[Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?T

Venkatraghavan S agnimile at gmail.com
Sat Sep 24 13:35:56 CDT 2016
Previous message: [Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?T
Next message: [Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?T
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Very true SadAji.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 24 Sep 2016 4:38 p.m., "kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> PraNAms
>
> Just reading some mails on the topic.
>
> Yes, jnaani sleeps as jnaani and ajnaani sleeps as ajnaani. The sleep is
> the absence of subject-object duality as anandamaya kosha is there for both.
>
> Just one thought.
>
> From thermodynamics there is no 100% purity as in there is no 100% pure
> gold. It is always 99.999999...%.
>
> Similarly jnaanan involve first paroxa jnaanam and for it to become
> aparoxa jnaanam purity of the mind is needed. It is not a discrete event
> since there is no 100% purity. Hence Swami Paramarthanandaji calls it as
> FIR reduction - F frequency of perturbation from the samatva dRishTi, I is
> the intensity of disturbance and R-recovery time from perturbation - FIR
> gets reduced as one abides in the knowledge of aham brahmaasmi.
>
> Hence 100% jnaani is not there and therefore one can still say there is
> identification with BMI can be there which gets reduced.
>
> My 2c
>
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
> *To:* Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 24, 2016 6:13 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and
> avidhya ?T
>
> Yes, that seed where all knowledge is resolved into potential form
> (prajnAnaghana) and all objects are resolved into potential form (ekIbhUta)
> is there as long as prArabdha is there. That is why a jnAni wakes up as a
> jnAni - his kAraNa sharIra has that Atma jnAna in its resolved, potential
> form.
>
> So the three avasthAs continue as normal even after jnAna, until the
> fructified prArabdha is resolved and all three bodies go back to their
> source.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On 24 Sep 2016 10:54 a.m., "Ravi Kiran" <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Venkatraghavan Ji
> >
> > Understand from paramArthika dRSTi ( paramArtha jnAna standpoint, which
> is
> > the only real view ), there is no avidyA ( either as agrahana or kinchit
> > bhAva rUpa), no more questions or answers :)
> >
> > But, the discussion here is from the sabeeja sath (or tinged Brahman) in
> > the context of deep sleep/creation, by admitting the presence of beeja /
> > seed in Brahman. This is mainly to get a better understanding of avidyA
> > locii in Brahman ( kAraNa or sushUpti ) and its possible effects
> > before/after arising of knowledge.
> >
> > Are we saying that avidyA ( which is kinchit bhAva rUpa) is destroyed
> > completely ( in all formats and variants) with the arising of knowledge
> in
> > all 3 periods of time and in all 3 avasthAs ?
> >
> > This would no longer attribute to the presence of any avidyA seed or
> beeja
> > ( as mUlAvidyA or avidyA shakti) in kAraNa or sushUpti ?
> >
> > Or, B) do we admit the presence of seed in sushUpti, even after the
> > arising of knowledge? since avidyA is traikAlika bAdhita for jnAni, he
> > wakes up from sushUpti as jnAni itself, as before. And this seed itself (
> > in kAraNa or sushUpti) is no longer producing any future births, since it
> > is bAdhita/destroyed by arising of knowledge in waking? Here,we are not
> > discussing any further specifics/characteristics about this seed (
> > mUlAvidya or beeja shakti, its destruction?) itself, as it is not
> required
> > and has no tangible effects anymore (seen as mithyA), from jnAni's
> > standpoint.
> >
> > Reading your response below,  it is inclined to the para B above. Pl
> > confirm.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Namaste Ravi Kiran ji,
> >> "jnAni cannot reasonably re-emerge from deep sleep"
> >>
> >> Initially we think moonlight is a thing. Then we realise there is no
> such
> >> thing. Only sunlight is. However, despite knowing it doesn't exist in
> >> reality we continue seeing moonlight.
> >>
> >> The basic principle is that experience cannot invalidate fact. JnAna
> will
> >> not destroy the experience of mithyA, it will only destroy the belief in
> >> its reality.
