[Advaita-l] Tamas, physical darkness, is a positive object

[V Subrahmanian]

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 6:24 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Tamas, physical darkness, is a positive object
>>
>>
>> श्रूयते । तत्र संशय्यते — किं ज्योतिःशब्दं *चक्षुर्विषयतमोपहं तेजः*, किं
>> वा
>> परं ब्रह्मेति ।
>>
>> Does the word 'jyotis' in the Chandogya passage 8.12.3 refer to the
>> physical light that dispels darkness that envelops objects perceptible to
>> the eye or the Supreme Brahman?
>>
>> From the usage  *चक्षुर्विषयतमोपहं*   it is clear that darkness is a
>> positive entity that is also popularly understood as 'absence of light'
>> and
>> that it is dispelled by light.
>
>
>
> If darkness is a positive entity, how can light ( whose nature is to just
> illumine, prakAsaka) dispel the darkness object ?
>

This is the question raised by those who are not comfortable with
'bhAvarupa ajnana': If ajnana is a positive entity how can jnana dispel it?


> In that case, where will darkness go, when light shines ?
>

Since darkness is a manifestation of prakriti, it will go back to its
source.

>
>
>
>> In any case that darkness is admitted by the
>> Vedantin as an object that is grasped by the eye is what we understand
>> from
>> the usage.
>
>
> //Sw. Gambhirananda translation, says:
>
> The doubt arises as to whether the word light refers to the "light visible
> to the eye" and dispelling darkness, or to Supreme Brahman.//
>

The Anandagiri and Ratnaprabha commentaries interpret that part of the
compound word as 'the darkness that envelops the objects perceptible to the
eye such as a pot.'

regards
vs

>
>
>
>> We do have the Upanishad itself admitting darkness, tamas, as a
>> specific entity and not as an abhava. In the antaryami brahmanam 3.7.13 is
>> this mantra:
>>
>> यस्तमसि तिष्ठंस्तमसोऽन्तरो यं तमो न वेद यस्य तमः शरीरं यस्तमोऽन्तरो
>> यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृतः ॥ १३ ॥
>>
>> He who, residing in tamas, impels the tamas (devata), but whom the tamas
>> devata does not know, for whom tamas is body, this antaryami is your self.
>>
>> The Upanishad also says next that tejas, light, is a devata, etc.
>>
>> यस्तेजसि तिष्ठंस्तेजसोऽन्तरो यं तेजो न वेद यस्य तेजः शरीरं यस्तेजोऽन्तरो
>> यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृत इत्यधिदैवतमथाधिभूतम् ॥ १४ ॥
>>
>> Recently in a chintana goshthi, a scholar asked 'in which element, bhuta,
>> could tamas be included?' I felt that since it is admitted to be an object
>> of the eye, the right element, bhuta, would be tejas, for among the five
>> elements, rupa is the guna of tejas and since tamas has the black color
>> that we perceive, it would be appropriate.
>>
>> Vidwan Sri Mani Dravid Sastrigal said in an Advaitasiddhi class that the
>> mimamsakas admit tamas as an object, that is cognized by the eye as black
>> in color.  Thus, tamas is a bhaavarupa object. An abhava cannot be black.
>>
>> Here is a audio recording of the Advaitasiddhi referred to above. One can
>> get to know a lot of things from a variety of shaastra-s from the talk:
>>
>>
>> http://www.mediafire.com/file/7yw76ziain9vu1z/091_MD_agnane_
>> anumana_upapattih_01_120212.WAV
>>
>> Even though the talk is in Tamil, everyone with a basic understanding of
>> Sanskrit can appreciate the recording as the lines from the Advaitasiddhi
>> are read and many Sanskrit terms are used in the exposition. One can, if
>> he
>> chooses to, go to 7.40 minutes in the audio to hear about the tamas
>> discussion.
>>
>> regards
>> subbu
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>