[Advaita-l] avidya is Agantuka

[Ravi Kiran]

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:21 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Sri Subrahmanian Ji observed
>
>
> << So, there is nothing wrong in admitting avidyā (manifested avidyā) to be
> adventitious, just like kāma and karma.  Anandagiri's purport is: avidyā is
> anādi and hence cannot be said to be āgantuka. Yet, its manifested form is
> āgantuka. >> .
>
>
> Sri Ravi Kiran Ji wanted to know if there is any other similar reference
> elsewhere in Shruti/Bhashya to the observation made in this portion of BU
> that अविद्या ( avidyā ) is आगन्तुक ( āgantuka) . I understood avidyā in
> this query  as referring to Avidyā ( with Capital A ) only as otherwise
> there was really no need to refer to Shruti/Bhashyam since manifest form of
> Avidyā is always āgantuka only. ( Ofcourse only Sri Ravi Kiran JI has to
> confirm if this understanding is correct or not ) .


We have studied - avidyA is anAdi - in advaitic texts

Hence, when come across this bhAshyam in Br.Up 4.3.22, was interested to
understand the purport behind the bhAshyakAra's statement and its
references in other places..


> Hence I checked to see
> if there is any further clarification in the Bhashyam itself on this issue.
> In my understanding the Bhashyam does indeed cover this aspect and
> clarifies that the manifest form of Avidyā  only is intended and that
> manifest form is ऐकीभावः ( एकीभावाद्धेतोः ).
>

Sorry, I am unable to get this same understanding from the above bhAshyam,
as the main discussion is not about Avidya or manifest form of Avidya, but
regarding the self effulgence of Atman -  though the Atman is
Self-effulgent ( by nature), why it is not perceived in deep sleep? and
explanation is given as , because of ऐकीभावः ( एकीभावाद्धेतोः ) .