> >>
> >> Similarly, for the jnAni there is no avidyA in reality, but to answer
> >> questions like the ones you raised we provisionally say until the
> prArabdha
> >> is exhausted,  avidyAlesha is there. He cannot have avidyA because jnAna
> >> has destroyed avidyA, and it's harmful effects like delusion and bondage
> >> are not felt by the jnAni. But the experience of duality continues, so
> we
> >> say it's because of avidyAlesha.
> >>
> >> That is why even after jnAna, we say he wakes up from sushupti as
> before.
> >> After the body falls, avidyAlesha also goes.
> >>
> >> "How does this seed in tinged Brahman itself gets destroyed, after jnAna
> >> prApti ?"
> >>
> >> By the arising of the knowledge that ultimately it never was there,
> >> despite experiencing it's effects. Again we have to apply the principle
> >> that experience cannot invalidate reality. Experience allows us to say
> >> avidyA has kinchit bhAva rUpa, and it's traikAlika bAdha through
> knowledge
> >> allows us to preserve advaita of Brahman.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Venkatraghavan
> >>
> >> On 23 Sep 2016 7:38 p.m., "Ravi Kiran via Advaita-l" <
> >> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ok, if tinged Brahman is accepted in the context of deep
> sleep/creation (
> >>> though Br.Up, Prasna.Up / bhAshya gives a different meaning ) , the
> >>> seeded
> >>> Brahman in deep sleep (seed or beeja in Brahman) is admitted even after
> >>> avidyA is destroyed by jnAna ? (for the same reason, a jnAni cannot
> >>> reasonably re-emerge from deep sleep)
> >>>
> >>> what is this seed that remains in Brahman, even after avidyA ( tattva
> >>> agrahana) is destroyed ?
> >>>
> >>> How does this seed in tinged Brahman itself gets destroyed, after jnAna
> >>> prApti ?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> 2016-09-23 23:50 GMT+05:30 V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> > Mandukya bhashya: 1.2 mantra:
> >>> >
> >>> >  ‘प्राणबन्धनं हि सोम्य मनः’ (छा. उ. ६-८-२)
> >>> > <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=C
> >>> handogya&page=06&hval=%E2%80%98%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E
> >>> 0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%AC%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%A
> >>> 8%E0%A4%82%20%E0%A4%B9%E0%A4%BF%20%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%A
> >>> E%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%20%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%83%E2%80%99%2
> >>> 0%28%E0%A4%9B%E0%A4%BE.%20%E0%A4%89.%20%E0%A5%AC-%E0%A5%AE-%
> >>> E0%A5%A8%29#Ch_C06_S08_V02> इति
> >>> > श्रुतेः । ननु, तत्र ‘सदेव सोम्य’ (छा. उ. ६-२-१)
> >>> > <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=C
> >>> handogya&page=06#Ch_C06_S02_V01> इति
> >>> > प्रकृतं सद्ब्रह्म प्राणशब्दवाच्यम् ; नैष दोषः,
> >>> बीजात्मकत्वाभ्युपगमात्सतः ।
> >>> > यद्यपि सद्ब्रह्म प्राणशब्दवाच्यं तत्र, तथापि
> >>> जीवप्रसवबीजात्मकत्वमपरित्यज्यैव
> >>> > प्राणशब्दत्वं सतः सच्छब्दवाच्यता च । यदि हि निर्बीजरूपं विवक्षितं
> >>> > ब्रह्माभविष्यत्, ‘नेति नेति’ (बृ. उ. ४-५-३)
> >>> > <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=B
> >>> rha&page=04#BR_C04_S05_V03>‘यतो
> >>> > वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ. २-९-१)
> >>> > <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=T
> >>> aitiriya&page=02#T_C02_S09_V01>
> >>> >  ‘अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथो अविदितादधि’ (के. उ. १-४)
> >>> > <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=K
> >>> ena_pada&page=01&hval=%E2%80%98%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E
> >>> 0%A4%AF%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%B5%20%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%A6%E0%A
> >>> 5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BE%E
> >>> 0%A4%A6%E0%A4%A5%E0%A5%8B%20%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A
> >>> 4%A6%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF%E
