[Advaita-l] Fwd: "time" as defined in Vedanta pariBAsha.

[V Subrahmanian]

Prof.VK ji has left a reply to this thread here:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/advaitin/conversations/messages/68346

regards
subbu

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Chandramouli ji.
>
> Many of the references cited by Prof. Hiriyanna are also quoted by Sri DS
> Subbaramaiya in the Dakshinamurthi stotram Vol 1 (the reference I had sent
> a couple of days ago) - in fact the presentation of the multiple views of
> time is remarkably similar between the two authors.
>
> The nature of time as an effect that Prof. Hiriyanna alludes to (and you
> refer to in your subsequent email) are I believe beautifully described in
> VidyAraNya svAmi's bhAshya of sUta samhita verse 1.8.23 - which I shared
> last evening with this group. He says, "उदित इति न जन्मभिप्रायम् । किन्तु
> मायावत्सदा सद्भावादिति । प्रागसत: सत्तासम्बन्धवाचको ह्युदयशब्द:".
> vidyAraNya with this explanation, beautifully equates the two views of time
> - one as an effect of mAya and the other as a relation between mAya and
> Brahman. The two viewpoints are not as far apart as we initially seem to
> suspect.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 12:59 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan Ji and Sri Praveen Ji,
>>
>>
>>
>> I quote from one of my earlier posts  << Apart from this there are any
>> number of instances where views different from the Bhashya are taken on
>> specific issues while accepting the overall concepts of the Bhashya. When
>> different views prevalent in advaita sidhanta on specific topics are
>> presented in different works, it is not always made clear whether any or
>> all of them are in accordance with the one advanced by Sri Bhagavatpada. I
>> face that difficulty whenever I refer to Sidhantaleshasamgraha of Sri
>> Appayya Dikshitar himself.>>,
>>
>>
>>
>>  Prof Hiriyanna observes in his article  “Advaitic conception of time”  that
>> there are at least four distinct views in extant advaitic works, only one
>> of them having the approval of Sri Bhagavatpada, yet others are not
>> rejected as they do not affect the main point of the doctrine.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.   This view is what Sri Bhagavatpada himself states.
>>
>> Time is an effect (kArya) of avidya or mAya like space
>>
>> ( BSB 2-3-7) << एतेन दिक्कालमनःपरमाण्वादीनां कार्यत्वं व्याख्यातम् । >>
>>
>> (etena dikkAlamanaHparamANvAdInAM kAryatvaM vyAkhyAtam |)
>>
>> Dakshinamurthy stotram stanza 2 << मायाकल्पितदेशकालकलना
>> वैचित्र्यचित्रीकृतम् (mAyAkalpitadeshakAlakalanA
>> vaichitryachitrIkRRitam)>>
>>
>>
>>
>> .  2. Time is not an effect of avidya, but is the relation between it
>> and Brahman.
>>
>> Quote from वन-माला (vana-mAlA)  a commentary on the Bhashya on
>> Taittariya Upanishad, << चिदविद्या-सम्बन्धः कालः >>  (chidavidyA-sambandhaH
>> kAlaH)
>>
>> In this view time falls outside avidya but is dependant upon it which is
>> one of the relata it relates. The significance of this view is that that
>> Time is beginningless although it has an end and ceases to be, along with
>> avidya, when right knowledge is acquired. It is also mithya.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.   Madhusudhana Saraswati  “ Sidhanta-bindu” << कालस्तु अविद्यैव >>
>> (kAlastu avidyaiva)
>>
>> Though this view identifies Time with avidya, Sri Hiriyanna observes that
>> this could be taken to mean that Time is an aspect of avidya and not
>> identical with it. That is,it is the dynamic aspect of avidya. Since avidya
>> and Brahman must be thought of as related so long as we reckon them as two,
>> we should assume that the present view admits that relation in addition to
>> Time.
>>
>>
>>
>> 4.   Time is an aspect (rUpa-bheda) of Brahman itself. This also is from
>>  वन-माला (vana-mAlA)  but is traced there to the authority of
>> Vishnu-purAna. Time is to be explained, in this view, as identical with it,
>> like सत् and चित् (sat and chit ). Like them, it is not what
>> characterizes Brahman but is the very essence of it. That is, by Time here
>> we have to understand eternity. Unlike the earlier three views, kAla is
>> changeless eternity here in which there is no before or after. It is this
>> “aspect” of Brahman that appears as phenomenal time, when viewed from the
>> empirical standpoint.
>>
>>
>>
>> The common aim of the first three explanations is to show that time and
>> change are transcended in the ultimate Reality. The last view implies that
>> the Advaita doctrine has no objection to regard it as real and ultimate,
>> provided its conception is transformed into that of eternity.
>>
>>
>>
>> In the above rendering I have practically copied from Sri Hiriyanna’s
>> article and the wordings are not mine mostly. All the quotes are from his
>> article.
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought this might be of some help.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>