>
>
> Regards
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 3:02 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 1:04 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Sri Ravi Kiran Ji,
> >>
> >>
> >> Reg << In the bhashyam to Br.Up.4.3.22, it is said that ..
> >>
> >> प्रकृतः स्वयञ्ज्योतिरात्मा अविद्याकामकर्मविनिर्मुक्त इत्युक्तम्,
> >> असङ्गत्वादात्मनः, आगन्तुकत्वाच्च तेषाम् ।
> >>
> >> It has been said that the self-effulgent Ātman which is being described
> is
> >> free from ignorance, desire and work, for it is unattached, while they
> are
> >> adventitious. >> ,
> >>
> >>
> >> This is followedup in the Bhashyam by the following
> >>
> >>
> >> << तत्र एवमाशङ्का जायते ; चैतन्यस्वभावत्वे सत्यपि एकीभावात् न जानाति
> >> स्त्रीपुंसयोरिव सम्परिष्वक्तयोरित्युक्तम् ; तत्र प्रासङ्गिकम् एतत्
> उक्तम्
> >> —
> >> कामकर्मादिवत् स्वयञ्ज्योतिष्ट्वमपि अस्य आत्मना न स्वभावः, यस्मात्
> >> सम्प्रसादे नोपलभ्यते — इत्याशङ्कायां प्राप्तायाम्, तन्निराकरणाय,
> >> स्त्रीपुंसयोर्दृष्टान्तोपादानेन, विद्यमानस्यैव स्वयञ्ज्योतिष्ट्वस्य
> >> सुषुप्ते अग्रहणम् एकीभावाद्धेतोः, न तु कामकर्मादिवत् आगन्तुकम्   >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ( Translation by Swami Madhavananda ) << Here an objection is raised.
> The
> >> Shruti has said that although the Self is Pure Intelligence, it does not
> >> know anything ( in the state of profound sleep ) on account of its
> >> attaining unity, as in the case of a couple in each other's embrace. The
> >> Shruti has thereby practically said that like desire, work etc, the
> >> selfeffulgence of the Atman is not its true nature, since it is not
> >> perceived in the state of profound sleep. This objection is refuted by a
> >> reference to the illustration of the couple in each other's embrace ,
> and
> >> it is asserted that the selfeffulgence is certainly present in profound
> >> sleep , but it is not perceived on account of unity ; it is not
> >> advetituous
> >> like desire, work etc. >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Note the concluding sentence. << न तु कामकर्मादिवत् आगन्तुकम्  >> . The
> >> Bhashyam clearly asserts that Avidya ( nonperception ) is not
> adventituous
> >> ( आगन्तुकम् ) like desire,work etc.
> >>
> >
> > In the  bhāṣya sentences we can perceive these points:
> >
> > 1.  //प्रकृतः स्वयञ्ज्योतिरात्मा अविद्याकामकर्मविनिर्मुक्त इत्युक्तम्,
> > असङ्गत्वादात्मनः, आगन्तुकत्वाच्च तेषाम् ।//
> >
> > avidyā, kāma and karma - three entities have been listed.  आगन्तुकत्वाच्च
> > तेषाम्  shows that all the three are included since the word 'teṣām' is
> in
> > plural (more than two). If avidyā were to be excluded, the word to convey
> > that would have been: tayoḥ.
> >
> > Apart from that, even in << न तु कामकर्मादिवत् आगन्तुकम्  >> the word
> > 'ādi' after kāma and karma stands for some entity, and that, as per the
> > context, is avidyā. So, the bhāṣyam is not excluding avidyā from the list
> > even here.
> >
> > Also, Anandagiri, in his gloss to the above says:
> >
> > यद्यपि न आगन्तुकत्वमविद्यायाः न युक्तम्, तथापि अभिव्यक्ता सा अनर्थहेतुः
> > आगन्तुकी इति द्रष्टव्यम् ।
> >
> > // Even though the adventitiousness of avidyā is not reasonable, yet, the
> > manifestation of avidyā, that is the cause of all trouble, is definitely
> > adventitious. Thus is to be understood.//
> >
> > So, there is nothing wrong in admitting avidyā (manifested avidyā) to be
> > adventitious, just like kāma and karma.  Anandagiri's purport is: avidyā
> is
> > anādi and hence cannot be said to be āgantuka. Yet, its manifested form
> is
> > āgantuka.
> >
> > regards
> > subrahmanian.v
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Hence I in my understanding it is not correct to interpret the Bhashyam
> as
> >> suggesting that Avidya is आगन्तुकम् ( adventituous ).
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Namaste Sri Chandramouli Ji
> >> >
> >> > I had noted your references in earlier e-mail, but had not got chance
> to
> >> > check the same (in the bhashyam and the context in which it is
> stated),
> >> for
> >> > the mention of avidya as Agantuka ..Thanks for the clarification
> >> >
> >> > As we can see in Br.Up bhAshyam, it is said that the svayam jyotistvam
> >> of
> >> > Atman is not perceived in sushupti, due to ekibhAvam
> >> >
> >> > ** स्वयञ्ज्योतिष्ट्वस्य सुषुप्ते अग्रहणम् एकीभावाद्धेतोः, न तु
> >> > कामकर्मादिवत् आगन्तुकम्
> >> >
> >> > In that line, it is said while avidya is Agantuka, svayam jyotistvam
> is
> >> > not, as it is the very innate nature of Atman.
> >> >
> >> > It further states - self-effulgent Atman (in sushupti) is free from
> >> > avidya-kAma-karma
> >> >
> >> > ** अविद्याकामकर्मविनिर्मुक्तमेव तद्रूपम्, यत् सुषुप्ते आत्मनो गृह्यते
> >> > प्रत्यक्षत इति
> >> >
> >> > In this line of thought, was interested to see further
> refs/elaboration
> >> > regarding this mention.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 4:00 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> >> hschandramouli at gmail.com
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Sri Ravi Kiran Ji,
> >> >>
> >> >> Have I misundrestood your question when I had replied earlier ?? Does
> >> >> your question pertain to the reasons advanced , namely  << for it is
> >> >> unattached, while they are
> >> >> adventitious. >> , being repeated elsewhere ( shruti/bhashyam ) ?? If
> >> so
> >> >> , of course my earlier response does not address the question.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Ravi Kiran via Advaita-l <
> >> >> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Namaste
> >> >>>
> >> >>> In the bhashyam to Br.Up.4.3.22, it is said that ..
> >> >>>
> >> >>> प्रकृतः स्वयञ्ज्योतिरात्मा अविद्याकामकर्मविनिर्मुक्त इत्युक्तम्,
> >> >>> असङ्गत्वादात्मनः, आगन्तुकत्वाच्च तेषाम् ।
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It has been said that the self-effulgent Ātman which is being
> >> described
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> free from ignorance, desire and work, for it is unattached, while
> they
> >> >>> are
> >> >>> adventitious.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Are there any other places (Sruti / bhashyam ), where we can find
> such
> >> >>> mention ?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> >> >>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >> >>>
> >> >>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> >> >>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >> >>>
> >> >>> For assistance, contact:
> >> >>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> >> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> >> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >>
> >> For assistance, contact:
> >> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>