> >>> 2%80%99%20%28%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%87.%20%E0%A4%89.%20%E0%A5%A7-%E
> >>> 0%A5%AA%29#KP_C01_V04> इत्यवक्ष्यत्
> >>> > ; ‘न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते’ (भ. गी. १३-१२)
> >>> > <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/php/format.php?bhashya=G
> >>> ita&page=13#BG_C13_V12> इति
> >>> > स्मृतेः । निर्बीजतयैव चेत्, सति प्रलीनानां सम्पन्नानां
> सुषुप्तिप्रलययोः
> >>> > पुनरुत्थानानुपपत्तिः स्यात् ; मुक्तानां च पुनरुत्पत्तिप्रसङ्गः,
> >>> > बीजाभावाविशेषात्, ज्ञानदाह्यबीजाभावे च ज्ञानानर्थक्यप्रसङ्गः ;
> >>> > तस्मात्सबीजत्वाभ्युपगमेनैव सतः प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः, सर्वश्रुतिषु च
> >>> > कारणत्वव्यपदेशः ।
> >>> >
> >>> > The translation of the above by Swami Gambhirananda, p.189-190 of
> >>> Advaita
> >>> > Ashrama edition, for the crucial portion: ///*Hence Existence is
> >>> referred
> >>> > to as prANa (in the Ch.Up.), and in all the Upanishads. It is spoken
> >>> of as
> >>> > the cause in all the Upanishads by *assuming* It (for the time being)
> >>> to be
> >>> > the seed of others (the whole creation).* And it is because of this
> >>> that
> >>>
> >>> > It is referred to - *by refuting Its causal state* - in such Vedic
> >>> texts
> >>> > as, 'Superior to the akshara (mAyA) (Mund. 2.1.2), 'from which speech
> >>> turns
> >>> > back (Tai.2.2), etc. That Supremely Real State, *free from causality,
> >>> > relation with body, etc. and modes of waking etc.* of that very
> entity
> >>> that
> >>> > is called prAjna, will be spoken separately in Its aspect as the
> >>> Turiya. If
> >>> > Brahman in Its seedless (non-causal) state be meant there, then the
> >>> > individuals that merge in It in deep sleep and dissolution cannot
> >>> > reasonably re-emerge. If anybody can re-emerge from sleep or
> >>> dissolution,
> >>> > conceived of as nothing but identity with the pure Brahman, then
> there
> >>> will
> >>> > be the possibility of the freed souls returning to take birth again,
> >>> for in
> >>> > either case, the absence of cause is a common factor."// By saying
> the
> >>> > above, Shankara has indicated that ‘in all the Shruti passages,
> >>> wherever it
> >>> > is said that during deep sleep the jiva merges in Brahman’ the
> >>> ‘Brahman’
> >>> > there is not the Absolute, Non-dual, Vedāntic Brahman, but the
> tinged,
> >>> > seeded, Brahman, that is the cause of creation.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > According to Shankara in all places where Brahman is referred to in
> the
> >>> > context of deep sleep/creation it is the tinged Brahman that is meant
> >>> and
> >>> > not the Nirguna chaitanyam.  The reasoning is what is stated by
> >>> Shankara
> >>> > above.
> >>> >
> >>> > regards
> >>> > subbu
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Ravi Kiran via Advaita-l <
> >>> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Raghav Kumar <
> >>> raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> >  the bhAShya there compares it with suShupti where avidyA is not
> >>> >> destroyed
> >>> >> > so we are still at the level of kAraNam brahma at this point. Same
> >>> goes
> >>> >> for
> >>> >> > 'tadaikShata'.
> >>> >> > Saying
> >>> >> >  यथा सुषुप्तादुत्थितः सत्त्वमात्रमवगच्छति सुषुप्ते सन्मात्रमेव
> केवलं
> >>> >> > वस्त्विति, तथा प्रागुत्पत्तेरित्यभिप्रायः
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> From sushupti, isn't the the bhAshya clearly referring to kevala
> sath
> >>> -
> >>> >> सन्मात्रमेव केवलं वस्त्विति?
> >>> >> There is no mention of avidyA in the above line quoted when
> >>> explaining sat
> >>> >> before creation.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> 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
>
>
>
Previous message: [Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?T
Next message: [Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?T
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list