talking of vyavahAra, there is
absolutely no fault in using sAMkhya language, categories and conclusions where
necessary, because the vedAntin knows very well how to accommodate sAMkhya
and how to set aside those portions of that darSana that conflict with upanishad-s.
 
> 
> What is correct?
> 
> Yoga = Sravana + Manana + Nididhyasana
> 
> OR
> 
> Yoga = Sravana + Manana + Nididhyasana + Yogic Practice like Asana,
> Pranayama, Dharana, Dhyana and Samadhi
> 
> Which is correct?
> 

Already answered in the second paragraph of my response above. In addition, when
sUtrabhAshya 2.1.3 says vaidikam eva jnAnaM dhyAnaM ca with respect to sAMkhya
and yoga, it refers to the jnAna imparted through SravaNa of aupanishada AtmajnAna
and to the dhyAna involved in manana and nididhyAsana on the Sruti vAkya-s that
convey said jnAna. Yogic practices like yama, niyama, Asana etc are fully accepted as
aids in this process. jnAna sahakAri kAraNatvAt, says bhagavatpAda in chapter 13 of
the gItAbhAshya, when talking of the amAnitvAdi guNa-s. And if you look under the 
bhAshya on chapter 2 for sthitaprajna lakshaNa-s and the entire chapter 6, you will
find that dhyAna yoga is seen as an inseparable and integral part (antaranga) of
Atma-jnAna-nishThA.
 
Regards,
Vidyasankar